Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-01-02 Bd Comm minutesItem Number: 4.a. I i CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: November 9 Attachments: Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: November 9 November 9, 2023 Approved Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) Minutes Assembly Room, Iowa City Senior Center Commissioners present: Chastity Dillard, Lauren Merritt, Louis Tassinary, Chad Simmons, Clif Johnson. Commissioners not present: Wangui Gadma, Eric Harris, Marie Krebs, Sikowis Nobiss. Staff present: Redmond Jones, Stefanie Bowers. Meeting called to order: 7:08 PM. Reading of Land Acknowledgement: Merritt read the Land Acknowledgement. Discussion and next steps based on motions passed on October 5, 2023, meeting and the facilitation team's response letter: Jones reviewed a memo he had written to the TRC. It started with the TRC's motion of October 5, which approved moving the phase 1 completion date to March 31, 2024. Based upon that mention, staff engaged the consultants to understand their expectations should there be an extension to phase 1 of the scope. The consultants provided a consensus e-mail response on October 13. Staff understanding of the consultant teams' position is that they are willing to accommodate an extension or delay. However, if the overall active engagement period extends beyond seven months (three months Phase 1 t four months Phase 2), the consultant teams would expect the City to negotiate contract extensions and associated financial considerations. Jones' memo requested that the TRC select one of two options. Option 1: If the TRC wishes to proceed according to the original contract, the next step will be to prepare for a presentation to the City Council on Nov 21. After that presentation, the TRC could move to phase 2 work as originally scoped in the consultant agreements. Option 2: If the TRC wants to temporarily pause active engagement with the consultants (i.e., take a break with no expectation of consultant assistance), then all parties must develop a shared written understanding of the pause and when phase 2 work will begin. If the TRC selects option 2, the facilitators would like to hold a retreat in early December so that work does not totally pause. TRC members discussed whether a pause was needed to debrief or to keep moving forward into phase 2. Amos Kiche spoke as a public member and stressed the need for the TRC to have a consensus moving forward. Commissioner Simmons moved for the TRC to adopt option #1, and Tassinary seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. Expectations and presentation plans of phase 1 to City Council on November 21: Commissioners Merritt, Simmons, and Dillard will be at the meeting on November 21 to present to City Council. At this time, Commissioner Simmons will also mention the need for the TRC to request additional funds to support outreach efforts. Commissioner Simmons also proposed that the TRC not hold any meetings in December. The TRC will decide at its meeting on December 7, whether to hold a meeting on December 21. Announcement of Commissioners: Simmons encouraged other TRC members to attend and participate in the Truthsgivings event at The Englert on November 10. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 PM. To view the recording or listen to the audio of this meeting, visit this link. a n N r N h h 0 h h a N iC ^ W M H N N M M M M M N N N N N N N 0 Item Number: 4.b. I i CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: November 16 Attachments: Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: November 16 November 16, 2023 Approved Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission Emma I Harvat Hall, City Hall Commissioners present: Chastity Dillard, Sikowis Nobiss, Lauren Merritt, Marie Krebs, Louis Tassinary, Chad Simmons, Clif Johnson. Commissioners not present: Wangui Gathua, Eric Harris. Staff present: Redmond Jones, Stefanie Bowers. Meeting called to order: 7:07 PM. Reading of Land Acknowledgement: Merritt read the Land Acknowledgement. Approval of minutes from the October 5, 25, and 26 meetings: Merritt moved, and Krebs seconded. The motion passed 7-0. TRC planning presentation: Commissioner Simmons introduced himself and his professional experience. Simmons reported that he thinks the facilitators have not provided all of the pieces to the TRC. The pieces the TRC has been given by the facilitators to tell its story are below. Truth & Reconciliation Commission Telling Our Story Simmons feels that the TRC needs to continue to build the pieces. His vision for the TRC is on the following page. Truth & Reconciliation Commission Telling Our Story Telling . Orga�iizafon IOommt pity _ SpviiSar Celebration and Remembrance According to Simmons, the second part is the team (people) development. High performance teams go through a process. Sometimes it can be a painful process. If the TRC can move towards performing they will be successful. There is additional work the TRC must do that cannot be performed by the facilitators. People test projects could include the following: • Truthsgiving • MLK Breakfast • Black Educator's Work Group • Civil Leadership Program • Housing Initiative to Black Business Wealth These projects would require additional funding from the City to the TRC. These projects would allow the TRC to test the waters. The list would also need to be expanded to be more representative of all persons and not just African Americans. Discussion and next steps: Staff will prepare a document that provides the contact information for all the facilitators and TRC members so that communications can be improved. Staff will also send out the TRC logo to commissioners for their use in the presentation slide deck. Per the request of Chair Dillard, staff will also send out a news release alerting the community of the upcoming presentation that TRC will make to the City Council. In preparation of the presentation to City Council, Commissioners will send a brief introduction of themselves to staff to be placed in the slide deck. Commissioners Tassinary and Nobiss will not be able to attend the City Council meeting. It is not known if Gathua will be present. Facilitator Larry Schooler provided an overview of how the fact-finding