The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2021-07-15 Info Packet, r � ��.�� iir�� ww rm, �� ►�c.ae�_ GTY �� IOWA C17Y www.icga�.arg IP1 City Council Information Packet Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Joint Meeting Joint Entities Meeting Agenda Miscellaneous July 15, 2021 IP3. Memo from Police Chief & Fire Chief: 2021 Fireworks Calls for Service I P4. IP5. � Climate Action Equity Report Civil Service Examination: Buyer I- Equipment Draft Minutes Library Board of Trustees: June 24 Planning & Zoning Commission: July 1 Senior Center Commission: June 17 July 15, 2021 City of lowa City Page 1 Item Number: 1. i r � �_�. -dr� _�� —�....� QTY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 15, 2021 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule ATTACHMENTS: Description Council Tentative Meeting Schedule ir � ��. -� � _��r.�E� + rW�m�m� -�a.ar�_ CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Subject to change Date Time Meetinq Monday, July 19, 2021 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting Hosted by ICCSD Tuesday, July 27, 2021 4:00 PM Special Work Session 6:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Tuesday, August 17, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, September 7, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, September 21, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, October 5, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, October 19, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Monday, November 1, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, November 16, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, December 7, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, December 21, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session 6:00 PM Formal Meeting July 15, 2021 Location Zoom Meeting Platform The Center, Assembly Room 28 5. Linn Street TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD i r � �_�. -dr� _�� —�....� QTY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 15, 2021 Joint Entities Meeting Agenda ATTACHMENTS: Description Joint Entities Meeting Agenda Item Number: 2. Iowa City Comtnunity School District Educational Services Center bletthew Degner Su�erintendenl ofSchuols I-.. I i �1� I.� I� .�. . I.�,��u. i .. .,.. � r,,,d. Joint Meeting Johnson County Board of Supervisors, City of lowa City, City of Coralville, City of North Liberty, City of Tiffin, City of Hills, University Heights, lowa City Community School District Board Clear Creek Amana School District, University of lowa Monday, July 19, 2021 Meeting via Zoom 4:30 p.m. Zoom Meeting Link: h_[tps7/iowecityschools-ore_zoom.us/i/97 L4461 R91 �1 AGENDA 1. Call to order 2. Welcome and Introductions 3. Discussion/update of the following: a. Facilities Master Plan 2.0 (ICCSD) • Preschool(ICCSD) b. Discuss potential partnerships to conduct a follow-up study of the 2005 Hydrogeology and Simulation of Ground-Water Flow in the Silurian-Devonian Aquifer System, Johnson County, lowa to be completed by the USGS Central Midwest Water Science Center. (Johnson County) c. COVID-19 update (Johnson County) d. Review of fireworks policies from cities and counties (City of lowa City) e. Report out from cities and counties on American Rescue Plan Act public engagement and spending decisions (City of lowa City) f. Next meeting date and time g. Other Business 4. Adjournment Entity in pareMhesis requested the item be placed on the agenda. It is' Ihe policy ofthe Iown City Comnnmity School Dis[cict not to discriminete on tlie basis afeace, color, nationul urigin, sex, divability, reli�ion, cravl, �ge, ma�itul staRi9, scxunl oricnlolion, gzndcr iticntiry tmd saclocconomic stams in its eduwtional progrums, octivitics. or cmploymcnl prncllccs Thorc is a gncvoncc pmcdurc for proccssing compl�ints ofdiscriminatiun. If yw hevc yuestiuns ur u gnevnnce related lo this pullcy, please cunlncl Ene Hnwurd, Directur of Equity � Employez Rzlations, 1R5 N. Dodge SC, lown City, IA 52245, (} 19) 6RR-IOOO, howard.cn<I<cio�voclryschools.ecg. Item Number: 3. i r � �_�. -dr� _�� —�....� QTY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 15, 2021 Memo from Police Chief & Fire Chief: 2021 Fireworks Calls for Service ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from Police Chief & Fire Chief: 2021 Fireworks Calls for Service r -'�_,---r��, CITY OF IOWA CITY ��`'°�'�� MEMORANDUM � Date: July 12, 2021 To: From: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Dustin Liston, Police Chief & John Grier, Fire Chief Re: 2021 Fireworks Calls for Service Police Department Calls for Service During the consumer fireworks sales period of June 1- July 8, 2021, there were no permits issued for fireworks sales within the city limits. This year shows a significant decrease in calls for service and a slight decrease in total man hours spent managing fireworks related calls compared to 2020. During the 2021 sales period, the lowa City Police Department received 136 calls for service (CFS) related to fireworks complaints, in which 158 officers were deployed. This is compared to 373 calls related to fireworks during the same period of 2020. Police spent a total of 51 hours responding to fireworks calls. This is compared to 60 hours spent responding in 2020. In 2021, there was 1 firework citation and 12 verbal warnings. For most calls, officers were unable to locate the individuals using fireworks. Below are five-year historical summary charts of fireworks calls, response, and outcomes by the police, a location map of the calls for service related to fireworks during the 2021 summer sales period, a table of the calls received by neighborhood, and comparisons to 2020 of calls for service by date and time of day. Five -Year Historical Summary of ICPD Fireworks Calls + Reponses 600 500 453 400 373 300 200 ll2 103 100 0 � � Total FireworksCFS 509 309 153 158 136 120 � Officers Deployed ■ 2017 ■ 2015 ■ 2019 2020 ■ 2021 135 60 51 39 20 ■� Total Response Hours July 13, 2021 Page 2 Five -Year Historical Summary of ICPD Fireworks-Related Warnings and Citations ao 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 �z Warnings and Citations Issued 66 12 7 _ z . 0 Warning Issued ■ 2017 ■ 2018 2019 2020 ■ 2021 ICPD Fireworks Calls for Service Location Map ♦ NENNEOp <t 5 O 4 17 10 0 1 Gtation Issued `' . . . "^� >n,�, ��e _ ` °`� � - � �,,�ona ' �� • � • � a p 2 0l s,Ha, o h --� , ...._� �� m 6 �:.n:c% NIFeP � .. � WPPRHF� ..,,-i n MEP9ERTH! o I . ` s � R- �Z � w � HStEpPJf� � I I L _ . R�� n li J _ � � � �`-� 0 Q z � � , � z EMAflxPTBR • v l �' ��' �OIVE •� EJEFFE0.50NST . c�eNon'.e sv � • , •:. • � �� . • mshisEav_ � ' c � m • [crwursr p � `aie�Ras q�= �• ° _ • I �� •j � •��sc •��• :_., � . : � c u—� � N �' : • Q'�F > • � � - �� rc • • � v� 1< •/� � o - � � % � � � - � XIPKWOO'�PVE � �r � • � � �� F � � . C� � �q � � � I i� � � y QO a dOrkHROg n ' m HIfwPNOpVE eRy � � J I � � � F � �6 • - C � • 9j ¢ m� � P.�� • �P • � • �G • , , : • � m �� - i N �R � � W� ..,\ � ! -- � P 0 �� N ¢ / � I- � K = I �\ r � a � � H�H`� �� ' CnL;iOr O�VL � I �� i e, 5. � • � July 13, 2021 Page 3 Total Police Fireworks Calls for Service by Neighborhood Area Bluffwood Bryn Manor Heights College Green Creekside Downtown Friendship Galaway Hills Goosetown Grant Wood Harlocke/Weeber Hilltop Hunters Run Longfellow Lucas Farms Manville Heights Melrose Miller / Orchard Morningside Normandy _ Northeast Northside . Northwest Oakcrest . Parknest Penny Bryn . Pepperwood Rochester * Shimek Southeast Southwest Estates Tyn Cae Village Green Walden Woods Walnut Ridge Westside Wetherby Windsor Ridge Wylde Green 0 0 18 7 23 34 0 9 34 5 1 4 21 41 3 2 17 6 2 23 17 22 6 3 4 10 4 5 36 2 1 11 11 0 8 57 3 3 � 1 7 2 7 6 0 2 21 0 0 0 1 8 1 2 5 4 0 3 10 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 5 0 1 1 1 0 0 19 1 1 � 0 1 1 3 8 0 0 17 0 0 1 1 8 1 1 5 0 6 6 5 3 0 0 0 1 0 1 9 0 0 2 1 0 2 18 1 1 � 6 10 8 16 28 0 0 56 0 0 1 9 30 3 1 14 2 4 9 15 23 0 2 1 14 3 5 45 0 0 3 4 0 6 44 5 1 � 1 2 7 15 1 1 17 0 1 0 2 11 2 1 3 0 1 11 5 6 0 1 1 2 0 2 13 1 1 4 3 1 0 17 0 0 July 13, 2021 Page 4 Total Police Fireworks Calls for Service by Date iao izo ioo so 60 40 20 0 Fireworks CFS by Day 6/1- 7/8 6/1 6/3 6/5 6/7 6/9 6/11 6/13 6/15 6/17 6/19 6/21 6/23 6/25 6/27 6/29 7/1 7/3 7/5 7/7 �— I6IOAjF:�I64iI�)I��I�)il Total Police Fireworks Calls for Service by Hour Fireworks CFS By Hour zoo iso 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 t�" .O� .O� p� O� O� .O� O� .O� O� .O� O� .O� O� O� O� .O� O� .O� O� .O� .h°j a. ti. .�. a. �. �. �. 1�. 1ti. 1ti. 1,�. ya. y�. y�. y1. y�. y�. ��. �ti. �ti. �,�. �,�. � 11 tiO •�;� ,�O l�O �i�O q�.� �� OO yy� ,y0� ,�O k0� y0� �O� �.0� �O �O �O .O� ,y0� ,�O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 'L 'Lti 'L 'L �2017 �2018 2019 2020 �2021 July 13, 2021 Page 5 Fire Department Calls for Service The lowa City Fire Department (ICFD) received 1 call for service related to fireworks incidents. 16 ICFD personnel were deployed, including 6 apparatus deployments. A total of 3.5 personnel hours was spent on fireworks calls for service. Below is a four-year historical summary chart of fireworks calls and responses, a table detailing calls by hour and fire area, a location map of ICFD calls for service, and a chart detailing the deployment summary for each call for service. Five-Year Historical Summary of ICFD Fireworks Calls + Responses 1� 7 3 4 2 � � F rev; cr k= � F`_� 1CFD Fire�•.�orksCFS Resources 2Z 1= = 1�= ■ Tota Apparatus�eployed ■2�1' ■2�1R ■2�15 2�2� ■2�21 Fire Department Calls for Service by Hour and Fire Area Hour ICFD Fireworks CFS Fire Area 00:51 1 2 61 3E 12 1E � ■ � —cea Fer�nne �e�.cyed Total Fireworks CFS 1 July 13, 2021 Page 6 Fire Department Calls for Service Location Map Kiv,vnu F::'�.c ��.sr sioE QR � � o ❑ o EARL RO w n N � ABER AVE wi�Low c�eEx dR i Fire Department Calls for Service Deployment Summary zso zoo sso ioo so 0 ■ apparatus deployed u ca� � 1 maxtime on cFs(mins) � Total perwnnel � i r � �_�. -dr� _�� —�....� QTY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 15, 2021 Climate Action Equity Report ATTACHMENTS: Description Climate Action Equity Report Item Number: 4. Clir�ate Change, Health and Equity in lowa City IUSDN Equity, Diversity and Indusion Fellow I Green lowa AmeriCorps Outreach Coordinator EQUITY & CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ',�: baa� u.wr e—� _ L The changing climate requires adaptation and preparation for the effects it will have on people's lives and wellness. Extreme temperatures, longer summers and winters, extreme precipitation and flooding, and extreme winds are the projected local impacts of climate change that will affect lowa City's economy, infrastructure, environment, and overall human health.' Addressing climate change, health, and equity in lowa City requires a two-pronged approach: reduce public health risks and build relationships between community stakeholders and the City. The City of lowa City is committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion; it works to ensure that all residents have access to the resources necessary to adapt to the changing dimate.z Building community resilience to climate change means centering issues of equity. The awareness and understanding of vulnerability and impact challenges is both necessary and useful as the community moves forward on climate action planning. The City will use the input-gathering process outlined in this document - in concert with the City's other equity tools - to assess new projects and programs and shape outcomes. The citizens of lowa City can also use this document to shape climate action and planning. It is intended to be a public tool for use by all. 2 Addressing Climate Change, Health, and Equity in lowa Ci[y The social determinants of health Diagram court�sy oi th� Institut� for Futun Studi�s, StxkFalm The impacts of climate change, like the determinants of health, are influenced by social and community networks, living and working conditions, and socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental conditions. Not all individuals or all communities are equally affected by climate change. Vulnerability, as defined by the Intergov- ernmental Panel on Climate Change, is "the degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, the adverse effects of dimate variability and change."3 Resilience, as defined by the World Health Organization, is "the ability of a natural or human system to absorb disturbances while retaining the same basic structure and ways of functioning, the capacity for self-organization, and the capac- ity to adapt to stress and change."° Community vulnerability to weather hazards differ by place, race, and income, because of inequities in the distribution of money and power, historical disinvestment in some communities, discriminatory practices and policies over time, structural racism, higher pollution burdens, and less access to resources for health.s The following chart highlights how some population groups persistently face greater impacts: lowa City Division of Climate Action and Outreach 3 VULNERABILITY TO HAZARD S Living in poverty Less ability to absorb losses and recover Lack transportation for evacuation Lower housing quality Higher proportional losses Non-White, Non-Anglo Women LGBTQ+ Chronically ill Children Older Adults Cultural barriers Broken trust in authority Reside in high hazard zones Wage gap, Care-giving role Exclusion or isolation Increased mortality Post-traumatic stress Reduced evacuation mobility Special care requirements Renters Low control over home disaster resistance Lower rates of insurance Disaster assistance favors homeowners Higher post-disaster rents Disabled Institutionalized Homeless Non-English Speakers Recent arrivals Urban Rural Reduced evacuation mobility Custom shelter needs Lower receipt of warnings Language barriers Unfamiliaritywith local hazards Less access to disaster assistance Evacuation complications Reduced emergency response capabilities Single-sector economic dependence 4 Addressing Climate Change, Health, and Equity in lowa City ; � -� 1! I ; ! ! �t'�;'1 �. .