Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-02-01 OrdinanceItem Number: 9.a. F ebruary 1, 2022 O rd inan ce rezon ing approximately 0.13 acres of prop erty located at 421 E. Market Street from Commercial O ffice (C O -1) to Mixed Use (MU). (R E Z 21- 0010) AT TAC HM E NT S : Description Staff Report with Attachments P Z Preliminary Meeting Minutes Ordinance STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ21-0010 Prepared by: Ray Heitner, Associate Planner Date: January 5, 2021 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: MMS Consultants 1917 S. Gilbert St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319-351-8282 l.sexton@mmsconsultants.net Contact Person: Sandy Steil MMS Consultants 1917 S. Gilbert St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319-351-8282 s.steil@mmsconsultants.net Owner: SACABA, LLC. mhayek@hmsblaw.com Requested Action: Rezoning Purpose: Rezoning of approximately 0.13 acres of land located at 421 E. Market Street from Commercial Office (CO-1) to Mixed Use (MU) zone. Location: 421 E. Market Street Location Map: Size: 0.13 Acres 2 Existing Land Use and Zoning: Ground floor office (currently vacant), upper flood residential; Commercial Office (CO-1) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: (Mercy Hospital) Commercial Office – CO-1 South: (Multi-Family Residential) Mixed Use - MU East: (Multi-Family Residential) Commercial Office – Co-1 West: (Multi-Family Residential) Mixed Use - MU Comprehensive Plan: Mixed Use District Plan: Central Planning District – Office Commercial Neighborhood Open Space District: C2 Public Meeting Notification: Property owners located within 300’ of the subject property received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. A Rezoning sign was also posted on the site. File Date: December 3, 2021 45 Day Limitation Period: January 17, 2022 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The owner is requesting a rezoning of approximately 0.13 acres of property located at 421 E. Market Street. The owner has requested that the property be rezoned from Commercial Office (CO-1) to Mixed Use (MU). The property currently contains vacant office space on the ground floor, with an apartment on the second floor. The owner has requested the rezoning to allow for more flexibility should the owner wish to rent out both floors as apartments, or as a single-family residence in the future. The subject property is located in the City’s Central Planning District. The owner has used the Good Neighbor Policy and held a Good Neighbor Meeting on December 29, 2021. ANALYSIS: Current Zoning: The purpose of the Commercial Office zone (CO-1) is to provide specific areas where office functions, compatible businesses, apartments and certain public and semipublic uses 3 may be developed in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The CO-1 zone can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or industrial areas. Multi-Family residential dwelling units in the CO-1 zone must be located above the street level floor of a building. The existing zoning would not allow multi-family residential dwelling units on both floors of the building. Proposed Zoning: The request is to rezone the subject property from the existing Commercial Office (CO-1) zone to Mixed Use (MU). The purpose of the Mixed Use zone (MU) is to provide a transition from commercial and employment centers to less intensive residential zones. The MU zone permits a mix of uses, including lower scale retail and office uses, and a variety of residential uses. This mix of uses requires special consideration of building and site design. Table 1 below shows how uses are permitted differently in the MU zone compared with the existing CO-1 zone. Table 1 – CO-1 and MU Zone Use Comparison Use: Commercial Office (CO-1) Mixed Use (MU) Attached Single-Family PR Detached Single-Family P Detached Zero Lot Line PR Duplex PR Animal Related Commercial (General) S Commercial Recreational Uses (Indoors) PR/S Alcohol Sales Oriented Retail PR Sales Oriented Retail PR Basic Utility Uses PR/S Hospitals PR Utility-Scale Ground-Mounted Solar Energy Systems S Communication/Transmission Facility Uses PR/S PR P = Permitted; PR = Provisional; S = Special Exception A rezoning from Commercial Office to a Mixed Use zone would allow several residential uses (either by right or provisionally) and alcohol oriented and sales-oriented retail uses (provisionally) to develop on the subject property. These uses are not currently allowed in the Commercial Office zone. If the existing structure is preserved and redeveloped, the structure could be redeveloped into a single-family residence or two-family use (also known as a duplex). The two-family use would be allowed as a provisional use in the Mixed Use zone, provided that additional criteria pertaining to additional standards in the Central Planning District and single and two-family uses in MU Zone are met. Alcohol oriented and sales-oriented retail uses would be allowed as provisional uses; however, these uses are limited to convenience stores associated with quick vehicle servicing uses. Given the narrow 40’-wide frontage of the subject property on a non-corner lot, future development of a quick vehicle servicing