process will work. Identifying the best sources to find the information so that the TRC can identity the facts and also any gaps in the data that the TRC needs to know to make its recommendations to the City Council. N The TRC will have to identify the vision as it sees it as it relates to systemic racism, stereotypes, and prejudices. Kearns and West will hand off to the TRC all the information and sources to them so they know how often that data is updated. Amos Kiche a member of the public, believes the TRC should create a strong statement on its intended deliverables to the community. Announcement of Commissioners: Krebs spoke on the recent recommendations by the Board of Regents on the elimination of any DEI functions that are not necessary for compliance or accreditation at state universities. Nobiss mentioned the effects of the book bans in that state of Iowa and its effect on education and learning. Nobiss also alerted to a new book that tells stories on challenges to bigotry and ignorance within the state of Iowa. Dillard reminded commissioners of "Giving Tuesday". The meeting adjourned at 9:03 PM. To view the recording or listen to the audio of this meeting, visit this link. 3 i47 a, a, a b N o a, w d P. a. a, d A. a, N `a h 0. 0. h e b N N N N M M M f~4 N N N N a <C Item Number: 4.c. I i CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Board of Adjustment: November 8 Attachments: Board of Adjustment: November 8 MINUTES FINAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAL MEETING EMMA HARVAT HALL NOVEMBER 8, 2023 — 5:15 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Bryce Parker, Paula Swygard MEMBERS ABSENT: Nancy Carlson, Mark Russo STAFF PRESENT: Sue Dulek, Kirk Lehmann OTHERS PRESENT: Missie Forbes, Bryce Achen, Susan Eberly, Tom Braverman CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. ROLL CALL: A brief opening statement was read by Swygard outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures that would be followed in the meeting. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC23-0008: An application submitted by Missie Forbes of Community Coordinated Child Care (4Cs) requesting a special exception to allow a daycare use in a Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone for the property located at 1839 B Street. Baker noted he has talked with Lehmann, who has talked to the City Attorney, about a possible conflict of interest on this item since his son is on the board of directors of this organization. He has been advised that as long as Baker can be objective and impartial it should not be a problem. Additionally, Baker and his son have had no communication whatsoever about this issue. Swygard opened the public hearing. Lehmann began the staff report showing a location map of the area and stated this application is to allow a childcare use at 1839 B Street. Its located east of Seventh Avenue and south of Court Street near Chadek Green Park. The primary access to the property is from B Street, which is to the north of the property. Lehmann noted it's also a bit unusual in that there's an alley to the south that exits on the Fifth Avenue and Garden Street and bisects this property, so there's a portion of the lot that's north of the alley and a portion that is south of the alley. The property is in a lower density single family neighborhood which is reflected by its RS-5 zoning (Low -Density Single -Family Residential zoning). Community Coordinated Child Care (4Cs) has an offer to purchase the subject property to use as a daycare and they've indicated an interest in using it for up to 120 children. The property is an older property built around the 1960s as a church, but it's been used as a fraternal lodge by the Independent Order of Odd Fellows since around 1974. The property was built prior to its current zoning so there are several legal non - conformities that are allowed to continue as long as the building isn't expanded or structurally altered. The applicant is proposing several site improvements. Vehicular access will be the Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 2 of 11 same on the north portion but one of the big changes is that the drives to the west of the building would become one directional so someone would enter it from B Street and go south down to the alley. Another change is that a pedestrian connection would be added through the site all the way from the right-of-way to the portion of the property that is south of the alley and there would be a demarcated crossing over the alley as well. In addition, that south portion would have a new parking area that would be added, as well as a play area, which would have access with that pedestrian connection. On the alley they are proposing to add landscaping screening which complies with current standards, and the applicant is showing alley improvements as well from the property line east over to Fifth Avenue. Lehmann shared some pictures of the current property noting the current pedestrian path to the building, which would be extended through the site. He noted there is currently no east/ west sidewalk in front in the public right-of-way. The alley by the property is currently paved and its hard to tell which portion of the alley is actually private property. The role of the Board of Adjustment is to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application based on the facts presented. To approve, the Board must find that it meets all applicable approval criteria, including specific and general standards, the specific standards pertain to the daycare use and the general standards apply to all special exceptions. The specific criteria related to daycare standards is found in the City code at Section 14-4B-4D- 7, and there are several of them. The first is that there are required interior activity areas that must contain at least 35 square feet of usable interior floor space per child. There are certain excluded areas, which are mostly bathrooms, offices and hallways. The subject property is pretty large with nearly 7800 square feet of usable interior floor space and theoretically could accommodate up to 222 children. It is more restricted based on the parking and some other site elements than its floor area. Lehmann reiterated the applicant proposes