� .� - – . ,t;, � Y — �_ y,. . �. � �' �' , ��,. _. ,� - _ . - � �� .. _�� " � _ �. � g� � ,.. � - . �.,, � �� ,.0 ,� �� - �. 6 � r I -- s,. ��. �� i �� :. � � . _ ,� � «, m ��$ � ,. ' `_�� G °° m.�"�. �a , _, �� ,�� - `� �� -� �.�� . .�,�� 9.��.,� � ��, `��_ � � _,��.�. .�� _ �s, �� . k�Vl.�.I�IIY'�.'JP� ��LLf��.-�.:M! I _ ....� . � E� � �lislii� ....`CYY�S�. �'�.�.�Sa�Sn In lowa City, the 2020 derecho and the 2008 flood demonstrated that resilience is bound up with people's ability to access quality housing, transportation, health care, and general connectedness within the city. In communities everywhere, peo- ple with more economic, social, or political capital are more likely to survive and thrive in changing climatic conditions. The report Climate Change, Health, and Equity: Op- portunities forAction observes, "Poor living conditions increase vulnerability to climate change and cause poor health status; poor health status even further increases climate vulnerability."bThe report also offers the following list of examples to demonstrate how living and working conditions, underly- ing health conditions, and other environ- mental impacts can create more vulnerabil- ityto climate change health impacts: • Ground level ozone—a respiratory irritant—increases with rising tem- peratures. Higher ozone levels result in more asthma attacks, more heart attacks, decreases in lung function, and increased hospital admissions and deaths.' People with cardiovascular disease are at greater risk of heat ill- ness; those with asthma are at greater risk from increased ozone levels and increased pollen.a Extreme rainfall and flooding may cause contamination of drinking wa- ter supplies with untreated sewage or chemicals.9 Warmer air and water temperatures cause higher levels of microbial contamination, increasing the frequency of food- and water-borne lowa City Division of Climate Action and Outreach 5 diseases.10 Farmers and farm communities are at higher risk of drought impacts if soils are already depleted or local groundwater is contaminated. • Farmworkers and other outdoor workers are at higher risk of heat illness." Extreme heat and weather events and drought contribute to declines in crop yields. As crop production declines, food prices increase, leading to greater food in- security. In developed nations, higher food prices encourage consumption of cheaper calorie-dense foods, which increases the risk for chronic illnesses such as obesity and diabetes.iz'3 • Poverty reduces the capacity to absorb ris- ing food, water, or energy prices. It is much harder for low-income communi- ties to rebuild after a disaster, especially since fewer lower-income households have ■ adequate insurance. In particular, riverside housing stock that has been inherited rather than mortgaged has no flood insurance re- quirements and is more vulnerable to catastrophic loss. People who need medications are more vulnerable to disrupted medical care in a natural disaster.14 • The Department of Defense calls climate change "a threat multiplier." Climate-exacerbated tensions over land and resources will likely increase civil strife, conflict, violence, and as- sociated displacement, which in turn carries mental health impacts even for those living far from the epicenter of conflict.15 • Rates of depression, anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorders, substance abuse, and suicides are all expected to rise as the effects of climate change worsen. The effects will be felt most keenly among children, the poor, the elderly, and those with existing mental health conditions. 6 Addressing Climate Change, Health, and Equity in lowa Ci[y The disproportionate impacts of climate change on individuals with pre-existing chronic illness and on socially disadvantaged groups threaten to greatly exacerbate existing health and social inequities, globally and within the U.S.16" Improving resilience means addressing underlying inequities in health outcomes, living conditions, and social cohesion of communities facing disruptive climate impacts. Some aspects of resilience include physical and psychological health, social and economic equity and well-being, availability of information and effective risk communication, and integration of gov- ernmental and non-governmental organizations. Social capital and connectedness also factor into resilience, as people who live in neighborhoods with strong social networks are likely to do better after a natural disaster because they can rely on help from others.'$ Impact of Climate Change on Human Health � � �ia C��lr~: , i , , �_.��ti��'i7� fw.11� �i'<�411C.1� ;_IiUii- m f�ZrtiM i i1.L•�1 r_i 7 .�'i�!'•:•LSil;4, ri .I r, }G�. �i�l•�. �,,,� , ,_�._� „ � � �i��; �-q�� ,i. � . ,_. r_i.. . _. ��i��ilij�iili`'J.iJ� ' i�h�i �� iT".-1 P:I c.t-Cr-. https://www.cdc.gov/cl imatea ndhealth/effects/ L',�„ _;��.�r.i�i.:.. �r.iil�.,�n �i. � � N i i •+ �f_7 �_�j'�. �'(�}, ,'i�r� 7.IC��, .. i ��1��1�17k1. �. , ;IICr'Iri�E3 JI'_ �i', . .. �,,.. . �� .^i�p:i. � ��'!Jj: .1.� �n_i',.� . 1'r� �'A'/ �';'� .1(--il � ��\%Fi',�l'�iK�' � ,�i�i�lt_1r�1.Na,..�j j lowa City Division of Climate Action and Outreach 7 PROJECT BACKG��`�� 4.3 Analyze Climate-Related Public '�. Health Impacts in lowa City ��w IIIIIIII �civen �het lowa Gtys cha�gmg clima;e br,ngs wlih ii a host ol public nealfY�. imo^caiions, ��e Gily d�,oWtl tlOCUrt�EO� dnd O�Epa�E l0 3dd�268 �hBf11. ..1e antl chronic respxaiory Illnesses. neet v zc�ss, and vector-0oma diseases are lusl a fev✓ J'o9 pubhc heallh Impecis expeCled. The Stele ol '.owa and Johnson Counly provitle a signilicant n�^.o�nt o( public �ealth tla�a �hal lowa Ciry can uul�.le, and naWral pariners may inclutle Johnson Ccanly, �he Unlversl�y of lowa, and hospiial antl heal�h facilities. OocumeMing the mosl Iikeiy p�.�Clic �eallh impacls relaleE lo dima�e change .,n�, guiAe ihe Ciry antl its public heallh par�ners to L?uer prepare to atldress Ihem. The reSWts ol lhis a��atysis shoultl be integratetl inlo olher aclions. � c�lutling asset mapping, communicalions and �,:uveach, antl preparetlness D�annmg. lowa City's Division of Equity and Human Rights identifies six priority areas, including education, building community, housing, criminal justice, health, and employment. All of these are impacted by the effects of climate change. The Equity and Human Rights Division, the Climate Action and Outreach Division, and the Climate Action Commis- sion collaborate on identifying climate actions to promote equity.19 In 2019, lowa City's Sustainability Office partnered with the Urban Sustainability Directors Network (USDN) to meet two specific goals in the Climate Ac- tion and Adaptation Plan:20 4.2 Develop communications and outreach plan for vulnerable populations. 4.3 Analyze climate-related public health impacts in lowa City As stated by the USDN, "climate risk is a function of exposure to natural hazards, sensitivity to these hazards, and the ability to adapt. Systemic and institutional racism and classism have resulted in increased exposure and sensitivity to hazards and a reduced capacity to adapt among people of color, immigrants, refugees, and lower-income residents, often referred to as frontline communities."21 The partnership with USDN produced a fellowship and a large accumulation of data about commu- nity-based organizations by Kuann K. Fawkes, the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Fellow in 2019-20. The guiding question in this research was, "Who i� lowa City will feel the impacts of climate change most acutely, due to compounding stressors?" 8 Addressing Climate Change, Health, and Equity in lowa City u�e 1'b'' 11 +o i�.i a"v 1 1 1 ENGAGEMENT & ��'A�FT��T ��'l� �.�.APPTI�T� _ . . . _ _ Community-based organizations (CBOs) can be valuable partners in both disseminating information from the city and communicating stakeholder concerns to the city. This po- tential for collaboration was the motivating force behind an effort to make a list of CBOs and categorize them, based on client vulnerabilities and connectedness to the city. Stakeholder mapping is an excellent strategy to help promote interaction between the City and CBOszz. Mapping stakeholders helps to: Build relationships between government and community Diversify goals and plans for climate resilience, by intentionally including stakeholders who were not reached before Visualize the complexity of relationships between stakeholders Create a comprehensive "go to" map for other city projects to build upon This project utilized a model for stakeholder mapping provided by the Urban Sustainability Directors' Network Summer Fellow, DeAngelo Bowden, in Fort Collins, Colorado. This model color-coding to reflect the connectedness of the CBOs to the city and the vulnerability of their clientele. � r � a a� L taw1+w✓4O Q3 „. ,,. . _ qz .. . .,, � . , . . .. . . . 4 GOW Y� lwwq Stakeholder mapping tool graphic from Fort Collins' Understanding Q0 Our Community Report, 2019. ,.,..... �.,�.., � _d._.,,.,.,. The Kazis suggests how much a stakeholder might be impacted by envimnmental policies and/or fuwre dimate changes. Impazt is identilied as negative or a missed opportunity to share in the benefit o! a poliry or plan or fature impacts f�om dimate change. The %� ax6 suggests the hisroriwl influence a specific stakeholder has had in these types ol environmental decision-making process in fort Collins. It is detined by time, resources, intormation. familizrlry with processes and real or perceived abdlty to influence outcomes. lowa City Division of Climate Action and Outreach 9 It should be noted that different organiza- tions that work with vulnerable populations underscore different priorities. Some focus on meeting basic needs and providing social services, while some focus on community or- ganizing, advocacy, and empowerment. Both subgroups can offer valuable insights which will shape and strengthen lowa Citys Climate Action Plan. The organizations represent- ing stakeholders whose voices should be amplified have been color-coded orange. This group includes organizations that focus on advocacy for immigrant or BIPOC com- munities, LGBTQ+communities, low-income households, and social service agencies. In community engagement efforts, these part- ners are ones to prioritize. As modelled by the Fort Collins Our Climate Future plan, there is effort to ensure equitable outreach with the goal of creating more equitable out- comes. Organizations that are already highly invested in climate action or city planning and development have been color-coded red. This group includes environmental or- ganizations, utility companies, development groups, various agencies within the local gov- ernment, and the school district. Functioning within their organizations, the stakeholders in these groups generally are assumed to already have high influence in local environ- mental decision-making processes. Maintain- ing collaborative relationships guides the community engagement efforts with this group of organizations. Organizations such as large employers, hospitals, banks, and community foun- dations are assumed to represent stake- holders with generally high levels of both influence and resilience. They have been color-coded yellow. In community engage- ment efforts, these groups are ones to lever- age. Some organizations may be only margin- ally connected to local environmental decision-making processes, but they serve stakeholders with generally higher levels of resilience. They have been color-coded green. This group includes some faith-based organizations, agencies affiliated with higher education, arts organizations, and foreign relations councils. In community engage- ment efforts, these groups are ones to keep informed. Ongoing outreach may result in shifting categorizations, reflecting an evolving under- standing of organizations' degree of connect- edness to the city and the vulnerability of the populations served. Conclusions As stated in lowa City's Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) Guiding Principles, "It is important that one result of the Plan is that it prepares everyone—notjust some people—for successfully coping with and adapting to a changing climate, while simultaneously reducing our emissions "z3 The process established in the creation ofthis report will be used as new projects and cli- mate actions are pursued. Gathering input to better understand the needs and resources offrontline residents requires intentionality and planning. The ongoing work of outreach, listening, and collaboration will strengthen the City's efforts to create a just and equita- ble climate future for all. 10 Addressing Climate Change, Health, and Equity in lowa Ci[y � 1 H 11 L 1 1'l_l �, �..J �,1� MAPPING QUADRANTS & �F'�'T1�TTTT�1�� Low-Income Advocacy Groups Environmental Organizations Groups for BIPOC or Immigrant Advocacy Government and School District Entities Gender/Sexuality Advocacy Groups Developers Social Services - Low-Income Assistance Energy Providers Human Rights Organizations Domestic Violence Organizations Health Services - smaller than hospitals Immigrant Services Groups Organizations for Formerly Incarcerated Disability Services Organizations Organizations for Senior EngagemenVServices Some College and University Groups Large Employers Some Faith-Based Organizations Hospitals Some Arts Organizations Funding Connections Organizations from nearby communities Banks Orange = vulnerable populations whose voices should be sought. "Quadrant (1) represents stakeholders who are assumed to be highly impacted by environmental decision-making processes, but historically have had very little to no influence on how those decisions are made (i.e. Communities of Color). This group should be prioritized for inclusion efforts." Green = groups less affected. "Quadrant (3) represents the stakeholders who may be only marginally connected to local environmental decision-making processes but have generally higher levels of resilience. The City of lowa City looks to actively keep these stakeholders informed on what is happening at the decision-making level. These stakeholders typically include residents from surrounding communities." Red = groups already connected. "Quadrant (2) represents the stakeholders within the lowa City community that may be considered "Champions" or those assumed to have high influence in local environmental decision-making processes and typically are strongly impacted by those decisions. Continue and build on the participation and sharing influence from those in Q1," Yellow = groups not much affected but already connected. "Quadrant (4) represents stakeholders that tend to have high influence on the decision- making process but often are not as impacted by those decisions in a negative way, if impacted at all. It is the City of lowa City role to educate these stakeholders on priorities identified by other communities within lowa City, consult them on decisions and objectives created internally." lowa City Division of Climate Action and Outreach 11 Endnotes 1 Fawkes, K. Addressing Climate Change, Health and Equity in lowa City. 1. 