use at this location is highly unlikely. The proposed rezoning would eliminate the property’s ability to accommodate animal related commercial (general), commercial recreational uses (indoors), hospitals, and utility-scale ground- mounted solar energy systems. As the subject property is adjacent to the Mercy Hospital campus, the rezoning would eliminate the Hospital’s ability to expand onto the subject property in the future. However, the adjacent uses on both the east and west sides of the subject property are currently residential. At this time, the City does not have any reason to believe that Mercy intends to expand 4 its facilities south of Market Street where the subject property is located. Rezoning Review Criteria: Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezonings: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan; 2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The current Central District Plan future land use map designates the subject property as appropriate for Office Commercial use. The Mixed Use designation does still provide an option for lower scale office uses that would be appropriate within the context of the less intense and more transitional character of the Mixed Use zone. Much of the existing Commercial Office zoned land in this area buffers the main property for Mercy Hospital. It is likely that the rezoning of the land around the periphery was primarily intended to allow for the development of supporting buildings and businesses for the main building on the Mercy Hospital campus. However, over time, many of these parcels, particularly along the north side of Bloomington Street, have maintained their preexisting structures and uses. The most recent building expansion with Mercy Hospital took place in 1990 for the property located at the southwest corner of E. Market Street and N. Johnson Street. While the Central District Plan does encourage the preservation of older homes in the Northside and Goosetown area from apartment conversion, the existing Commercial Office zoning would already allow for more intense uses than what may be allowed in the Mixed Use zone such as hospital facilities and basic utility uses. The Comprehensive Plan’s future land use map shows the property as appropriate for Mixed Use. Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character: The subject property is bordered by multi-family residential housing to the east, west, and south, with the Mercy Hospital main building to the north across E. Market Street. Mixed Use zoning can be found directly west and south of the property, with Commercial Office zoning located to the east and north. The subject property’s block is largely comprised of duplex and multi-family residential housing that has been retrofitted within 100-year-old homes. The additional residential uses allowed within the Mixed Use zone would not be out of character with the adjacent existing uses. NEXT STEPS: After recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council will set a public hearing for the rezoning. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of REZ21-0010, a rezoning of approximately 0.13 acres from Commercial Office (CO-1) to Mixed Use (MU). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Aerial Photograph 3. Rezoning Exhibit 4. Applicant Statement Approved by: _________________________________________________ Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services E MARKET ST N GILBERT STN VAN BUREN STMU CB2 CO1 REZ21-0010421 E. Market Streetµ 0 0.02 0.040.01 Miles Prepared By: Ray HeitnertDate Prepared: December 2021 An application submitted by MMS Consultants, on behalf of SACABA LLC., for the rezoning of 0.13 acres ofproperty located at 421 E. Market St. from Commercial Office (CO-1) to Mixed Use (MU). E MARKET ST N GILBERT STN VAN BUREN STREZ21-0010421 E. Market Streetµ 0 0.02 0.040.01 Miles Prepared By: Ray HeitnertDate Prepared: December 2021 An application submitted by MMS Consultants, on behalf of SACABA LLC., for the rezoning of 0.13 acres ofproperty located at 421 E. Market St. from Commercial Office (CO-1) to Mixed Use (MU). This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF. Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice. December 3, 2021 Project 11411-001 City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 Re: 421 E Market St. Dear Mr. Heitner: MMS Consultants on behalf of Sacaba LLC is requesting a rezoning of the property located at 421 E Market Street. This property is currently zoned CO-1 and we are requesting it be rezoned to MU. The house is currently be used as office space for rent on the first floor and an apartment above. We are requesting the property be rezoned to MU to allow the flexibility to rent out the whole house for residential purposes but also want the flexibility to use it for the office space below. 5 of the 6 houses on the north half of this block are being used as residential rental properties. The house is located on Market Street, which is designated as an Arterial street according to the 2016 publication by the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County (MPOJC). The property immediately to the west of 421 E Market is zoned MU. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Sandy Steil- Project Manager MMS Consultants, Inc. s.steil@mmsconsultants.net MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 5, 2022 – 6:00 PM – FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin (via phone), Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Nolte, Maria Padron STAFF PRESENT: Ray Heitner, Sarah Hektoen, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: Pam RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ21-0010, a proposal to rezone approximately 0.13 acres of land located at 421 East Market Street from Commercial Use CO-1 to Mixed Use. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. CASE NO. REZ21-0010: Location: 421 East Market Street An application for a rezoning of approximately 0.13 acres of land from Commercial Office (CO-1) to Mixed Use (MU). Heitner began the staff report with an aerial view of 421 East Market Street and also a view of the zoning. The current zoning is CO-1 Commercial Office. To the west and south is Mixed Use so there is Mixed Use zoning adjacent to the subject property. Heitner noted there is an existing two-story structure on the subject property. The request is to rezone to Mixed Use to provide a little bit more flexibility from the applicant’s perspective to either continue to rent the ground floor of the existing building as a commercial use or possibly convert structure to single family use or have two different apartments, one on each floor. It's staff’s understanding right now that the office space on the ground floor has been vacant for some time. Heitner gave an overview of the zoning, CO-1 (Commercial Office) generally supports office related uses and is intended to serve as a buffer between residential zones and intensive commercial or industrial areas. One distinction within the CO-1 zone is that multifamily residential dwelling units have to be located above street level so the existing zoning would not allow Planning and Zoning Commission January 5, 2022 Page 2 of 9 multifamily residential dwelling units on both floors of the building. The proposed zoning for Mixed Use is intended to provide a transition between commercial and employment centers to less intensive residential zones. Mixed Use zone allows a variety of uses and for a mix of residential and commercial uses. Heitner noted a table was included in the staff report that shows the uses that are allowed in the CO-1 and Mixed Use zones. In the Mixed Use zones there's more variety of residential zones that are either permitted by right or provisionally such as in this instance where in all likelihood the existing structure will be preserved. In this situation it may be either a detached single-family use permitted by right or duplex use permitted as a provisional use and would have to abide by some additional criteria from that's required for duplexes within the Central Planning District. The rezoning would remove a few commercial uses that are currently applicable to the CO-1 zone such as animal related commercial, indoor commercial recreational use or hospital facilities. However, Heitner noted it would probably be difficult to facilitate a lot of those uses on the existing framework of the lot as it stands with a 40- foot width so more than likely what they would ultimately see with the existing structure and the existing lot layout would be something either residential or office commercial in nature. For the rezoning review criteria, staff uses two different criteria points in review of its rezonings. The first is consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and second, compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. With respect to consistency with the Comprehensive Plan the subject property is designated for office commercial use in the Central District Plan. As Heitner mentioned before rezoning to Mixed Use zone would allow for some flexibility to permit a mix of office and residential use and/or single family residential or apartments on either floor. There is a point within the Central District Plan that encourages reinvestment of the area's older housing stock, so staff feels by permitting a Mixed Use zone in this location it does present more options for residential use viability going forward. Heitner showed the Central District Plan Map noting again the area the subject property is located is designated as Office Commercial in the Central District Plan but right adjacent it indicates preferred Mixed Use for the Central District Plan. With respect to compatibility with the existing neighborhood, Heitner reiterated there is Mixed Use zoning directly west and south of the subject property and there are examples of the housing types that are adjacent to the subject property that are in line with the existing structure. Heitner showed some photos of the area to give the Commission a feel for the aesthetic character of the surrounding area and noted there's a few structures that are similar in scale and use to the existing structure on the subject property. In terms of next steps, upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, a public hearing would be scheduled for consideration by City Council. Staff is recommending approval of REZ21-0010, a proposal to rezone approximately 0.13 acres