Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2019-09-12 Info Packet
� r City Council Information Packet September 12, 2019 CITY O� IOWA CITY www.icgov.org IP1. Council Tentative Meeting Schedule =:l K i -MM• - • • IP2. Work Session Agenda: September 17 IP3. Memo from Media Production Services Coordinator: Future of the Telecommunications Commission (Previously distributed in 8/29 Information Packetl IN. Consideration for establishing a Climate Commission IP5. Memo from Transportation Planner. Bike Master Plan Implementation IP6. Pending City Council Work Session Topics IP7. Memo from Communitv Develooment Planner: HCDC Feedback: Tax Exemptions for Affordable Housing I1138. Memo from Community Development Planner: HCDC Feedback: City Low Income House Tax Credit Funds I1139. Memo from Parks & Rec Director: Emerald Ash Borer Update IP10. Invitation: Johnson County to honor longtime community advocate Bob Welsh: September 19 1113111. Civil Service Examination: Assistant Superintendent of Recreation I11312. Civil Service Examination: Operations Supervisor: Transportation Services IN 3. Civil Service Examination: Recreation Assistant I11314. Bar Check Report: August 2019 Memo to City Manager from Johnson County Assistant Planner: Future Land Use Map Amendment Draft Minutes IPI 5. Airport Commission: August 15 IP16. Airport Zoning Commission: August 14 IP17. Histodc Preservation Commission: August 19 I11318. Planning and Zoning Commission: September 5 ! k 1 it, 5, i.w. I I .1p V; 11t �_ CITYO� IOWA CITY www. cgov.org City Council Information Packet IN. Council Tentative Meeting Schedule September 17 Work Session September 12, 2019 IP2. Work Session Agenda: September 17 IP3�. "Memo from Media Production Services Coordinator: uture of the Telecommunications Commission [Previously dis uted in 8/29 1 nformation Packet, IN. ConsideratiCIRfor establishing a Climate C mission IP5. Memo from Tra ortation Planner: B' Master Plan Implementation IP6. Pending City Cound ork Sessi Topics cellaneous IP7. Memo from Community evelop nt Planner: HCDC Feedback: Tax Exemptions for Afford le Housing IP8. Memo from Com pity Development Pla er: HCDC Feedback: City Low Income House T Credit Funds IP9. Memo from P & Rec Director: Emerald Ash rer Update IP10. In vhnson County to honor longtime commu ' advocate Bob Welsh: Septe -r19 IP11. Civil ervice Examination: Assistant Superintendent of Recr 'on IP12. C' 'I Service Examination: Operations Supervisor. Transportatio Services IP13. Civil Service Examination: Recreation Assistant IN . Bar Check Report: August 2019 Draft Minutes IP15. Airport Commission: August 15 IP16. Airport Zoning Commission: August 14 IP17. Historic Preservation Commission: August 19 IP18. Planning and Zoning Commission: September 5 Item Number: 1. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule ATTACHMENTS: Description Council Tentative Meeting Schedule , r 1 City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule _ ;�~�` ■� Subject to change CITY OF IOWA CITY September 12, 2019 Date Time Meeting Location 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 September 12, 2019 Work Session Agenda: September 17 ATTACHMENTS: Description Work Session Agenda: September 17 1 � i ,tMEW- Ifl =1®i CITY OF I©UVA CITY 410 Fast Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 5 2240-1 826 (3 19) 356-5000 (31 9) 356-5009 FAX Invw-ICgo W, org City Council Work Session Agenda Tuesday, September 17, 2019 Emma J. Harvat Hall - City Hall 5:00 PM • Joint meeting with Telecommunications Commission • Consideration of a Climate Commission • Presentation on Bike Lanes for Dodge/Governor • Clarification of Agenda Items • Information Packet Discussion [September 5, September 12] • Council updates on assigned board, commissions, and committees Item Number: 3. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Memo from Media Production Services Coordinator: Future of the Telecommunications Commission [Previously distributed in 8/29 Information Packet] ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from Media Production Services Coordinator: Future of the Telecommunications Commission [Previously distributed in 8/29 Information Packet] 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: 4. September 12, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description DRAFT Resolution establishing a Climate Commission Prepared by: Brenda Nations, Sustainability Coordinator, 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 (319)887-6161 Resolution No. Resolution establishing a Climate Action Commission Whereas, in Resolution No. 17-96 the Iowa City City Council authorized the creation of a Climate Action Steering Committee for the purpose of creating the Climate Action and Adaption Plan to achieve greenhouse gas emissions targets of 26-28% from 2005 levels by 2025 and 80% by 2050; and Whereas, the Steering Committee convened during the creation of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, adopted in September 2018, and dissolved from an official City capacity to continue as a self -governed advisory board; and Whereas, after one year, members of the self -governed committee recommended a formal City Commission to address the City's climate action and sustainability objectives; and Whereas, in July 2019, City Council declared a Climate Crisis and increased new greenhouse gas emissions targets of 45% by 2030 and net zero emissions by 2050 as recommended in October 2018 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in response to this crisis; and Whereas, creation of a Climate Action Commission will enhance and enable further community efforts to achieve the City's ambitious climate goals; and Whereas, a created Climate Action Commission will operate as an advisory body to the City Council and shall advise, research, analyze, promote, and with approval, implement initiatives that support the City's climate and sustainability goals, including the Climate Action Plan and any related or updated plan hereafter; and Whereas, the composition of the Climate Action Commission shall include seven members with backgrounds, knowledge, and expertise offering representation across the community which could effectively guide implementation of climate objectives. MidAmerican Energy and the University of Iowa will each have a standing representative on the Commission. Five at - large seats, representing other key stakeholders, will be appointed by the City Council. Key stakeholders may include, but are not limited to, the Iowa City Community School District, area commercial businesses, local industry, design and construction professionals, non -profits, and the general public; Whereas, residents of Iowa City should be given preference, but members are not required to have Iowa City residency; and Whereas, the self-governing climate advisory board is a direct successor to the Steering Committee which developed the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. Active members of this board have expressed interest in continuing in a formalized role and it is appropriate to appoint these members initially, without regard to gender balance; and Whereas, Commission member terms should be three years, with a two -term limit, and the initial terms will be staggered in length, with three members appointed for three years, and two members appointed for two years. The two standing members, MidAmerican Energy and the University of Iowa will assign their representatives and not be subject to term limits; and Resolution No. Page 2 Whereas, the Commission should be guided by principles of equity, and ensure through diverse and representative Commission membership and through its actions, to consider equity impacts of proposed climate initiatives; and Whereas, the Commission may form working groups or subcommittees on specific topics and issues to achieve substantive progress on action areas of the plan. Working groups and subcommittees may include members from outside the Commission; and Whereas, the newly created Commission will create greater credibility, influence, awareness, and capacity in interactions with City elected and appointed leadership, and throughout the community; and Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the Iowa City City Council hereby establishes a Climate Action Commission in order to assist the City in the implementation of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan in order to reach the new Climate Crisis emissions targets by 2030 and 2050 as follows: 1. The Commission shall have seven total members, of which, five at -large members appointed by the City Council, one from MidAmerican Energy, and one from the University of Iowa. 2. Members shall have backgrounds, knowledge, and expertise offering representation across the community which will effectively guide implementation of climate objectives, and may include representation from the Iowa City Community School District, area commercial businesses, local industry, design and construction industry, non -profits, and the general public. 3. Any active member of the climate advisory board who is interested in serving on the Commission is appointed as an initial member, even if not gender balanced. 4. City residency is preferred, but members are not required to be Iowa City residents as long as they are residents of Johnson County and meet the requirements set forth in Paragraph 2. 5. Member terms shall be three years, with a two -term limit, and the initial terms shall be staggered in length, with three members appointed for three years with terms ending December 31, 2022, and two members appointed for two years with terms ending December 31, 2021. Accordingly, the new terms for three members shall commence January 1, 2023 and for two members on January 1, 2022. Representative members from MidAmerican Energy and from the University of Iowa will govern their own appointments and not be subject to term limits. 6. The Commission may form working groups and/or subcommittees on specific topics and issues to achieve substantive progress on action areas of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. 7. The Climate Action Commission shall: a) advise the City Council on climate issues. b) research, analyze, and promote climate actions, with particular attention tc eq u ity. c) educate and engage with the public on climate action and the City's climate and sustainability goals. Resolution No. Page 3 d) assist City staff, City Council, and members of the community with implementing approved initiatives that support the City's climate and sustainability goals, including the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan and any related or updated plan hereafter. d) recommend to City Council updates to the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. 8. The Climate Action Committee shall adopt bylaws, which it deems necessary and advisable for the conduct of business of the Commission. Passed and approved this day of 2019. Mayor ATTEST: CITY CLERK Approved by City Attorney's Office Item Number: 5. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Memo from Transportation Planner: Bike Master Plan Implementation ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from Transportation Planner: Bike Master Plan Implementation CITY OF IOWA CITY . ,MEMORANDUM Date: September 12, 2019 To: Geoff Fruin; City Manager From: Kent Ralston; Transportation Planner Re: Bike Master Plan Implementation Introduction: Both Dodge and Governor Streets (between Burlington and Bowery) are identified as corridors to receive bike lanes as part of the adopted Bike Master Plan (proposed bicycle network map attached). Both segments are extensions of existing/planned buffered bike lanes to the north of Burlington Street (Governor is currently striped and Dodge is planned to be striped this fall), and a four -to -thee lane conversion with the addition of bike lanes on Dodge Street to the south (between Bowery and Kirkwood) - also planned to be completed this fall. History / Background: To move forward with implementation of bike lanes on Dodge and Governor Streets (between Burlington and Bowery), the existing on -street parking would likely need to be eliminated — the equivalent of approximately 40 spaces in each corridor. As such, a neighborhood meeting was held on August 7, 2019 where residents and property owners of the affected corridors were asked to provide feedback on the proposed project. Similarly, a separate group of concerned residents (not residing in the affected corridors) also met to discuss the project. The meetings were well attended with approximately 75 total participants. While very few participants voiced concerns with the elimination of on -street parking on Dodge Street, a clear majority of property owners and residents of Governor Street did not wish to move forward if the project necessitated the elimination of on -street parking. Conversely, a clear majority of participants (not residing in the affected corridors) wished to proceed with the project as identified in the Bike Master Plan. Those with concerns regarding the removal of on -street parking noted potential hardships due to general lack of off-street parking options, poor alley maintenance and inaccessibility during winter months, lack of access for the elderly/disabled, difficulty maintaining adequate parking for AME Bethel Church, and the potential for increased vehicle speeds/collisions. Discussion of Solutions: Following are options discussed during the public meeting and internal staff meetings: Eliminate on -street parking and implement buffered bike lanes on each corridor. This option fulfills the goals of the Bike Master Plan but could create difficulty for residents as voiced at the public meeting — likely more so for Governor residents as Dodge residents are generally provided more/paved off-street parking for the multi -family structures. If this option is chosen, on -street parking arrangements for AME Bethel Church must be provided as part of a `special exception' granted during a recent addition to the building. Eliminate on -street parking and implement a buffered bike lane only on Dodge Street and provide shared -lane arrow pavement markings on Governor Street. This option would ultimately provide a continuous southbound bike lane from North Dodge Street to Kirkwood Avenue as identified in the Bike Master Plan. Dodge Street would likely be impacted less by the removal of on -street parking and is arguably a more important corridor for bike lanes as it has approximately double the daily traffic and provides a continuous north/south September 12, 2019 Page 2 connection, whereas Governor Street terminates north of the railroad tracks. Providing shared -lane arrow markings (and bikeway signage) on Governor Street would provide an indication to motorists to expect northbound bicycles and would transition to the existing buffered bike lanes north of Burlington Street. Reduce each corridor to one travel lane and implement buffered bike lanes. This option would fulfill the goals of the Bike Master Plan by allowing for buffered bike lanes to be installed while retaining on -street parking. This option would necessarily revert Governor Street back to a one-way street from the recent change to a two-way facility. • Widen each corridor and implement bike lanes. This option would require a capital improvements project whereby the street width in each corridor would be widened to allow for the addition of bike lanes while retaining on -street parking. This project has not been contemplated to date but would fulfill the goals of the Bike Mater Plan. An approximate cost estimate for the project is $400,000. Provide a shared parking/ bike lane on both corridors. This option would provide a painted (dedicated) area that could be used for bikes during the busiest commuting hours and then allow for on -street parking in that space in the evenings and on weekends when parking demand may be highest and when bicycle volumes may be lowest. For example, parking could be prohibited from 7AM-6PM Monday - Friday. This arrangement would be new to Iowa City but is used in other communities. Retain current configurations and do not eliminate on -street parking in either corridor. This option would not fulfill the goals of the Bike Master Plan and would leave a gap in the north/south bike corridor. However, each corridor could be improved by implementing shared lane arrow pavement markings and bikeway signage. While this would not provide a continuous bike lane on either corridor, it would help to fill the gap and provide motorists a visual cue to expect bicyclists within each corridor. Financial Impact: Aside from the potential capital improvement project to widen each corridor to allow for the addition of bike lanes while retaining on -street parking (estimated at $400,000), the costs to implement necessary pavement markings and signage are relatively modest. These costs are programmed in the current CIP for Bike Master Plan projects. Recommendation: Staff intends to present this item to the City Council at their September 17th Work Session and provide a summary of each option. Staff would like feedback from the Council on a preferred course of action. Bicycle NeNvork With Proposed Facility Types Legend On -Street Bicycle Facilities Exis,t ng Proposed teC 13,ke Lanevnide sivuldem Climbing LaneIlJphill Bike Lam Buffered Bike Lane& pivtccled Bite Latz)Cyda TrarAs % RiCytle Dcluiltvdift W.Ad and Sgrd R-1.. m, s v 0 C -.dm study Qtf-Street BjCycle Facilities Existing Proposed *;p M.ID-Use Valleirbared-Use pouts Proposed Bike Lanes Siaepaihs Dedleawd On-Stleetil'arifilies B-14. L-1 —1, Reed D., E*.Lanes rnn L_ U',tu.—N t6._ c_mwaoruthomvRn.aim 15,kI, Laa'Ne Wth tAM 5vvv and M~P U." St"" 11456'ro0s GIN*Y R A vRmxF .,k. I.—"nese R..d DM Fm,,d"alh. L�Ocspde Tniiafth NM CWrbig L..,,wUphili ft. L-th C,. 25 0.5 Mile 0 alta Ala R•i Rpg-. 'a •ZT3i CITI Or I UINA 0111 T' Map 26. Rmycle Netvwrk wrth Proposed krohily Types., Northeast Qjjadran r N) CD (0 Item Number: 6. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Pending City Council Work Session Topics ATTACHMENTS: Description Pending City Council Work Session Topics �t VIII CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE PENDING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TOPICS September 6, 2019 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 changes recommended by Opticos. Also 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. Possible joint work session with Planning and Zoning Commission on the South District Form Based Code (Fall 2019) 9. Discuss possible changes to residential zoning classifications to allow and/or require a greater diversity of housing types (i.e. missing middle) Item Number: 7. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Memo from Community Development Planner: HCDC Feedback: Tax Exemptions for Affordable Housing ►_1AG_Ta:ILvi14z111&'5 Description Memo from Community Development Planner: HCDC Feedback: Tax Exemptions for Affordable Housing CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: September 12, 2019 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Kirk Lehmann, Community Development Planner Re: HCDC Feedback: Tax Exemptions for Affordable Housing Introduction: At their August 20, 2019 meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) considered the May 24, 2019 recommendation of the special committee appointed to investigate how to use tax exemption for incentivizing affordable housing. HCDC members had requested to review this recommendation prior to consideration by Council. After discussion, HCDC supported the committee's recommendation 6-2 with one modification regarding the income of tenants. Background/Discussion: The committee determined tax exemption is a viable tool for new construction of multi -family housing for developments with six or more rental units. To provide the developer with a level of predictability, the committee recommended that the City Council support a 40% tax exemption on all units in the development for a period of 10 years based on various program parameters, including that assisted households must be under 60% of median income. Additional background on this item can be found in the attached memo from staff and HCDC minutes. Discussion: The committee reviewed three scenarios for tax exemption: a six -unit townhome development, a 12 unit multi -family property and a 36 unit multi -family property. Based on the scenarios and assumptions made, the total amount of taxes exempted for this incentive over the 10 -year period ranged from $62,040 for the six townhomes, to $124,080 for the 12 plex and $275,520 for the 36 - unit property. Recommendation: HCDC recommended this program, but that the income of the household in assisted units be limited to under 40% of median income, not 60%. The recommendation, with this one modification, was approved by a 6-2 vote. Those who voted against expressed a preference for a longer affordability period based on the subsidy provided. I r 1 -P-z -4 Date: May 24, 2019 CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Tracy Hightshoe, Neighborhood and Development Services Director Re: Affordable Housing Action Plan — Tax Exemption Recommendation Introduction: The City Council adopted the Affordable Housing Action Plan in June of 2016 to address ways the City could retain our existing affordable housing stock as well as create and support additional affordable housing in our community. The 2018-19 City of Iowa City Strategic Plan supports this plan as the need for safe, decent and affordable housing that is accessible to all is critical in fostering healthy neighborhoods, promoting environmental sustainability and advancing social justice and racial equity. The Affordable Housing Action Plan identified 15 action steps to support affordable housing. To date, 13 of the 15 steps have been completed. One of the remaining action steps was to set up a committee of staff, developers and other interested stakeholders to determine the viability and potential parameters of a tax exemption program that would support affordable housing. Property tax exemption is a tool provided by state law to encourage the construction or rehabilitation of residential, commercial, and industrial properties by temporarily reducing property taxes. For affordable residential housing, state law sets the maximum exemption at 100% for ten years for new construction. Affordable housing is for families who are low and moderate income defined by state law as those households earning no more than 80% of area median income. The City can design its plan with less benefits, but it cannot exceed the state maximum benefits. A committee of six community members and City staff was formed in January of 2017. The committee was tasked with the question if tax exemption was a viable option for incenting affordable housing, and if so, how. After much discussion and analysis, the committee met on May 17, 2019 to formulate their recommendation to City Council. Committee Recommendation: The committee determined tax exemption is a viable tool for new construction of multi -family housing for developments with six or more rental units. To provide the developer with a level of predictability, the committee recommended that the City Council support a 40% tax exemption on all units in the development for a period of 10 years based on the following: • At least 15%, but not more than 20% of the total units are leased to households under 60% of median income. • The maximum rent is limited to what a household at 40% of median income could afford minus the estimated utility allowance for tenant paid utilities. Based on HUD's income limits effective 6/1/2018 and estimated utility allowances, this would be $805 for a three- bedroom, $683 for a two-bedroom and $578 for a one -bedroom. • The development must be located outside the Riverfront Crossings district and the developer may not use this incentive in combination with tax increment financing (TIF) as exempted taxes do not generate a TIF increment. • Due to a concern about placing additional affordable housing units in areas the City's Affordable Housing Location Model (AHLM) discourages, tax exemption will not be May 28, 2019 Page 2 approved if any additional local, state or federal incentives are provided for affordable housing in areas the AHLM discourages. Similar to the Riverfront Crossings requirements, full time college students may qualify for an affordable unit if they are income eligible and financially independent of their family/parents (i.e., not claimed as a dependent on another's tax form and they have sufficient income to rent the unit). The developer/owner must annually recertify tenant income for the affordable housing units to the City. If the total household income goes above 80% median income, rent for that unit can be raised to the private market rent and the next available unit must be rented to an income eligible household at the restricted rent. A developer may request different terms than the ones outlined above, however before granting a tax exemption, the City would consider the capacity of the developer/project manager to administer the program, including income certification of households and annual reporting requirements, the number of affordable units proposed in the development, the household income level targeted and the proposed rents for the affordable units as compared to the market rate units. The committee did also consider tax exemption for the rehabilitation of existing units and the construction of new homes for homebuyers. The committee determined that there is not enough incentive to induce developers to rehabilitate existing structures. While tax exemption has worked in other Iowa communities to encourage new construction, the committee determined that without further subsidy, tax exemption alone would not produce homes in Iowa City affordable to those under 80% of median income. If the City Council wishes to proceed, staff will market the incentive to the development community. If a request is received based on the provisions outlined, staff would create an Urban Revitalization District for that property. If a developer requests different terms, a development agreement would be submitted to the City Council for consideration. Staff can provide additional information, if needed, and is available for questions. Copy to: Committee Members MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2019 — 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ROOM 202 PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Aguilar, Megan Alter, Matt Drabek, Charlie Eastham, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz, Lyn Dee Kealey, Peter Nkumu, Maria Padron MEMBERS ABSENT: John McKinstry STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Tracy Hightshoe OTHERS PRESENT: Ellen McCabe, Sara Barron RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-2 (Fixmer-Oraiz and Drabek dissenting) the Commission recommends to City Council the Tax Exemption Memo dated May 24, 2019 on the condition that the income of beneficiaries be reduced from 60% of the Area Median Income to 40% of the Area Median Income. By a vote of 7-0 (Nkumu absent) the Commission recommends to City Council support for allocating City LIHTC funding to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, subject to additional discussion with the Housing Trust Fund regarding the parameters of how they would allocate funds with the goal of lowering rents as far as possible for as many households as possible. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Padron called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 11, 2019 MINUTES: Kealey moved to approve the minutes of July 11, 2019. Nkumu seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. (Fixmer-Oraiz and Alter absent) PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. WELCOME NEW HCDC MEMBERS AND INTRODUCTORY PRESENTATION: Lehmann had the new members introduce themselves. Lyn Dee Kealey introduced herself noting she moved back to Iowa City in 2006 and she is a social worker at the University of Iowa Hospitals on the burn trauma unit for 24 years. She is interested in affordable housing and wants to work on the Commission to learn and see what can be provided for the community. Peggy Aguilar moved from Iowa City from Des Moines in 2016, while she was in Des Moines for 13 years she was the director of family services with Habitat for Humanity, so affordable housing has been in her Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 2 of 10 veins for a long time and wants the opportunity to see how she can use her knowledge and skills to help make Iowa City a better place for residents. Matt Drabek moved to Iowa City in 2007 for graduate school, graduated in 2012 and never left. He is interested in housing, he is a founding board member of a group called The Iowa City Tenants Union and did some similar work for a different group 8 or 9 years ago. Lehmann did a presentation on the role of the Commission. Lehmann works with grants that benefit low and moderate income households for public services, public facilities, etc. He works mostly with nonprofits but also some small development portion of business loans for low and moderate income individuals. They also do the housing rehab out of the Community Development Division and that includes a number of different funding sources, they also do the UniverCity program which purchases home near downtown, do rehabs and sell them. In Neighborhood Services, the umbrella division Lehmann works under, there is the Housing Authority, housing inspections, rental inspections and neighborhood outreach. Important terms: HUD: Department of Housing and Urban Development CDBG/HOME: Community Development Block Grant/HOME, the two primary grant programs for the City AMI: Area medium income LMI: Low/moderate income FMR: Fair Market Rent LIHTC: Low Income Housing Tax Credit Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County: a nonprofit that allocates affordable housing funds In terms of CDBG it has been around for a long time now and Iowa City has been receiving funds almost since the beginning. The goals of CDBG are providing safe, decent and sanitary housing, a suitable living environment and also expanding economic opportunities. Properties must meet a national objective, which for most cases means it benefits LMI households or individuals. Some funds can be used to eliminate slum and blight and some may be used to meet an urgent need. CDBG can be used for funding public services, facilities, economic development, and it can support housing but cannot develop new affordable housing. So that is where HOME comes in, which is one of the biggest source of federal funds for affordable housing to produce affordable housing. The HOME program has been around since 1990, the City also receives and annual allocation of HOME funds which can be used for construction of new housing, acquisitions, direct assistance to tenants and owners, etc. It has income requirements depending on the size of the project and complexity and type of the project. Both CDBG and HOME, if used to support housing, have fair market rents that the projects have to abide by. To allocate funds every year the City follows the consolidated plan, a five-year plan, that identifies the greatest needs for LMI households in the area, how the City can meet those needs and what are the exact projects to do to meet those needs. The consolidated plan guides CDBG/HOME investment, helps set priorities, and staff is currently working on the new consolidated plan right now and hope to have a draft done by December. Within the 5 -year consolidated plan are annual action plans. Each year these plans lay out the specific set of activities that will be funded. At the end of each year the City submits an annual consolidated plan report (CAPER) to show if they are meeting the needs as identified. Other documents of note: Analysis of impediments to fair housing choice - also known as the Fair Housing Choice Study Citizen participation Plan, how the City uses citizen input and how it is reflected in all plans and actions by the City As a general overview, Lehmann noted the City's fiscal year starts July 1 and the first thing the Commission will be doing in September will be reviewing last year's activities and outcomes in the CAPER. Next will be the Aid to Agencies funding process, which is how the City allocates public service dollars. Applications are open in August or September and the Commission will make their recommendations to Council in January. The annual CDBG/HOME funding round, for public facilities and affordable housing projects, is paired with an Emerging Aid to Agencies funding round, for newer service Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 3 of 10 agencies that need help getting off the ground or for those that hadn't received funding in the past, and applications open in December and the Commission recommends their allocations in March. The Consolidated and Annual Plans must be completed by May. The fiscal year ends June 30. Funding for FY20 will be approximately $659,000 in CDBG and $483,000 in HOME. Those are the primary federal sources of funding, and are the majority of the funding for services and affordable housing. There are also local funds the City uses. The Affordable Housing Fund gets split out for different uses, for FY20 the City allocated $1 million; part of that goes to The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, part goes to LIHTC projects that leverage dollars from the State, some will go towards housing security funds (rental deposits and a landlord risk mitigation fund to help people who have had barriers finding housing before), $75,000 goes into an opportunity fund, $75,000 for healthy homes (bridging health and housing), $50,000 is set aside for emergent situations. Finally there are some funds for land banking for future affordable housing, local Aid to Agencies funds ($555,000), GRIP, the UniverCity program, and The Housing Authority. Lehmann noted this year they will use federal dollars for public services, renovating facilities for nonprofits, neighborhood improvements to parks in LMI areas, housing rehab and other housing programs (acquisitions, buyer assistance, rental rehab), economic development for small business loans and assistance for LMI businesses. Lehmann mentioned income limits that come with federal dollars, and those are used for all the programs depending on how they decide to split them out on any given project and depending on what project outcomes they would like to see. Income limits are based on household size, currently a low income household of four makes $75,000; 30% of the median income is roughly the poverty line. Typically the City prefers to fund lower income households if they can but it depends on the situation. Rent limits are based on fair market rent and currently a fair market rent for a two-bedroom is $902/month and for a three bedroom $1,304/month. HUD also determines modest house prices for home buyer programs, currently the limit is $244,000 for both existing and new homes. Fixmer-Oraiz asked about the opportunity fund. Lehmann stated it is used to fund situations as they arise. There used to be an allocation for land banking; currently the City has around $640,000 in that fund but the opportunities for land are not coming forth so the City is looking for other opportunities to best use those funds as well. Fixmer-Oraiz asked the difference from opportunity fund and emergent funds. Hightshoe explained emergent funds have been used with residents are displaced from their rentals due to new company allocations, etc. (Rose Oaks, Hawkeye Court). Eastham asked what is the greatest need for housing in the community, where do the highest cost burdens lie and with which income groups. Lehmann said there is generally higher cost burden in lower income groups, typically renter families. For example in the less than 30% AMI right now there are 6700 renter households and for less than 50% AMI owner households are around 2000 currently. Eastham asked about the 6700 renter households and what percentage were student households versus nonstudent. Lehmann said that is challenging to figure out, but looking at poverty rates, and you remove students from Iowa City's population, the poverty rate for Iowa City is approximately what it is for other Iowa cities which is around 11 %, so he would guess most of the renter households are students. Eastham noted the census bureau classifies by household type which can separate student versus nonstudent households. Lehmann said if they look at rental households by rental type nonfamily (which would generally be students) is 5000 so that is most of the 6700 but there are some of those 5000 that may not be students. Lehmann noted he prefers to use the poverty rate for students for that reason. Nkumu asked what microloans are used for. Lehmann stated those funds can be applied for by LMI businesses, generally it is microenterprises with less than five employees and as long as half those folks are LMI, it qualifies as an LMI microbusiness. Funds help them start a business. Nkumu asked if it was a grant or a loan they have to pay back. Lehmann stated it is a loan they must pay back. Hightshoe noted the loans are through MidwestOne bank, the City just guarantees the funds. Lehmann noted that helps the business establish a commercial line of credit. Nkumu asked what the maximum amount of loan one can apply for. Lehman replied $10,000 for a single loan. Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 4 of 10 REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE TAX EXEMPTION MEMO DATED MAY 24,2019: Hightshoe stated in June 2016 Council adopted an action plan for affordable housing which included 15 different strategies to encourage affordable housing. The memo in the Commission packet discussed the 15 steps and progress to this point. One of the steps Council wants the Commission to review is using a tax exemption policy to encourage the development of new affordable housing. A committee was formed to discuss what it would take for a private developer to construct housing where some of it is affordable for up to 10 years, the maximum allowed by State Code. The committee consisted of City employees from legal, finance, city manager's office, and neighborhood services. From outside the City, there were two developers, an appraiser, a realtor and two lenders. The developers stated for a private developer to do affordable housing they do not want a negotiation process, they want to know the parameters from the get -go. Based on that the committee settled upon a 40% exemption of property taxes for a development for a 10 years. In return, the developers felt that would be a sufficient motivation for them to provide at least 15% of the units in the development as affordable. Affordable was defined as the maximum rent a household at 40% of median income could afford minus the estimated utility allowance for tenant who paid utilities. Based on HUD's income limits effective 6/1/2018 and estimated utility allowances, this would be $805 for a three- bedroom, and $683 for a two- and $578 for a one -bedroom. Drabek asked if the committee did an estimate on what the real rent would be, taking the rent price of $578 plus the 40% tax savings, does that equal the market rental rate. Hightshoe said they did, market rates on new construction rentals are expensive, a one -bedroom in new construction would likely be $900 to $1000 rents. Eastham asked what the difference is between the rent reduction above the market level and the amount of money received as a tax exemption. Hightshoe did not have the analysis with her, the goal was for the developer to have a 10% rate of return but to do that they would have to forgive 90% of the taxes on the whole development. The developers said they were more worried about vacancy so they just wanted a tax exemption for the amount they were losing in rent. Developers noted there was no tax exemption process that would make this viable for downtown because of the rents they can get in the downtown. Hightshoe noted a developer may request different terms than the ones outlined in the memo, however before granting a tax exemption, the City would consider the capacity of the developer/project manager to administer the program, including income certification of households and annual reporting requirements, the number of affordable units proposed in the development, the household income level targeted and the proposed rents for the affordable units as compared to the market rate units. Alter asked about the concern about placing additional affordable housing units in areas the City's Affordable Housing Location Model (AHLM), so geographically speaking what areas are available for this type of application. Lehmann said generally the south and east parts of town would not be allowed under the AHLM. Hightshoe added that because this tax exemption provides a mix of market and affordable units, the AHLM would not apply. Alter asked how it fits into transportation lines and Hightshoe said it wasn't a part of the discussion. Eastham suggested the maximum income limit be changed, which is currently 60% of the area median income, and changing that wouldn't change the financial calculations of the developer, so he suggests 60% is too high. Hightshoe acknowledged the committee discussed 60% being high, however anyone under that amount is also eligible. Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) encouraged the Commission to think about the fact that every time they start an affordable housing program it is dollars allocated to a specific type of housing, in this case new construction. One thing staff pointed out in their most recent memo to Council about the allocation of the affordable housing fund is that new construction is one of the most expensive ways to create affordable housing and existing housing can make more economic sense to be converted into affordability. She stated the Commission can evaluate this proposal and its merits based on cost and who may be eligible but she encourages them to think more broadly about this being an investment of City resources into creating affordable housing for a 10 year period in new construction where it is more Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 5 of 10 expensive to find units. So it is not just the individual variables of this proposal but how this proposal fits in overall toolkit of making more housing, with better variety, more available to more people in more areas. Fixmer-Oraiz noted the 10 year time frame; why was it set at 10 years? Hightshoe added that is the maximum allowed by State Code, it can be set for less than 10 years but not for more. Padron asked if the rent would stay the same for the 10 years. Hightshoe said it will always be based on HUDs rates so it would probably increase slightly each year. Padron also asked where the 15% amount came from. Hightshoe said the committee discussed and chose to try to match the tax increment finance policy which is at 15%. Additionally the reason they didn't feel the AHLM should apply is because the committee felt like the whole city should be eligible, so when talking about mixed developments and trying to get every development to have a percentage of affordable housing they liked the 15% but wanted no more than 20% so they could have the mixed income. Also because of the AHLM and the concern about concentrating affordable housing in certain developments is why they wanted this incentive to be city- wide, unless other funds subject to the AHLM should be used as well. Fixmer-Oraiz asked about the annual recertification of the tenants. Hightshoe said the developers would have to do that or they could hire a nonprofit to do it but each year when they issue new leases they would have to verify income of the tenant and make sure the tenant is eligible. If the tenant's income goes over the threshold, then that unit is no longer considered affordable and the next unit that becomes available the developer has to rent as an affordable unit. Alter noted that doing the income review disincentivizes one from making a better income because they must have housing and some stability. Hightshoe said that is standard in all HUD and State programs. She also noted that if the income threshold is 60% but then goes up, it is not considered non -affordable until the income is at 80% so it would need to be a drastic income change. Kealey asked if the tax exemption goes away after 10 years do the units have to remain affordable after the 10 years. Hightshoe confirmed they do not, they can then be rented at any rate after the 10 years. Eastham asked if they had a median income table available and asked what 60% of the median income for a three person household. Lehmann said it would be $51,720 and that a two bedroom unit would be around 16% of income. Eastham would like the Commission to lower the maximum income to at least 50% or 40% of median income. Alter feels this program is a short-term idea, at year 10 that tenant has to move and the problem starts over. She noted it is short -sided in the scope of the long-term problem. Nkumu acknowledged that 10 years does go quickly but feels this solution is better than nothing and what is the alternative if there is not this plan. Hightshoe admitted she struggles with the 10 year problem, it is also the same in the Riverfront Crossings affordable housing requirement, it is only 10 years as well. The catch is developers will not provide affordable housing without the subsidy. Drabek noted the 10 year limit is a limit of public subsidy of private development, it does not apply to any program the City runs such as The Housing Authority. Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) noted other options are to acquire units that have already been built and either they become part of the public housing program or a nonprofit housing provider, so after the 10 years those units would not go away as in this case of new construction with tax exemptions. The tradeoff is if The Housing Fellowship were to buy a building tomorrow that was built 30 years ago and added it to their inventory they would not be interested in raising rents to the market rent. Lehmann noted in the HOME program if it is less than $15,000 it is a five year period of affordability, if it is up to $40,000 it is a 10 year, if more than that it is 15 year and new construction is 20 years. So the way Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 6 of 10 a lot of affordable housing funders talk about it is the turnover number of units; 10 years is an expected annual 10% of units would turnover every year out of affordability. Eastham agrees it is a handicap approach, but the terms of affordable housing, such as in Riverfront Crossings, can be atrocious. He is more interested in trying to reduce the maximum income, 60% of median household incomes are paying 17% of their income for this rent whereas a $30,000 income household would be paying close to 30% of their income. He suggests lowering the 60% down to 40%. Lehmann noted that if it is lowered to 40% then everyone in those units would be cost burdened by definition. Eastham said then to lower the maximum to the cost burden. Hightshoe also noted it has to be easy to explain to a developer, they don't understand by looking at the income table. Eastham feels a developer would just need to look at what the maximum income is for occupants of these units. Hightshoe also added they looked at affordable homeownership and with the Iowa City market and the housing prices a tax exemption alone would not encourage somebody to bring it down. It also was not feasible with rehabs, the rehab would have to raise the assessment significantly to adjust for the tax exemption. Fixmer-Oraiz asked if during the conversations within the committee, did the developers appear interested in pursuing this exemption. Hightshoe said the developers thought it would be viable and something to look at if they saw vacancies increase. If approved by Council, there still may never be a single application for a project. Eastham said it would also be prudent for the City to make sure if this subsidy is worth it — what the net loss or gain would be for this tax exemption. Hightshoe said those numbers were looked at and studied for this proposal. Eastham moved to recommend to City Council the Tax Exemption Memo dated May 24, 2019 on the condition that the income of beneficiaries be reduced from 60% of the Area Median Income to 40% of the Area Median Income. Aguilar seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-2 (Fixmer-Oraiz and Drabek dissenting). Hightshoe asked the reason for the dissent so it could be documented. Fixmer-Oraiz noted it did not seem like a long enough period for affordable housing to justify the exemption. Drabek agreed. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON ALLOCATING CITY LIHTC FUNDING TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND OF JOHNSON COUNTY (HTFJC): Hightshoe stated when Council asked staff to develop the 15 -step action plan for affordable housing, they requested it be regularly reviewed and updated. Staff went through a comprehensive analysis looking at the plan and made several additional recommendations for Council. Council wanted input regarding both the tax exemption committee and two other items listed in the memo. One was altering the scoring criteria for CDBG/HOME, which the Commission does every year, and staff's recommendation is to give a higher score to projects that reduce the rent further than just fair market rent because in staff analysis there are areas where rent is lower than fair market rent. In those cases, subsidizing someone for the same unit at the same price the private market is already producing in that neighborhood may not make sense. The second item is regarding the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC). Right now, the City provides 50% of Affordable Housing Fund dollars to HTFJC to allocate. Many LIHTC projects (the fund also reserves 20% for LIHTC projects), are being funded by both the City and HTFJC. A couple years ago the City combined their application process, but some projects are being funded by both and it is difficult when an amendment comes back because it comes to two different parties. As such, staff thinks there may also be efficiency in just having one entity review and to avoid conflicting reviews. Also, if HTFJC administered all the funds, the City could remove them from the Aid to Agencies pot of money and they wouldn't be competing with other agencies, instead being funded by a 5% administrative fee to build their capacity and have a reliable source of funds for administrative expenses. If HTFJC took on the LIHTC process, there would be another 5% they could also for administration. Hightshoe also noted if the City funds the same projects as the HTFJC, there is duplication of efforts in monitoring. Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 7 of 10 Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) said they have heard they don't know what the point system will be for scoring this year and this past year there were no extra points based on where the funds came from, which was a departure from the past. They are waiting for the LIHTC scoring process to be released. Hightshoe said staff recommendation was to have the set aside and administered through HTFJC and if the scoring criteria is released and there is higher scoring for city contribution the City will take back those funds to try to improve the chances of LIHTC developers in our community of getting funded. If it doesn't matter or HTFJC doesn't get additional points it made sense just to have one entity review the projects. The HTFJC Board is also made up of people who only review housing projects so they have experience in reviewing housing projects. Padron asked if the Commission could do the same thing with other agencies, just give them direct money every year. Lehmann said what they are recommending for HTFJC is similar to what the federal government does for the City, the City gets funds and are told some amount of it can be used for administrative costs, but the allocation of funds every year is not the same and a certain amount of dollars is never guaranteed. Padron misunderstood and thought this was money that would come away from the Aid to Agencies (A2A) funding and Hightshoe explained HTFJC separately administers hundreds of thousands of dollars for the City but cannot access any for administrative expenses, so they must apply through the A2A process for administrative funds. This will fund them without them applying for administrative funds. Padron asked if there would be more money in the Aid to Agency funds to distribute to others then and Hightshoe confirmed that was correct. Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) requested this be considered as a project based fee with the caveat that if this fell apart and the City decided to no longer give funding to HTFJC that they would have five years to apply back and be considered a legacy agency. Hightshoe stated this year the Commission allocated HTFJC $30,000 in A2A and the City would want to make sure they continue to get that $30,000 so if their Affordable Housing Fund contribution was only $25,000, then the City would give HTFJC another $5,000 from Aid to Agencies to make up the difference. Eastham supports this idea and feels it is a good step on staff's direction. He wants to talk about establishing guidelines that will further lower rents for projects with City funds. On page 23 of the packet, this memo's recommendation #2 regarding altering preference in scoring criteria, the staff proposes a good thing which is to give a higher preference to CDBG/HOME projects that have rents lower than the HUD maximum rent. However Eastham does not think the standard should be projects lower than HUD maximum rent but rather projects that reach some percentage of the average housing contribution to their rental costs. Eastham reiterated his goal in life is to eliminate housing cost burdens. Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) stated she cannot speak for The HTFJC Board of Directors but her instinct would be for the City to give them the money and tell them the parameters, not for them to decide. Eastham said every entity gets money with guidelines attached to it. McCabe said they would take their normal process and work with the funding they have with a LITHC developer and then follow the guidelines the City has attached to that funding. Eastham stated a sensible rent target for subsidized units, new construction or acquisition, is some high percentage of the average rent paid by the housing choice voucher system. That group of people have the lowest incomes and are receiving assistance, their average rent payment is standard, so rents should be set at their level to not put them in a cost burden. Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) asked what happens to the money after it is granted to the developer because part of this is what happens longer term with the money too. How does that money come back into the affordable housing dollars. If the money is a loan it comes back to the City to fund additional housing projects. Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) agrees, if the City is giving HTFJC money as a grant or loan. Eastham said to get lower rents is has to be a grant. McCabe noted when HTFJC uses Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 8 of 10 local government funds, such as when working with Sand land year, that was a loan so that money had to come back. Hightshoe explained to new members that a LIHTC project is a 30 year period of affordability. McCabe added it can be up to 60% AMI as well. Eastham said it can be 60% of AMI but it could also be lower. Fixmer-Oraiz moved to recommend to City Council support for allocating City LIHTC funding to The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, subject to additional discussion with the Housing Trust Fund regarding the parameters of how they would allocate funds with the goal of lowering rents as far as possible for as many households as possible. Eastham seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0 (Nkumu absent). REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF THE FINALIZED 2019 FAIR HOUSING CHOICE STUDY (ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE): Lehmann noted this is just returning to the Commission with changes that were discussed by HCDC, also legal reviewed the document as laid out in in the memo in their packet. This will be presented to Council at the August 20 meeting. Lehmann noted Stephanie from Human Rights was going to present on fair housing enforcement processes but because the recommendation in the plan is to have her do a training for all Boards and Commissions, they decided to wait to combine efforts for that later in the year, especially as a full presentation is expected to take one and a half hours. Lehmann noted McKinstry had brought up during the public comment portion of the discussion mobile home housing and Lehmann added that in the study as an HCDC recommendation. That change specifically is discussed on page 178 of the plan, under education and outreach Strategy 1: Improve Demand -Size Awareness. "The demand side of the housing market includes tenants, homeowners, borrowers, mobile home park residents, and other who need and/or use housing." Lehmann asked if there were any additional recommendations, and if there were none, then no vote was needed. The Commission indicated no vote was needed. AID TO AGENCIES RECOMMENDATIONS FOLLOW UP: Lehmann stated staff (city manager's office and neighborhood services staff) met with the Agency Impact Coalition (AIC) (Shelter House, Prelude, Neighborhood Center, Free Medical Clinic, United Action for Youth and Domestic Violence Intervention Program) on July 30. Fixmer-Oraiz also attended the meeting. Lehmann said staff was there to listen, find out what the agencies needs were, how they saw budgets potentially as well. DVIP talked about the 29% decrease in A2A funding over the last year and were within $14,000 of losing their federal funding match, Prelude talked about how their A2A amount was stable and they have trouble keeping staff because they can't increase salaries, free Medical Clinic discussed how the people they help are having more complex issues and other complications that come with increased immigration populations and cultures. Staff then discussed the budget timeline and how it fits into everything and how agencies can be involved. The kickoff for the budget is August 20 at 5pm, and is open to the public (it will be the City Council work session). During September and October staff looks through capital improvement needs, October through November is when departments submit requests, and budget requests are finalized in December. In January the budget is presented to Council and Council adopts it in March. Staff also looked at what current A2A levels would be if A2A funding had increased over time. At 2% (what most city departments base budgets on) the amount would be $304,000 (excluding CDBG and utility funds), if adjusted by the CPI inflation index it would be around $281,000, and if done by changes in taxable valuation it would be $366,000. The City Manager mentioned he didn't realize A2A had decreased as much as it had over time simply because the City has allocated more funding for public services, just not through the A2A grant. Things like contributions to the Behavioral Access Center, Winter Shelter, etc. The AIC asked to look at funding through what is the need, the City Manager asked what they felt was a fair funding and requested the AIC provide that amount to the City. Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 9 of 10 Fixmer-Oraiz noted the AIC members encouraged City staff and HCDC members to look at their overall impact on the community as an asset that includes economic multipliers and community health. This was in response to the budget feeling like just another line item, and one that could be easily under -valued. She added the discussions were positive. Eastham noted the August 20 Council work session meeting will not be discussion, it will just be setting budget priorities. In the packet released for that meeting, the City Manager is going to suggest an increase of 2% from the base of $250,000 for Aid to Agencies which is not necessarily what the AIC group is going to propose. Fixmer-Oraiz acknowledged the City Manager knew he would not have a proposal from AIC in time for the work session but he is asking for it by Labor Day so it is still early on in the process and can be adapted perhaps. Lehmann added the City Manager wanted to call out A2A in this upcoming work session because it was not addressed in the last one. Padron requested HCDC be informed of the proposal from AIC to the City Manager to see if Council's final budget allocation matches that proposal. Fixmer-Oraiz can reach out to AIC to ask for a copy of their proposal. STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT: Lehmann stated the next meeting of HCDC would be September 19 at 6:30pm, held at the Iowa City Public Library Meeting Room D. At this meeting will be the review of City Steps with nonprofits. It will also be the public meeting for the CAPER and will receive legacy Aid to Agencies funding applications. Eastham asked for an update on the South District Homeownership program and Habitat for Humanity's proposal. Lehmann said because the City actually found a property under their previous application the City will move forward this year with that project and will encourage Habitat for Humanity and HCDC to consider looking at the South District Program as part of the competitive process next year. Lehmann noted the City updated its affordable housing programs summary that has been done in the past, FY15 — FY19, he will send it to HCDC as a follow up item. Basically from FY15 — FY19 $9.9 million has gone to assist affordable housing projects and workforce housing projects. 452 units have been affordable and 66 workforce units, 339 renter projects (mostly from Riverfront Crossings) and 204 rehab projects. Eastham asked if the rent amounts were included in the data for these projects. Lehmann has the target income levels not the rent levels. Hightshoe said most are at fair market rent. Lehmann plans to incorporate that data into the CAPER. Lehmann noted the Fair Housing Choice Study is going to Council on August 20 and the Housing Trust Fund turns 15 this year. IFA's Iowa Housing Conference is in Cedar Rapids this year from September 4 to September 6. It is $270 to attend if anyone is interested. Hightshoe stated Iowa City is hosting the American Planners Housing Conference this year, October 9- 11. The City will do an affordable housing tour. ADJOURNMENT: Eastham moved to adjourn. Fixmer-Oraiz seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0 (Nkumu absent). Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 10 of 10 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record Name Terms Exp. 7/11 8/15 O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant Aguilar, Peggy 6/30/22 ■ X Alter, Megan 6/30/21 X X Drabek, Matt 6/30/22 O/E X Eastham, Charlie 6/30/20 X X Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa 6/30/20 X X Kealey, Lyn Dee Hook 6/30/22 O/E X McKinstry, John 6/30/20 X O/E Nkumu, Peter 6/30/22 O/E X Padron, Maria 6/30/20 X X • Resigned from Commission Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant Item Number: 8. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Memo from Community Development Planner: HCDC Feedback: City Low Income House Tax Credit Funds ►_1AG_T61:ILvi14zk1&-5 Description Memo from Community Development Planner: HCDC Feedback: City Low Income House Tax Credit Funds CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: September 12, 2019 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Kirk Lehmann, Community Development Planner Re: HCDC Feedback: City Low Income House Tax Credit Funds Introduction: At their August 20, 2019 meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) considered City staff's recommendation in the Affordable housing Memo to City Council, dated July 29, 2019, of providing City Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) match funding to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC). After discussion, HCDC unanimously recommended this to Council with the caveat that the HTFJC Director discuss allocating these funds with restrictions concerning rent and tenant income with her Board. The Director will report back to HCDC at their next meeting, and HCDC will make a final recommendation to Council as to possible restrictions. Background: Currently HCDC reviews LIHTC applications through a joint funding process with the HTFJC. This change would provide funds for HTFJC to administer as a match for LIHTC projects through their own allocation process, unless the Iowa Finance Authority's scoring criteria change to provide an advantage for a direct City allocation of funds opposed to a local trust fund for LIHTC projects. Additional background on this item can be found in the attached memo from staff and HCDC minutes. Discussion: The City's LIHTC allocation is a set-aside of 20% of the amount the City allocates to the Affordable Housing Fund. In FY20, this amounts to $200,000. However, because this reduces duplication of efforts, it should prove a more effective use of funds, and it should make navigating the process simpler for LIHTC developers. Recommendation: HCDC supports this effort as a way to streamline processes to create affordable housing. HCDC voted 7-0 to recommend having HTFJC receive these funds for allocation, with the caveat that the HTFJC Director report back from their board regarding additional restrictions concerning rent and tenant income. This will be considered at HCDC's next meeting, during which HCDC will make a final recommendation. CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: August 9, 2019 To: Housing and Community Development Commission From: Tracy Hightshoe, NDS Director Re: Staff Recommendations The City Council directed staff to review the Affordable Housing Action Plan and consider new strategies to improve the availability and affordability of housing in Iowa City. At their August 6, 2019 work session, Council reviewed a memo from staff dated July 29, 2019 and approved all recommendations, except two that relate to the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC). The City Council requests the commission's input on the following items: 1) Allocating Council's set-aside for Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) projects to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC). For FY20, this is $200,000; and 2) Altering the preference and scoring criteria for CDBG/HOME assisted projects to promote housing applications that reduce rents or housing costs for owner -occupied properties that are lower than the HUD maximum limits. HCDC will review CDBG/HOME application materials, including the scoring criteria, this fall as part the CDBG/HOME funding process. This item will be on HCDC's October agenda for consideration. At the August 6 Council meeting, staff recommended allocating the Council set-aside for LIHTC projects to the HTFJC for the reasons noted below. Council directed staff to solicit input from HCDC on this recommendation. Since making this recommendation, staff learned the upcoming LIHTC Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP), which outlines the scoring criteria, is not expected to include a preference for local trust fund dollars. If this is the case, the City would retain these funds for a direct allocation and continue to have HCDC review and make a recommendation. • The LIHTC application process is extremely competitive. In recent years, applicants were awarded points if they received funds from a local housing trust fund but not for allocations from the City. This can make a difference in whether a project is funded. If not funded, the City loses out on millions of dollars for affordable housing from the Iowa Finance Authority. • The process would be more efficient for developers and the City. The City currently allocates funds to the HTFJC for affordable housing and has a direct LIHTC allocation process that is currently in conjunction with the HTFJC. An applicant must apply through two different entities for essentially City funding for the same project. • The Board of the HTFJC has considerable experience reviewing complex housing projects. If the applicant requests additional funds or an amendment to the project, the applicant would go through one entity who would complete a comprehensive review. • The HTFJC is 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 staff's hope that the City's contribution to the HTFJC will help encourage other local governments to contribute so that regional affordable housing solutions can be more effective. The Commission's recommendation will be placed in the City Council's August 20 packet in hopes that it will be discussed at their work session. The HTFJC is preparing for their fall LIHTC allocation process. Staff will be present for any questions. MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2019 — 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ROOM 202 PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Aguilar, Megan Alter, Matt Drabek, Charlie Eastham, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz, Lyn Dee Kealey, Peter Nkumu, Maria Padron MEMBERS ABSENT: John McKinstry STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Tracy Hightshoe OTHERS PRESENT: Ellen McCabe, Sara Barron RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-2 (Fixmer-Oraiz and Drabek dissenting) the Commission recommends to City Council the Tax Exemption Memo dated May 24, 2019 on the condition that the income of beneficiaries be reduced from 60% of the Area Median Income to 40% of the Area Median Income. By a vote of 7-0 (Nkumu absent) the Commission recommends to City Council support for allocating City LIHTC funding to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, subject to additional discussion with the Housing Trust Fund regarding the parameters of how they would allocate funds with the goal of lowering rents as far as possible for as many households as possible. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Padron called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 11, 2019 MINUTES: Kealey moved to approve the minutes of July 11, 2019. Nkumu seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. (Fixmer-Oraiz and Alter absent) PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. WELCOME NEW HCDC MEMBERS AND INTRODUCTORY PRESENTATION: Lehmann had the new members introduce themselves. Lyn Dee Kealey introduced herself noting she moved back to Iowa City in 2006 and she is a social worker at the University of Iowa Hospitals on the burn trauma unit for 24 years. She is interested in affordable housing and wants to work on the Commission to learn and see what can be provided for the community. Peggy Aguilar moved from Iowa City from Des Moines in 2016, while she was in Des Moines for 13 years she was the director of family services with Habitat for Humanity, so affordable housing has been in her Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 2 of 10 veins for a long time and wants the opportunity to see how she can use her knowledge and skills to help make Iowa City a better place for residents. Matt Drabek moved to Iowa City in 2007 for graduate school, graduated in 2012 and never left. He is interested in housing, he is a founding board member of a group called The Iowa City Tenants Union and did some similar work for a different group 8 or 9 years ago. Lehmann did a presentation on the role of the Commission. Lehmann works with grants that benefit low and moderate income households for public services, public facilities, etc. He works mostly with nonprofits but also some small development portion of business loans for low and moderate income individuals. They also do the housing rehab out of the Community Development Division and that includes a number of different funding sources, they also do the UniverCity program which purchases home near downtown, do rehabs and sell them. In Neighborhood Services, the umbrella division Lehmann works under, there is the Housing Authority, housing inspections, rental inspections and neighborhood outreach. Important terms: HUD: Department of Housing and Urban Development CDBG/HOME: Community Development Block Grant/HOME, the two primary grant programs for the City AMI: Area medium income LMI: Low/moderate income FMR: Fair Market Rent LIHTC: Low Income Housing Tax Credit Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County: a nonprofit that allocates affordable housing funds In terms of CDBG it has been around for a long time now and Iowa City has been receiving funds almost since the beginning. The goals of CDBG are providing safe, decent and sanitary housing, a suitable living environment and also expanding economic opportunities. Properties must meet a national objective, which for most cases means it benefits LMI households or individuals. Some funds can be used to eliminate slum and blight and some may be used to meet an urgent need. CDBG can be used for funding public services, facilities, economic development, and it can support housing but cannot develop new affordable housing. So that is where HOME comes in, which is one of the biggest source of federal funds for affordable housing to produce affordable housing. The HOME program has been around since 1990, the City also receives and annual allocation of HOME funds which can be used for construction of new housing, acquisitions, direct assistance to tenants and owners, etc. It has income requirements depending on the size of the project and complexity and type of the project. Both CDBG and HOME, if used to support housing, have fair market rents that the projects have to abide by. To allocate funds every year the City follows the consolidated plan, a five-year plan, that identifies the greatest needs for LMI households in the area, how the City can meet those needs and what are the exact projects to do to meet those needs. The consolidated plan guides CDBG/HOME investment, helps set priorities, and staff is currently working on the new consolidated plan right now and hope to have a draft done by December. Within the 5 -year consolidated plan are annual action plans. Each year these plans lay out the specific set of activities that will be funded. At the end of each year the City submits an annual consolidated plan report (CAPER) to show if they are meeting the needs as identified. Other documents of note: Analysis of impediments to fair housing choice - also known as the Fair Housing Choice Study Citizen participation Plan, how the City uses citizen input and how it is reflected in all plans and actions by the City As a general overview, Lehmann noted the City's fiscal year starts July 1 and the first thing the Commission will be doing in September will be reviewing last year's activities and outcomes in the CAPER. Next will be the Aid to Agencies funding process, which is how the City allocates public service dollars. Applications are open in August or September and the Commission will make their recommendations to Council in January. The annual CDBG/HOME funding round, for public facilities and affordable housing projects, is paired with an Emerging Aid to Agencies funding round, for newer service Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 3 of 10 agencies that need help getting off the ground or for those that hadn't received funding in the past, and applications open in December and the Commission recommends their allocations in March. The Consolidated and Annual Plans must be completed by May. The fiscal year ends June 30. Funding for FY20 will be approximately $659,000 in CDBG and $483,000 in HOME. Those are the primary federal sources of funding, and are the majority of the funding for services and affordable housing. There are also local funds the City uses. The Affordable Housing Fund gets split out for different uses, for FY20 the City allocated $1 million; part of that goes to The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, part goes to LIHTC projects that leverage dollars from the State, some will go towards housing security funds (rental deposits and a landlord risk mitigation fund to help people who have had barriers finding housing before), $75,000 goes into an opportunity fund, $75,000 for healthy homes (bridging health and housing), $50,000 is set aside for emergent situations. Finally there are some funds for land banking for future affordable housing, local Aid to Agencies funds ($555,000), GRIP, the UniverCity program, and The Housing Authority. Lehmann noted this year they will use federal dollars for public services, renovating facilities for nonprofits, neighborhood improvements to parks in LMI areas, housing rehab and other housing programs (acquisitions, buyer assistance, rental rehab), economic development for small business loans and assistance for LMI businesses. Lehmann mentioned income limits that come with federal dollars, and those are used for all the programs depending on how they decide to split them out on any given project and depending on what project outcomes they would like to see. Income limits are based on household size, currently a low income household of four makes $75,000; 30% of the median income is roughly the poverty line. Typically the City prefers to fund lower income households if they can but it depends on the situation. Rent limits are based on fair market rent and currently a fair market rent for a two-bedroom is $902/month and for a three bedroom $1,304/month. HUD also determines modest house prices for home buyer programs, currently the limit is $244,000 for both existing and new homes. Fixmer-Oraiz asked about the opportunity fund. Lehmann stated it is used to fund situations as they arise. There used to be an allocation for land banking; currently the City has around $640,000 in that fund but the opportunities for land are not coming forth so the City is looking for other opportunities to best use those funds as well. Fixmer-Oraiz asked the difference from opportunity fund and emergent funds. Hightshoe explained emergent funds have been used with residents are displaced from their rentals due to new company allocations, etc. (Rose Oaks, Hawkeye Court). Eastham asked what is the greatest need for housing in the community, where do the highest cost burdens lie and with which income groups. Lehmann said there is generally higher cost burden in lower income groups, typically renter families. For example in the less than 30% AMI right now there are 6700 renter households and for less than 50% AMI owner households are around 2000 currently. Eastham asked about the 6700 renter households and what percentage were student households versus nonstudent. Lehmann said that is challenging to figure out, but looking at poverty rates, and you remove students from Iowa City's population, the poverty rate for Iowa City is approximately what it is for other Iowa cities which is around 11 %, so he would guess most of the renter households are students. Eastham noted the census bureau classifies by household type which can separate student versus nonstudent households. Lehmann said if they look at rental households by rental type nonfamily (which would generally be students) is 5000 so that is most of the 6700 but there are some of those 5000 that may not be students. Lehmann noted he prefers to use the poverty rate for students for that reason. Nkumu asked what microloans are used for. Lehmann stated those funds can be applied for by LMI businesses, generally it is microenterprises with less than five employees and as long as half those folks are LMI, it qualifies as an LMI microbusiness. Funds help them start a business. Nkumu asked if it was a grant or a loan they have to pay back. Lehmann stated it is a loan they must pay back. Hightshoe noted the loans are through MidwestOne bank, the City just guarantees the funds. Lehmann noted that helps the business establish a commercial line of credit. Nkumu asked what the maximum amount of loan one can apply for. Lehman replied $10,000 for a single loan. Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 4 of 10 REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE TAX EXEMPTION MEMO DATED MAY 24,2019: Hightshoe stated in June 2016 Council adopted an action plan for affordable housing which included 15 different strategies to encourage affordable housing. The memo in the Commission packet discussed the 15 steps and progress to this point. One of the steps Council wants the Commission to review is using a tax exemption policy to encourage the development of new affordable housing. A committee was formed to discuss what it would take for a private developer to construct housing where some of it is affordable for up to 10 years, the maximum allowed by State Code. The committee consisted of City employees from legal, finance, city manager's office, and neighborhood services. From outside the City, there were two developers, an appraiser, a realtor and two lenders. The developers stated for a private developer to do affordable housing they do not want a negotiation process, they want to know the parameters from the get -go. Based on that the committee settled upon a 40% exemption of property taxes for a development for a 10 years. In return, the developers felt that would be a sufficient motivation for them to provide at least 15% of the units in the development as affordable. Affordable was defined as the maximum rent a household at 40% of median income could afford minus the estimated utility allowance for tenant who paid utilities. Based on HUD's income limits effective 6/1/2018 and estimated utility allowances, this would be $805 for a three- bedroom, and $683 for a two- and $578 for a one -bedroom. Drabek asked if the committee did an estimate on what the real rent would be, taking the rent price of $578 plus the 40% tax savings, does that equal the market rental rate. Hightshoe said they did, market rates on new construction rentals are expensive, a one -bedroom in new construction would likely be $900 to $1000 rents. Eastham asked what the difference is between the rent reduction above the market level and the amount of money received as a tax exemption. Hightshoe did not have the analysis with her, the goal was for the developer to have a 10% rate of return but to do that they would have to forgive 90% of the taxes on the whole development. The developers said they were more worried about vacancy so they just wanted a tax exemption for the amount they were losing in rent. Developers noted there was no tax exemption process that would make this viable for downtown because of the rents they can get in the downtown. Hightshoe noted a developer may request different terms than the ones outlined in the memo, however before granting a tax exemption, the City would consider the capacity of the developer/project manager to administer the program, including income certification of households and annual reporting requirements, the number of affordable units proposed in the development, the household income level targeted and the proposed rents for the affordable units as compared to the market rate units. Alter asked about the concern about placing additional affordable housing units in areas the City's Affordable Housing Location Model (AHLM), so geographically speaking what areas are available for this type of application. Lehmann said generally the south and east parts of town would not be allowed under the AHLM. Hightshoe added that because this tax exemption provides a mix of market and affordable units, the AHLM would not apply. Alter asked how it fits into transportation lines and Hightshoe said it wasn't a part of the discussion. Eastham suggested the maximum income limit be changed, which is currently 60% of the area median income, and changing that wouldn't change the financial calculations of the developer, so he suggests 60% is too high. Hightshoe acknowledged the committee discussed 60% being high, however anyone under that amount is also eligible. Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) encouraged the Commission to think about the fact that every time they start an affordable housing program it is dollars allocated to a specific type of housing, in this case new construction. One thing staff pointed out in their most recent memo to Council about the allocation of the affordable housing fund is that new construction is one of the most expensive ways to create affordable housing and existing housing can make more economic sense to be converted into affordability. She stated the Commission can evaluate this proposal and its merits based on cost and who may be eligible but she encourages them to think more broadly about this being an investment of City resources into creating affordable housing for a 10 year period in new construction where it is more Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 5 of 10 expensive to find units. So it is not just the individual variables of this proposal but how this proposal fits in overall toolkit of making more housing, with better variety, more available to more people in more areas. Fixmer-Oraiz noted the 10 year time frame; why was it set at 10 years? Hightshoe added that is the maximum allowed by State Code, it can be set for less than 10 years but not for more. Padron asked if the rent would stay the same for the 10 years. Hightshoe said it will always be based on HUDs rates so it would probably increase slightly each year. Padron also asked where the 15% amount came from. Hightshoe said the committee discussed and chose to try to match the tax increment finance policy which is at 15%. Additionally the reason they didn't feel the AHLM should apply is because the committee felt like the whole city should be eligible, so when talking about mixed developments and trying to get every development to have a percentage of affordable housing they liked the 15% but wanted no more than 20% so they could have the mixed income. Also because of the AHLM and the concern about concentrating affordable housing in certain developments is why they wanted this incentive to be city- wide, unless other funds subject to the AHLM should be used as well. Fixmer-Oraiz asked about the annual recertification of the tenants. Hightshoe said the developers would have to do that or they could hire a nonprofit to do it but each year when they issue new leases they would have to verify income of the tenant and make sure the tenant is eligible. If the tenant's income goes over the threshold, then that unit is no longer considered affordable and the next unit that becomes available the developer has to rent as an affordable unit. Alter noted that doing the income review disincentivizes one from making a better income because they must have housing and some stability. Hightshoe said that is standard in all HUD and State programs. She also noted that if the income threshold is 60% but then goes up, it is not considered non -affordable until the income is at 80% so it would need to be a drastic income change. Kealey asked if the tax exemption goes away after 10 years do the units have to remain affordable after the 10 years. Hightshoe confirmed they do not, they can then be rented at any rate after the 10 years. Eastham asked if they had a median income table available and asked what 60% of the median income for a three person household. Lehmann said it would be $51,720 and that a two bedroom unit would be around 16% of income. Eastham would like the Commission to lower the maximum income to at least 50% or 40% of median income. Alter feels this program is a short-term idea, at year 10 that tenant has to move and the problem starts over. She noted it is short -sided in the scope of the long-term problem. Nkumu acknowledged that 10 years does go quickly but feels this solution is better than nothing and what is the alternative if there is not this plan. Hightshoe admitted she struggles with the 10 year problem, it is also the same in the Riverfront Crossings affordable housing requirement, it is only 10 years as well. The catch is developers will not provide affordable housing without the subsidy. Drabek noted the 10 year limit is a limit of public subsidy of private development, it does not apply to any program the City runs such as The Housing Authority. Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) noted other options are to acquire units that have already been built and either they become part of the public housing program or a nonprofit housing provider, so after the 10 years those units would not go away as in this case of new construction with tax exemptions. The tradeoff is if The Housing Fellowship were to buy a building tomorrow that was built 30 years ago and added it to their inventory they would not be interested in raising rents to the market rent. Lehmann noted in the HOME program if it is less than $15,000 it is a five year period of affordability, if it is up to $40,000 it is a 10 year, if more than that it is 15 year and new construction is 20 years. So the way Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 6 of 10 a lot of affordable housing funders talk about it is the turnover number of units; 10 years is an expected annual 10% of units would turnover every year out of affordability. Eastham agrees it is a handicap approach, but the terms of affordable housing, such as in Riverfront Crossings, can be atrocious. He is more interested in trying to reduce the maximum income, 60% of median household incomes are paying 17% of their income for this rent whereas a $30,000 income household would be paying close to 30% of their income. He suggests lowering the 60% down to 40%. Lehmann noted that if it is lowered to 40% then everyone in those units would be cost burdened by definition. Eastham said then to lower the maximum to the cost burden. Hightshoe also noted it has to be easy to explain to a developer, they don't understand by looking at the income table. Eastham feels a developer would just need to look at what the maximum income is for occupants of these units. Hightshoe also added they looked at affordable homeownership and with the Iowa City market and the housing prices a tax exemption alone would not encourage somebody to bring it down. It also was not feasible with rehabs, the rehab would have to raise the assessment significantly to adjust for the tax exemption. Fixmer-Oraiz asked if during the conversations within the committee, did the developers appear interested in pursuing this exemption. Hightshoe said the developers thought it would be viable and something to look at if they saw vacancies increase. If approved by Council, there still may never be a single application for a project. Eastham said it would also be prudent for the City to make sure if this subsidy is worth it — what the net loss or gain would be for this tax exemption. Hightshoe said those numbers were looked at and studied for this proposal. Eastham moved to recommend to City Council the Tax Exemption Memo dated May 24, 2019 on the condition that the income of beneficiaries be reduced from 60% of the Area Median Income to 40% of the Area Median Income. Aguilar seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-2 (Fixmer-Oraiz and Drabek dissenting). Hightshoe asked the reason for the dissent so it could be documented. Fixmer-Oraiz noted it did not seem like a long enough period for affordable housing to justify the exemption. Drabek agreed. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON ALLOCATING CITY LIHTC FUNDING TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND OF JOHNSON COUNTY (HTFJC): Hightshoe stated when Council asked staff to develop the 15 -step action plan for affordable housing, they requested it be regularly reviewed and updated. Staff went through a comprehensive analysis looking at the plan and made several additional recommendations for Council. Council wanted input regarding both the tax exemption committee and two other items listed in the memo. One was altering the scoring criteria for CDBG/HOME, which the Commission does every year, and staff's recommendation is to give a higher score to projects that reduce the rent further than just fair market rent because in staff analysis there are areas where rent is lower than fair market rent. In those cases, subsidizing someone for the same unit at the same price the private market is already producing in that neighborhood may not make sense. The second item is regarding the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC). Right now, the City provides 50% of Affordable Housing Fund dollars to HTFJC to allocate. Many LIHTC projects (the fund also reserves 20% for LIHTC projects), are being funded by both the City and HTFJC. A couple years ago the City combined their application process, but some projects are being funded by both and it is difficult when an amendment comes back because it comes to two different parties. As such, staff thinks there may also be efficiency in just having one entity review and to avoid conflicting reviews. Also, if HTFJC administered all the funds, the City could remove them from the Aid to Agencies pot of money and they wouldn't be competing with other agencies, instead being funded by a 5% administrative fee to build their capacity and have a reliable source of funds for administrative expenses. If HTFJC took on the LIHTC process, there would be another 5% they could also for administration. Hightshoe also noted if the City funds the same projects as the HTFJC, there is duplication of efforts in monitoring. Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 7 of 10 Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) said they have heard they don't know what the point system will be for scoring this year and this past year there were no extra points based on where the funds came from, which was a departure from the past. They are waiting for the LIHTC scoring process to be released. Hightshoe said staff recommendation was to have the set aside and administered through HTFJC and if the scoring criteria is released and there is higher scoring for city contribution the City will take back those funds to try to improve the chances of LIHTC developers in our community of getting funded. If it doesn't matter or HTFJC doesn't get additional points it made sense just to have one entity review the projects. The HTFJC Board is also made up of people who only review housing projects so they have experience in reviewing housing projects. Padron asked if the Commission could do the same thing with other agencies, just give them direct money every year. Lehmann said what they are recommending for HTFJC is similar to what the federal government does for the City, the City gets funds and are told some amount of it can be used for administrative costs, but the allocation of funds every year is not the same and a certain amount of dollars is never guaranteed. Padron misunderstood and thought this was money that would come away from the Aid to Agencies (A2A) funding and Hightshoe explained HTFJC separately administers hundreds of thousands of dollars for the City but cannot access any for administrative expenses, so they must apply through the A2A process for administrative funds. This will fund them without them applying for administrative funds. Padron asked if there would be more money in the Aid to Agency funds to distribute to others then and Hightshoe confirmed that was correct. Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) requested this be considered as a project based fee with the caveat that if this fell apart and the City decided to no longer give funding to HTFJC that they would have five years to apply back and be considered a legacy agency. Hightshoe stated this year the Commission allocated HTFJC $30,000 in A2A and the City would want to make sure they continue to get that $30,000 so if their Affordable Housing Fund contribution was only $25,000, then the City would give HTFJC another $5,000 from Aid to Agencies to make up the difference. Eastham supports this idea and feels it is a good step on staff's direction. He wants to talk about establishing guidelines that will further lower rents for projects with City funds. On page 23 of the packet, this memo's recommendation #2 regarding altering preference in scoring criteria, the staff proposes a good thing which is to give a higher preference to CDBG/HOME projects that have rents lower than the HUD maximum rent. However Eastham does not think the standard should be projects lower than HUD maximum rent but rather projects that reach some percentage of the average housing contribution to their rental costs. Eastham reiterated his goal in life is to eliminate housing cost burdens. Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) stated she cannot speak for The HTFJC Board of Directors but her instinct would be for the City to give them the money and tell them the parameters, not for them to decide. Eastham said every entity gets money with guidelines attached to it. McCabe said they would take their normal process and work with the funding they have with a LITHC developer and then follow the guidelines the City has attached to that funding. Eastham stated a sensible rent target for subsidized units, new construction or acquisition, is some high percentage of the average rent paid by the housing choice voucher system. That group of people have the lowest incomes and are receiving assistance, their average rent payment is standard, so rents should be set at their level to not put them in a cost burden. Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) asked what happens to the money after it is granted to the developer because part of this is what happens longer term with the money too. How does that money come back into the affordable housing dollars. If the money is a loan it comes back to the City to fund additional housing projects. Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) agrees, if the City is giving HTFJC money as a grant or loan. Eastham said to get lower rents is has to be a grant. McCabe noted when HTFJC uses Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 8 of 10 local government funds, such as when working with Sand land year, that was a loan so that money had to come back. Hightshoe explained to new members that a LIHTC project is a 30 year period of affordability. McCabe added it can be up to 60% AMI as well. Eastham said it can be 60% of AMI but it could also be lower. Fixmer-Oraiz moved to recommend to City Council support for allocating City LIHTC funding to The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, subject to additional discussion with the Housing Trust Fund regarding the parameters of how they would allocate funds with the goal of lowering rents as far as possible for as many households as possible. Eastham seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0 (Nkumu absent). REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF THE FINALIZED 2019 FAIR HOUSING CHOICE STUDY (ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE): Lehmann noted this is just returning to the Commission with changes that were discussed by HCDC, also legal reviewed the document as laid out in in the memo in their packet. This will be presented to Council at the August 20 meeting. Lehmann noted Stephanie from Human Rights was going to present on fair housing enforcement processes but because the recommendation in the plan is to have her do a training for all Boards and Commissions, they decided to wait to combine efforts for that later in the year, especially as a full presentation is expected to take one and a half hours. Lehmann noted McKinstry had brought up during the public comment portion of the discussion mobile home housing and Lehmann added that in the study as an HCDC recommendation. That change specifically is discussed on page 178 of the plan, under education and outreach Strategy 1: Improve Demand -Size Awareness. "The demand side of the housing market includes tenants, homeowners, borrowers, mobile home park residents, and other who need and/or use housing." Lehmann asked if there were any additional recommendations, and if there were none, then no vote was needed. The Commission indicated no vote was needed. AID TO AGENCIES RECOMMENDATIONS FOLLOW UP: Lehmann stated staff (city manager's office and neighborhood services staff) met with the Agency Impact Coalition (AIC) (Shelter House, Prelude, Neighborhood Center, Free Medical Clinic, United Action for Youth and Domestic Violence Intervention Program) on July 30. Fixmer-Oraiz also attended the meeting. Lehmann said staff was there to listen, find out what the agencies needs were, how they saw budgets potentially as well. DVIP talked about the 29% decrease in A2A funding over the last year and were within $14,000 of losing their federal funding match, Prelude talked about how their A2A amount was stable and they have trouble keeping staff because they can't increase salaries, free Medical Clinic discussed how the people they help are having more complex issues and other complications that come with increased immigration populations and cultures. Staff then discussed the budget timeline and how it fits into everything and how agencies can be involved. The kickoff for the budget is August 20 at 5pm, and is open to the public (it will be the City Council work session). During September and October staff looks through capital improvement needs, October through November is when departments submit requests, and budget requests are finalized in December. In January the budget is presented to Council and Council adopts it in March. Staff also looked at what current A2A levels would be if A2A funding had increased over time. At 2% (what most city departments base budgets on) the amount would be $304,000 (excluding CDBG and utility funds), if adjusted by the CPI inflation index it would be around $281,000, and if done by changes in taxable valuation it would be $366,000. The City Manager mentioned he didn't realize A2A had decreased as much as it had over time simply because the City has allocated more funding for public services, just not through the A2A grant. Things like contributions to the Behavioral Access Center, Winter Shelter, etc. The AIC asked to look at funding through what is the need, the City Manager asked what they felt was a fair funding and requested the AIC provide that amount to the City. Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 9 of 10 Fixmer-Oraiz noted the AIC members encouraged City staff and HCDC members to look at their overall impact on the community as an asset that includes economic multipliers and community health. This was in response to the budget feeling like just another line item, and one that could be easily under -valued. She added the discussions were positive. Eastham noted the August 20 Council work session meeting will not be discussion, it will just be setting budget priorities. In the packet released for that meeting, the City Manager is going to suggest an increase of 2% from the base of $250,000 for Aid to Agencies which is not necessarily what the AIC group is going to propose. Fixmer-Oraiz acknowledged the City Manager knew he would not have a proposal from AIC in time for the work session but he is asking for it by Labor Day so it is still early on in the process and can be adapted perhaps. Lehmann added the City Manager wanted to call out A2A in this upcoming work session because it was not addressed in the last one. Padron requested HCDC be informed of the proposal from AIC to the City Manager to see if Council's final budget allocation matches that proposal. Fixmer-Oraiz can reach out to AIC to ask for a copy of their proposal. STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT: Lehmann stated the next meeting of HCDC would be September 19 at 6:30pm, held at the Iowa City Public Library Meeting Room D. At this meeting will be the review of City Steps with nonprofits. It will also be the public meeting for the CAPER and will receive legacy Aid to Agencies funding applications. Eastham asked for an update on the South District Homeownership program and Habitat for Humanity's proposal. Lehmann said because the City actually found a property under their previous application the City will move forward this year with that project and will encourage Habitat for Humanity and HCDC to consider looking at the South District Program as part of the competitive process next year. Lehmann noted the City updated its affordable housing programs summary that has been done in the past, FY15 — FY19, he will send it to HCDC as a follow up item. Basically from FY15 — FY19 $9.9 million has gone to assist affordable housing projects and workforce housing projects. 452 units have been affordable and 66 workforce units, 339 renter projects (mostly from Riverfront Crossings) and 204 rehab projects. Eastham asked if the rent amounts were included in the data for these projects. Lehmann has the target income levels not the rent levels. Hightshoe said most are at fair market rent. Lehmann plans to incorporate that data into the CAPER. Lehmann noted the Fair Housing Choice Study is going to Council on August 20 and the Housing Trust Fund turns 15 this year. IFA's Iowa Housing Conference is in Cedar Rapids this year from September 4 to September 6. It is $270 to attend if anyone is interested. Hightshoe stated Iowa City is hosting the American Planners Housing Conference this year, October 9- 11. The City will do an affordable housing tour. ADJOURNMENT: Eastham moved to adjourn. Fixmer-Oraiz seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0 (Nkumu absent). Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 10 of 10 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record Name Terms Exp. 7/11 8/15 O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant Aguilar, Peggy 6/30/22 ■ X Alter, Megan 6/30/21 X X Drabek, Matt 6/30/22 O/E X Eastham, Charlie 6/30/20 X X Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa 6/30/20 X X Kealey, Lyn Dee Hook 6/30/22 O/E X McKinstry, John 6/30/20 X O/E Nkumu, Peter 6/30/22 O/E X Padron, Maria 6/30/20 X X • Resigned from Commission Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant Item Number: 9. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Memo from Parks & Rec Director: Emerald Ash Borer Update ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from Parks & Rec Director: Emerald Ash Borer Update ,�.®4. CITY OF IOWA CITY 21:1sl q= MEMORANDUM Date: September 11, 2019 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Juli Seydell Johnson, Director of Parks & Recreation Zachary Hall, Superintendent of Parks Re: Emerald Ash Borer Update In June, staff updated City Council regarding the ongoing Emerald Ash Borer infestation throughout the city. At that time, the Emerald Ash Borer Treatment Services contract had just begun with an anticipated 400 ash trees to be treated based on inventory data of size, location and health. At the beginning of the contract, and all through the spring and summer, the treatment contractor TruGreen and staff re-evaluated the list of ash trees to -be -treated to ensure detrimental effects from the Emerald Ash Borer infestation had not compromised the number of trees to -be -treated. In September the initial contract was completed identifying that of the 417 trees to -be -treated 2 trees had to be removed due to onsite construction conflicts and storm damage. Additionally, 16 trees were determined not treatable after evaluations by the treatment contractor and staff. Thus, a total of 399 trees, dispersed throughout the entire city (reference attached map), were treated with most trees located in the street right-of-way. The total cost of treatment, which will be repeated every two years, was approximately $50,000. Trees continue to be assessed for potential treatment, however it appears the infestation of Emerald Ash Borer, the presence of white mottled rot, storm damage and general tree decline is limiting this option. In 2020, staff estimates there may be an additional 200 ash trees that may be eligible for treatment. To determine if an ash tree is a candidate for treatment or must be removed Forestry staff follows an evaluation process that encompasses a visual inspection of the tree that examines the overall health of the tree, location, any evidence of sustained damage from storms, the presence of overhead and underground utilities, any evidence of past pruning and an evaluation of past service records outlining the history of the tree. Before treatment of any ash tree begins the treatment contractor re-evaluates each tree on the treatment contract to confirm if the tree is still a viable candidate for treatment. If the contractor and staff determine the tree is not a viable candidate, then the tree is removed from the treatment contract and added to the tree removal contract and scheduled for removal. The city is committed to the pragmatic balance of public safety and responsible urban forest preservation. Throughout 2019 the city has contracted and completed internally the removal of 105 ash trees due to storm damage, general tree decline and the rampantly increasing effects from the Emerald Ash Borer infestation. Another 50 ash trees are anticipated for removal before the end of the calendar year. The following graph summarizes the City's tree removal and planting history over the last four years. September 11, 2019 Page 2 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0: 2015 Replanting vs Tree Removals 2016 2017 *Replanting to Removal ratio is —2:1 Mi . iL�i 2018 Total * ■ Ash Tree Removals m Non -Ash Tree Removals All Tree Removals Tree Plantings Increased ash tree removals will be inevitable as the effects of the Emerald Ash Borer infestation are revealed year-to-year. There are approximately 3,000 ash trees located on city property, which includes approximately 1,000 of these trees located in street rights-of-way. Staff estimates there are an additional 200 ash trees potentially eligible for treatment located in street rights-of-way. There may be a few trees in active use areas of parks that are potential candidates for treatment. There are no plans to treat the majority of 1,700 ash trees in forested and wooded area, for many of these are small caliper ash that are "volunteer" growth, that do not serve the same function as street trees specifically planted in rights -of -ways. Ash tree losses in wooded areas will be organically replaced by neighboring native species of oaks and hickories. So far, tree removals have focused on street trees due to the safety concern and liability of fallen branches on traffic, cars and people. The number of Forestry emergency call -outs for tree damage after storms is increasing as a larger percentage of trees are experiencing a decline in health. Mitigating damage and removing debris takes time away from tree planting and care of young trees. Trees in parks will also need to be addressed as staff works to deliver urban forestry practices that promote public safety, tree preservation and the expansion of a diverse tree canopy. The increase in urban forestry work is evident in the private sector as well, with private tree contractors backlogged with wait lists for tree removals on private property. This backlog impacts the City's ability to work with third party contractors as well. Although staff is supportive of additional tree plantings on City property it is important to note that there is not capacity from current staff to continue tree removals, and plantings at the level of recent years. Newly planted trees require intensive watering, weeding and pruning during the first five years after planting. The City's commitment to urban forestry has been acknowledged through the award of Tree City USA for the past 39 years. In addition, the City's efforts in 2018 earned a Tree City USA Growth Award from the National Arbor Day Foundation for its expanded urban forestry efforts in management, tree preservation and canopy expansion. The City was also awarded the Tree's Forever Outstanding Group Project for its Arbor Day tree planting projects coordinated with the ICCSD, Trees Forever, Green Iowa AmeriCorps, the Iowa DNR and others. The Arbor Day tree planting projects were the culmination of a yearlong planning effort that resulted in a two-day planting event during Earth Week, where Hoover Elementary and City High students planted a September 11, 2019 Page 3 mix of 200+ native sapling trees at TTRA. The students also received oak saplings to take home for planting. During the last year the City has collaborated with contractors, nonprofit groups and volunteers in planting approximately 500 trees throughout the city and have given away approximately 400 trees to children throughout the city to personally plant at their homes. Where site conditions allow, staff is committed to a tree replacement goal of at least two trees planted for every tree removed. Cleanup and ensuring public safety from recent tree damaging storms has been staff's focus, but approximately 100 more trees are anticipated to be planted this fall. Staff are energized for next year's tree planting opportunities and have been working to capitalize on the successes of 2019. Expanded tree planting projects, urban wood utilization and tree preservation will be the focus. As a part of the City's Climate Action Plan the City is committed to working toward expanding the tree canopy coverage throughout the urban area. To be successful the community will need to develop collaborative approaches that incorporate tree plantings throughout the entire city and not just public property. Partnering with Project Green, the United Way, Master Gardeners and Green Iowa AmeriCorps on future planting projects will be key toward achieving this goal. In future years, implementing a subsidized tree purchase program for residents will help to expand the tree canopy coverage on private property. Tree planting projects and tree care will need to include private businesses, non -profits, other governmental agencies and private residents. The Tree Advisory Committee has been meeting quarterly throughout the last year to examine the current condition of the Emerald Ash Borer infestation, work on planting projects, work on Arbor Day celebrations and update the City's public outreach and engagement efforts. As a result, staff has expanded its Arbor Day program to educate more children within the city about the benefits of trees, has expanded its public notification process for tree removals in neighborhoods, has provided online access to the tree inventory and is exploring programs for urban wood utilization. The Forestry staff loves trees and is sensitive to the loss of trees throughout the city due to Emerald Ash Borer and how that affects neighborhoods. The City has a great responsibility of balancing the management of public safety, tree preservation and tree diversification in an ever- changing landscape due to pests and disease, changing land uses and public need. Trees are mortal beings and the urban forest is a dynamic, complex and evolving system that takes great care and thoughtful understanding to make it the best it can be. Staff is committed to using all resources, technologies and support to find a balance that allows for a diverse, resilient and healthy forest. emoved Remaining 2019 ,ash Trees to be R .y ieVy� Orr �r yy Tt. [ PP }}ffes� iia atO r 3 # 4' '•t_ ♦ # t« # * # .. # .v1 # - qtr r _ F1 At 41 # i iia 6 A 4a 2019 Ash Trees Removed x TPw } i - iy•:�i w� ir F - A'' Item Number: 10. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Invitation: Johnson County to honor longtime community advocate Bob Welsh: September 19 /_1if_1;67:ILvil=1is111&5 Description Invitation: Johnson County to honor longtime community advocate Bob Welsh: September 19 Ashley Platz From: Geoff Fruin Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 11:09 AM To: Ashley Platz; Kellie Fruehling Subject: FW: News release: Johnson County to honor longtime community advocate Bob Welsh Sept. 19 Attachments: Welsh Event Flyer.pdf Can you please place this in the IP? Thanks– Geoff hanks– Geoff From: Lynette Jacoby[mailto:ljacoby@co.johnson.ia.us] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 10:51 AM To: Lynette Jacoby <Ijacoby@co.johnson.ia.us> Subject: News release: Johnson County to honor longtime community advocate Bob Welsh Sept. 19 ,Johnson COUnty BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Lisa Green -Douglass, Chairperson Pat Heiden Rod Sullivan, dice Chairperson Royceann Porter Janelle Rettig For immediate release Contact: Board of Supervisors Office; Lynette Jacoby, Social Services Department Contact number: 319-356-6000; 319-356-6090 Contact email: sups@co.iohnson.ia.us; liacobv@co.iohnson.ia.us Monday, Sept. 9, 2019 Johnson County to honor longtime community advocate Bob Welsh Sept. 19 Johnson County, Iowa — The Johnson County Board of Supervisors and Social Services Department will honor longtime community advocate Bob Welsh and proclaim Sept. 19, 2019 to be Bob Welsh Appreciation Day in Johnson County. The event will take place on Thursday, Sept. 19 beginning with a morning reception in Room 203 B/C of the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building, 855 S. Dubuque St., Iowa City, followed by a proclamation at the Board of Supervisors' formal meeting beginning at 9 a.m. in the Johnson County Administration Building, 913 S. Dubuque St., Iowa City. The public is invited to attend. "I am not a young man, yet right around the time I was born, Bob began a crusade to improve the lives of Johnson County's neediest residents," said Rod Sullivan, Board of Supervisors Vice Chairperson. "Over the decades, thousands of people have lived better lives because of his work. No one has given more to the 'least among us' than Bob Welsh." Welsh, a retired minister, is well-known in the community for his work advocating on behalf of others. He has spent decades advocating for older adults, caregivers, children and individuals with disabilities, and has been instrumental in local affordable housing efforts. He has served on numerous boards and commissions at both the state and local level, including the Johnson County Task Force on Aging, Johnson County Livable Community, Johnson County Consortium on Aging, Children's Agenda and Older Iowans Legislature. "Bob has been a tireless advocate for all marginalized populations in Johnson County for more than 50 years," said Lynette Jacoby, Johnson County Social Services Director. "We are recognizing him not only for his decades of service to our county, but also for his dedication and love for this community." -END- 2'ou are invited to a reception honoring Bev, #,go #Ielsli Thursday, September 10, 8-9:00 A.M. Reception with coffee & pastries Health and Human Services Bldg. RM 203 9:00 A.M. Board of Supervisors Proclamation to follow Please join us to celebrate Bob Welsh for his i31any 1.��' r years of V. serVlCe to Johnson County Item Number: 11. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Civil Service Examination: Assistant Superintendent of Recreation ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Examination: Assistant Superintendent of Recreation I r 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX VVW'W'.icgov.org September 9, 2019 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Assistant Superintendent of Recreation 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 Assistant Superintendent of Recreation. Matthew Eidahl IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Rick Wy s, Chair Item Number: 12. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Civil Service Examination: Operations Supervisor: Transportation Services ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Examination: Operations Supervisor: Transportation Services Ir :-Z CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (3 (9) 356-5009 FAX wwn..icgov.org August 30, 2019 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Operations Supervisor — Transpjbrqph Services 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 Operations Supervisor — Transportation Services. Daniel Bissell IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ick Wyss, Chair Item Number: 13. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Civil Service Examination: Recreation Assistant ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Examination: Recreation Assistant f r i — C CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City. Iowa 52240- 1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX www. icgov. org August 30, 2019 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Recreation Assistant 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 Recreation Assistant. Sydney Stodola IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Aickss, Chair Item Number: 14. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Bar Check Report: August 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Bar Check Report: August 2019 FROM: Sergeant Derek Frank RE: Aug 2019 Bar Check Report DATE: Sept 10, 2019 This report tracks the performance of Iowa City liquor license establishments in monitoring their patrons for violations of Iowa City's ordinances regarding Possession of Alcohol Under the Legal Age (PAULA) and Persons Under the Legal Age in Licensed or Permitted Establishments (Under 21). "Bar checks" are defined by resolution as an officer -initiated check of a liquor establishment for PAULA or other alcohol-related violations. This includes directed checks of designated liquor establishments, and checks initiated by officers as part of their routine duties. It does not include officer responses to calls for service. The bar check ratios are calculated by dividing the number of citations issued to patrons at an establishment during a period of time by the number of bar checks performed during the same time period. If at any time a venue with a granted exception certificate has a PAULA ratio more than .25 during a 12 -month period, their certificate is reviewed for revocation. Note, while the resolution requires that bar checks and citations of the University of Iowa Department of Public Safety (DPS) be included in these statistics, UI DPS ceased performing bar checks and issuing these citations to patrons in May of 2014. Charts PAULA/ Under 21 ratios - Aug 2019 4 3.5 3 25 2 1.5 05 1 IJ 4Qo ■ PAULA Ratio ■ Under 21 Ratios PAULA/ Under 21 ratios - previous 12 months 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 I tl 1■ 1 ■ ■I ■ ■I ■I ■■ .I _1 _1 ■ ■ I ■ ,`,,)`� c�^4• itis �`� �,}� [��' gQ- P4- �� Q� �� csk. QQ ��5 �jF. ,���' �`� �,� Q'�` �O '?P,P`�` J��, 19 ti 1 QQ©1+ CQ& S1' 1q. 0� `� 0 PAULA Ratio 0 Under 21 Ratio Raw Data Bar Check Data - Aua 2019 AND GRILL EDEN LOUNGE 5 0 6 0 1.2 MARTINIS 4 21 4 Ratio Ratio AIRLINER 8 3 28 0.375 3.5 BO ]AMES 5 1 8 0.2 1.6 SPORTS 6 1 18 0.166666667 3 COLUMN, CORP 5 0 1 0 0.2 SUMMIT 8 0 22 0 2.75 RESTAURANT & BAR 1 0 0 0 0 FIELDHOUSE 6 0 10 0 1.666666667 BAR 4 0 0 0 0 UNION BAR 6 0 8 0 1.333333333 BROTHERS BAR 7 0 6 0 0.857142857 AND GRILL EDEN LOUNGE 5 0 6 0 1.2 MARTINIS 4 0 4 0 1 DCS,DC'S 6 0 6 0 1 DUBLIN 2 0 2 0 1 UNDERGROUND PINTS 5 0 1 0 0.2 BLUE MOOSE 1 0 1 0 1 TAP HOUSE HILLTOP 1 0 0 0 0 TAVERN DOES PLACE 4 0 0 0 0 STUDIO 6 0 0 0 0 13,YACHT CLUB CARL & ERNIES 1 0 0 0 0 GOOD TIME PUB & GRUB QUINTONS BAR 1 0 0 0 0 & DELI IOWA CITY 1 0 0 0 0 EAGLES CLUB SAMS PIZZA 1 0 0 0 0 DEADWOOD 2 0 0 0 0 TAVERN Total 86 5 120 Bar Check Data - previous 12 months CACTUS 1 5 0 5 0 CACTUS 2 1 2 0 2 0 PEPPERJAX 1 1 0 1 0 GRILL BO JAMES 51 24 41 0.470588235 0.803921569 VINE TAVERN 11 5 2 0.454545455 0.181818182 AND EATERY EDEN LOUNGE 6 2 0 0.333333333 0 SUMMIT 102 30 123 0.294117647 1.205882353 RESTAURANT & BAR UNION BAR 83 23 62 0.277108434 0.746987952 AIRLINER 69 17 80 0.246376812 1.15942029 FIELDHOUSE 73 13 61 0.178082192 0.835616438 BAR IOWA CITY 6 1 6 0.166666667 1 BREWLAB,VAN BS BLUE MOOSE 6 1 1 0.166666667 0.166666667 TAP HOUSE SPORTS 76 10 85 0.131578947 1.118421053 COLUMN, CORP MARTINIS 42 4 17 0.095238095 0.404761905 ,EDEN LOUNGE 30 2 18 0.066666667 0.6 BROTHERS BAR 93 1 18 0.010752688 0.193548387 AND GRILL PINTS 33 0 4 0 0.121212121 DC'S 34 0 6 0 0.176470588 BARDOT 3 0 3 0 1 DUBLIN it 0 3 0 0.272727273 UNDERGROUND HATCHET 1 0 0 0 0 JACKS MICKEYS IRISH 3 0 0 0 0 PUB DONNELLYS 3 0 0 0 0 i PUB HILLTOP 4 0 0 0 0 TAVERN SALOON 1 0 0 0 0 TCB 15 0 0 0 0 JOES PLACE 20 0 0 0 0 THE MILL 3 0 0 0 0 CLUB CAR 1 0 0 0 0 BIG GROVE 5 0 0 0 0 BREWERY ST. BURCH 1 0 0 0 0 TAVERN STUDIO 12 0 0 0 0 13,YACHT CLUB CARLOS 1 0 0 0 0 OKELLYS FIRST AVENUE 1 0 0 0 0 CLUB CARL & ERNIES 3 0 0 0 0 GOOD TIME PUB & GRUB TWO DOGS PUB 9 0 0 0 0 ESTELAS FRESH 3 0 0 0 0 MEX AVOCADO 5 0 0 0 0 MEXICAN BAR & GRILL BLUE MOOSE 1 0 0 0 0 TAP HOUSE QUINTONS BAR 2 0 0 0 0 & DELI IOWA CITY 2 0 0 0 0 EAGLES CLUB AMERICAN 5 0 0 0 0 LEGION POST 17 GEORGES 6 0 0 0 0 BUFFET GABES 5 0 0 0 0 DAVES FOX 2 0 0 0 0 HEAD SAMS PIZZA 1 0 0 0 0 BLACKSTONE 2 0 0 0 0 DEADWOOD 4 0 0 0 0 TAVERN COACHES 4 0 0 0 0 CORNER SHAKESPEARES 7 0 0 0 0 Totals 865 141 530 TP JOSH HUSARD AICP, LEED-AP, CFM johOn County PLANNING, DIRECTOR NATHAN MUELLER, AICP, CFM DEVELOPMENT AND ASSISTANT DIRECTOR LUKE MCCLANAHAN SUSTAINABILITY ASSISTANT PLANNER Sony _M-NerrKTUM, Date: September 13, 2019 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager G� _ i — 9 From: Luke McClanahan, Assistant Planner - Re: Future Land Use Map Amendment Request (FLUM-19-27760) of AdTDKna Mr. Fruin, As you are aware, Mr. Adam Kos has requested an amendment to the Johnson County 2018 Comprehensive Plan to change the Future Land Use Map to include approximately 100 acres as a new commercial growth area of the county. This property is adjacent to the city limits of Iowa City and is located directly southwest of the intersection of Oak Crest Hill Road SE and South Riverside Drive. The Johnson County Board of Supervisors has deferred action on this item until October 24, 2019 to address concerns raised by your city staff. County Supervisors Janelle Rettig and Rod Sullivan, along with Planning, Development and Sustainability staff, request to hold an informal, non-binding meeting with council members of their choosing, you, and other City staff to discuss the proposed amendment. The County would like to meet within the next two weeks to hear the City's thoughts and attempt to resolve any outstanding concerns with the property in question. We request that you please coordinate with your Council and staff to select individuals to participate in the meeting. Nate Mueller, Assistant Director of PDS, will contact you early next week to set up a meeting time and location. Nate can be reached at (319) 356-6083 or nmueller(c?co.iohnson.ia.us. Resppct y, Luke McClanahan Assistant Planner Planning, Development and Sustainability Enclosure: Staff Report 913 SOUTH DUBUQUE STREET, SUITE 204, IOWA CITY, IA 52240-4273 PHONE: (319)356-6093 FAX:(319)356-6084 www.johnson-county.com STAFF REPORT DATE: September 12, 2019 TO: Johnson County Board of Supervisors FROM: Johnson County Planning, Development & Sustainability Nate Mueller RE: Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendment Application FLUM-19-27760 Location The property in question is located in the SW Y. of the NW'/. of Section 3, Township 78 North, Range 6 West of the 5th P.M. The property is located on both sides of Oak Crest Hill Rd SE at its intersection with Highway 218, in West Lucas Township. Purpose of Request The applicant is requesting to change the FLUM designation of 11 parcels located at/near the intersection of Oak Crest Hill Road and Highway 218 from Agricultural to Commercial and Conservation Development. If approved, the new FLUM designations would allow the applicant to pursue Commercial, Agribusiness (C -Ag), or Highway Commercial rezoning for the properties west of Oak Crest Hill Rd, and residential development with at least 50% open space on the properties east of the road. Property History and General Information Based on aerial photography, the properties in question appear to have been in agricultural production with some timber stands since at least the 1930s. Conservation Department records including a 1918 tree -cover analysis of Johnson County indicates that some of the timber areas have existed since before 1918. There is also a blue line stream that crosses the southern portion of the commercial request area. The vast majority (89%) of the property on the east side of the road is in the mapped Special Flood Hazard Area (i.e. 100 year floodplain). The property consists of eleven parcels (183 acres), which have never been platted. The three northern most parcels were zoned R -Residential in 1960, while the remaining parcels are zoned A - Agricultural (see exhibit 3, next page). The property has frontage on Highway 218 and Oak Crest Hill Rd SE. Functionally, all access will come from Oak Crest Hill Rd SE, which is a paved surface road with an estimated traffic count of 2140 VPD at this location per the 2018 DOT study. The property in question is currently designated as Agricultural on the Future Land Use Map FLUM-19-27760 — Oak Crest Hill Rd SE — Exhibit 2 — Existing Future land Designations and City Fringe Area FLUM-19-27760— Oak Crest Hill Rd SE — Exhibit 3 — Existing Zoning in the Area. Purple shading = Corporate Limits of Iowa City Yellow and Amber shading = Current residentially -zoned ground Red shading = Current CH -Highway Commercial -zoned ground Red and green hatching—proposed amendment areas FLUM-19-27760 — Oak Crest Hill Rd SE — Exhibit 3 — Floodplain. Purple shading = Corporate Limits of Iowa City Green shading = Special Flood Hazard Area (i.e. 100 -year floodplain) Red shading = Regulatory Floodway Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Review Criteria According to the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, if a development proposal is not supported by the Comprehensive Plan, the first consideration should be to modify or deny the proposal. Secondarily, and only if certain criteria are met, should a Comprehensive Plan or map amendment be considered to accommodate the proposal. The criteria listed below come from 3 sources: (1) The criteria from Chapter 6 — Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan, (2) the general guidelines staff used in developing the initial FLUM, and (3) elements of the Future Land Use Development Guidelines not directly addressed by the other criteria/guidelines. These 3 sets of criteria should be used to determine if a Comprehensive Plan amendment is appropriate. Review Criteria from Section 6 — Implementation of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan • The character of the adjacent parcels. North of this property is the Ryerson Woods City Park (north/northwest across Oak Crest Hill Rd SE), and a concrete casting plant which is located within Iowa City to the east/northeast. The property is bounded on the west by Highway 218, and to the east by Oak Crest Hill Rd (commercial request) and the S&G quarry (residential request). Adjacent to the south is Regency Mobile Home Park and a variety of small residential subdivisions. • The zoning and uses on nearby properties. There are between 75 and 100 dwellings adjacent to the south in Regency, as well as additional residential zoning and residences south along Oak Crest Hill Rd SE. To the north is Ryerson Woods (a city park zoned R -Residential), the Johnson County Fair Grounds (zoned C - Ag), the casting plant (inside Iowa City, zoned 11 general industrial), and natural state open space (also within Iowa City, but zoned for 11 general industrial and 12 heavy industrial). • The suitability of the property for the uses allowed under the current zoning designation. The property, as currently situated, is suitable for continued conventional row -crop production. It would also be suitable for residential development on the northern portion that is currently zoned R -Residential. • The type and extent of positive or negative impact that may affect adjacent properties, or the county at large, if the request is approved. The impact to neighboring properties could be significant. The existing residential development in the mobile home park could experience direct impacts from intensive commercial use immediately to the north. The character of the neighborhood would shift, though not dramatically as there is a quarry, a concrete casting plant, and a highway interchange located adjacent to the property. The impact of the proposal on public infrastructure and facilities. Secondary Road access to this property is via Oak Crest Hill Rd SE, which is paved. The additional traffic from one additional dwelling should easily be accommodated by the existing road network. Additionally, this property is located relatively close to Iowa City, and should be sufficiently serviced by Johnson County Sheriff, Johnson County Ambulance, and the Hills Volunteer Fire Dept. The length of time that the subject and adjacent properties have been utilized for their current uses. This land has been in row -crop production for upwards of 90 years (possibly longer). The quarry has been in active operation since 1997 (22 years). The casting plant was built sometime between 2006 and 2008 (11-13 years). Regency Mobile Home Park has been in this location since 1971 (48 years). • The benefits of the proposal to the public health, safety, and welfare. Provision of commercial services in this area could potentially provide employment and retail/service to the area residents, as well as the general community. However, staff feels that the portion of the request to establish conservation development —a primarily residential category—on property that is predominately Special Flood Hazard Area (89% of the area lying west of Oak Crest Hill Rd) poses significant risk of property loss, and potentially threat to safety for residents and first responders in the event of a flood. As such, it would present a threat to public health, safety, and welfare rather than a benefit. • Comparison between the plan and the proposed change regarding the relative conformance to the goals and strategies. The plan specifically calls for, "Encourag(ing) new commercial and industrial development within the cities and the Urban Growth Areas" (Land Use Goal 3, Strategy 1). Being adjacent to an existing industrial development that is within city limits and provided with city services (water and sewer) should be a primary consideration for the Board as to whether this type of development is appropriate under County regulations at this location. Consideration of professional staff recommendations. Please see Analysis and Conclusion section at the end of this report. Synopsis of general guidelines staff used in determining growth areas. Growth areas are generally: In close proximity to cities and services/employment centers. Close "as the crow flies", but also close in shorter vehicle miles travelled. This property is located adjacent to the corporate limits of Iowa City. Across Oak Crest Hill Rd to the north is the city's growth area. Not in any immediate growth areas of the contiguous metro cities (Iowa City, Coralville, North Liberty, Tiffin). This property is located immediately outside — and adjacent to - Iowa City's growth area. The district plan for this part of Iowa City was last updated in the mid 2000s. This area has seen limited development pressures over the past 15 years — both within the city limits and in the county. In areas with existing non-ag development, and offer the potential for infill development Nearby development includes the Regency Manufactured Housing Park to the south, and a precast concrete plant to the east (within city limits). There is other residential development to the south, and the S&G quarry is located to the east of the conservation development portion of this request. In areas where the potential environmental impact of future development will be minimal/limited. The immediate environmental impact on this site would be approximately 3-4 acres of sensitive woodland as reported by the applicant. The potential for impact to the large sensitive woodland and blue line stream to the south also exists if this property were to approach full buildout of commercial uses. • In areas with availability of land that has high potential to yield developments at the desired density of the comp plan (1 acre per lot or smaller). As a commercial development, density of lots is not a primary consideration. Commercial developments in the county tend to utilize the entirety of their site to the greatest extent possible. The layout of this property should present few impediments to dense, efficient development. • In areas with the potential for new (and existing) road networks to be developed in a way that offers high levels of connectivity/interconnection. There is no real potential for interconnectivity to the west given the limited access highway. With extensive frontage to Oak Crest Hill Rd, and relatively few internal impediments, we would expect to see a relatively dense, interconnected road network if this property were to develop. • In areas with higher quality existing road networks (generally paved or chip seal roads in close proximity) Oak Crest Hill Rd SE is a paved road, and serves as a major collector or arterial in the south- central part of the county. • For commercial and industrial land uses, located at or near interstate interchanges, or intersections of quality existing road networks (generally paved or chip seal roads in close proximity). Probable access points for this property onto Oak Crest Hill Rd would be located within 1/3 to 1/2 mile of the interchange with Hwy 218. Additionally, the western frontage of the property would be Hwy 218, which would minimize any potential impacts to residential uses to the west. Items considered in the Future Land Use Development Guidelines that are not addressed above: • Zoning and Subdivision Requirements -The proposed rezoning or use complies or can comply with all zoning and subdivision regulations. With existing road frontage, the commercial portion of the request could reasonably comply with subdivision requirements. However, given the prevalence of the floodplain on the property east of Oak Crest Hill Rd, it is highly unlikely that a subdivision application could comply with the requirements related to development in mapped floodplain. • Public Health Regulations —The proposed use has the ability to meet Public Health Department standards for water and waste water. With an area of this size, future development should be able to comply with water and wastewater requirements. The regulation of those systems (DNR vs. local Public Health) would be dictated by the scale of the future development, and would be decided at the time of platting. • Environmental Impact—The proposed rezoning or use complies with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance and does not negatively impact historic or archaeologically significant sites, or areas with unique features such as wetlands, water areas, floodplains, nature preserves and parks, special native vegetation areas, critical wildlife habitat, steep slopes, and sensitive soils. Development of the western portion of the property would all but certainly entail some impact to the sensitive woodlands on site —the applicant has stated an intention to impact approximately 20% of the 21 acres of woodlands - in addition to any potential impacts from realigning the blueline stream in the future. There are also wetlands, steep slopes, and highly erodible soils on the property. Any development to the conservation development property to the east would involve significant filling of mapped floodplain. Impacts to the woodlands, wetlands, and stream would be controlled by the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, including required mitigation if impact exceeds the allowed thresholds. Impacts to the floodplain would be regulated by the Floodplain Management Regulations. • Agricultural Impact —If the proposed rezoning or use is located in the Agricultural Area of the Future Land Use Map, the use or rezoning should minimize the amount of farmland that is removed from active production and is not likely to create potential future conflict with neighboring agricultural operations. The impact of converting this area to commercial and residential would have little -to -no effect on the surrounding agricultural uses as the property is not bordered by any active farm land. However, development would remove approximately 72 acres of high-quality farmland from production (approximately 71% of the 101 -acre property has CSR2 rating over 79), which may or may not be a sacrifice worth making to obtain the potential economic development and jobs impacts that siting commercial development close to town, on a good road, near an interstate interchange might provide. FLUM-19-27760 — Oak Crest Hill Rd SE — Exhibit 4 — CSR Comments from Iowa City While neither State Code, nor the existing 28E Fringe Area Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City provides for official comment on Comp Plan and FLUM amendments by the City Council, a major consideration in developing the original FLUM was identifying areas that were geographically close to cities, but did not interfere with immediate growth areas or growth plans of any city in the contiguous metro (Iowa City, Coralville, North Liberty, and Tiffin). Because development that respects — and works with - the immediate growth plans of the cities is fundamental to smart planning (and also factored heavily in developing the initial map), PDS staff felt it was appropriate to reach out to City Staff for comment on the proposal. Comments from the city are strictly informational for the Board to consider in reviewing this FLUM amendment request. This property is adjacent to the City of Iowa City, and directly north across Oak Crest Hill Rd, SE is the City's growth area. City Planning staff have provided comments, which are attached to this report as a separate memo. Primary Considerations Potential impact on city commercial development (per Iowa City's comments). Iowa City has expressed concerns on how this development would impact commercial development/redevelopment within the city (see attached memo). Additionally, from the city perspective this represents leap -frog commercial development as this development would not be near other city commercial development, even if annexed. The Comp Plan also has a specific goal about directing commercial development to the cities where it can be served by city services. As has been mentioned, the general philosophy in siting growth areas when developing the map was to give strong consideration to avoiding conflicts with city growth and development. This is the main reason why this area was not designated as commercial growth originally — the assumption was that being adjacent to city limits (and presumably city services), commercial development would be better served by city sewer and water supply if annexed. Potential impact to sensitive areas (timber, stream corridor. floodplain). The properties east of Oak Crest Hill Rd which the applicant is requesting to change to Conservation Development are predominately floodplain (approximately 72 of the 82 acres (89%)).Future subdivision of this site would be faced with significant hurdles, as development regulations in flood prone areas are difficult, and projected to get more difficult under the proposed UDO. While any future development on this site will be subject to the regulations of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance including reporting and mitigation of impacts, the applicant has indicated that immediate development plans will involve disturbance of a portion of the sensitive woodlands present on site for the primary purpose of visibility of the site from the highway. While the initial anticipated disturbance is relatively limited (roughly 4 acres out of approximately 21 acres total [19-20%1), it is reasonable to predict that future commercial development on the site will have at least some impact to the remaining sensitive areas, including woodlands, wetlands, and also potential impact to the blue line stream. Potential impact on existing neighboring land use (Regency Mobile Home Park). As mentioned, the Regency mobile home park is located immediately south of (and adjacent to) the proposed request. While creating commercial use adjacent to residential use has the potential to create conflict, the county does have buffering and screening requirements as part of our commercial site plan review, which should buffer to existing residential uses to an extent. Additionally, the applicant's proposed development plan would grow from the north end, south, meaning the early development areas would be located a quarter mile or more away from the park. It is also important to note that Regency is currently zoned CH — Highway Commercial. If the park were to come under new management, or otherwise be redeveloped, the property would have a right to develop in accordance with the Highway Commercial zoning regulations in place at the time it is developed. There is also the potential that adding commercial uses within walking distance of the park may provide additional employment opportunities to area residents, as well as providing other shopping and/or services that are currently only accessible by car, or a lengthy and dangerous walk to commercial centers within Iowa City. Planning & Zoning Commission Following public hearing the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of this application subject to the request on the east side of Oak Crest Hill Rd SE being changed from Conservation Development to Preservation. The Commissioners noted Iowa City's concerns, but felt that if Iowa City was not willing to work with the applicant on annexation and development within the city, then they should not impeded the development moving forward in the county. The applicant did not object to the condition, and would be willing to accept a map change that designates the property east of the road as Preservation as opposed to Conservation Development. Analysis and Conclusion Staff views this application as 2 different requests — the proposed commercial west of Oak Crest Hill Rd, and the proposed Conservation Development (i.e. residential development) east of the road. This analysis will address the two areas separately. Conservation Development - Staff is adamantly opposed to designating a property that is predominately floodplain as suitable for residential rezoning, especially when the Board has indicated during preliminary reviews of proposed floodplain regulations that they support making residential development in mapped flood hazard areas more difficult. Allowing residential rezoning in the mapped Special Flood Hazard Area presents too much of a risk to future residents as well as county first responders. This is provided a residential subdivision could be developed on the property. Staff does not think the conservation development portion of this request is appropriate, and recommends that the Board not approve this change. Staff would support changing the FLUM designation for the property east of Oak Crest Hill Rd SE to Preservation, as the extremely limited development opportunities of that category more closely align with the floodplain and other likely sensitive areas on site. The remainder of the analysis in this section will focus on the request for commercial land use designation west of Oak Crest Hill Rd. Commercial - In creating the initial Future Land Use Map (FLUM), commercial and industrial FLUM areas were located near existing interchanges, and other specific developed intersections throughout the county. This is one of the few sites in the County that has an interchange with a 4 -lane highway or interstate that is not already designated as a commercial or industrial growth area. This interchange (and the interchange at Hills) were specifically NOT designated as commercial or industrial growth areas because of their proximity to their respective cities, and the assumption (or knowledge) that city development plans for such an important economic development areas would be in conflict. While this site appears to satisfy many of the FLUM amendment review criteria from the plan, the guidelines used in creating the original map, and the Future Land Use Development Guidelines, larger policy considerations likely outweigh the physical suitability of the site. The Comp Plan is a policy document, and despite a location meeting most of the technical considerations for map amendment, the Board should consider the broader implications and impacts when setting growth areas, such as interaction with a nearby city. The City has expressed strong concerns about siting commercial development adjacent to city limits, and as has been mentioned throughout this report, the siting of initial growth areas gave strong consideration to avoiding conflicts with city growth and development. Staff would like to note that while approval of this request would lay the foundation for commercial development on the site, a denial would not extinguish all development possibilities for the land owner. The northern portion of the property (approximately 32 acres) is currently zoned residential, and could be platted as a residential subdivision under our current guidelines. Residential development on a property of that size would likely better -preserve the existing sensitive woodland on site as existing timber is more of an amenity in residential settings. A denial of this request would also allow continued agricultural production on the southern portion of the property. It should be noted that any future development (commercial or residential) would more than likely be subject to review and approval by Iowa City per the fringe area agreement in effect at the time. Staff recognizes and gives significant weight to the City s concerns about the potential Interference with, or impact to, Iowa City's overall growth and development plans. Staff feels that coordination with the City on large scale developments adjacent to city boundaries should remain a primary consideration. Based primarily on the City's obiections staff feels that this area should remain agricultural for the time being and recommends that the Commercial portion of application FLUM-19-27760 be denied. Staff feels that the Conservation Development portion of this request should be denied: however, if the Board was inclined to change the area east of Oak Crest Hill Rd SE to Preservation instead of Conservation Development, staff would recommend approval of that change. Potential Future Consideration - While the Board has a history of encouraging commercial development to annex into the city, if the City is not willing to entertain updating their district plan to consider annexation and development at this time, the relatively high level of existing infrastructure (paved roads and interstate