2 Ibid. 3 IPCC (2007a). Summary for policymakers. In: WHO. Protecting Health from Climate Change: Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment. 2013. 4 WHO. Protecting Health from Climate Change: Vulnerability and Adaptation Assess ment. 2013. 5 Fawkes, K. Addressing Climate Change, Health and Equity in lowa City. 9. 6 Rudolph L, Gould S, Berko J. Climate Change, Health, and Equity: Opportunities for Ac tion. 2015. Public Health Institute, Oakland, CA. 7 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Health effects of ozone pollution. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/health-effects-ozone-pollution. Ac cessed January 28, 2021. 8 Kovats R5, Hajat 5. Heat stress and public health: a critical review. Annu Rev Public Health 2008;29:41-55. 9 Patz JA, Vavrus SJ, Uejio CK, McLellan SL. Climate change and waterborne disease risk in the Great Lakes region of the U.S. Am J Prev Med 2008;35(5):451-8. 10 EI-Fadel M, Ghanimeh 5, Maroun R, Alameddine I. Climate change and temperature rise: implications on food- and water-borne diseases. Sci. Total Environ. 2012;437:15-21. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.07.041. 11 Kovats R5, Hajat 5. Heat stress and public health: a critical review. Annu Rev Public Health 2008;29:41-55. 12 McMichael AJ, Powles JW, Butler CD, Uauy R. Food, livestock production, energy, dimate change, and health. The Lancet 2007;370(9594):1253-1263. doi:10.1016/50140- 6736(07)61256-2. 13 Seligman HK, Laraia BA, Kushel MB. Food Insecurity Is Associated with Chronic Disease among Low-Income NHANES Participants. The Journal of Nutrition 2010;140(2)304-310. 14 Balbus JM, Malina C. Identifying Vulnerable Subpopulations for Climate Change Health Effects in the United States: J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2009;51(1):33-37. doi:10.1097/ JOM.Ob013e318193e12e. 15 Costello A, Abbas M, Allen A, Ball S, Bell 5, Bellamy R, et al. Managing the health effects of climate change: Lancet and University College London Institute for Global Health Commission. Lancet 2009;373(9676):1693-733. 16 Shonkoff 5 M-FR, Pastor M, Sadd JL. The climate gap: Environmental health and equity implications of climate change and mitigation policies in California — a review of the literature. Climatic Change 2012;109(1):485-503. 17 Balbus JM, Malina C. Identifying Vulnerable Subpopulations for Climate Change Health Effects in the United States. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine � 19 20 21 22 23 2009;51(1)33-37. Thompson T, Benz J, Agiesta J, Cagney K, Melt M. Resilience in the wake of Superstorm Sandy: The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research; 2013. Available at: https://apnorc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Communications_Final_fxd.pdf Fawkes, K. Addressing Climate Change, Health and Equity in lowa City. 10. Ibid. 2. lowa City Climate Action and Adaptation PIan.19. Fawkes, K. Addressing Climate Change, Health and Equity in lowa City. 29. lowa City Climate Action and Adaptation PIan.19. 12 Addressing Climate Change, Health, and Equity in lowa City Item Number: 5. i r � �_�. -dr� _�� —�....� QTY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 15, 2021 Civil Service Examination: Buyer I- Equipment ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Examination: Buyer I- Equipment � r A �,�� m��w„ `s "`�,°a"w� -•�LJf. _. �17Y OF I ...� OWA C[TY 4�10 East Wasiiington Stroct IowaCity,lpwa S22qq•IR25 (31'I) 356-SODU (J 19) 356-5009 PAX tvrvw.l cgov. nrg June 14, 2621 TO: The Honarable Mayor and #he City Council fZE: Civil Service Entrance Ex�mination — Buyer I— Equipment Under the authnrity of the Civil Service Gommission of (owa City, lowa, E da hereby certify the following named person(s} as eligible ior the position ofi Buyer I— Equipment. Mary Murphy lawa City C[viI Service Commission � Melis a Jensen, Chaii Item Number: 6. i r � �_�. -dr� _�� —�....� QTY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 15, 2021 Library Board of Trustees: June 24 ATTACHMENTS: Description Library Board of Trustees: June 24 �� BOARD OF TRUSTEES 123 S. Linn St. • lowa City, IA 5224D 319-356-5200 • icpl.org Minutes of the Electronic Regular Meeting June 24 2021 DRAFT Electronie Meeting (Pursuant to lowa Code Section 21.&) An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of board members, staff, and the public presented by COVI[?-;19. Members Present: Wesley Beary, Kellee Forkenbrock, Carol Kirsch, Robin Paetzold, Hannah Shultz, Derek Johnk, Tom Rocklin, John Beasley (entered at 5:06 p.m.) Members Absent: Monique Washington Staff/Others Present: Noa Kim, Elsworth Carman, Sam Helmick, Kellie Kerns, Anne Mangano, Patty McCarthy, Jason Paulios, Brent Palmer, Angie Pilkington, Alyssa Hanson Call Meeting to Order: President Beary called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m. A quorum was present. Public Discussion: None to Report Items to be discussed: Fines and Fees Report - Director Carman provided an update to fines and fees data for Board review and discussion. President Beary recommended at the May meeting sorting through the specifics of extending for however many months and setting a time frame, with a concrete proposal for 8oard approval. Staff recommended extending the current library-wide fine free model through June 30, 2022. Carol Kirsch made the motion to approve the model as written. Tom Rocklin seconded. Motion carried on a recorded vote: 7 AYEs Beasley, Forkenbrock, Kirsch, Paetzold, Rocklin, Shultz, Johnk; 0 NAYs 0 Abstain 1 Absent Washington Annual Board Report -This is a regularly scheduled agenda item for review and Board approval. Specific sections about the report were highlighted by Director Carman. The Board discussed accomplishments and goals. Director Carman will take feedback from Board members through July 12. The final, incorporated narrative will be presented at the July 22 meeting. NOBU Budget Request - This is a regularly scheduled discussion item for review and Board approval. Specific sections about the report were highlighted by Director Carman. A community engagement survey and staff development/engagement were discussed and encouraged. The final budget will 6e presented for approval at the July 22 meeting. Policy Review: 809: Library Use - This is a regularly scheduled policy for review and Board approval. Specific section updates were provided by Jason Paulios. Robin Paetzold made the motion to approve the policy as amended. Derek Johnk seconded. Motion carried on a recorded vote: 7 AYEs Beasley, Forkenbrock, Kirsch, Paetzold, Rocklin, Shultz, Johnk; 0 NAYs Abstain 1 Absent Washington. Review Statistics and Financials -This is a regularly scheduled agenda item for review and Board approval, typically on a quarterly and end-of-year basis. The only item pertaining to this is May disbursements, which will be addressed in the consent agenda. Staff Reports: Director's Report — Included in the director report are two old business items from the May meeting: Phase Transitions and Mask Mandate Changes - Director Carman provided an update to COVID-19 positivity rates, Phase 5 transitions, and mask mandate changes regarding ICPL Reopening Guidelines. In-Person Meetings - Old business item to discuss resuming in-person Board meetings. President Beary recommended a step and analysis approach during the May meeting. Director Carman provided an update on what other City Boards' and Council approach is. This will be discussed further at the July 22 meeting. Director Carman inquired whether the eoard would like to hold the annual celebration dinner to cover 2020-2021. ICPL Admin will take the lead on organizing a September event. Departmental Reports: Children's Services — Pilkington provided a report included in the board packet, and offered to answer any questions. Collection Services — Mangano provided a report included in the board packet, and highlighted the Lolly Eggers Legacy portion. Information Technology Services — Palmer provided a report included in the board packet. A big thanks from the Board to IT for all they have done! Development Office Report - McCarthy provided a report included in the board packet, and highlighted there will be an Eat Out and Read at Goose Town Cafe on July 15t. An offer to answer any questions. An update pertaining to reopening of the BookEnd and overview on donations was also provided. Miscellaneous - Nothing to Report President's Report: President Beary expressed, even though there were challenges, a thank you for all Board support during the term and learning processes. Beary advised to feel free to reach out at any time - it has been a pleasure. Announcements from Members: Secretary Johnk expressed profound gratitude to all the outgoing members. Committee Reports: Friends Foundation meeting was held on the 3�d and new officers elected. Communications: The article, Thankful for Open Libraries, was shared with the Board. Consent Agenda: Derek Johnk made the motion to approve the consent agenda as amended. Carol Kirsch seconded. Motion carried on a recorded vote: 7 AYEs Beasley, Forkenbrock, Kirsch, Paetzold, Rocklin, Shultz, Johnk; 0 NAYs 0 Abstain 1 Absent Washington. Set Agenda Order for July Meeting — President Beary communicated items for the July agenda: Strategic Plan Update - moved to August Review Board Annual Report Adopt NOBU Budget MOA between ICPLFF and ICPL - moved to August Review 4th Quarter/Annual Statistics and Financials Policy Review: TBD - ICPL Leadership Team will set Departmental Reports: AS, CAS Adjournment. Beary closed the meeting at 6:51 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kellie I(erns Administrative Services Coordinator N v N � � h- 0 '6 0 m J a V N C � �N N �E � O U 0 � i f0 O m N N � � 0 V W � w V Z 4 0 z W Q N N O N a � 7 s Y C O � � z w N m 6 w Z � w v�i t=j a ¢ w d J w x � Z � w w � O Z } W � Y X O O 2 Item Number: 7. i r � �_�. -dr� _�� —�....� QTY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 15, 2021 Planning & Zoning Commission: July 1 ATTACHMENTS: Description Planning & Zoning Commission: July 1 MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 1, 2021 —7:OOPM ELECTRONIC FORMAL MEETING MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: PRELIMINARY Susan Craig, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Mark Nolte, Maria Padron, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend Sara Hektoen, Ray Heitner, Kirk Lehmann, Anne Russett Mike Welch, Martin Galindez Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to lowa Code section 21.8) An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of VAC20-0003 a vacation of the Block 18, County Seat Addition public alley right-of-way adjacent to 220 Lafayette Street, subject to a utility easement, access easement, and sanitary sewer easement, as described in the staff report and in forms approved by the City Attorney's office. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM and welcomed new member Padron. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Signs nominated Hensch as Chair, Martin seconded, a vote was taken and approved 7-0. Craig nominated Signs as Vice Chair, Hensch seconded, a vote was taken and approved 7-0. Signs nominated Martin as Secretary, Nolte seconded, a vote was taken and approved 7-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. CASE NO. VAC20-0003: Applicant: Gilbane Development Company Location: Right-of-way adjacent to 220 Lafayette Street Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 2 of 20 An application submitted for a vacation of approximately 0.14 acres of public right-of-way. Heitner reiterated the proposed item tonight is a vacation of approximately 0.14 acres of public right-of-way between the 700 block of South Dubuque Street and 220 Lafayette Street. He showed an aerial view of the subject area and the zoning applied, both sides of the subject right- of-way are Riverfront Crossings Central Crossing Zone. Regarding background on this proposed vacation, Heitner stated some members might remember that in December of 2020 there was a rezoning for the adjacent properties that came before this Commission to rezone to Riverfront Crossings Central Crossing Zone that was recommended for approval by this Commission and, ultimately, approved by City Council in February 2021. At the time of the rezoning, it was understood that the next step in this development process would be to vacate the alley in between the two blocks that currently exist in this area and so thaYs the application before the Commission tonight. Heitner next discussed some of the review criteria that staff looks at for vacations, the impact on pedestrian and vehicular access, impact on emergency and utility vehicle access and circulation, impact that adjacent private properties, the desirability of the right-of-way for access and circulation needs, locations of uti�ities and other reasons and any other relevant factors. Starting with impact on pedestrian and vehicular access, Heitner noted the alley does not contain any formal pedestrian means of access, there is an interior sidewalk to the 220 Lafayette building but that is not something staff would consider a formal means of pedestrian access. Regarding if the alley is needed for vehicular circulation, the alley provides vehicular access to parking areas along the west and north sides of the apartment building at 220 Lafayette Street and the east (rear) side of the businesses fronting 700-730 South Dubuque Street, so it is an important alley for those properties in terms of getting that rear parking access. In terms of impact on emergency and utility vehicle access, the existing alley is necessary in terms of ineeting Fire Code as there's a section in the International Fire Code that requires a certain distance between a street and an exterior of a building to be within 150 feet of whaYs termed as a fire apparatus access road so right now there is an implication for fire access for having access to that alley in place. Heitner noted there's also some gas and electric service lines on the east side of the alley so if vacated a utility easement will be needed for retention of those utilities until the adjacent properties are vacated and the utility is no longer needed. In terms of access impact on access of adjacent private properties, as just mentioned the alley is sort of paramount to regular access for the existing block makeup. That said the south block of 700 Dubuque Street and 220 Lafayette do have frontage on to those streets and from a pedestrian standpoint there is access from those streets right now. Heitner expiained the proposed right-of-way vacation won't impact access to any other properties outside of the subject assemblage. In terms of desirability of the right-of-way for access or circulation needs, that was discussed during the rezoning stage several months back, but the applicant proposes to redevelop the entire block and in doing so the alley won't really be necessary anymore. With respect to location of utilities and other easements or restrictions on the property, Heitner Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 3 of 20 stated there's gas and electric utilities along the east side of the alley, there's also a City sanitary sewer main that runs beneath the alley. One of the conditions of the rezoning of the property was that the sewer main would have to be relocated to a location approved by the City Engineer. Ultimately easements for all of the utilities will need to be retained and the applicant will also have to establish new easement areas upon redevelopment of the property. Heitner next discussed a couple other relevant factors. There are three different owners of the properties east and west of the subject right-of-way and so in staff's view it is easier to wait to convey the alley to the applicant until they're the title holder of all the adjacent properties. Heitner stated while the alley currently serves as an important corridor for traffic circulation and utilities, it won't be necessary for traffic or utilities in the applicants upcoming redevelopment plans. In summary, staff is recommending approval of the vacation of the alley contingent upon retention of access easement for general access, as well as fire access, private utility easement for the gas and electric utilities and then also sanitary sewer easement for as long as the adjacent properties are occupied. In terms of next steps, pending the Commission's recommendation, the proposed vacation will be reviewed by City Council, where they will discuss not only the vacation at hand, but also the conveyance of the land with respect to the applicanYs proposal for fair market value. Staff recommends approval of VAC20-0003 a vacation of the Block 18, County Seat Addition public alley right-of-way adjacent to 220 Lafayette Street, subject to a utility easement, access easement, and sanitary sewer easement, as described in the staff report and in forms approved by the City Attorney's office. Craig asked why the staff recommendation doesn't make mention of the stipulation that the land won't be conveyed until all the property is owned by one entity. Heitner responded that is something that they can put in as a Commission recommendation to City Council. Staff doesn't typically include those details on conveyance in the staff recommendation, but if thaYs something that the Commission wants to include as a recommendation to Council, they can certainly do so. Craig doesn't want to break with tradition but noted it just seems like if the City Council approves it who are they going to sell it to if there's three different people that own the property. Hektoen explained that is the conveyance aspect of it which is a separate process and they do have a purchase agreement that they have executed so that part is being addressed in a different context. Hensch is curious of how the fair market value is determined, do they just hire an appraiser. Hektoen stated they typically go off of the assessed value of the adjacent land or if there's a recent purchase agreement that would indicate the property better than the fair market value, assuming iYs an arm's length transaction, they often consider that in determining what they think is acceptable. Hensch opened the public hearing. Michael Welch (Axiom Consultants) is representing Gibane Development and stated Heitner covered the highlights and the important parts of that alley vacation. Welch wanted to give a little update on the project status. They've been working with staff on a level one design review for Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 4 of 20 the height bonus to have up to six floors and are nearing completion. Welch noted he has a couple loose ends to tie up as far as a maintenance agreement and working through a couple minor items related to that height bonus. The site plan has been submitted and they received their first round of review comments from City staff they have responded to and resubmitted that plan so they are feeling they're on track there as far as having a project that staff can approve with both the height bonus and site plan. The goal for starting construction is yet this year on that new building and their easements are in place to cover the gap between when iYs conveyed and when those other buildings are taken down. Hensch closed the public hearing. Nolte moved to recommend approval of VAC20-0003 a vacation of the Block 18, County Seat Addition public alley right-of-way adjacent to 220 Lafayette Street, subject to a utility easement, access easement, and sanitary sewer easement, as described in the staff report and in forms approved by the City Attorney's office. Martin seconded the motion. Nolte noted he was glad to hear the project is moving forward. Signs agreed and stated it seems like this is a logical step in order to get that block redeveloped and is sure the applicant will have come before the Commission with something amazing to look at. Hensch stated he is really looking forward to this redevelopment because it looks like a difficult lot with the railroad tracks to the north and Ralston Creek to the east and he is very curious to see what comes next. Townsend asked what happens if they can't purchase all that other property. Hensch replied then the title won't be conveyed. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: Presentation on the proposed South District Plan Amendment (CPA21-0001) to facilitate the adoption of form-based zones and standards (REZ21-0005) Russett along with Lehmann will jointly be presenting this item and noted this is going to be the first of many presentations on the proposed South District Form-Based Code. Tonight Russett will provide an overview of the work that they've done so far, how they got to this point, discuss the planning process, and give a very high level summary of the proposed amendments. She will also share some examples of the types of neighborhoods that this Code could produce and then provide some justifications ior the amendments. Lehmann will then provide a more detailed summary of the draft Code, tonight they're going to go through about half of it, and then will discuss next steps. Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 5 of 20 In terms of project background, Russett explained they initiated this project back in January 2019 when the City executed a contract with Opticos Design, an urban design firm out of Berkeley California, to really start developing this Form-Based Code. They have been working very closely since January of 2019 with Tony Perez and Martin Galindez of Opticos on this code. They have all put a lot of work into this Code and the goals of the project are to implement the vision of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the South District Plan. They want to create neighborhoods that are safe for pedestrians, encourage walking, preserve environmental resources, create communities that have a highly interconnected street network and allow for a variety of housing types for residents to have more choices and a variety of price points. The ultimate goal is then to apply this Code to other greenfield and other undeveloped areas of the City, this is the starting point and they expect that it will expand to other areas over time. Russett showed a map of the area that they're looking to start this is within the South District. Wetherby Park is the northern boundary, Alexander Elementary School in the middle, Gilbert Street is on the West and the Sycamore Greenway is on the east side of the planning area. In terms of the planning process, Russett explained this started back in 2015 with the adoption of the South District Plan. After that Plan was adopted City staff worked toward different ways of implementing that vision. The first project that they worked on was a project direction report, which was phase one of this project, where the City worked with Opticos to assess the feasibility of implementing a Form-Based Code and as part of that process there was a lot of stakeholder meetings, community workshops, and a visual preference survey. Some of the input that they got from that planning process back in 2017 is that the community saw a need for small neighborhood centers in the South District, they wanted to see a strong network of trails and parks, they saw that the community needed different housing options, including missing middle housing, better street connectivity, traffic calming, and the opportunity for people to age in place. Russett showed a graphic created by Opticos to help visualize missing middle housing and explained that missing middle housing is basically everything between detached single-family housing to midrise or larger scale apartments so everything in between those two scales is missing middle (such as duplexes, three- and four-unit buildings, courtyard apartments, and townhomes). The goal of this Code is to allow more of those housing types. Russett stated after that was completed, they started with phase two, which is the development of the draft Code. As part of that they worked with another consulting group that prepared a residential market study to examine whether or not there was a market for missing middle housing in the South District, and the short answer is yes, this study did conclude there is a market. Therefore, since that time they've been doing stakeholder meetings and outreach to develop the initial draft of the Code they released in 2019. After staff released that draft, they did more stakeholder meetings and outreach to get feedback on that draft, and then for the past year staff has been working on revising that draft based on comments received and making sure that it can work within the existing City processes related to land development. The revised draft was released just a couple weeks ago. Russett showed a chart that summarized the stakeholder outreach that they did since the beginning of the project. They've met with community members, affordable housing advocates, property owners, developers, the homebuilder's association and a variety of different groups throughout the process. What they heard from developers and landowners was that the development process is often lengthy and uncertain and if the new process is more predictable even with more regulation, that would be acceptable. There was also some concern that the market wouldn't support missing middle housing but there was also a need for more choices and more affordable housing. There was also some concerns with the Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 6 of 20 Plan's goal of creating single loaded streets along open spaces and green areas from the community, they heard that they see the open space in this area as an amenity and there was some concern about development near existing neighborhoods. There was an expectation that any development would be high quality development, and they also recognize the need for housing that is both affordable and accessible. Russett next discussed the summary of the proposed amendments, explaining there are two parts to these amendments, the first is an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, specifically the South District Plan. Staff feels that the Form-Based Code that they are discussing tonight does align with the existing South District Plan. What they are proposing are some amendments to more explicitly link the Comprehensive Plan to the proposed Code, some new goals and some new objectives. Russett noted one of the more major changes that they're proposing is the new Future Land Use Map for this area, they're proposing new land use designations and the map itself to directly align with the new zones. Russett explained the reason that they're doing this is because it is really necessary to allow the missing middle housing and a diversity of housing types and iYs