a daycare use with up to 120 children, so well below the maximum that would be allowed. Next is required outdoor areas for which the childcare use must provide a fenced outdoor play area of not less than 100 square feet per child based on the maximum number of children at any given time. There are side and front setbacks required where playground equipment is not permitted. These areas must be well drained, free from hazards and readily accessible to the daycare center. It also must have a fence that encloses the outdoor play area that's at least four feet in height. Lehmann stated the property is zoned residential so that four -foot fence standard applies. He noted all playground equipment shown on the site plan is located outside of the restricted areas and the site plan includes an outdoor play area that's approximately 2,156 square feet and could accommodate up to 21 children at a time. It's surrounded by a four -foot fence as indicated on the site plan and is also accessible by a pedestrian path with the demarcated crossing in the alley. Lehmann also noted that in terms of outdoor play areas, it's within easy walking distance of Chadek Green Park as well, so based on this staff believes this standard is met and there is a possibility that the play area could be expanded in the future which should allow more kids outside as well. The next criterion is vehicular circulation; the use must provide a drop off/pickup area in a location that is convenient to or has good pedestrian access to the main entrance to the facility. Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 3 of 11 The drop off/pickup area must also contain sufficient stacking and parking spaces to ensure that it doesn't back up into adjacent streets. Lehmann explained the way that its structured traffic is expected to flow in one direction from B Street to the north, down the alley and exit east on Fifth Avenue. He stated because most of the alley is currently unimproved, and the site plan shows an improved alley, staff recommends that that be a condition of approval of tonight's special exception. In terms of ongoing maintenance, that's handled by adjacent property owners including 4Cs. The subject property has 29 parking spaces, 15 of those are new spaces south of the alley and there are 14 existing non -conforming spaces north of the alley, some of which are in front of the building. The site also has seven stacking spaces that are west of the building on a nine -foot wide one direction drive. All parking and stacking spaces are connected to the building with pedestrian routes so staff believes this criterion is met. However, continuing with this criterion, the minimum parking requirement is one space per employee based on the maximum employees on site at any one time plus one space for each 10 kids is served by the maximum number of children on site at any one time plus one stacking space for each 20 children served by the maximum number of children on site at one time. The stacking spaces per 20 children can also be switched out for parking as well. Parking is the primary limiting factor for the number of children in this building. Based on the stacking spaces provided they could have up to 140 kids, so parking is adequate to accommodate the 120 children that are proposed in addition to 17 staff members. However, that final number of spaces would be determined by the actual number of staff and children onsite, which could vary over time. The applicant also anticipates that many families and staff will access the site by walking, biking or by bus because the properly is less than a quarter mile from the nearest transit stop and the site plan shows bicycle parking that meets the minimum requirements on the site. The next criterion is tied to pedestrian circulation, which is that a sidewalk must be constructed connecting the main entrance of the center to the adjacent public right-of-way and must be clearly separated from vehicular circulation to minimize conflicts between users, vehicular and pedestrian. Lehmann stated there is a sidewalk that already exists from the main entrance to the public right-of-way however there is no sidewalk along the B Street right-of-way. The site plan proposes new sidewalks with raised curbs through the property along the west and south sides of the building which will help minimize the extent to which users must walk across drives or aisles. Staff also recommends a condition that any new pedestrian routes through the site have a raised curb to help ensure pedestrian safety. Lehmann noted in this criterion it doesn't specify that it has to be a raised curb but staff would recommend that be a condition of approval. Regarding site development standards, the criteria state if it's located in a residential zone or in the Central Planning District it must comply with the multifamily site development standards in section 14-2B-6. In this case the proposed use is both in a residential zone and the Central Planning District so it has to comply. The building and site do meet some multifamily site development standards but not standards related to the location and design of surface parking, mechanical equipment and additional standards in the Central Planning District. That being said, all of the existing non -compliant features are either considered elements of a non- conforming structure or non -conforming development which means a change in use can occur provided it does not increase or extend the degree of non -conformity and in this case it does not. Additionally, all changes to the site being proposed comply with current zoning standards, so staff believes this criterion is met. Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 4 of 11 Lehmann moved onto the general standards that apply to all special exceptions found a 14-413- 3. The first is that it can't be detrimental to or endanger public health, safety, comfort or welfare. This is an existing building that's been around for a long time and the building and site characteristics are well suited to a daycare use. With the conditions discussed through this presentation staff believes that helps mitigate any potential impacts due to increased traffic and also believes that the proposed use will provide services that are beneficial to the neighborhood and the community. The second standard is related to whether it will be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values. Again the use is located in an existing building and there are no changes being proposed to that building. The outdoor play areas are relatively small and set back and screened from adjacent properties, which staff believes will help mitigate noise impacts. Additional traffic will be generated by the use but it'll be during business hours and the proposed traffic flow, site layout and recommended conditions will help mitigate potential negative impacts. In addition, the new parking area south of the alley is adequately set back and screened from the abutting uses according to standards, however staff does recommend that the S2 screening shown on the site plan be a condition of approval as an element that's being brought into conformance with the zoning code and would not be otherwise required it is non -conforming development. Third is that it won't affect the orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties Lehmann reiterated this is an area that's fully developed as a residential neighborhood and it's occupying an existing structure that's been around since the 1960s. Additionally, it will provide beneficial services that staff doesn't believe will substantially impact the development or improvement of surrounding properties. Staff believes that the conditions will help mitigate any potential negative impacts for those surrounding properties. The fourth criterion is that it has adequate facilities. Again, it is an existing area so it has utilities, access roads, and other facilities already provided and established. The site was largely developed without sidewalks, but there is a pedestrian connection to the right-of-way and through the site. Staff believes the conditions help ensure the infrastructure can handle increased traffic volumes, specifically along the alley, and any changes to site features will be evaluated for compliance with City standards at site plan and building permit review, including those related to drainage. Lehmann noted staff did consider requiring a sidewalk in front of the building as well, but the broader neighborhood doesn't have sidewalks so adding a sidewalk specifically in front of this one building isn't necessary to improve the safety of the area. Standard five is related to ingress and egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. As previously noted, the front of the site is accessed from B Street with the rear access from the alley and most traffic is expected to flow one directional through the site exiting the alley east towards Fifth Avenue. The staff and drop off traffic will utilize the stacking spaces as well as some of the alley where there's additional parking spaces in the rear of the building and those are connected to the rest of the building by a pedestrian route and a demarcated alley crossing. Lehmann stated there is also signage and pavement markings shown to help direct traffic through the site which will help minimize that traffic congestion. In addition, the conditions will ensure that the alley can handle anticipated traffic volumes prior to the occupancy of the Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 5 of 11 site. In terms of other changes to the site, there are no other changes proposed to the existing street or drive portion of the property north of the alley, and the new parking on the portion south of the alley complies with all current standards. In addition, the applicant anticipates many families and staff will be accessing the site from other modes of transportation as it is near an existing transit stop. Criterion six states that the special exception must comply with all other standards in the zoning code. Lehmann reiterated it does meet most standards of the RS-5 zone but was built prior to the current zoning designation so there are elements that don't meet current standards. Those are things like the way that parking backs into the alley, the width of the isle in front of the building, the building encroaches into the side setback and the need to provide parking lot trees. Those are things that are currently non -conforming and would be allowed to continue as non- conforming. However, this does bring several elements of the site into compliance with current standards, especially with proposed conditions, for example the new landscaping buffers. Additionally, as things change in the future, staff will ensure that any new changes comply with relevant standards during building permit and/or site plan review process. The final criterion is that it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City as amended. As far as the Future Land Use Map designation for this area the Comprehensive Plan shows it as residential, but the Central District Plan which provides more specific guidance shows it as Private Institutional. The Comprehensive Plan also generally supports providing goods and services within convenient walking distance for residents in the immediate area and the proposed exception would convert what is an existing private institutional use to another private institutional use. Based on these findings staff does recommend approval of EXC23-0008 to allow a daycare use in a Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone for the property located at 1839 B Street, subject to the following conditions: 1. Design improvements to the alley from the area abutting the subject property to 5th Avenue in the east, in addition to any pedestrian crossings, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to site plan approval. Alley improvements must be accepted by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 2. Provide screening to the S2 standard between parking areas and adjacent properties along the east and west property lines as shown in the site plan dated October 31, 2023 3. Any new pedestrian routes through the site that directly abut parking areas shall be separated by a raised curb or barrier that is a minimum of five inches (5") in height. Lehmann noted staff did receive some correspondence that was included in the agenda packet, it was generally positive. They also received some calls but most of them were asking clarificatory