interchange) in this area make it very conducive to commercial development under County standards. Additionally, the City would still have review and comment authority on future rezoning, subdivision, and Site Plan approval on the site —giving them the opportunity to request conditional zoning, or other considerations that could minimize conflicts during future annexation and connection to city services. While big box retail —or other commercial uses that generate heavy customer traffic - may be more appropriate within the city, there are certain types of commercial and industrial uses that are better situated in the county (e.g. implement dealerships, business headquarters for heavy equipment uses such as grading, ready -mix plants, other uses with limited or no retail, etc.) that could utilize the infrastructure in this area while providing benefits for both city and county residents. If the City does not foresee extending their Immediate growth area to include this property, and if the economic development opportunities of developing this site or area for a use appropriate in the unincorporated area are substantial enough it may be worth the Council and Board discussing a unified approach to development for this intersection that considers the costs, benefits, impacts, and opportunities to both entities and identifies the scale and/or type of development that may be appropriate. r Cdr !14�w ITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LRERANRE Date: August 9, 2019 To: Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission From: Neighborhood and Development Services Department Re: 2019 Fringe Area Future Land Use Map Amendments Introduction and Summary Neighborhood and Development Services staff appreciates the opportunity to review and provide comment on the County Future Land Use Map amendment applications within and near the Fringe Area. Although there is no formal review requirement stipulated in the City/County Fringe Area Agreement, staff appreciates the ongoing coordination with County planning staff on issues in the Fringe Area. This memo outlines the advisory positions of City staff on three County Future Land Use Map amendment applications. The City is currently analyzing long-range planning needs within the Fringe Area, and will need to incorporate any major County land use map amendments into its ongoing analysis. Approach to Analysis In staffs review of the proposed Future Land Use Map amendments, NDS staff: a) Compared the existing land use category to the proposed, including the general intended land uses and the associated density/intensity of development allowed. b) Reviewed the policies in the City/County Fringe Area Agreement. c) Identified applicable goals and policies in the City's comprehensive plan. For amendments proposing more intense land uses (e.g. commercial) that are more appropriate with access to City services and infrastructure, staff reviewed the annexation potential. Future Land Use Map Amendment FLUM-19-27757 of Charlie Ockenfels Application Background The proposed request by Charlie Ockenfels is to change 6.85 acres on the County's Future Land Use Map from Agricultural to Residential on parcel number 1503253001 (this parcel does not currently have an address). The subject property is located at the southern end of the Oak Crest Hill region, off Indian Lookout Road. The majority of the properties surrounding the subject property are also shown as Agricultural on the County Future Land Use Map, with the exception of the land to the east, which is designated Preservation. Adjacent properties located to the west and north of the subject property feature larger lot residential homes, and have a mixture of zoning between County R -Residential and County A- Agricultural. Figure 1 is a zoning map that shows the location of the proposed amendment in blue. August 9, 2019 Page 2 The end of the application packet contains seven copies of a plat outlining the subject parcel, with signatures from adjoining neighbors indicating support of the map amendment to County- Residential (as well as subsequent rezoning and subdivision of the parcel). The section of the application essay titled "Land Use and Map, Proposed South Land Use — Oak Crest Hill Region", contains some language about how preexisting, lower density residential uses should be preserved, and how potentially similar residential uses could be built in the area east of Oak Crest Hill Road. This section of the application essay seems to be describing the area including the subject property. Analysis Table 1 compares the existing Future Land Use Map category to the proposed amendment. Table 1. Comparison of Existing and Proposed Land Use Category 'Assumes a rezoning to standard County R zoning, with the ability to develop the site to its full build- out potential (not factoring in constraints from sensitive areas). Fringe Area Policy The subject parcel is located in Area "C" of the City's Fringe Area, outside of the growth area. This Fringe Area designation calls for rural/agricultural uses, or uses consistent with the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. Road infrastructure must meet the City's rural design standards. Existing FLUM Category Proposed FLUM Category Agricultural Residential Typical Land Uses Agriculture (Crop Production & Single-family detached Animal Husbandry); Limited dwellings (1 unit per acre of Residential denser); Can include some non-residential development Residential Limited, case by case (no more Limited to locations that can Development than 2 acres per dwelling); support and accommodate should be associated with food designated Residential production or consistent with densities historic use Max Development Development intensity not 6 Dwelling Units" Potential specified in the Future Land Use Map Category. 'Assumes a rezoning to standard County R zoning, with the ability to develop the site to its full build- out potential (not factoring in constraints from sensitive areas). Fringe Area Policy The subject parcel is located in Area "C" of the City's Fringe Area, outside of the growth area. This Fringe Area designation calls for rural/agricultural uses, or uses consistent with the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. Road infrastructure must meet the City's rural design standards. August 9, 2019 Page 3 City's Comprehensive Plan The City's South Central District Plan does not cover the subject area. NDS's Advisory Position Several large -lot residential land uses can be found to the west of the subject property. Indian Lookout Rd. SE is a paved road that can support demand for residential development. Given these existing conditions, NDS staff does not have concerns with the proposed amendment. Going forward, City staff believes that the County should be mindful of the potential for increased residential density on both the subject parcel and in the immediate surrounding area, in the event that subsequent Future Land Use Map amendment requests are received or ownership of property changes. However, as it relates to the subject property, development beyond 2-3 additional dwelling units will prove challenging due to constraints with sensitive areas. Future Land Use Map Amendment FLUM-19-27759 of Claude Greiner Application Background The proposed request by Claude Greiner is to change the County Future Land Use Map from Agricultural to Residential to allow for future residential development on two parcels equaling 73 acres. Figure 2 shows the subject properties in blue, next to the yellow area identified as Residential on the County Future Land Use Map. In June of 2019, the Iowa City City Council approved a preliminary plat for a 7 -lot subdivision located directly north of the subject properties. The approved subdivision contains a stubbed out street and stormwater detention infrastructure, intended to service both the subdivision to the north and planned development on the subject properties. Analysis There is a moderate degree of existing residential uses to the west along American Legion Road. Additionally, there is some estate housing to the north of American Legion Road. The existing residential land uses are identified on the County's Future Land Use Map as Residential. While the subject properties would be directly adjacent to the land designated Residential, there are still large August 9, 2019 Page 4 swaths of undeveloped land within this designated area. Table 2 compares the existing land use category with the proposed. Staff anticipates that with a potential rezoning to County- Residential, a full build -out of the properties could yield between 50 and 70 dwelling units. Table 2. Comparison of Existina and Pr000sed Land Use Cateaory 'Dwelling unit figure based on an assumption of rezoning to County R -Residential zoning, at the maximum build -out of 1 unit per acre. Max build -out does not take into consideration the area needed for the development of roadways and stormwater management. Fringe Area Policy The two subject parcels are located outside of the City's current Fringe Area, meaning that they are technically not subject to any of the regulations of the Fringe Area Agreement. These properties are; however, located within 2 miles of the City's jurisdictional boundary. The closest Fringe Area classification can be found to the north and west of the subject parcels, which is Fringe Area B — Outside of the Growth Area. This Fringe Area classification calls for rural/agricultural uses, and road infrastructure must meet the City's rural design standards. City Comprehensive Planning The City's Southeast District Plan does not cover the subject properties. However, about one -mile northwest of the County's designated Residential land use area (see Figure 2), the Southeast District Plan does call for future housing to match what is located on the west side of Taft Avenue (upon improvement of Taft Avenue to City standards, and projected subsequent residential development). The density projected for this area is a low to medium range density, with lot sizes between 5,000 — 8,000 square feet in size (roughly 1/10 to 1/5 of an acre). With continued demand for expansion of the City eastward, it is not unreasonable to assume similar development patterns could eventually abut the County's designated Residential land use area. NDS's Advisory Position NDS staff has concerns with the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment from Agricultural to Residential. The land use change, and subsequent rezoning and development of the subject properties, could add a generous amount of estate -sized housing to an area that the City has seen outward growth and demand for increased residential growth. There is abundant land (approximately 190 acres) within the County's designated Residential land use area for County Residential infill development. And finally, the City Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council evaluation of the rezoning of the property to the north of the subject properties was met with some resistance, due to the area's proposed departure from the agricultural uses prescribed in the City/County Fringe Area Agreement. Existing FLUM Category Proposed FLUM Category Agricultural Residential Typical Land Uses Agriculture (Crop Production & Single-family detached Animal Husbandry); Limited dwellings (1 unit per acre or Residential denser); Can include some non-residential development Residential Limited, case by case (no more Limited to locations that can Development than 2 acres per dwelling); support and accommodate should be associated with food designated residential production or consistent with densities; historic use Max Development Development intensity not 73 Dwelling Units' Potential specified in the Future Land Use Map Category. 'Dwelling unit figure based on an assumption of rezoning to County R -Residential zoning, at the maximum build -out of 1 unit per acre. Max build -out does not take into consideration the area needed for the development of roadways and stormwater management. Fringe Area Policy The two subject parcels are located outside of the City's current Fringe Area, meaning that they are technically not subject to any of the regulations of the Fringe Area Agreement. These properties are; however, located within 2 miles of the City's jurisdictional boundary. The closest Fringe Area classification can be found to the north and west of the subject parcels, which is Fringe Area B — Outside of the Growth Area. This Fringe Area classification calls for rural/agricultural uses, and road infrastructure must meet the City's rural design standards. City Comprehensive Planning The City's Southeast District Plan does not cover the subject properties. However, about one -mile northwest of the County's designated Residential land use area (see Figure 2), the Southeast District Plan does call for future housing to match what is located on the west side of Taft Avenue (upon improvement of Taft Avenue to City standards, and projected subsequent residential development). The density projected for this area is a low to medium range density, with lot sizes between 5,000 — 8,000 square feet in size (roughly 1/10 to 1/5 of an acre). With continued demand for expansion of the City eastward, it is not unreasonable to assume similar development patterns could eventually abut the County's designated Residential land use area. NDS's Advisory Position NDS staff has concerns with the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment from Agricultural to Residential. The land use change, and subsequent rezoning and development of the subject properties, could add a generous amount of estate -sized housing to an area that the City has seen outward growth and demand for increased residential growth. There is abundant land (approximately 190 acres) within the County's designated Residential land use area for County Residential infill development. And finally, the City Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council evaluation of the rezoning of the property to the north of the subject properties was met with some resistance, due to the area's proposed departure from the agricultural uses prescribed in the City/County Fringe Area Agreement. August 9, 2019 Page 5 While the rezoning was ultimately approved, a joint -consult between City and County staff was necessary. The subject application proposes a similar request, but is outside of the area identified for County residential infill development. Future Land Use Map Amendment FLUM-19-27760 of Adam Kos Application Background The proposed request by Adam Kos for a Future Land Use Map amendment is to change 115.37 acres of land designated Agricultural to Conservation Development and Commercial. This proposed amendment area is shown in Figure 3. The subject area currently contains A -Agricultural, R - Residential, and CH -Commercial Highway County zoning. The change in land use designation is intended to support a sizeable mixed commercial, residential, and conservation development project. Figure 3 shows the subject properties within the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment area. The proposed land use designations for each parcel are identified in the table. Figure 3. Location of Proposed Map Amendment e� 1 � Ap6 I C 9 — 10 }Nl]001 1 1 ' ffiffi 1 �� .h11036116am I103326 30(0 os _� 10331 r 1m6]3 tom Parcel ID QxraM ton 102861]003 pmvrcicw 10266/]001 eameRw 102M1]002 Cam,ercw 1033161006 a Donn,ercw 10331s1006 CortnR+cw 1033126001 a pmmxul 1038101002 < CQlmwc®i 1033101001 COmmn'YI 103122sM2 CmfswMon D6M0prM 1096226009 6 C0133sv�fin pmebm]vi 1031261001 COmMwEm Dcebpmstl August 9, 2019 Page 6 Analysis The application proposes changing the existing Agricultural land use designation to a combination of Commercial and Conservation Development land uses. The area along the northern end of the map amendment, proposed as Commercial, is already zoned R -Residential under the Johnson County zoning ordinance. The County land use plan still shows this area as Agricultural. This area is bordered by County A -Agricultural zoning to the south, Ryerson Woods to the northwest, and City property zoned General Industrial (1-1) to the east. While there is an adjacent intense zone in City 1-1 to the east, the South Central District Plan calls for this area to transform to public/private open space in the future, thereby removing any contiguity the subject area might have with an industrial zone. Table 3. Comparison of Existinq and Proposed Land Use Category Fringe Area Policy The subject area is within Fringe Area C — Outside of the Growth Area. This Fringe Area designation calls for rural/agricultural uses, or uses consistent with the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. Road infrastructure must meet the City's rural design standards. Given the envisioned build out for this development, the proposed land use map amendment presents a radical change from the existing County land use designation and from what is prescribed in the City/County fringe area land use policy. City Comprehensive Planning The City's South Central District Plan does not cover the subject area. However, the plan does call for the land to the east of the proposed commercial area at the project's northern end to revert to open space. NDS's Advisory Position NDS staff has concerns with the proposed Commercial map amendment application. While the subject area is outside of the City's South Central District Plan area, adjacent properties that fall within the plan call for less intense uses, with the southern portion of the Plan area prescribing open space and single- Existing FLUM Proposed FLUM Proposed FLUM Category Category Category Agricultural Commercial Conservation Development Typical Land Uses Agriculture (Crop Retail; Service; Office Protection of Production & Animal sensitive areas Husbandry); Limited Residential Residential Limited, case by case NA Permitted, but Development (no more than 2 acres must use cluster per dwelling); should subdivision be associated with food design (50% open production or space consistent with historic requirement) use Max Development Development intensity Development intensity Up to 50% of Potential not specified in the not specified in the acreage not Future Land Use Map Future Land Use containing Category. Category. sensitive areas could be developed for residential. Fringe Area Policy The subject area is within Fringe Area C — Outside of the Growth Area. This Fringe Area designation calls for rural/agricultural uses, or uses consistent with the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. Road infrastructure must meet the City's rural design standards. Given the envisioned build out for this development, the proposed land use map amendment presents a radical change from the existing County land use designation and from what is prescribed in the City/County fringe area land use policy. City Comprehensive Planning The City's South Central District Plan does not cover the subject area. However, the plan does call for the land to the east of the proposed commercial area at the project's northern end to revert to open space. NDS's Advisory Position NDS staff has concerns with the proposed Commercial map amendment application. While the subject area is outside of the City's South Central District Plan area, adjacent properties that fall within the plan call for less intense uses, with the southern portion of the Plan area prescribing open space and single- August 9, 2019 Page 7 family residential. Development of Commercial land uses, which could take on a wide variety of ultimate uses, could be out of character with both the current and planned built environments of the subject area. As was previously stated, the proposed development would be a radical departure from what is prescribed in the City/County Fringe Area Agreement. Based on the utilities and infrastructure needed to serve a commercial use, City staff recommends that future commercial development be located within the City's corporate limits. The proposed Commercial area is outside of the City's growth area; and therefore, annexation will not be contemplated. Additionally, the subject parcels contain several existing sensitive areas that should be left undisturbed, including unwooded wetlands, wooded wetlands, woodlands, highly erodible soils, and steep slopes.Lastly, City staff has general concerns about the viability of such a large-scale development in this location. The Iowa City area has seen construction of several commercial and mixed-use developments in recent years, many of which are located along the 1-80 corridor. The remote location of this proposed development, in addition to an already saturated commercial retail market in the area, could prove challenging. Redevelopment of the S&G Materials Sand Quarry for Conservation Development might be appropriate. It is possible that the area might one day benefit from a trail connection to Iowa City's southern trail network. City staff would like to be a part of any ongoing discussions on the extent of any redevelopment of the area for Conservation Development uses. Conclusion The decision on these amendments is the County's; however, staff greatly appreciates the opportunity to comment on these proposed amendments. Staff looks forward to continuing coordination with County planning staff on updates to the Fringe Area policy. Item Number: 15. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Airport Commission: August 15 ATTACHMENTS: Description Airport Commission: August 15 August 15, 2019 Page 1 MINUTES DRAFT IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2019 — 6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Warren Bishop, Scott Clair, Christopher Lawrence, Bob Libby, Judy Pfohl Staff Present: Eric Goers, Michael Tharp Others Present: Devin Mashik RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None. DETERMINE QUORUM: The meeting was called to order at 6:02 P.M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the July 18, 2019, meeting were reviewed by Members. Tharp noted that there was a misspelling of Judy's name in the attendance section. This will be corrected. Bishop moved to accept the minutes of the July 18, 2019, meeting as amended. Lawrence seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. FAA/IDOT Projects i. Obstruction Mitigation — Tharp stated that currently they are in the process of sending letters to property owners, in order to collect the tree requests. This will then complete the plans and specs needed to finalize what is sent to the FAA. He added that they are a bit behind schedule and that he may need to have one or two special meetings with the Commission, in order to speed up the announcement process. This will help to get back on track a bit. ii. Runway 25 Threshold Relocation — Tharp stated that they have the FAA grant for this project and that things are moving forward as planned. b. FBO ! Flight Training Reports i. Jet Air — Tharp stated that Wolford is out on the east coast picking up an aircraft for Jet Air and is therefore not present. He then reviewed the monthly maintenance reports, stating that they have had a couple of tours August 15, 2019 Page 2 recently at the Airport. He also spoke to some general maintenance issues with hangars. The Young Eagles event took place recently and the staff at the Airport were kept busy sprucing things up in anticipation of that. Tharp also noted the upcoming pancake breakfast. C. Airport Operations i. Management — 1. City Climate Action Plan — Tharp spoke to the City Manager's memo, asking for thoughts and ideas on how they can help the City meet its climate action goals. He stated that one item that caught his eye is working with Mid American Energy to use their tool of allowing users to monitor utility costs. Tharp stated that he will look into this further. As for other measures, he noted that the Airport has changed lighting to LEDs everywhere possible. Members asked about solar and whether its use at the Airport would be feasible. Tharp responded, noting that the City has looked into the use of solar and he further explained what they have suggested. This includes having EV charging stations available, for example. Members continued to discuss ways in which the Airport might help the City with its climate action goals. Pfohl suggested Tharp contact a professor at the University who is involved in this area to see if the students could do a project on this issue. Tharp stated that he could do this, and Goers added that the City does have its own Sustainability Coordinator who might have some ideas for the Airport. The idea of an all -electric airplane being used for training was also brought up, as a way to save fuel. 2. 2019-2020 T -Hangar Rates — Tharp noted that the Airport Commission sets the hangar rates every year. Currently there are 59 t -hangars, with all but one being occupied. He gave Members a brief history of this process and how they have dealt with this in the past. He stated that last year they did some adjustments and that he is recommending this year to keep rates flat. Lawrence moved to keep t -hangar rates consistent with last year's rates. Pfohl seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. ii. Budget — 1. Flight Simulator — Tharp noted that Bishop has brought back a proposal for a TD 2 flight simulator, a desktop -based system. He and Tharp spoke to this system briefly and then responded to Member questions. Pfohl stated that she questions if training pilots is the purpose of the Airport, or if it should be Jet Air training pilots. Members responded, noting that they don't see it as just a pilot tool. The discussion centered around the cost of such a system and who should be paying for this. Members spoke to how this tool could pay for itself, by charging back to pilots for the privilege of using it. The discussion turned to the question of: is it the Airport's job (to buy the simulator) and even further: is this an infrastructure investment that is aligned with the Airport's mission. The idea of providing space at the Airport for a simulator was tossed around August 15, 2019 Page 3 as well, with Members agreeing that this would make sense. It comes back to: who is paying for the simulator and its upkeep. The suggestion of looking at the City's mission for the Airport was brought up, to look at the Charter for the Airport Commission, and try to determine if such an investment would make sense. Goers then spoke to this question, noting that the City Council has given this Commission the authority to do everything having to do with the Airport and its operations, other than sell property. Tharp then spoke to the Commission about the options they do have: the Airport buys the system and rents it out, working with Jet Air to do so. The second option is someone else buys the system and the Airport provides the space for it. He then spoke to some of the options available on such a training device system. Tharp also spoke to the idea of opening it up to hangar tenants to see if they are interested in a pre -paid option. This type of investment opportunity would cover the cost of the system. Members continued to share their thoughts on how they might proceed with acquiring a simulator. Members then turned to the options available for such a training device and how updating such a system might play out. Members also shared their experiences with using a flight simulator and what they would like to see in a system. Looking at such a purchase as a revenue generator, Members then discussed how this could be a real positive for the Airport. Tharp stated that it sounds like there is a general consensus on the TD 2, and he noted how they could move forward at this point. Goers responded to Member questions regarding how they would handle the simulator being bought by a private group. He added a suggestion as to how they might open this up to the public to see if anyone is interested in such a pre -paid type of arrangement. Members also asked Goers for his advice on how they would handle any of them wanting to be one of the private investors in this purchase. Goers responded, speaking to conflict of interest concerns. He stated that as long as the option is open to everyone in the public, this would not be a conflict. How to get the word out was the next topic of discussion. Tharp spoke to how he might be able to obtain a list of pilots in the area, as well as the hangar occupants list, as starting points. Others gave suggestions of various social media sites as a way to communicate such an idea and to gauge interest in such a purchase. A suggestion was made to form a subcommittee to come up with a proposal for the entire Commission to review and make their final decision on. Clair moved to form a subcommittee to return to next month's meeting with a proposal for the Commission to review. Pfohl seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. Bishop and Clair volunteered to be on this subcommittee. August 15, 2019 Page 4 2. FY2021 Budget — Tharp responded to questions regarding hangar age and maintenance costs associated with them. He spoke briefly to 2021's budget and some of the possible projects they might try to tackle. Tharp also spoke to updating their web site and social media presence. He stated that he is considering having FUEL, the marketing/branding company that they have used in the past, help with this. iii. Events 1. Pancake Breakfast — August 25 — Tharp stated that the Monarch Festival will be part of this event, as well. d. Commission Member Reports — Libby stated that the viewing area has people at it all the time, which everyone is pleased with. He added that Jet Air has had several large groups out and that they have pulled an airplane right up to the viewing area for the group to see up close. e. Staff Report — Tharp reminded Members of the Aviation Conference at the end of the month. He also noted that he will be out of the office on Friday. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, August 15, 2019, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building. This is the second Thursday of the month, versus the third. ADJOURN: Lawrence moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:16 P.M. Bishop seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. CHAIRPERSON DATE August 15, 2019 Page 5 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time TERM j �N io N w Z M `.