important to have land use designations that are clear to show there's a diversity of housing types that are allowed. Russett noted it also creates options for neighborhood commercial centers orjust neighborhood centers in general which could be commercial or could be an open space area. In terms of the Zoning Code amendments, Russett gave a high-level summary. Some of the big changes that stafF is proposing with the Zoning Code amendments is that a mix of building types will be required, so every block must have a mix of building types. For example, if a block has eight lots, not ali eight lots can be single family, there could be seven lots that are single family, but one would need to be somelhing different, like a duplex. Staff is also requiring a mix of frontage types, so that could be a porch or stoop and there's a variety of different frontage types that could be selected by the developer. She explained this is to ensure that there's a diversity and there's visual interest within the streetscape and there's not monotony in the building design. In terms of parking, alleys are only required in the main street area, parking must be set back from the front facade of the building. In terms of the amount of parking that the Code requires, it is slightly lower than the current Zoning Code. Carriage houses in the proposed Code are allowed with most building types, carriage houses are also referred to as granny flats or accessory dwelling units or accessory apartments, they are typically in the City now seen associated with a single-family home, but this Code would allow them with a townhome or with the duplexes, so there's going to be more allowances to incorporate this housing type. Street trees will be required to be planted within the public right-of-way, also block lengths will be reduced to ensure a highly interconnected street network. The Draft Code also includes several civic spaces which are defined, and the locations are identified on the Future Land Use Map. Russett noted they have incorporated regulatory incentives for developers, who are providing affordable housing. So if a developer is voluntarily providing affordable housing through low income housing tax credits, or some other funding source, they can seek out height bonus or different flexibility or waivers from development standards. Staff has created a new term which is called design sites. A design site is an area of land that can accommodate no more than one primary building type (with exceptions). A platted lot may have multiple design sites. Design sites provide more flexibility than traditional platted lots since they can be administratively adjusted. Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 7 of 20 The draft code also includes minimum and maximum depth and width standards for these design sites currently our code just has minimums. Lastly Russett discussed the minimum dimensional standards, minimum lot sizes and proposed maximums to help ensure more compact development. She shared some examples of what this type of Code could produce, they're looking to produce pedestrian friendly areas that are easy to walk in and are safe to walk in. There's lots of porches and frontage is facing the street and not seeing a lot of garages. These are going to be typically house scale buildings so, even though some of these housing types and building types will allow multiple units they're still in scale with the existing single-family buildings. In terms of justifications for the proposed amendments, the current Zoning Code provides limited flexibility, it tends to lead development to separating land uses and limiting the mix of land uses. There is some flexibility allowed through the plan development overlay rezoning process and the Code does allow accessory dwelling units with single family homes and also allows duplexes on corner lots. Howeverjust allowing those uses within these zones hasn't resulted in mixing those types or seeing a lot of duplexes or accessory dwelling units being built. Also zoning regulations have historically been used to segregate communities through single family zoning, through creating minimum lot sizes, through only allowing single family. Currently, in the residentially zoned areas of the City 81 % is zone single family. Russett also noted conventional zoning results in auto oriented development, residents need to rely on cars as more land is consumed. The City has goals to address climate change and to address equity issues, so the goal of this Code is to create a more sustainable community and more equitable community, and it does that by providing a wider variety of housing types and a variety of price points. It requires a mix of building types and includes incentives for developing affordable housing, it ensures that streets are connected, and neighborhoods are connected. It creates neighborhood nodes either by identifying centers of communities which could be a small commercial area or open space and it ensures more compact development. Lehmann next went into the nuts and bolts of the Code. He noted it can be complicated so the Commission should feel free to ask questions along the way. He started with the Form-Based Zones and Standards and the first section which is the introduction. The introduction talks about the intent briefly discuss the Zoning Districts and how this Code applies with other sections of the Code. It also talks about the process, about how reasonings are slightly different, how subdivisions would be slightly different, and the neighborhood plan which is a new component of this as well. In terms of intent Lehmann wanted to reiterate a couple things. The point is to improve the environment by supporting multimodal transportation options and reducing vehicle traffic, they want a variety of housing types, levels of affordability and accessibility, health and sustainability to focus on pedestrian scale neighborhoods that reinforced the unique characteristics of lowa City and all of this is done to also promote walkable neighborhoods. Lehmann stated the way the Code is organized is a little different than conventional zoning code. The conventional one is based on use, residential single-family zones,. residential multifamily zones, and commercial zones. This Form-Based Code is organized more around a transact concept which looks at the spectrum, from urban to rural, and it gives them a number for each of those. Tier one is the natural area and tier six are areas like downtown. The South District is generally suburban in nature, so would really be tier two, three and four areas which are lower in Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 8 of 20 scale and buildings don't really get over two to three stories, maybe up to four stories in the main street area. Moving on to process and the way that this Code works, staff wants to make sure that it fits into existing processes and they're not creating new ways of doing things, but rather enhance the ways that they do things currently to try and improve them to reach these goals. Lehmann stated the first step would be rezoning to a Form-Based Zone which is a standard Zoning Code Map Amendment. Staff does recommend that it is done concurrently with a preliminary plan, because the zoning standards are tied into lot sizes and all those sorts of things, and also with the Future Land Use Map because it is a lot more detailed and iYs hard to just blanket zone a whole area like they often see as RS-5, low density residential single family zone, because that can't be done in this case unless they already have some engineering done in advance, which is why they recommend that it goes with a preliminary plat. As far as the staff review and the Planning and Zoning Commission review, there are specific criteria that are included in that rezoning, and that is to try and provide some certainty to both developers and to the community as to how things can develop in this area. First and foremost, it has to comply with the Future Land Use Map but there are some situations where it can be changed and those are specifically laid out in the Code or alternatively if circumstances have changed or something comes to light, like a public interest to change how it looks, then they can incorporate that into the rezoning and change what is on that Future Land Use Map. The other criteria are tied to responding appropriately to site conditions, for example, making sure that more intense zones are organized around neighborhood features. Also, making sure that transitions between neighborhood Form-Based Zones make sense as they don't want two different zones looking at each other across the street instead they want that to happen across a block or cross an alley if possible. Also, they need to make sure that the design of the sites suits the topographical environmental or other constraints that might be there. Regarding the subdivision process, Lehmann said they basically would consider it a more detailed preliminary plat so, for example, they would show certain things that are not on current preliminary plants such as design sites, thoroughfare types, civic spaces and building types. There is also some additional notation about the possible administrative changes that can be made and then it should also abide by the new standards that are part of this Code for parcel size, street size, layout, block size, some of those changes are incorporated into the subdivision code, rather than in the zoning code. In addition, for the final plat when they're actually laying out the parcels there is an additional submittal that would come that is called the Neighborhood Plan which is very similar to what the preliminary plat has but is updated to reflect any changes that have happened since then and also adding in the frontage type standards as well. Lehmann reiterated that every design site should have a building type and irontage type and then streets would correspond with thoroughfare type and open spaces would correspond to a civic space type, so it really is categorizing different uses and different forms of the physical environment and applying it on individual parcels. As development happens, it would then follow that Neighborhood Plan that would be submitted with the final plat. Again, there would be an opportunity for administrative changes if, for example, design sites need to be modified and they can swap out building types, frontage types, civic space types, as long as it meets the underlying standards. For example, a duplex requires a larger lot, but if there is a single-family lot that would fit a duplex and they think a duplex is more appropriate for that location they'd be able to administratively change that. Lehmann did state however, for those changes to happen all other development standards would have to be met as well. Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 9 of 20 Craig asked if this new Form-Based Code is one for the new areas that are developed or will it apply to the already developed areas such as the development across from the school where if someone bought two houses that sit together that were in bad condition and tore them down could they put a four plex there. Lehmann responded that all the existing properties on the map do not have a designation, they would just stay under their current designation. Also, many of those are in the County but if they are annexed in the future the map shows what the City expects development to look like around the existing properties. Lehmann explained what he was showing was the detail on the Future Land Use Map noting it doesn't have street names but the area they are discussing has McCollister Avenue that goes right through the heart of it from South Gilbert Street on the west, Lehman Avenue is to the south, that curves into Sycamore Street, Wetherby Park is the north boundary and to the east is The Sand Hill Prairie that the City maintains. Craig asked if the red lines are alleys. Lehmann confirmed those are alleys and he really just wanted to show this map because iYs a more detailed land use map than a lot of the greenfield sites shown on current maps to show it as low density residential but there's not a lot of distinction of what that means. Lehmann will show a more detailed version of the Future Land Use Map and explained he will go through every element and the individual Code sections. To summarize the process section, Lehmann stated it is a slightly modified version of a regular development process and again those purposes are really the balance that upfront certainty and the developmental flexibility. On the upfront certainty side, rezonings are based on approval criteria, so it gives more certainty that things would follow that Form-Based or the Future Land Use Map and what that means is actually defined and there are enhanced plans that gets submitted including the Neighborhood Plans. On the development flexibility side there's an opportunity for administrative changes later on, so even though there is more detail upfront, they can come back and change it if iPs still meets the different provisions of the Code and this really does offer a much broader variety of missing middle housing types that has been talked about. Lehmann next discussed the zones, which is the second section of the Code. The first two subsections are really tied to the purpose and it describes sub zones. The bulk is really just going through the individuals zone standards, so mostly focusing on those individual zone standards but he'll talk briefly about the sub zone as well. Martin noted they are looking at these proposed zones and talking about connectivity and walkability, but she is not seeing any neighborhood commercial in there, is that something thaYs going to be addressed later. Lehmann explained neighborhood commercial is incorporated through the sub zone because they're regulating by building type, not by use so iYs not going to be specifically labeled a commercial zone. The commercial zones are going to be the open sub zone