of land located at 421 East Market Street from Commercial Use CO-1 to Mixed Use. Craig noted this area is really the buffer between the commercial just to the west noting on the next block west there are two five story buildings. She asked what's the building height allowed in Mixed Use. Heitner replied it is 35 feet. Craig noted that's three stories roughly and noted if somebody owned this property and the bigger square next to it, they could redevelop it, but only to a maximum height of three stories. Heitner confirmed that is correct. Planning and Zoning Commission January 5, 2022 Page 3 of 9 Hensch opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Hensch closed the public hearing. Signs moved to recommend approval of REZ21-0010, a proposal to rezone approximately 0.13 acres of land located at 421 East Market Street from Commercial Use CO-1 to Mixed Use. Townsend seconded the motion. Craig noted this does allow the property to stay a viable rental option. Hensch is hopeful that they rehabilitate the structure because there's some nice houses in that area. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE GOOD NEIGHBOR POLICY: Russett stated the Commission had several discussions related to the City's current Good Neighbor program in 2019 and 2020 and in 2020, the Commission recommended that the City require Good Neighbor meetings for certain types of land development applications and City Council concurred with that recommendation. Therefore, in response to the direction provided by the Commission and City Council, staff has drafted a Good Neighbor Policy which was included in the agenda packet. Russett noted although the City has had a Good Neighbor Program for many years, no formal policy has ever been adopted outlining the expectations. Therefore, staff has proposed a formal policy that would be adopted by City Council. Staff has proposed a policy as opposed to an amendment to the Zoning Code and unlike an amendment to the Code, a policy does not legally require Good Neighbor Meetings so it would not be mandatory. However, the approach has been to formalize current expectations through the adoption of a policy. Russett noted although most applicants are very willing to hold a Good Neighbor Meeting as part of the process in an unlikely event that an applicant refuses to hold a meeting, and the City would not be able to penalize them based on what they're proposing as a policy. Russett noted at this point staff is still working out some issues with the City Attorney's office and is working with them to revise the draft policy in the form that it is tonight. Staff is recommending that the Commission defer this item to January 19 so they can work through those issues with the City Attorney's office, however, would like the Commission’s input on the approach of proposing a policy, which would not legally require Good Neighbor Meetings, but instead formalizes expectations through a resolution. However, if the Commission would like staff to pursue a Code Amendment, which would legally require the meetings, that can be discussed as well. Hensch noted he has two thoughts. One, he agrees with the policy because it gives more flexibility and things can be changed more quickly if they need be. He understands since it's just C0✓ Prepared by: Ray Heitner,Associate Planner,410 E.Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240;(RF721-0010) Ordinance No. Ordinance rezoning approximately 0.13 acres of property located at 421 E. Market Street from Commercial Office (CO-1) to Mixed Use (MU). (REZ21-0010) Whereas, the owner, SACABA, LLC, has requested a rezoning of property located at 421 E. Market Street from Commercial Office(CO-1)to Mixed Use (MU); and Whereas, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 0.13 acres of property located at 421 E. Market Street, legally described below; and Whereas, the Owner has requested the rezoning of said property to allow for potential commercial office or single-family residential or duplex residential uses; and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan encourages the preservation of residential structures within the Northside area; and Whereas, the proposed rezoning will help ensure the long-term viability of the existing structure by providing more options for future use; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has the reviewed the proposed rezoning and determined that it complies with the Comprehensive Plan; and Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I Approval. Property described below is hereby classified Mixed Use (MU): The east half of Lot 2 in Block 46, in Iowa City, Iowa, according to the recorded plat thereof. Section II. Zoning Map. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. Section III. Certification and Recording. Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. Section IV. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section V. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section VI. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication in accordance with Iowa Code Chapter 380. Passed and approved this_ day of , 20_. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Approved by City Attorney's Office (Sara Greenwood Hektoen— 1/25/22) Ordinance No. Page It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Alter Bergus Harmsen Taylor Teague Thomas Weiner First Consideration 02/01/2022 Vote for passage: AYES: Harmsen, Taylor, Teague, Thomas, Weiner, Alter NAYES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Bergus Second Consideration Vote for passage: Date published Item Number: 12. F ebruary 1, 2022 O rd inan ce amen d ing Titl e 8, en titled “Police Regulations,” Chap ter 8, entitl ed “Community Pol ice Review Board ,” to in crease the comp osition of th e b oard from five memb ers to seven memb ers. (Pass & Ad opt) Prepared B y:Susan Dulek, A ssistant City A ttorney Reviewed By:Geoff Fruin, City Manager F iscal I mpact:None Recommendations:Staff: Approval Commission: C P R B approved a draft ordinance at its 12/13/21 meeting to increase the Board to 7 members and to eliminate the 5-year waiting period for I C P D officers. Attachments:Memo from City Manager Draft Minutes from 12/13/21 C P R B meeting L etter from C P R B to City Manager Ordinance Executive S ummary: T he C P R B recommended to Council that the board be expanded from 5 to 7 or 9 members. At the Oct. 19 work session, Council directed staff to draft an ordinance increasing the membership to 7. T his ordinance also decreases the 5-year waiting period before a former member of the Police Dept. may be appointed to 2 years. Background / Analysis: Resolution No. 20-159 entitled “Resolution of I nitial C ouncil Commitments addressing Black L ives Matter Movement and S ystemic R acism in the wake of the murder of G eorge F loyd by the Minneapolis Police and calls for action from protesters and residents” contained 17 action items. T he action item in Paragraph 8 was a request to the C PRB for a “report and recommendation … regarding changes to the C PRB ordinance that enhance its ability to provide effective civilian oversight of the IC PD….” T he C P R B submitted a list of recommendations to City C ouncil in a memo dated D ec. 22, 2020 which included increasing the membership from 5 to 7 or 9 as well as emphasizing membership include a current or former member of law enforcement. Council discussed this recommendation at its Oct. 19, 2021 work session and directed staff to draft an ordinance increasing the membership to 7 with an emphasis on a member representing law enforcement. In addition to increasing the membership to 7, the ordinance also decreases the 5-year waiting period for a former member of the ICPD to be appointed to 2 years. When the CPRB was created in 1997, there was no such waiting period, but in 2003 the Council became concerned about possible conflicts with current or recently employed ICP D officers and added the 5-year waiting period. T he waiting period limits the pool of law enforcement applicants. A draft ordinance was provided to the C PRB for comment along with a cover memo from the City Manager. T he CPRB discussed the proposed ordinance at its Dec. 13, 2021 meeting and recommended that Council approve it. T he draft ordinance eliminated the 5-year waiting period. At its Jan. 4 meeting, Council amended the proposed ordinance by decreasing the waiting period to 2 years rather than eliminating it altogether. T he ordinance also corrects an oversight in Ordinance No. 21-4857 that lengthened the time period to file a complaint from 90 to 180 days after the alleged misconduct. A provision at Section 8-8-3E also should have been amended to 180 days. AT TAC HM E NT S : Description memo minutes letter Ordinance Date: November 23, 2021 To: Community Police Review Board From: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Re: Community Police Review Board (CPRB) Expansion On December 22nd, 2020 the CPRB sent the City Council a memo containing thirteen recommendations. One of the outstanding recommendations that you presented to the City Council was to expand membership of the CPRB from five members to seven or nine members. Specifically, your memo stated: “The CPRB requests to change its membership from the current five-member-board to having seven or nine members. In selecting from candidates for the CPRB, an emphasis shall be placed on persons being of a minority race, requiring at least four of the members shall be from a minority race. Further, it should be made mandatory that at least one member be a current or former member of the police force or otherwise considered an expert in police procedures and/or police policies.” At its October 19, 2021 work session, the City Council discussed this recommendation and directed staff to prepare an ordinance that would expand membership to seven members. The City Council concurred with the CPRB’s emphasis on the importance of both a diverse membership and the inclusion of a police professional. However, it was decided that mandating such diversity or police professional experience may be problematic, particularly if application pools for future openings are limited. The City Council felt comfortable indicating the strong preference for both objectives knowing that it is the elected leadership’s final decision to appoint members to the board. Attached to this memo is a draft ordinance that expands membership to seven members. The draft maintains language that “The City Council