`a NAME EXP. � N O � V °D °' °D 00 c0 W W W t0 to W W t0 Warren 06/30/22 Bishop X X X X X X X X X X Scott Clair 06/30/23 N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M X X Robert Libby 07/01/20 O/ O/ X X X X E X X E X X Christopher 07/01/21 Lawrence X X X X X X X X X X Judy Pfohl 06/30/22 N N N N N N N M M M M M M M X X X Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time Item Number: 16. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Airport Zoning Commission: August 14 ATTACHMENTS: Description Airport Zoning Commission: August 14 Airport Zoning Commission August 14, 2019 Page 1 MINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 14, 2019 —1:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Mike Parker, Chris Ogren, Dennis Keitel Members Absent: Royceann Porter Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Sue Dulek Others Present: Randy Hartwig Draft RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None CALL TO ORDER: Tharp called the meeting to order at 1:09 P.M. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. Approval of Minutes: 05-21-19: Tharp asked to review the minutes from the meeting in May. Tharp noted that there was a draft version in the packet. Ogren moved, seconded by Parker approval of the minutes. Motion passed 3-0 (Porter absent). b. Chair Application Review & Selection:Tharp stated that they did seek applications for the role of Chairperson. Tharp described the process for members and introduced Randy Hartwig who he noted was the only applicant for the role. Tharp recommended the Commission appoint Hartwig as chair. Parker moved, seconded by Ogren to appoint Hartwig to serve as Chairperson. Motion carried 3-0 (Porter absent). ADJOURN: Ogren motioned to adjourn, seconded by Keitel. Motion Carried 3-0(Porter absent); Meeting adjourned at 1:20 P.M. CHAIRPERSON DATE Airport Zoning Commission August 14, 2019 Page 2 Airport Zoning Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2019 Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time TERM w 0 NAME EXP. N 4t o � Dennis Keitel 12/31/2023 O X Christine Ogren 12/31/2021 X X Mike Parker 12/31/2022 X X Royceann Porter 12/31/2020 X O Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time Item Number: 17. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Historic Preservation Commission: August 19 ATTACHMENTS: Description Historic Preservation Commission: August 19 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL August 19, 2019 MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd, Gosia Clore, Lyndi Kiple, Cecile Kuenzli, G. T. Karr, Quentin Pitzen, and Jordan Sellergren. Thomas Agran, Helen Burford, and Sharon DeGraw arrived late MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: Brianna Wills, Mike Oliveira RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 26 East Market Street (Old Brick) — Local Historic Landmark (new monument sian). Bristow noted that Old Brick is located on the corner of Clinton and Market Street and was fundamental to beginning of the preservation movement in Iowa City. She said numerous projects have been approved by the Commission for this property. The current project is signage for the church. She shared a view showing their current signage on top of the hill. Part of the project involves installing a retaining wall because of some drainage issues. The retaining wall is not tall enough to require either a building permit or approval by the Commission, so it is not being reviewed, though Staff would like to comment that putting in a limestone retaining wall like this would be considered appropriate for this structure. Bristow shared an image of the proposed retaining wall and sign. The sign would be set below the church. There is a hedge on the top of the hill and retaining wall to give a little privacy to a patio they will be installing on the top side of the retaining wall. The sign is set in a little bit from the corner at the base of the retaining wall so there can be some landscaping around. The sign will use a harder variety of limestone than the retaining wall since it will be engraved. Agran and Burford joined the meeting at 6:10 p.m. Bristow said the subject of the sign will be the Old Brick name and a "B" logo that they use on their website. Another view showed the proposed sign set back a little bit from the corner. Bristow said it was not going to be installed on the surface of the retaining wall. It will be installed in front of the retaining wall. Bristow shared the detail of the logo, the name, and the date that will be on the sign. She noted the Commission does review signage. It comes up more often on landmarked properties because most residential properties in districts don't have signage. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 2 of 6 Bristow explained there are signage guidelines for the downtown area, but they tend to relate to either projecting signs or signs in a sign band on a commercial building. She included Preservation Brief 25, regarding new signs, for review. These briefs are put out by the National Park Service. The Brief talked about signs working with a building, rather than against it, often featuring details of the building as a motif for the sign. The sign should not obscure significant features and the material should be compatible with those of the historic building. Bristow said given the fact that the sign is set at the bottom of the hill, in front of the retaining wall, and is constructed of limestone, which would be appropriate with a church like this, Staff finds the sign appropriate and does recommend approval. She said the only other material that would be appropriate would be brick. Boyd asked if there were any clarifying questions, then opened the public hearing. Brianna Wills, Executive Director of Old Brick, came to answer questions. She noted the sign is a small part of a very large project they are hoping to start next week. It started with some water issues they were having with the foundation. She said it is an almost $200,000 project. She noted they went through many design iterations and ultimately went with the limestone look because the front stairs of Old Brick are limestone. They did not go with brick because aged red brick is very difficult to match. She said they would use Anamosa limestone, a natural Iowa product. Kuenzli noted the function of a sign is to convey some information about what the building is or what its function is. In the case of Old Brick, she thought that was important since it was originally a religious structure. Kuenzli believed the proposed sign was hard to read and did not convey enough information about its multiple uses. She thought people would assume it was a church. Wills agreed they were going with a simpler sign. As a marketing piece, she said they are hoping the new sign will pique enough interest and curiosity in people passing by to take out their smartphones and search for Old Brick. That action will get them to their website and social media, where they can explore the history of Old Brick and learn how it is used. Burford thought the date on the sign was barely legible. Wills said the 1856 date would be engraved in dark print and noted that this would be a lighted sign. Agran said they could have a lively and valid critique about the branding of Old Brick, but for the scope of this conversation the actual content of the sign is not something that is within the Commission's purview, just the architecture of the sign. He did not see a problem with the structure, or the materials used, and said he would be voting in favor of the project. Sellergran asked how they decided upon the font. Wills said it was part of the logo that had been adopted by their board. Bristow said Staff also wondered where the design came from. They went to Old Brick's website and found it was their logo. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 3 of 6 Mike Oliveira said he drives by Old Brick all the time and still didn't really know what it was. He asked how its purpose would be described. Wills said it functions as a community center and a nonprofit incubator. She said it currently houses 16 nonprofits. Kiple noted she is a student and uses her smartphone all the time. She said everything she knows about Old Brick came from the marquee sign that was there. She said every day when she would walk by, she would learn something new from the sign, such as when it was built, what it has been used for, and how it is used now. Boyd closed the public hearing. Kiple believed the proposed sign conveys that it is a community building and it is inviting. Boyd said he agreed with Agran, that the Commission is not really looking at what the sign says, but rather just making sure the sign fits the character. He said if this is their logo and that's what they want to do, he was fine with it. Karr agreed. While not something the Commission would vote on, he did think a separate informative plaque, viewed as people would walk into Old Brick, would be an acceptable alternative to adding more information to the sign. MOTION: Karr moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 26 East Market Street as presented in the application. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. 527 North Van Buren Street — Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (window removal). Bristow explained this property is on the corner of Church and Van Buren. It is a contributing property in the Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District. She said earlier this year the removal of a non -historic roof canopy and stair entry to a second floor was approved. The house was built as a single-family home, but it had been duplexed long ago. Now, the second -floor entry was going to be removed. The current project is part of returning the house to a single-family home. It does involve some changes in order to make a more functional kitchen. In this case the kitchen has two windows, one facing north, which is on Church Street, and one facing the backyard and the garage on the west, and numerous doors. In order to get some upper cabinets in this kitchen to make it more functional for a family, the proposal is to remove the window that faces west. The upstairs corner room will be a bathroom. In order to have shower space, the proposal is to remove the corresponding window above the kitchen window to create some wall space. She said the windows facing Church Street are original to the house. While the back of the house has had some significant changes, the north side of the house has not had the same kind of changes. Bristow said the windows on the Church Street (north) side would remain. In addition to the two windows proposed to be removed, a cover used to block weather from coming in the back door would be removed. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps show this house always had a one-story HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 4 of 6 bump -out and that it was always enclosed, which is a little bit unusual. Sometimes these were rear porches. Bristow shared a view showing stairs that would eventually be removed. She did not know the status of a window that was presumably removed for the stairs. She thought if the window was going to be opened back up, maybe one of the windows being removed now could be used in that location. Bristow said the house has aluminum siding on it and the applicant has enough aluminum siding for patching. Removing the aluminum siding is not part of the scope of this project. Bristow said Staff recommends approval of this project since there have been significant changes to the exterior rear of the house, and the fact that the house is going to be single-family again. The proposed changes will facilitate the functioning of those spaces. Kuenzli asked if the windows would remain on the bump -out? Bristow said yes. Boyd opened the public hearing. Mike Oliveira with Prestige Properties spoke. He bought this house in the winter. He said it had been a duplex that was owner -occupied on the first floor and the top floor was rented out. He said the house was in pretty bad shape. He said they submitted all the necessary paperwork to convert it from a duplex to a single family. He said the project is currently stalled until they figure out what they can do with the upstairs bathroom and the kitchen. He said the kitchen had approximately five doors and the two windows, making cabinet space very limited. He said he put in a request to the Historic Preservation Commission to take out the two windows and redo the space to make it livable. He thought it was a nice, four-square house. Oliveira thought taking off the back -door entry on the north side was a good thing. He said it would make the property more attractive. He noted they already took off a canopy that used to cover the entire back area. He couldn't remember the details about the window, presumably to the dining room, but said if they could put it back in, they would. Boyd closed the public hearing. Agran thought the project was a positive change for the property and said he supported the application. Boyd also was comfortable with the plan. DeGraw had joined the meeting. Agran said if the dining room window could be opened up and it happened to be the same opening size as the other window, it would be nice if a window removed for the project was installed there, then all the existing windows would match and be of the same age. In the past, Boyd noted the Commission has asked that materials be retained for reuse or salvage. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 5 of 6 Agran said since the dining room window was not in the current application the Commission could only make a recommendation to reuse the window if possible. Kuenzli agreed with Agran and applauded the return of the building to a single-family residence. MOTION: Agran moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 527 North Van Buren as presented in the application. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 10-0. ADJOURNMENT: Clore moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Karr. The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Minutes submitted by Judy Jones HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 6 of 6 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 TERM 10/1 11/0 12/1 1/10 2/14 3/14 4/11 5/09 5/23 6/13 8/08 8/19 NAME EXP. 1 8 3 AGRAN, 6/30/20 O/E X X O/E O/E X O/E O/E X X X X THOMAS BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/20 X O/E X X X X X X OE X X X BUILTA, ZACH 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X X X -- -- BURFORD, 6/30/21 O/E O/E X X X X O/E X X X X X HELEN CLORE, 6/30/20 O/E X X O/E X X X O/E X OE OE X GOSIA DEGRAW, 6/30/19 X X X X O/E X X X X OE X X SHARON KARR, G. T. 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X KUENZLI, 6/30/19 X X X X O/E X X X X OE X X CECILE KIPLE, LYNDI 6/30/22 __ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ X X PITZEN, 6/30/21 X X X X X X X X X X X X QUENTIN SELLERGREN, 6/30/22 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X JORDAN SHOPE, LEE 1 6/30/21 X X O/E X X X rx X OE -- -- Item Number: 18. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 12, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission: September 5 ATTACHMENTS: Description Planning and Zoning Commission: September 5 MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 5, 2019-7:OOPM—FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Max Parson STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett, Jade Pederson OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Welch, Davis Maxwell RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of ZCA19-03, an application submitted by Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC for an amendment to the Riverfront Crossings regulating plan to include the property located at 625 S. Gilbert Street in the Central Crossing Subdistrict. By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ19-07 an application submitted by Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 1.6 acres of property located at 305 and 315 E. Prentiss Street and 625 S. Gilbert Street from Community Commercial (CC -2) and Intensive Commercial (CI -1) to Riverfront Crossings -Central Crossings (RFC -CC) subject to the following conditions: 1. Dedication of right -a -way along South Gilbert Street. 2. Provision of an access easement to give the City access to a manhole for the trunk sewer. 3. Provision of an access easement to give the City access to a sanitary sewer line. 4. Improvements of Ralston Creek, including the removal of invasive trees, addition of riprap and tree planting, as well as a temporary construction easement for the reconstruction of Prentiss Street Bridge. And then the fifth is 5. Execution of an affordable housing agreement. By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of SUB19-09, an application submitted by the Governor Group, LLC for a preliminary plat and sensitive areas development plan for South Gilbert Commercial Development subdivision, a 7.07 acre, 2 -lot commercial subdivision with one outlot located south of Southgate Avenue between S. Gilbert Street and the Crandic Railroad Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 2 of 15 CASE NOS. ZCA19-03 and REZ19-07: Applicant: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC Location: 305 and 315 E. Prentiss Street and 625 S. Gilbert Street a. An application submitted by Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC for an amendment to the Riverfront Crossings regulating plan to include the property located at 625 S. Gilbert Street in the Central Crossing Subdistrict. (ZCA19-03) b. An application submitted by Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 1.6 acres of property located at 305 and 315 E. Prentiss Street and 625 S. Gilbert Street from Community Commercial (CC -2) and Intensive Commercial (CI -1) to Riverfront Crossings -Central Crossings (RFC -CC). (REZ19-07) Anne Russett introduced Neighborhood Development Services planning intern Jade Peterson who is going to be presenting this case. Peterson stated this item includes two applications. These applications are submitted by Capstone collegiate properties LLC. The first application is for regulating plan amendments to include 625 South Gilbert Street and the Central Crossing Subdistrict, and the second application is for the rezoning of properties at 305 and 315 East Prentiss Street and 625 South Gilbert to Riverfront Crossing Central Crossings. Peterson showed an aerial view of the subject area. Ralston Creek runs along the west of the property and the Iowa State railroad is along the south. Currently on the subject property the land uses include residential, office and intense commercial. The zoning of the site is community commercial and intensive commercial. Similar zoning extends to the south, properties to the west and north are zoned Riverfront Crossings. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the regulating plan that would include 625 South Gilbert Street in the Central Crossing Subdistrict and they're also proposing a rezoning of the subject property to RFC -CX. Peterson added any future development will be subject to the affordable housing requirements since the proposed zoning will be within Riverfront Crossings. The applicant intends to develop an eight -story residential building. A Good Neighbor meeting was held on September 3. Next Peterson showed the development concept that was submitted by the applicant and their statement of intent. It shows an eight -story, 178 dwelling unit building. The building concept would have three lower levels for 259 residential parking spaces, and five upper levels for dwelling units. A bonus height request would need to be submitted for this concept. The requests will be reviewed by the staff form -based code design review committee as well as the City Council. The concept also shows improvements along Ralston Creek and a pedestrian way that connects to South Gilbert Street. Peterson stated the property falls within the downtown and Riverfront Crossings master plan. Moreover, the property falls within two sub districts of the Riverfront Crossings. 625 South Gilbert Street or the southern part of the property is within the Gilbert Subdistrict and the northern portion of the property 305 and 315 East Prentiss Street are within the Central Crossing Subdistrict. The regulating plan amendment asked to include 625 South Gilbert Street as a part of the Central Crossing Subdistrict. Peterson noted the two sub districts have distinctive objectives, regulations and standards that they follow. She showed a table with some of the most Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 3 of 15 notable differences and similarities between the Central Crossings and Gilbert Subdistricts. As far as land use goes, the two subdistricts are nearly the same and follow the CB -5 zone. The base height maximum is one floor less in the Gilbert Subdistrict then in Central Crossings and the bonus height maximum that can be achieved from bonus height provisions differs by three floors. Staff use two criteria to review the regulating plan amendment and rezoning application. The first is compliance with the Comprehensive plan and the second is compatibility with the existing neighborhood. With regards to the compliance with the Comprehensive Plan to subject property is located in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, which envisions the site to be redeveloped to allow a mix of residential and commercial uses. Staff used comparisons of the two subdistricts to evaluate the regulating plan amendment application. Peterson showed a table that outlines objectives and development character of the two subdistricts. The Central Crossing Subdistrict is more focused on residential development to address the need for housing close to downtown. The Gilbert Subdistrict is mostly built out to the north of the railroad and envisions that area south of the railroad to redevelop at a lower intensity. In terms of scale and intensity of use the Central Crossings wishes to maintain moderate scale, while Gilbert wants to maintain smaller scale south of the railroad. Both subdistricts have objectives to restore enhance conditions along Ralston Creek. Staff is proposing a condition to this rezoning that requires improvements to be made along Ralston Creek that will encourage having the creek as asset as well as fulfill an objective of the District Plan. The condition will require improvements including the removal of invasive species, stream bank stabilization and tree planting. Peterson stated the second review criteria that staff uses to review this application is compatibility with existing neighborhood. The surrounding neighborhood has residential multi- story buildings to the north, east and west of the project site, a raised railroad and an overpass are to the immediate south. Massing studies were submitted by the applicant and their statement of intent and these studies show what an eight -story building would look like on the site from the street view. Since the site has a lower elevation, the scale of the proposed building is similar to the surrounding multi -story buildings. Peterson showed images that were submitted by the applicant and their massing study. One shows a view looking southeast from the Dubuque and Prentiss Streets intersection. Another image shows a view looking north on South Gilbert. Additional images that were submitted, looking south from the RISE and looking west from the Prentiss and Gilbert Street intersection. Next Peterson discussed traffic implications and access, the access on East Prentiss as shown on the concept plan is actually private property belonging to the adjacent property owner and an access agreement will be needed with the adjacent owner in order to utilize the access. In the case that an access agreement cannot be achieved, alternative access will need to be identified during design review. Staff is proposing conditions to be attached to the rezoning that are related to access and traffic. One of the conditions addresses the need for the enhancement of pedestrian infrastructure along South Gilbert Street. The condition requires dedication of right-of- way along the southern property line to allow the City to reconfigure the sidewalk. This will allow an additional buffer between pedestrians and vehicle traffic. Condition two requires provision of an access easement from manhole for a trunk sewer located near the southwest corner of the subject property. Condition three requires the provision of an access easement for a sanitary sewer line that runs through the old Maiden Lane right-of-way located in the southeast portion of the property. Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 4 of 15 Peterson noted Ralston Creek is an environmentally sensitive area and borders the property to the west. Any development on this site requires a 30 -foot buffer from the Ralston Creek floodway. A sensitive area site plan will need to be submitted for any development on the subject property. The Ralston Creek 100 and 500 year floodplains both cover some of the property. Because of this, any development needs to comply with the City's floodplain management regulations. Flood proofing requirement and minimum floor elevations will be determined during site plan and building plan review. As far as the stormwater management of the site goes, staff believes that it will be handled by the existing storm water infrastructure which staff believes is sufficient, but further analysis will be made at the site plan stage. Peterson stated the role of the Commission for this case is to determine whether the rezoning and regulating plan amendment complies with a Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the existing neighborhood character. Next steps pending Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation of approval this case will go to a public hearing at City Council and pending City Council approval the applicant can submit a height bonus request. Staff recommends approval of ZCA19-03, an amendment to the River Crossings regulating plan to include the property located at 625 South Gilbert Street in the Central Crossings Subdistrict. Staff also recommends approval of REZ19-07 a proposal to rezone approximately 1.6 acres of property at 305 and 315 East Prentiss Street and 625 South Gilbert Street from Intensive Commercial and Community Commercial to Riverfront Crossings Central Crossings, and this will be subject to the following conditions. 1. Dedication of right -a -way along South Gilbert Street. 2. Provision of an access easement to give the City access to a manhole for the trunk sewer. 