and then the Main Street Zone will also allow commercial. Martin stated then there could be a neighborhood grocery store on the corner and Lehmann corifirmed in certain locations and with certain building types. Lehmann started with the palette of zoning districts, or tiers, T2, T3 & T4. There is also T1 but iYs not a separate zone ifs more just the open space areas. T1 zones are not reflected as separate zones on the maps but are reflected through those natural areas that are located on the Future Land Use Map and its basically nature or open space. T3 are the neighborhood edge zones, and Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 10 of 20 then they go up in in density/intensity, but it doesn't really regulate density in the same way as other areas because they're more focused on the building types, how they lay out within the street, and how they interact with each other. That is the form that really guides the zone, which is why iYs called a Form-Based Zone. In the T3 Neighborhood Edge Zone there are house-scale detached buildings, approximately two and a half stories, occupied attics and walk out basements. Lehmann noted half stories are not something that are Zoning Code currently identifies, so this is a different way of looking at height. The Form-Based Zone does include height standards, but it also includes stories as one of its measures of height. In terms of the housing types that they could expect to see in this zone are the building types of large houses, duplexes, and cottage courts, so for example similar to a RS-5 zone but a Iittle less restrictive. Instead of regulating what a duplex might look like through provisional zoning criteria, it will be regulated through the building type standards, and those will be in the presentation in two weeks. The T3 Neighborhood Edge is the lowest intensity zone. T3 Neighborhood General would be a step up from that in a higher intensity of those suburban zones. Again, it would be buildings up to two and a half stories, occupied attics, walk out basements and low scale detached buildings. T3 Neighborhood General allows a broader variety of building types than are allowed in T3 Neighborhood Edge. It can still be houses, duplexes, cottage courts but also adds in small scale multifamily and townhomes. The multifamily could be up to six units and townhomes could be up to a row of three units. This would be similar to a RS-12 or RM-12 zone, but it doesn't allow large scale multifamily and there are limits on the size that a multiplex could be, the building type is specifically called multiplex small. So again, the T3 Neighborhood General is a little more intense but still relatively low density. Lehmann next discussed the T4 zones, the urban zones, the T4 Neighborhood Small is still two and a half stories, so iYs the same height, it is house scale, detached with some attached buildings, occupied attics, walk out basements. Lehmann explained these can be some larger units, but they blend in with low scale buildings, and don't look out of place in a residential neighborhood. Building types are cottage courts, small multiplexes, courtyard buildings (which have up to 16 units), townhouses in rows of up to eight, but overall the scale of buildings generally won't occupy an entire block in these zones. It could be compared to a RM-20 zone, but the difference is with the way the building types are defined, there are maximum building sizes to not end up with a block size apartment complex. T4 Neighborhood Medium is where there starts to be larger units, heights of three and a half stories with an occupied attic, they are still primarily house scale buildings, a larger house scale, and then there would be some block scale attached and detached buildings as well. Lehmann noted iYs a more intense zone with larger multiplexes up to 12 units, courtyard buildings up to 16 units, and townhouses up to a row of eight units. This would be similar to a RM-44 zone, but again these no building with more than 16 units and although they may get some block scale buildings in this, they can only be up to three stories. Finally, there is the T4 Main Street, it is the most intense and allows the broadest variety of uses. It allows up to four stories, there are block scale buildings, there are attached buildings, and there can be up to 24 townhouses, a courtyard building can have up to 24 units and Main Street buildings are unrestricted. Lehmann stated the T4 Main Street are the neighborhood focal points, and are denser attached buildings, which is what one would expect in a traditional Main Street in perhaps a town of 5000 people. Lehmann next discussed one of the other ways commercial uses are accommodated are through sub zones in the T3 Neighborhood General, T4 Neighborhood General and T4 Neighborhood Small and would just be designated T3NG0 instead of T3NG. Also, in those zones there are additional flexibility for uses that would be allowed, and, basically, that means that it allows more Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 11 of 20 than nonresidential uses. These areas tend to be at the neighborhood centers and to see as a walkable area. It could be childcare, it could be commercial, etc., but iYs a broader variety that is allowed in those open sub zones. Lehmann presented the Future Land Use Map again to show item by item, show where all these zones and sub zones are. The T3 Neighborhood Edge areas are generally placed next to existing development, so it is just south of the existing development thaYs currently along Langenberg, it is also up north around the school and around the existing County subdivisions that are there, it is also adjacent to the golf course. Next is the T3 Neighborhood General, which can be considered a bulk zone where there are neighborhoods outside of busier roads or commercial centers. Quite a bit of the map is Neighborhood General as iPs one of the more versatile zones, it allows single family duplexes and then small scale multifamily, but there is the height limit of two and a half stories. The T4 Neighborhood Small are generally located along either smaller collector streets, next to some denser existing development or on single loaded streets where there's not development on the other side, and it is also surrounding major intersections as well. Lehmann specifically pointed out South Gilbert Street and McCollister Avenue as an area to see this zoning. The next zone is Neighborhood Medium, this is where buildings can be up to three and a half stories, so it is really only located along major corridors and especially at major intersections such as at the intersection of South Gilbert and McCollister where they expect more intense uses to be located based on the characteristics of the area. Finally, is the Main Street and iYs really only a small commercial node at the heart of this part of the community with the idea being the focal point in the school district. Lehmann noted there are also neighborhood nodes where there are open zones and those are located in the heart of their respective sub districts. Between those there are quite a few different places for neighborhood commercial uses as the zones are laid out according to what the City expecting in terms of the road network, in terms of uses, in terms of intensities, and in terms of scale of development with single loaded streets, for example. Lehmann explained the way that this is different is the Future Land Use Map is more detailed and the dimensional standards are slightly different because a lot of building bulk is primarily regulated by building types, iYs not regulated by uses as much. There are some opportunities to modify or decrease lot size further if they provide, for example rear access, rear utility easements, or additional civic space. However rear access is not required, so the way that the lots were designed was to accommodate the buildings given front access and/or rear access, but rear access with allow a smaller lot. Another change that was touched on briefly in the introduction was that parking is regulated by zone in this case, so it is slightly different because the amount is regulated by the zone, as is the location, so there are different setbacks for buildings compared to parking such that the buildings are to be closer to the street than the parking with the idea being they don't want the street front to be dominated by garage doors or blank walls, so it does require that parking is set back a little further. Lehmann showed a diagram on how parking is set back from the front fagade, he noted there are some opportunities to tweak that a little bit but generally iYs going to be set back from whatever is occupying most of the streetscape. Some other changes Lehmann wanted to mention are there are frontage types and building types and those are required for each design site, and then there's also the sub zones, specifically the open zone which allows for greater variety of uses, especially nonresidential uses. Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 12 of 20 Lehmann next moved on to discuss the use standards, noting they are pretty similar to what they are used to seeing with a standard use table, uses that are permitted just straight up, uses that are provisionally allowed that requires staff review. Signs noted looking at the Future Land Use Map, there's a lot of detail put together on these various zones and into all these potential streets, but does the plan say that this is where streets really will be because otherwise if they start moving streets, then they lose the zones. Lehmann stated thaYs where those rezoning criteria come into play acknowledging if they move streets iYs going to move zones and so thaYs where the specific criteria come into place so that when they are reconstructed, zones are related upon it, it has to make sense in the same way and that those zoning criteria are followed. Lehmann stated the Future Land Use Map isn't an engineered plat or anything so changes can and will happen but hopefully it would be reconstructed in a similar manner. Lehmann went back to the use standards and stated staff does still regulate uses in Form-Based Zones, again permitted by right, provisionally allowed where staff reviews to make sure that it meets some criteria, and then through special exception, where it goes through a discretionary process by the Board of Adjustment. Lehmann noted in most cases the missing middle housing is permitted by right and that would be all of the building types that are allowed. Detached single family dwellings aren't permitted in those urban zones and a lot of the other standards follow the existing zones. Lehmann did point out that in the open zones how the commercial uses are allowed as well in the Main Street Zone how commercial uses are allowed. He stated there are additional uses called live/work that also allows some commercial uses that would be within certain residential zones, specifically those that are T4 zones. Lehmann next discussed the missing middle, the definition that they use in the Zoning Code is house scale buildings with multiple units and walkable neighborhoods. He wanted to touch on this again because this is one oi those major changes that is missing in a lot of zoning codes because usually there's high priority for single family detached or high priority for large multifamily and some of those missing middle housing types get lost. The way this Code looks at it is makes them allowable uses and instead of regulating by the uses it regulates by those building types instead. Lehmann stated there are two new use categories, one is community gardens, land cultivated by multiple users for plants essentially, it is also a joint civic space type and does allow some onsite retail for produce that was grown on site, but most structures on it are pretty limited and iYs mostly going to be that green space. He noted they did want to include this as is not included in the current Zoning Code and they don't really have any use category that would allow for this. It would have likely been classified as agriculture, so this is a way to make sure that there was an opportunity for community gardens and civic space. The other new use category is live/work space, it is similar to the home businesses that are currently allow but iYs a slightly more intense version of where someone lives in the unit that they also work in. Those nonresidential uses that are allowed are limited, iYs similar to what is allowed in the Peninsula live/work areas, but it does limit on premises sales to goods made in the unit, for example an artist studio, and it does prohibit certain hours for deliveries, certain hours for clients and only up to three outside employees, and it does limit the number of clients per day. It is a more intense commercial use that could be allowed but does have its own restrictions that come with it and iYs really only Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 13 of 20 allowed in those T4 Zones and above, likely the live/work would be in the town home building types. Lehmann explained the differences between the use standards as they currently are and these, these use standards incorporate the missing middle, there is an accessory use table that isn't in the current Zoning Code, which makes it easier to interpret some of those uses and then there are those two new use categories. Lehmann reiterated however that uses are not the primary way that they're regulating the form of the environment, it is really by those forms in building types and in frontage types. The site standards are similar to the site development standards and it works in tandem with them. Some of these standards, like screening, supplement the existing standards and some just add slight differences to them. Regarding screening they do regulate walls and fences, they regulate mechanical equipment, again these sites standards supplant the existing standards that the City has. Generally, there are height limits on walls and fences, and they're