shall strive to appoint members who represent the diversity of the community.” While the CPRB recommended that at least one member be a current or former member of the police force, there are potential complexities with having a current peace officer employed by Iowa City as a voting member of the CPRB. In order to more successfully attract police professionals, the draft ordinance does strike an existing requirement that an officer be removed from the department for a minimum of five years. Thus, under the draft ordinance a recently retired peace officer may apply and be eligible to serve on the CPRB. Such appointment is not mandatory as the draft ordinance maintains language that the “The City Council also reserves the right, for good cause shown, to waive the requirement that the board include one current or former peace officer.” It is important to note that Board composition has been the subject of discussion since the CPRB was created in 1997. The initial ordinance language included that the “Board shall include one current or former “peace officer” as the term is defined by state law” and gave the City Council the ability to waive that requirement for ‘good cause’. However, in 2003 the Council became concerned about possible conflicts with current or recently employed peace officers from the Iowa City Police Department. Thus, they amended the ordinance to prohibit the appointment of a current Iowa City peace officer or one that has been employed by the City of Iowa City within five years. The CPRB and City Council have recently agreed that is important to have a peace officer perspective on the Board. The current ordinance significantly limits the pool of peace officer applicants and, given the expansion to seven members appears imminent, it seems very reasonable to drop the prohibition on recently employed peace officers. However, I do recommend that current peace officers employed by the City of Iowa City still be explicitly prohibited from serving on the CPRB. The draft ordinance will be presented to the City Council for consideration after the CPRB has an opportunity to review and comment on the proposal. Thank you for your continued service to the Iowa City community and for your ongoing advocacy to make positive changes to the current CPRB framework. Attachments: Draft Ordinance for CPRB Comment COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5043 December 14, 2021 Geoff Fruin, City Manager 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: Draft Ordinance – Increase CPRB Members Dear Mr. Fruin, The CPRB met on December 14 to discuss your letter regarding the draft ordinance change. The Board reviewed and approved of the language and would also like to express their appreciation. Regards, Chris Olney Community Police Review Board staff representative Cc: City Attorney’s Office r;—• Prepared by:Susan Dulek,Asst. City Attorney,410 E.Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240(319)356-5030 Ordinance No. 22-4873 Ordinance amending Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations," Chapter 8, entitled "Community Police Review Board," to increase the composition of the board from five members to seven members. Whereas, Resolution No. 20-159 entitled "Resolution of Initial Council Commitments addressing Black Lives Matter Movement and Systemic Racism in the wake of the murder of George Floyd by the Minneapolis Police and calls for action from protesters and residents" contained 17 actions items; and Whereas, the action item in Paragraph 8 was a request to the Community Police Review Board (CPRB) for a "report and recommendation ... regarding changes to the CPRB ordinance that enhance its ability to provide effective civilian oversight of the ICPD..."; and Whereas, the CPRB submitted a list of recommendations to City Council in a memo dated December 22, 2020; and Whereas, it is in the City's interest to enact a recommendation to increase the size of the board from five (5) members to seven (7) members with emphasis on having a member representing law enforcement; and Whereas, Ordinance No. 21-4857 amended Section 8-8-3D to lengthen the time period to file a complaint from 90 to 180 days after the alleged misconduct; and Whereas, a related provision at Section 8-8-3E also should have been amended to 180 days, and it is in the City's interest to correct this oversight. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I. Amendments. 1. Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations," Chapter 8, entitled "Community Police Review Board," Section 3, entitled "Definition of Complaint; Complaint Process in General," Subsection E is amended by adding the underscore text and deleting the strike-through text as follows: E. Only those complaints to the board which do not involve the conduct of an Iowa City sworn police officer or are not filed within ninety (90) one hundred eighty (180) days of the alleged misconduct may be subject to summary dismissal by the board. 2. Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations," Chapter 8, entitled "Community Police Review Board," Section 8, entitled "Board Composition; Limited Powers of Board," Subsection Al is amended by adding the underscore text and deleting the strike- through text as follows: 1. The board shall consist of five (5) seven (7) members appointed by the City Council, who shall be Iowa City eligible electors and shall serve without compensation. The City Council shall strive to appoint members who represent the diversity of the community. Appointments to the board shall include one current or former "peace officer" as that term is defined by State law, except that a peace officer employed as such by the City of Iowa City within five (5) two (2) years of the appointment date shall not be appointed to the board. The City Council reserves the right to waive the residency requirement for good cause shown. The City Council also reserves the right, for good cause shown, to waive the requirement that the board include one current or former peace officer. Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Ordinance No. 22-4873 Page 2 Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. P. --d and apprgved this 1st day of February , 2022. TirApr Attest: 0✓` ( .Le 1k y( ) J G_pa CittyClerk JJ Approved by City Attar `dOffioe' (Sue Dule —01/0612022) Ordinance No. 22-4873 Page 3 It was moved by Taylor and seconded by Thomas that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Alter g Bergus X Harmsen x Taylor X Teague x Thomas x Weiner First Consideration 01/04/2022 Vote for passage: AYES: Weiner, Alter, Bergus, Harmson,Taylor,Teague,Thomas NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration 01/18/2022 Voteforpassage: AYES: Taylor, Teague, Weiner, Thomas, Alter, Harmsen,Bergus NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Date published 02/10/2022 Item Number: 13. F ebruary 1, 2022 O rd inan ce amen d ing Titl e 10 of the City Code, entitl ed "Use of Public Ways and Prop erty," Chap ter 11, en titled "F armer's Market," to req u ire al l vendors to carry in su rance. (Second Consid eration) Prepared B y:Susan Dulek, A ss't. City A ttorney Reviewed By:Geoff Fruin, City Manager J uli Seydell J ohnson, Director P arks & Rec F iscal I mpact:none Recommendations:Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments:ordinance Executive S ummary: T he ordinance requires all vendors at the F armers Market to carry insurance. Background / Analysis: T he C ity C ode currently requires only grilling vendors to carry liability insurance. T his ordinance will require all vendors to carry insurance to ensure a level of protection for both the vendors and customers in case of potential claims due to the actions of a vendor. T he amount of insurance will be determined by the City Risk Manager. T he insurance requirement is consistent with vendor requirements of other farmer markets held in municipalities similar in size to I owa City. AT TAC HM E NT S : Description Ordinance Prepared by:Susan Dulek,Asst. City Attorney,410 E.Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240(319)356-5030 ORDINANCE NO. 22-4874 Ordinance amending Title 10 of the City Code, entitled "Use of Public Ways and Property," Chapter 11, entitled "Farmer's Market," to require all vendors to carry insurance. Whereas, the City Code currently requires only grilling vendors to carry liability insurance in an amount determined by the City Risk Manager; and Whereas, it is in the City's interest to require all vendors to carry liability insurance. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I. Amendments. 1. Title 10, entitled "Use of Public Ways and Property," Chapter 11, entitled "Farmers Market," Section 3, entitled "Standards for Granting or Denying Authorization," Subsection E is hereby amended by adding the underscore text and deleting the strike-through text as follows: E. Grilling vendor requirements only: 1. The grilling vendor has obtained insurance in a reasonable amount necessary to minimize risk of harm to persons and property based on the intended use, as determined by the city's risk manager. 2. The person vendor has obtained all necessary permits required by the Johnson County Health Department. 3. Such other requirements as the director may establish in the administrative rules. Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Pa -• and approved this 1st day of February , 2022. . • Ma Tr Attest: it 1 7 G� Cit Clerk v' Approved by eri CityAttorYOfice (Sue Dulek—01/07/2022) Ordinance No. 27-4874 Page 2 It was moved by Weiner and seconded by Alter that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Alter X Bergus X Harmsen X Taylor X Teague X Thomas X Weiner First Consideration 01 /1A/9099 Vote for passage: AYES: Teague, Thomas, Bergus, Harmsen, Weiner, Taylor, Alter NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration Vote for passage: Date published 02/10/2022 Moved by Weiner, seconded by Thomas, that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at that time. AYES: Alter, Burgus, Harmsen, Taylor, Teague, Thomas, Weiner NAYES: None ABSENT: None Item Number: 14. F ebruary 1, 2022 O rd inan ce amen d ing Titl e 3, “F in ance, Taxation an d F ees”, Chap ter 7, “Iowa City Downtown Self-Supported Municipal Imp rovemen t District”, Section 4 “O p eration F u n d ” of the City Code to conform to amendmen ts in Iowa Cod e Ch apter 386 regard ing mu l ti-resid ential prop erties. (Second Consid eration) Prepared B y:Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Assistant City Attorney Reviewed By:Geoff Fruin, City Manager F iscal I mpact:No impact Recommendations:Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments:Ordinance Executive S ummary: Since adopting the Downtown S S MI D ordinance in 2015, properties classified as multi-residential for property tax purposes have been assessed and have paid the S S MI D tax levy. Pursuant to state code, the S S MI D tax has not been levied against property assessed as residential property. R ecent state code changes reclassified multi-residential properties as residential, but gave the City the authority to continue levying the S S MI D tax against such properties. T his amendment is appropriate to track the state code changes, thus preserving the status quo. Background / Analysis: AT TAC HM E NT S : Description Ordinance Sara Greenwood Hektoen,Assistant City Attorney,410 E.Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030 Ordinance No.: 22-4875 Ordinance amending Title 3, "Finance, Taxation and Fees", Chapter 7, "Iowa City Downtown Self-Supported Municipal Improvement District", Section 4 "Operation Fund" of the City Code to conform to amendments in Iowa Code Chapter 386 regarding multi-residential properties. Whereas, the City of Iowa City adopted ordinance 15-4649 on December 15, 2015, to provide for the existence and operation of the Downtown Self-supported Municipal Improvement District (Downtown SSMID), to provide for the maintenance of improvements or self-liquidating improvements for such district, and to levy taxes with respect to such district, all as more specifically defined in Iowa Code Chapter 386 "Self-Supported Municipal Improvements Districts" (the Act); and Whereas, as declared in Section 3-7-3, all property within the district is similarly related so that the present and potential use or enjoyment of the property is benefited by the condition, performance of administration, redevelopment, revitalization and maintenance of the district and the owners of property in the district have a present and potential benefit from the condition, performance of administration, redevelopment, revitalization and maintenance of the district; and Whereas, pursuant to the Act, the SSMID tax has not been levied against property assessed as residential property for property tax purposes; and Whereas, pursuant to Iowa Code Chapter 441, multi-residential properties were not assessed as residential property for property tax purposes and thus the SSMID tax has been levied against such properties in accordance with the Act; and Whereas, House File 418 amended Iowa Code Chapter 441 and 386 to reclassify these properties as residential for property tax purposes but to allow cities the right to continue levying the SSMID tax against such properties; and Whereas, to conform with the intention of House File 418 and preserve the status quo so that the purposes of the SSMID may be realized, it is in the public interest to amend the ordinance. Now therefore, be it ordained, by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, Section I. Iowa City Code of Ordinances Section 3-7-4 "Operation Fund" is hereby amended by striking or adding language as follows: Pursuant to the provisions of the Act, there is hereby established and created a Self- supported Municipal Improvement District Operation Fund with respect to the District to be known as the "Iowa City Downtown Self-supported Municipal Improvement District Operation Fund" (herein the "Operation Fund"), for which the City may certify taxes (the "Operation Tax") against the property, as defined in the Act (-excluding ng Ordinance No. 22-4875 Page 2 e ee_. - -e - ,_. _ e ee e e ee - e. se - , within the district(the"property")each year, in addition to all other taxes, commencing with the levy of taxes for collection in the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2016, for the purposes of paying the administrative and operational expenses of the district, as defined and authorized in the act or paying part or all of the maintenance expenses of "improvements" or"self-liquidating improvements", as defined in the act, for a period of ten (10) years. Property assessed as residential property for property tax purposes is exempt from the tax levied under this Chapter except property classified as residential property under section 441.21, subsection 14, paragraph "a subparagraph (6). Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication. Passed and approved this 1st day of February , 20 May4 Approved by Attest a 1 -_' ,711. _ _4 L City lerk City Attor y's Office (Sara Greenwood-Hektoen —01/12/2022) Ordinance No. 72-4875 Page 3 It was moved by Thomas and seconded by Taylor that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Alter X Bergus X Harmsen x Taylor Teague x Thomas x Weiner First Consideration 01 /iR/2n22 Vote for passage: AYES: Thomas, Bergus, Harmsen, Weiner, Taylor, Alter, Teague NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration Vote for passage: Date published 02/10/2022 Moved by Taylor, seconded by Weiner, that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. AYES: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Taylor, Teague, Thomas, Weiner NAYES: None ABSENT: None