3. Provision of an access easement to give the City access to a sanitary sewer line. 4. Improvements of Ralston Creek, including the removal of invasive trees, addition of riprap and tree planting, as well as a temporary construction easement for the reconstruction of Prentiss Street Bridge. And then the fifth is 5. Execution of an affordable housing agreement. Hensch asked if the property adjacent immediately west of the property along Ralston Creek that the Commission rezoned some months ago has the same conditions on that property regarding Ralston Creek as being placed on this property. Russett confirmed they did carry that same condition forward to this rezoning. Hensch also noted because there's quite a severe elevation change from Dubuque Street and Gilbert Street and then going down Prentiss Street and wondered what are those elevation changes? If they are talking about a bonus height of how far down that the area already is just by the topography? Russett is not aware of the elevation changes, but perhaps the applicant might have some information on that. Dyer asked if Staff found out about the affordable housing in Riverfront Crossings. Russett replied she did look into that and has an update. Since the Riverfront Crossings form -based code was adopted through various development projects, the City has required that 94 units be affordable within the Riverfront Crossings District and so far 60 of those units have been built. In terms of the fee in lieu paid, there were two projects that provided a fee in lieu and the total that Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 5 of 15 City has in the pot for affordable housing is just over $808,000 and that money does need to be spent within Riverfront Crossings. Martin asked of the 60 units, how many are occupied? Russett will have to look into that Hensch asked if the number of built units includes the Delray development (the one right on the railroad tracks on Dubuque, by the other Hodge properties). Russett said it does not. Hensch noted the number of units will go up quite a bit. Baker asked at what point in the process, and who's responsible for approving the final exterior design? Russett stated it is addressed during the design review phase so the applicant after the rezoning would submit a design review application to staff and they would review that. In this case, since the applicant is requesting a bonus height, it has to go to the City Council for final review and approval. Baker also asked about the pedestrian walkways, and who's responsible for maintaining that now and in the future? Russett noted it is a right-of-way so it's the city's responsibility. Hektoen stated the adjacent property owners maintain the sidewalk, by state law, adjacent property owners are responsible for maintaining the sidewalk. Baker stated he has a personal concern when you look at sidewalks like this, that have no buffer between the street and the edge of the sidewalk, there needs to be some sort of railing or something there and who's responsible for that? Russett stated that's the same concern that staff has so that's why they are requesting that the applicant provide additional right-of-way in that area, because the City's hope is that eventually the sidewalk will go behind the bridge abutment to provide a buffer between the pedestrian and vehicle traffic instead of in front of the bridge abutment as it is currently. The City would eventually be re-routing that sidewalk but it's not something that is funded at this point. Baker noted there will be an increase in the population down there and it just seems like that the City should at least install a temporary railing, some sort of buffer there to coincide with the completion of the project, even though the City will change the location of the sidewalk eventually. Baker noted the City has this problem over on Riverside as well and he doesn't want to see it cropping up more and more. Hensch asked about the condition regarding the steam bank stabilization, including necessary grading in addition of riprap, does the City specify the riprap because he would hate to see a bunch of broken up concrete. Hektoen said Public Works will review the plans and approve the materials. Hensch opened the public hearing. Mike Welch (Axiom Consultants) is representing Capstone Collegiate Communities. Additionally, Davis Maxwell is here with Capstone tonight. Welch started by saying they held a good neighbor meeting, and with a much lower turnout, as you can imagine most of the properties within that 200 foot radius are rental properties. Most of the building owners and property owners are other developers in the area, so they are aware of the project and don't have any concerns. With regards to item A, the regulation plan change, he wanted to make a couple of points. First the South Gilbert district extends up Gilbert, which makes sense until you look at these three properties and you see that the property 625 Gilbert Street is bordered on the south by the tracks and on the west by Ralston Creek and really does seem to fit in the intent of Central Crossings Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 6 of 15 more with the residential. He also thinks the Clark building, that's the little to the east is also residential. Therefore it seemed that moving that into Central Crossings District just seemed to make sense as the railroad tracks are a natural buffer there. Additionally in the design and in the concept plan at this point, they aren't planning to have any frontage access off South Gilbert. There currently is a shared driveway and the property line splits the center of the driveway, that will be maintained but not a primary access point for the proposed building. They are in favor of the condition for the additional right-of-way to give the Cty the option in the future to reroute the sidewalk. Welch continued on with item B and stated two years ago on when Davis came and wanted to do this project, it was a really exciting project for the neighborhood. It became apparent while working through the Riverfront Crossings Code they would have to do height bonus. Since they don't meet the student housing because they are not close enough to campus there's a bunch of those bonuses that aren't available, so the one that that became available to them was public art, which gets them one floor. The others were the LEED credits and this project is really tailored for those. Welch didn't get into too many details because that will happen at design review and height bonus review. However he shared Capstone will do as part of their project energy efficiency, sustainability, because they own the buildings for the long haul. They're not building it, to sell it, they're building it to own it and so they have a vested interest in in that long-term performance of the building and for their tenants. The other part that that is exciting is Ralston Creek and we really see Ralston critique as an opportunity to create another amenity that helps separate them from the other properties in the area. We are interested in working with staff and the City to see how they can make Ralston Creek more accessible to the public. One item that was on that site plan is a proposed connection from Gilbert Street around the south side of the building and up to Ralston Creek. Not only is that a nice feature on the site, but if someone is walking on Gilbert Street it gives them a way to kind of cut through and avoid going up and over the hill on Prentiss Street there. Regarding the comment about riprap, unfortunately, they are involved in the project on the west side and that is the route that they intend to go again. In the statement of intent, there is a kind of a rendering or a cross section in there that the landscape architect on the team helped them put together. It is a pretty ambitious goal but it is the direction they want to go and really creating a natural kind of inviting area if there's space. Right now they are working with some floodplain buffers and some stormwater retention and mitigation measures in there. Welch also pointed out it is important to understand is the massing of this building and how it fits in that neighborhood. He does not have the exact elevation difference, but recalls from the Prentiss Street Bridge to the intersection of Dubuque and Prentiss there is likely a 25 to 30 feet elevation change there. Hensch stated a slide of that information would be very effective because the massing concepts are really good but to be able to illustrate that that difference of elevation, because that's like two and a half floors would be helpful. Welch noted in that statement of intent on page nine, there is a schematic section that cuts down Prentiss Street there. There is 620 Dubuque, which is the highest building on the corner of Dubuque and Prentiss and the elevation of the top at 736, that's the height of the eve on that Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 7 of 15 building. 225 Prentiss, which is the one that's currently being built on the west side of Ralston will be at 710. With the building they are proposing at the top of that eighth floor it would be around 742. So they are only six feet above the building on Dubuque Street even though they eight floors instead the four they have from grade. The other image worth noting is the view from The Rise from that corner at Court and Linn and you look at it and you don't see a building, you just see trees. It's just kind of sticking out above the trees back there. Again, it's one of those that that as you get further away, you really can't see the building. Welch concluded by stating the conditions seem acceptable. The only one they may need to work with the City on is the sewer easements, just depending on the building, it could be an easement or a realignment might be necessary to make that work. Welch is comfortable they can work that out with staff during the design process to address. Hensch stated when he walked and drove through that area it looks like virtually anything you do will decrease the amount of impervious surfaces in there. Is that your estimation? Welch replied that yes, they are working with the Clarks to get that access easement off of the alley and in doing so would get rid of that long curb cut in front of the City Electric building that's there now. That would then be a more typical street, grass or vegetated parkway of some kind, and then sidewalk. They haven't really looked at the landscaping on the north side of the proposed building, but there'll be an opportunity there for enhancing the streetscape will be an improvement for what's there today. Hensch asked if they had developed a new preliminary estimation of which level of LEED they will use, silver, gold, platinum? Welch stated any LEED certification no matter what level you go to ends up being a pricey process. For a residential building, you don't really see a return on investment from spending the money to get this certification however they will incorporate the same principles of LEED and use the LEED prerequisites and checklist to guide the design and incorporate those items. They we will not be pursuing a LEED certification. Dyer noted the applicant is asking for a bonus based on LEED. Welch confirmed that is correct, but to clarify the way the Code reads is you can still get the credit by doing the items and verifying that the items are done without going through the LEED certification process through the Green Building Council. Russett confirmed for the bonus height, it's called the LEED bonus height, but certification is not required. And it also talks about environmental aspects that could be made to the project and the applicant is also proposing those improvements along Ralston Creek. So there is some flexibility in options that could be incorporated that relate to energy and sustainability and the environment in that bonus height option. Dyer asked then if the City will really test for LEED qualities, will they do blower door tests and other things to verify that LEED standards have been met. Hektoen said with the Chauncey the City had their architect provide us with a certification saying this meets all of these standards and it was constructed in accordance with these plans. The City relied upon their experts. Dyer believes if they are getting a bonus then the city should take some responsibility. Hekteon stated that inspections are done, but the City doesn't have the same kind of expertise on staff to do the kind of work that the architects and the engineers. Dyer asked why the project had to have a height bonus. Welch responded it was the economics of the of the property to meet the parking requirements on site to get the density that justifies the Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 8 of 15 land cost and the building cost. The other option would be to redevelop as a standalone building with surface parking, that wouldn't be the best use for a property that's 1200 feet from campus and close to downtown. Dyer asked if they considered keeping the Gilbert Street designation for Riverfront Crossings so that that part would be lower? Because the point on Gilbert Street is to have lower buildings? Welch said they did look at that, but there is a step back on Gilbert Street and so your kind of back behind that railroad abutment before you get to the full height of the building. Welch stated as you as you look at that transition the railroad tracks on South Gilbert makes that area a natural transition. The trees will screen and soften the height of the building there as well. Dyer noted along Gilbert Street it will still be eight stories and an alternative would be to accept the Gilbert Street District requirements for the part of the building that faces Gilbert Street. Davis Maxwell (Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC) stated as a student housing development company, they do business all over the country. This is one market that they are very interested in to provide quality housing for the students who attend the University of Iowa, but also anybody can live here as well. It's not solely for the students at the University of Iowa, that's just target market. Hensch asked if this was their first foray into the Iowa City Market? Maxwell replied it was. Dyer asked what is their intent with regard to affordable housing? Will they have it in their building? Maxwell stated they are currently marketing roughly 10% of the units to be affordable. Hensch closed the public hearing. Signs moved to recommend approval of ZCA19-03, an application submitted by Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC for an amendment to the Riverfront Crossings regulating plan to include the property located at 625 S. Gilbert Street in the Central Crossing Subdistrict. Additionally, Signs moved to recommend approval of REZ19-07 an application submitted by Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 1.6 acres of property located at 305 and 315 E. Prentiss Street and 625 S. Gilbert Street from Community Commercial (CC -2) and Intensive Commercial (CI -1) to Riverfront Crossings - Central Crossings (RFC -CC) subject to the following conditions: 1. Dedication of right -a -way along South Gilbert Street. 2. Provision of an access easement to give the City access to a manhole for the trunk sewer. 3. Provision of an access easement to give the City access to a sanitary sewer line. 4. Improvements of Ralston Creek, including the removal of invasive trees, addition of riprap and tree planting, as well as a temporary construction easement for the reconstruction of Prentiss Street Bridge. And then the fifth is 5. Execution of an affordable housing agreement. Townsend seconded the motions. Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 9 of 15 Hensch acknowledged kudos to Axiom because of their very nicely structured and comprehensive report that he believes made it very easy to understand things. It was very nice to see those massing concepts, because that is always an issue. He is also very pleased to see that we're turning Ralston Creek into being treated as more than just a drainage ditch, get it back to be treated as a natural resource, which of course is an element of this whole area. He acknowledged there's a lot of issues with height but given the change in elevation it is really going to help mitigate the appearance of mass for this project. And then the higher elevation on Gilbert Street right next to the railroad tracks looking up from the sidewalk on Gilbert Street, looking up to those railroad tracks, it's pretty substantial up there, then that helped, again, would create that illusion of mitigation for that height. So he thinks those are some just features in that area that really soften the mass and scale of the building. Overall it's an improvement and currently there are too many impervious surfaces in the area, so anything done will improve that. Hensch is in favor and will support this application. Signs agrees and doesn't have any problem with the height in the scheme of things. He hears Dyer's concerned about Gilbert Street, but he drives that route every day and never look at that space, he's always looking at the curb going north. Dyer noted that part is intended for pedestrians to not have the sense of a big mass right next to them. One concern she has is blocking the light to the apartment building that's on the corner of Prentiss and Gilbert Street and hope there's something other than a flat glass wall to look at. Dyer also noted her continued frustration that they don't see any building designs and they don't know what little what it will look like. Hensch also appreciated that a good neighbor meeting was held. He wants to recognize people who do that because he thinks that is the spirit of the commission and they hope for community input. Townsend stated she is very pleased to hear that they are going to have the affordable housing piece in there and not pay the fee in lieu, she thinks that's very important for that area. Dyer asked if it would be possible to amend that fifth condition to make it that the affordable housing is on site and not make it an option? Hensch asked isn't it by Code that they have the option of either the number of units or the fee in lieu of because the fee in lieu of has to be spent and Riverfront Crossings? So the actual effect will be the same over time? Hektoen confirmed that and also noted technically speaking, this is a code requirement. We included in the list of conditions just so the applicant is reminded of that obligation. It is not necessary to include it as a condition of the rezoning. The code allows for these various options because a lot of times the applicants don't have their plans fully fleshed out at this stage and that's that was the rationale between allowing these different options. Dyer asked if for this project could it be limited to take out the option. One concern she has is this is pretty close to campus and fees in lieu could be spent way down at the other end by Highway Six, which is a lot different location, it's like half a mile farther away from campus. Signs shares that concern in general however the developer indicated his intent was to have on site affordable housing. Would you have any problem with us taking out the fee in lieu part of that of that clause? Hektoen said it is difficult for the Commission to go down that path without Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 10 of 15 further analysis of what actually distinguishes this from any other property in the Riverfront Crossings. As you guys know the conditions imposed on rezoning are supposed to meet public needs that are generated by this rezoning. The City has established the affordable housing requirements for the entire Riverfront Crossings area and ordinances been passed that allow the fee to be spent anywhere in the Riverfront Crossings area not just in each subdistrict so without further analysis of the uniqueness of this situation, she cautions the Commission against deviating from the existing structure. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CASE NO. SUB19-09: Applicant: The Governor Group, LLC Location: South of Southgate Avenue between S. Gilbert Street and the Crandic Railroad An application submitted by the Governor Group, LLC for a preliminary plat and sensitive areas development plan for South Gilbert Commercial Development subdivision, a 7.07 acre, Not commercial subdivision with one outlot located south of Southgate Avenue between S. Gilbert Street and the Crandic Railroad. Russet began the staff report showing a map of the location of the property. It is located on South Gilbert Street just south of Southgate Avenue and then the CRANDIC is the eastern boundary of the site. The area is all zone CI -1. In terms of the background on this application, there's one existing building on the proposed lot one and the subdivision will allow new commercial development on lot two. The applicant chose not to use the good neighbor policy for this subdivision. In terms of the Comprehensive Plan, both the Comprehensive Plan in the South District Plan identified this as appropriate for commercial development. Russett showed a map of the plat. There are two proposed lots one and two, and then to the south there's outlot A which will be used for stormwater management. There's also wetlands in that outlot. In terms of transportation, the property is accessed via South Gilbert and Southgate Avenue. There's an existing sidewalk along South Gilbert and the preliminary plat shows proposed sidewalks along Southgate Avenue. There's also bus service to this site. The property is within the floodplain. The entire property is located within the 500 year flood plain and most of the property is within the 100 year flood plain. The developer plans to fill this entire site to the 100 year flood plain elevation and any development would need to comply with the city's floodplain management ordinance. As mentioned there are wetlands on the site, there's a total of 0.08 acres of wetlands, all at the southern part of the project site within outlet A. The sensitive areas ordinance does require a 100 foot buffer from all wetlands but also provides an option for reducing that buffer through buffer averaging. The applicant has proposed buffer averaging to decrease the buffer by 50 feet around one wetland located at the north eastern portion of the preliminary plat. The applicant has proposed to remove around 2500 square feet of that buffer and add an additional 16,792 square feet of buffer around the larger wetlands to the southwest of the preliminary plat. The buffer is being requested because the combined size of the wetlands is less than 1/10th of an acre and the buffer averaging would increase the size of the buffer around the majority of wetlands. Also, the wetlands are not buffered to the east because the CRANDIC railroad is on the east side. Also the reduced buffer is on the opposite bank of the drainage ditch and outside Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 11 of 15 of the grading limits. The applicant also proposed a storm water detention basin within the buffer area and this is allowed as the sensitive areas ordinance does allow storm water detention facilities in these buffer areas. Construction activity within outlot A shall be limited to construction of the stormwater retention basin. There will also be a silt fence installed to provide erosion control and avoid disturbance of the wetlands. There was also a potential for archaeological resources on this site, a phase one study was completed and it concluded that no further investigation was recommended. In the staff report that was submitted to the Commission the stormwater management is originally listed as a deficiency but Public Works Department has reviewed some changes made to the stormwater plans and they have approved the preliminary stormwater management plan so that is no longer a deficiency The role of the Commission in the review of a preliminary plan is to review it to see if the plat complies with our subdivision regulations and other applicable codes as well as the Comprehensive Plan Next steps, after a recommendation of approval from the Commission, the Council will review the preliminary plan and sensitive areas development plan and then the applicant would be able to submit a final plat application and final sensitive areas development plan. Staff does recommend approval of SUB19-09 an application submitted by the Governor Group LLC for a preliminary plat and sensitive areas development plan for the South Gilbert commercial development subdivision. A two lot 7.06 acre commercial subdivision located south of Southgate Avenue between South Gilbert Street and Crandic railroad. Signs asked if there was a building on the site. Russett said there is on lot one, she believes it is under construction right now. Signs asked if that is that like getting the cart before the horse? Russett said they were able to submit a site plan for the site, even without the subdivision, now they want to sell off lot 2 so they needed to subdivided. Hensch opened the public hearing. Mike Welch (Axiom Consultants) is representing the Governor Group. Regarding fill on this site, almost the entire property has already been filled above the hundred year flood floodplain over the last like 10 years or so there's just little bits along the perimeter that aren't quite up there most mostly because of sidewalk raids. As part of this project, it will get sidewalk constructed along the south side of Southgate Avenue, that section of sidewalk completed from South Gilbert to the railroad tracks. And then any access from lot two onto South Gilbert would have to go through Public Works comply with access onto an arterial street. Hensch asked about the stormwater area and for clarification on the whole issue. Because they pretty much filled up the whole area there doesn't seem like there could be much left for the wetlands? Welch stated the wetlands go down that east property line along the Crandic, they are actually seep wetlands, which aren't as common, but they're actually up on the railroad embankment, it's where there's waters like seeping out of the railroad embankment and providing the hydrology for those wetlands. Hensch asked if it was coming through from the other side, because that hill. Welch said they didn't really investigate that but would guess is that's where the water is coming from. Typically seen on old railroad grades are those real sluggish kind of drainage channels alongside of them and that's what's creating a lot of the Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 12 of 15 additional wetlands. Back 10 plus years ago when the Kennedys first started filling this property they did contact the Core and at that time the Core told them that there was no need to do that they weren't going to take jurisdiction so Code didn't apply. And so they filled up to where they filled up. This time and going through the process the Core said yes, there's a connection to the river, so we are going to take jurisdiction, until then we had the wetland investigation done. Hensch stated he presumed they had to do a phase one environmental survey for this. He imagines there were some findings relative to the railroad, with all the creosote and various chemicals thrown on that over the years. Welch confirmed that is correct. They did a phase one environmental survey, but because the railroad is off their property they didn't extend that far. Dyer asked if the wetlands would be maintained or just be swamp. Welch said the basin or the wetlands really will not be changed from what they are now, the grading will stop and those wetlands will remain undisturbed. Hensch closed the public hearing. Baker moved to recommend approval of SUB19-09, an application submitted by the Governor Group, LLC for a preliminary plat and sensitive areas development plan for South Gilbert Commercial Development subdivision, a 7.07 acre, Not commercial subdivision with one outlot located south of Southgate Avenue between S. Gilbert Street and the Crandic Railroad. Dyer seconded the motion. Hensch said he has been driving past this area since '93 so wasn't too big fan of the way the fill was thrown in there over the years but is glad to see the area getting developed and the wetlands are going to be protected. Probably smaller than it should have been, but you know things change over times. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: AUGUST 15, 2019 Townsend moved to approve the meeting minutes of August 15 2019. Baker seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett didn't have any updates. Baker asked about the issue raised earlier in the first item on the agenda about the sidewalks that are just right next to the roadway. What is the understanding of what his concern was and where you're going with it now? Russett stated her understanding was that Baker would like the Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 13 of 15 City to make the improvement as soon as possible, and if there can be a temporary or short-term remedy to explore that. Baker stated his real concern is bigger. He would like for the City to identify any other locations comparable in the City and work on some sort of remedy. He knows of two or three places in town where the sidewalks are literally, if you miss a step, you're in front of a car. There ought to be some way to protect pedestrians that it's not there now. That ought to be on the City staff agenda somehow. Signs asked if anyone knows an update on the South Riverside underpass tunnel, it was supposed to happen last year. Russett does not know what caused the delay but she knows they are working on it. Should be open next spring or summer. Hensch noted the estimated price tag for the South Riverside one is a million dollars. Hektoen said acquiring property from the railroad is never an easy task. Signs noted they seem to be bumping into this affordable housing on site versus fee in lieu issue quite often it's something that the Commission is concerned about. What, if anything can be done? Can this commission forward a recommendation to Council to make a change or how what kind of process would happen if we wanted to put our toes in the water? Hektoen said the Commission has the authority to initiate rezoning and that's what it would be, an amendment to the Code. Hensch thinks it is a very difficult issue because frankly, he thinks sometimes the fee in lieu of is a more efficient way to address this, to leverage that money using Iowa Finance Authority money to get way more affordable housing units. He thinks it's more complicated than it just sounds. Signs agrees they would want to get more information. He feels it flies against the intent of trying to scatter these units throughout the community, in this case the Riverfront Crossings neighborhood, and you potentially get a building full of just these units and that's not always a positive thing in the long run. The other problem he's had with it since day one is the fee in lieu amount does not build a unit. The amount is not enough to build a unit. The fee in lieu is somewhere in the high $80,000 and the City has paid $200,000 for several units in town and so he has a problem with the with that disconnect. Hensch asked about Riverfront Crossings, noting when that consultant was here they spoke about reducing the number of subdistricts, is that on some kind of a timeline or que? Russett said in terms of next steps on that they want to discuss the consultants recommendations with the Council. And then ultimately staff will be taking amendments forward for the Riverfront Crossings form -based code. Dyer asked if the amendments would address concerns raised regarding bonus height. Russett noted the consultants concern is the way the Code is structured, like in Central Crossings, it appears that the maximum height is four stories but if you dig down in the Code more than you realize you can get a bonus height for eight and the consultant thinks that information should be up front on the map that says the base height is four and with height bonuses as you can get up to eight, it should be more transparent. Adiournment: Baker moved to adjourn. Signs seconded. Planning and Zoning Commission September 5, 2019 Page 14 of 15 A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member 3/15 (W.S.) 4/2 4/5 (W.S) 4/16 4/19 5/3 5/17 6/7 6/21 7/5 8/16 9/6 9/20 10/18 12/20 1/3 BAKER, LARRY -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X O/E X X DYER, CAROLYN O/E X O/E X X X X X O/E X O O/E O X X X FREERKS, ANN X X X X X O/E X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- `-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- HENSCH, MIKE O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E PARSONS, MAX X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X SIGNS, MARK X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X THEOBALD, JODIE X X X X X X X X O/E -- -- -- -- -- -- `-- -- `-- -- -- -- -- -- TOWNSEND, BILLIE -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X O/E X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member 1/17 (W.S.) 2/4 2/21 3/7 3/21 4/4 4/18 5/16 6/6 6/20 7/18 8/15 9/5 BAKER, LARRY X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X DYER, CAROLYN O/E X X X X X X O/E X X X X X FREERKS, ANN -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- HENSCH, MIKE X X X X O/E X X X X O/E X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X O/E X X X O/E X X X X O/E O/E X PARSONS, MAX X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E SIGNS, MARK X X X X X O/E X X X X O/E X X THEOBALD, JODIE I -- -- -- -- -- -- I -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- TOWNSEND, BILLIE I X X X I O/E X X X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member