not allowed in the T4 Main Street Zone. Mechanical equipment has to be screened either by the building, by wall parapets or by walls if iYs an existing building thaYs in one of these zones. For landscaping, it is a bit unusual in that it works in tandem with the existing landscaping standards. Lehmann noted there are some new parking landscaping requirements and there are new street tree standards which was touched upon when talking about the thoroughfare street types. He stated these things are all checked during the site plan or building permit review process. Plant diversity is probably the biggest change in that for new street trees they would only allow 5% of any species and 10% of any genus in any trees that are on the sites, they should be spatially distributed and also should try to incorporate mature trees when possible. Those do work with the existing standards, but it is a bit more detailed in how they want to encourage a biodiversity within these areas to promote sustainability. Landscaping is expected to be installed with development and should be maintained, and it should be separated from vehicular areas. Lehmann discussed parking, as already mentioned the amount and location of onsite parking is listed by zone, there are also current parking standards, some of which apply, and then there are new parking landscaping standards that are involved in this section as well. Some of the differences are tied to traffic minimization, there's provisions for bicycle parking, for carpool spaces, for office uses and then for cars to share spaces for large residential and office uses. There are some large vehicle parking and loading standards and they're slightly different than current Code standards. Lehmann stated the parking lot design standards and landscaping standards are to try and avoid larger areas of pavement so there are standards about breaking up larger parking areas, making sure there's pedestrian access to sidewalks, and landscaping when iYs a larger area. They want to make sure that parking spaces are accessed from an internal drive and not just from the streets. He noted one difference is that tandem parking is allowed, where there are two cars located front to back, but iYs regulated by use generally and would only be allowed within one unit, so someone is not going to get stuck behind a neighbor. Overall, the more parking there is, the more landscaping thaYs required, tree coverage is based on the lot area, so the bigger the lot more trees required. They do encourage that the landscaping areas incorporate stormwater management to try and filter the storm water rather than treat it as a waste product, but that is not required. Finally in the site standards, Lehmann noted there is a subsection on adjustments to standards He explained these are administrative changes that again that can be made to different Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 14 of 20 provisions. They do require that there is a finding that is made with that so iYs similar to the current minor modifications accept that there wouldn't be a notification requirement, it would be more like the adjustments in Riverfront Crossings. Those include things such as the design site size, the amount of fa�,ade, the facade zone, the main body or wing height, which comes with building types, the front parking setback, screen height and then there's some flexibility thaYs allowed for affordable housing which he'll discuss later in the affordable housing chapter. Adjustments or modifications do require findings that are made by staff and most of it is to accommodate an existing feature. Lehmann noted the Form-Based Code provides flexibility like dimensional standards for affordable housing. The final section to discuss tonight is on civic space types as those are really a new concept for the City of lowa City, it basically typifies open space and categorizes them and provides some standards with that. The first two sub sections are the general standards and the purpose and then the rest of them are just the different types of civic spaces that could be selected. A civic space could be a public open space, or it could be private open space, but it has to be accessible and dedicated to public use and it would be really delineated in that subdivision process and finallzed in that neighborhood plan. Again, there is the opportunity to change what the civic space type is in the standards but thaYs where it would be codified, or at least made public. Lehmann stated there is required open space in that City requires that land must be provided for public open space or fee-in-lieu paid. That is an existing standard that can tie into this, but it doesn't always tie into this. Public spaces that are dedicated to the City could qualify as a civic space and meet that requirement, but if iYs a private civic space it would not meet that requirement and those would not be able to be used for the neighborhood open space dedications. In terms of what public access and visibility means, Lehmann explained it really means that they have to allow the public to access it and see it, so they want to ensure that iYs visible through single-loaded streets, bike and pedestrian paths, and making sure that iYs not tucked away behind existing development as a sort of private park, it has to be accessible. This also does include natural features such as creeks or other natural open spaces that are there, some of those are delineated on Future Land Use Map, some may be located later as the sensitive areas plans are developed. Building facades must front on the civic space, they want the civic spaces to look on complete facades that are nicely developed and not just the side of building. As far as the use of civic spaces, there primarily intended to be gathering spaces and they must be designed accordingly, but there might be some opportunity for commercial uses, there are opportunities for service areas, especially if iYs privately owned as they do want it to contribute to stormwater management, and using some of that green infrastructure and since they are looking at street trees they are looking at things that absorb water instead of piping it into storm sewers, iYd be great if they could incorporate the stormwater management into these green spaces that exists. Lehmann pointed out seven options for civic spaces, the first two are the Greenway and the Green. The Greenway is basically a long linear space that would be multiple blocks, it would be an opportunity for strolling, there could be sidewalks along it, there could be a trail down it, it could be flanked by streets and could be flanked on one side by buildings. It serves as a connector between open space areas. This civic space type would be allowed in all zones, except for the T4 Main Street Zone. The Green is similar but it's just a standard open space, a large space available for unstructured recreation, it limits the amount of buildings that can be put on site, and it also is allowed and all zones but the T4 Main Street Zone. The next two are the Plaza and the Pocket Park/Plaza. The Plaza is only allowed in the T4 Main Street Zone. IYs really a cornmunity focal point similar to a historic town center that is seen in some small lowa Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 15 of 20 towns. It might have some structured space, but it would be primarily a gathering place. The Pocket Park/Plaza is a little different, iYs basically a smaller version of either the Green or of the Plaza depending on the context, because it is allowed in all zones, so if iYs in a T4 Main Street Zone it would be expected to be a Plaza and a more formal space that serves the neighborhood. It iYs in a T3 Zone or a lower density neighborhood zone, it is expected to be some sort of small park that serve as an immediate neighborhood. The next two are the Playground and Community Garden. Playgrounds pretty self-explanatory and intended for children and are allowed in all zones. They could be incorporated into any other civic space, so it could be in a Plaza or it could be in a Green, but it is its own type as well. The Community Garden has already been briefly touched upon, but iYs intended for garden plots available to nearby residences and is allowed in all zones. The final type of civic space is the Passage, which is a little unique in that it is both a civic space and also a thoroughfare type. The City does have standards right now that allow for pedestrian passageways through blocks that can allow a larger block length. Lehmann explained this is similar to that, but it adds some more standards as to what that has to look like and it is allowed for all zones. For a Passage, one would expect the houses to front it, the Ped Mall would be an urban example of what a Passage might look like. It does increase the allowable block size which Lehmann wlll touch upon during the next meeting as to how those standards work together in the subdivision process. Lehmann showed on the Future Land Use Map the variety of civic space types. Ones to the east are more neighborhood focal points similar to some of the open zones, there are some linear spaces where there's infrastructure, there's an existing trail on the northeast side of McCollister, east of South Gilbert. Staff is proposing another one where there's an existing sewer line as it makes sense to put some sort of trail where they have some infrastructure. He noted they are also proposing an expansion of the Sand Hill Park, some buffer on the southeast side next to the sanitary sewer plant, and finally, they are showing a Plaza in the middle of the T4 Main Street Zones. The imagine they would see some commercial areas there with outdoor seating, etc. Lehmann next explained how this is different from the existing Zoning Code, it can be public or private, it is a new concept, but it builds on current open space standards, and really classifies the open space, both natural and urban open spaces, and it creates standards. He noted it also formalizes some of the pedestrian route criteria that they have currently with the Passage, it does tie stormwater management into the amenity space and builds it into the Future Land Use Map and then through that it is also incorporated in the neighborhood plans and the other new planning processes. Lehmann stated the next steps will be a discussion next time at the July 15 meeting on the building type standards, architectural elements standards, the frontage types, thoroughfare types, and then the affordable housing incentives. They will also talk about some other minor changes that were required throughout the Code to implement this and then some changes with the South District Plan. Then at the August 5 subsequent meeting they will have an opportunity to discuss anything the Commission would like more clarity on and then at the August 19 meeting is when staff would expect to make a recommendation on the Form-Based Code and on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Council. Once Council receives the recommendation, they would set a public hearing and have three hearings of the Code, and one hearing of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. So theoretically the Comprehensive Plan Amendment couldn't be approved until September 21 and theoretically if this schedule is followed the Code would be adopted potentially on October 19. Lehmann acknowledged they are accepting public comments throughout this entire process but Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 16 of 20 strongly encourage that public comments are provided by August 5 so that by the end of the meeting, staff could have an opportunity prior to the Commission hearing it on August 19 to incorporate any changes. Hensch asked if at the August 19 meeting is where the Commission considers adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Form-Based Code, is that also when the public hearing would be held for the first time for the public to weigh in on this. Lehmann said they could submit written comments prior to that and those could be provided to the Commission at the August 5 meeting for consideration, otherwise the formal public hearing on both of these items would be August 19. Craig first asked about the parking in the images that were shown, to her it appears like there were not near enough parking spaces for some of those big buildings. Will there be parking underground, even for a four-plex, four parking spots doesn't seem like enough. She recognizes they said that the parking standards were diminished somewhat, but what are the parking standards and will there be enough parking for some of those structures, particularly the bigger ones. Also, is there any way to make it an incentive or incentivize a developer to include electrical charging stations in the parking, she feels that would be very attractive for someone as 10 years from now they're going to have a lot more electric vehicles around. Craig also stated she is still a little fuzzy about the whole design sites and what that means, they showed a picture of the big square that was divided into three squares or three rectangles and who divides those and decides if there are single family homes on them, maybe one with the granny suite or whatever, she needs to try to educate herself more on that. Finally, on the gathering places, Craig thinks all those concepts are great but it just feels like maybe there's not enough of them in there, this feels like a very dense development. Overall, she really likes it, but there are no plans for a City park, or all the civic spaces maintained by the City or maintained privately. Lehmann responded briefly on the parking question. For each zone, there is a subsection seven called parking and that sets the minimum standard for that zone. For example, for the T3 Neighborhood Edge Zone, studio up to two-bedroom units would require one parking space per unit minimum, three or more would require two parking spaces per unit, for commercial or nonresidential uses no parking would be required up to 1500 square feet with the assumption being it would use the on-street parking, if iYs greater than that, then the parking standard starts to come into play. Lehmann acknowledged the parking standards are less than the current standards, but these are minimum requirements and they are trying to look at ways to encourage walkable, denser developments, and so these are the minimums that would be required for a unit. However, a developer could decide they want two parking spaces for every bedroom, and they can still do that, there's nothing that would prevent them from doing that, iYs just that the minimum required would be less than the current Code. Craig said then for a four-plex with just four parking spots that is okay. Lehmann responded it would be acceptable if those were all one-bedroom units. Lehmann noted in terms of design sites, the design sites show flexibility and one could have an entire large parcel fit for duplexes or fit for five single family homes. The flexibility of not platting those individual sites can allow for a mix of homes that would fit the site and could be tweaked as developed. He acknowledged realistically most people are probably still going to plat parcels like Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 17 of 20 they currently do. For example, if there is a plat for a multifamily building but in the future they decide that parcel would be better for two single family homes instead they don't have to subdivide it again, instead, they would just use design sites and deal with it that way. Craig asked how the individual who's purchasing it know whaYs their property. Lehmann said it would be similar to the legality of a condo regime and thaYs why they would still expect most people to probably developmenl it as they buy it. Hektoen confirmed it would be like a condo association or the owner is also the developer and continues to own all of the units. Lehmann said it can also be similar to a planned overlay process with sometimes all of the buildings on a single lot, and they have to put invisible lot lines. The difference is in this those invisible lines can be shuffled around depending on what the market forces seem to be as long as they're meeting the frontage mixed standards, the dwelling type standards, and all of those sorts of things. Lehmann next answered the question on the civic space, he does believe they do make a distinction on the Future Land Use Map about public versus private open space and what they're thinking for those areas is one of them would be a small public park, the one thaYs in the central east side. He noted there are already a lot of park amenities in the South District, thaYs one of the selling points, there is Terry Trueblood, open space from the prairie, Wetherby Park and the Sycamore Trail and greenway. Craig recognizes that but was thinking more about playgrounds for children, she acknowledged there is the school playground, but not much else. Lehmann agreed and noted that a decision to put in a playground will be up to the person that is developing the civic space, because the City does not distinguish which civic space types should be where, that would be up to the developer. Russett added staff did talk to the Parks and Rec Department about park needs in this area and they felt that a playground was really needed east of the greenway so thaYs why they identified that area as a public park that will become an area with a playground. Signs is interested in discussing the affordable housing piece and the fee-in-lieu piece. He is personally done with the fee-in-lieu concept because everybody's using it and if they really want to get affordable housing truly scattered throughout the communiiy and incorporate into these areas they have to do away with that fee-in-lieu because every developer uses it, and they don't build affordable units in their developments. He just wanted to say that is something he is going to harp on a lot through this process. Signs also had an interesting observation about multimodal transportation and looking at these spaces, they talk about a lot less parking with the idea that people will use other transportation sources and that concerns him in light of the fact that the transportation department is cutting bus routes. So here they are creating a whole development, a whole area thaYs going to theoretically rely more on buses, so he hopes they are having that conversation with the transportation department and with City Council as far as funding the transportation department. Signs is also concerned about the map, it shows very distinct zones in very distinct places and from his experience with developments, especially in this larger area of land, rarely do they end up that way. All of a sudden streets won't be there and uses will change so he'd like to hear Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 18 of 20 much more about what happens as things change because they all know what they do today and whaYs going to be done five years from now, are distinctly different. Finally, Signs has a quick question of if this ties into the needs for adjustments in rental codes. Will development here discourage or encourage rental units, it may not be relevant to the conversation, but those were just some things he made note of tonight and he looks forward to having more conversations in the in the couple of sessions to come. Padron agrees with Craig about electric vehicle stations, that would be great. She likes that parking requirements are being reduced, but she would like to see how they will be complimenting or encouraging other modes of transportation. Will there be more parking for bicycles or wider streets for bike lanes, etc. Finally, regarding the trees, will they be requiring the use of native species to reduce the use of water, also in terms of landscape are they encouraging the use of local materials that don't require transportation for landscape. Padron also agrees with Craig that it seems that are not enough green spaces, and also the greenway is allowed in some of those zones, but it's not a requirement, so what would happen if a developer chooses not to have any of those green spaces. The area would then become very dense and not good for stormwater management without be something like permeable pavement. She also agrees with Signs on the concern over public transportation and would like to hear much more about that. Finally, Padron is also concerned about the commercial inside the neighborhoods because thaYs another thing if they're hoping that people will use less cars, but if they have to drive really far away to get groceries, how's that going to work. Hensch looks forward to the future opportunities to hear more about this and encourages all Commission members to continue to do some research and reading on this. DISCUSSION OF RETURNING TO IN-PERSON MEETINGS: Russett noted a couple updates for the Commission. The Governor's emergency declaration allowing cities to meet virtually has been extended through July 25, but it is expected that it will not be extended after that point. This Commission has one more chance to meet virtually, on July 15, but Russett stated there's been some interest from the Commission to meet back in person. Russett would like to request that they have that July 15 meeting as a virtual meeting so the consultants can participate more easily. Hensch agreed that seems reasonable unless somebody has an objection to that. He added that he saw today that persons 12 years age and up in lowa City have a 69.9% vaccination rate so almost at that 70%. Johnson County is doing really well. Russett also wanted to mention that at this point there's not going to be any hybrid meetings, it will all be back to in person. Lehmann added they will all be recorded so people can watch it at least. Craig asked why no hybrid, with zoom people could still participate. Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 2021 Page 19 of 20 Martin thought they confirmed one person can call into the meeting, rather than be in person. Russett will look into that but thinks they can arrange that, but it would just be something they would provide to Commission members, not the pub�ic. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JUNE 17, 2021: Signs moved to approve the meeting minutes of June 17, 2021. Nolte seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Martin noted she will not be able to attend the next meeting as she will be out of town. ADJOURNMENT: Craig moved to adjourn. Townsend seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. Z O y y0 �� O OU (� � N W � Z.VT N NGN � Z � F 2 r ZQ Z g a � X X X X X X X W m Q J �,��Ym � �aa��dz (/7 = �Z� W C7 yF-fW-�yZ �'Z�-'JpZ?r waoa�o � x�za�n� � � � � �s X � �� c� C � � C � � � o �aQZ �a¢ �� n W II II W � YXOO' Item Number: 8. i r � �_�. -dr� _�� —�....� QTY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org July 15, 2021 Senior Center Commission: June 17 ATTACHMENTS: Description Senior Center Commission: June 17 Preliminary Minutes June 17, 2021 MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION June 17, 2021 ELECTRONIC Formal Meeting ZOOM MEETING Platform Members Present: Paula Vaughan, Linda Vogel, Lorraine Dorfman, Susan Eberly, Angela McConville Members Absent: Zach Goldsmith, Jeannie Beckman Staff Present: LaTasha DeLoach, Kristin Kromray Others Present: None Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to lowa Code sectiori 21.8) An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of council members, staff, and the public presenied by CO\/ID-19. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by McConville at 4 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE MAY 20, 2021 MEETING: Motion: To accept the minutes from the May 20, 2021 meeting with clerical edits. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Dorfman/Eberly PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW: DeLoach reported phased reopening has begun. Members can use fitness rooms by appointment. At this time masks are required in public spaces, but if exercising or playing an instrument masks can be removed. Infrastructure has been added to the building including additional cameras, push button unlocks for the Washington and Skywalk entrances as well as intercoms at those entrances. Preliminary Minutes June 17, 2021 Additionally, the Senior Center floors have been renumbered, the front desk moved to the ground floor, Operations Assistant desk moving to the 2"d floor, and the billiards room has been painted. Starting July 15f building and business hours will be from 8 AM — 5 PM, M-F. Members and public will be able to come in and utilize the building. Programming this summer will continue to focus on outdoor activities with some limited in person and hybrid program taking place in the building. There have been a range of feelings expressed by instructors, with some ready to be back in the building full time and others wishing to wait. The City Council will be meeting at the Senior Center in the Assembly Room in July and August. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: McConville stated her goal for a Board of Supervisor presentation would be in early fall and thought in a presentation in conjunction with the Senior Center's 40t" anniversary would be a good idea. Vogel asked if the next commission meeting would be in person. DeLoach thought that it would be but was not sure if it would occur in the Assembly Room or in room 202. DeLoach reported she has been working on an equity standard with one of the summer interns. She presented a first draft and asked for feedback. It is currently reads: "Our equity standard is to purposefully embrace standard by creating a more equitable, accessible, safe, welcoming and including senior center where differences are recognized, respected, valued and celebrated." The Commission discussed the statement and gave feedback. DeLoach thanked the commissioners for their input and would present another draft in the future. McConville asked if what if someone does not meet this standard. DeLoach mentioned that the Senior Center has a code of conduct. DeLoach discussed how the code of conduct is administered. Commissioners discussed the importance of mission/vision statements. Vaughn asked how people know these mission/vision statements and equity standard. DeLoach said they are on the SC website and said she thought it would be a good idea to put them on the Senior Center TV's as well as post them in the building. McConville noted she has people in North Liberty sign off on these types of statements when they sign up for various things. DeLoach reported the contract is in place with the new architecture firm and that they have all of the necessary documents. Programming for the 40t" anniversary is under way. The plan is to have a weel of celebrations including partnering with the library on a Grandparents Day event and potentially partnering with Film Scene to show a movie in the park. 2 Preliminary Minutes June 17, 2021 The Commission discussed meeting in person in July. McConville asked if there will be a hybrid for people who do not feel comfortable coming into the building. Dorfman voiced that she would like that option. Motion: To Adjourn. U7 r � N �o � N � ti N � C � '� � .� � a ro i� U a � a � '� Y � �i q O m � � � .� � � U �. � � � � � o �c �C ; o � � � � � N o>C 5C �C I �C �C I 5C 5C � N � i � � i � O i � � � � N �w � i � � i � � i ✓Y � �--i M � N � i � � i � � i � � �--i N r. N r,� �1 �1 N i � 1'� i � �i i ✓y ry � 0 N �w � i O i � � � i VY O N '. O N � i � i � � � � � � O o ' z � �Z z z �Z �Z �Z � 0 ` � �Z � z z z �Z �Z �Z a 0 N ; �c ; o �c �c �c �c �c � � � i � i � � O � � � � � �-�"i N �--� M O N N M N N N N N N N N N � � � � � � � � � � W� � � � � � � � � M \ M M M M M M \ �,' N N N N N N N N N y •--i .� � .--i 'r ti � �--� .—i h Y,�,, � � O c�d � �+ N o� � � � � >, ° o ,d � •5 � � o ��'�� Z � " � '� r�pj a�i '� � � U o�Hu � v� zy�; aQ � �w � � � o � � ro �� a a N � � �