questions. Parker asked to see the raised curb on the site plan. Lehmann showed the new raised curb and explained it will go around the property and in addition have the parking area separated by a raised curb because this side of the block does not have a sidewalk. Baker asked about the parking infrastructure, and the number of people allowed in the facility. Lehmann stated there is space for 140 children based on stacking spaces, but he doesn't think Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 6 of 11 they can get the staff they want on site so that is why they're considering 120 children as their limit. Lehmann stated they could ask the applicant about their plans, but parking is the limiting factor here. The size of the building could hold 220 but the number of children is capped at 120 right now with the staff they're planning on having onsite due to available parking. Baker also asked about the outdoor space and does the 2,156 square feet of outdoor area include the paved area south of the alley. Lehmann stated it does not and the outdoor area will be fenced in and the paved area that's there now that is used for parking will continue to be used for parking in the future. Baker noted the paved area on the alley towards B Street doesn't seem to have enough depth for parking places so is there a minimum requirement for the depth of a parking space. Lehmann explained that the minimum depth required is 18 feet and based on the submitted site plan it appears that they could meet it north of the alley, it could also potentially be 15 feet if it were a compact space, and they are showing compact spaces in that portion south of the alley. The only spaces that they're keeping are the ones directly next to the building, otherwise, because they'd be reconstructing the alley and improving the alley, there will be a new parking lot to the south. Baker asked what kind of surface is considered for the alley improvement, will it be concrete or asphalt, and what exactly will be the improvements. Lehmann explained it would be a typical alley as seen in any new development, and the surface used would be determined by the City Engineer, but they typically see concrete. He noted gravel alleys don't work, which is why staff is recommending the condition. Baker asked who would pay for the alley improvement. Lehmann stated the applicant would pay for the complete paving of the alley, even past their property lines. IN be an offsite improvement that would be required as a condition because of the heavy use of the alley anticipated by the application. Baker noted it says adjacent property owners are responsible for maintenance and snow removal in the future but there was no good neighbor meeting so he is wondering if the adjoining neighbors know they will have this responsibility, he is assuming they been taking care of the alley in the past somehow. Lehmann acknowledged people do get confused about alleys, they are the responsibility of adjacent property owners, but that's why he put that in there to make it clear that's the case, since it can be confusing sometimes for folks. Swygard noted in the newly built parking lot it on the site plan it notes there are eight compact stalls, do those require signs. Lehmann stated he believes that they do. Swygard stated when she visited the site, two trips both day and night, she noticed there are several floodlights along the roofline, the two in the front were obviously there to illuminate the flag pole and one on the side where the entrance is. Do those floodlights have to be brought up to current standards and be shielded, they're not currently shielded. Lehmann stated if it's an existing feature of the property it would not have to be brought up to current standards however that could be a condition if the Board finds it necessary to address those issues and bring the lighting up to standards. Swygard noted currently there is a streetlight in the alley that would illuminate that new parking lot area, are staff aware of any plans for further outdoor lighting. Lehmann replied he is not however that would usually be reviewed at site plan review and any new light would have to comply with current standards. Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 7 of 11 Missie Forbes (Executive Director, 4Cs) stated part of their mission is to look at barriers to children accessing quality, early childhood educational experiences, which they know leads them to be better citizens and students and things like that. One of the things that they have intentionally done is look within the community to see where there are deserts or pockets of the community where childcare isn't as accessible as it could be. They identified this particular area of Iowa City to not have any close childcare within a mile footprint and then they also identified that it was pretty close to a bus line, and there's a building that was for sale. All that pointed to doing a deeper dive into the property and what they could potentially do to put a childcare center in that part of town. So that is what they're trying to accomplish with this project knowing that finding affordable childcare for families in a certain socio-economic status is harder so part of the project would be to make sure that at least 50% of the children served there would be on State subsidy childcare assistance as well. Forbes acknowledge while they welcome and open their doors for any child, they are specifically looking to tackle the problem of not having enough childcare assistance slots in Iowa City. Additionally, they know infant care is also hard to find so they may look at modeling the program to address the needs of certain age ranges. Swygard asked about the outdoor lighting and if they will be putting a flag out in the front at the current flagpole. Forbes replied she is not sure what kind of improvements or what they would do currently, they're just trying to get through this hurdle. However, knowing that there is a flagpole there they would likely use it if they could comply with the standards, they just haven't done too deep of a dive into some of those improvements. Bryce Achen (McClure Engineering Company) is the civil engineering representative for 4Cs and they will address the site lighting when they get to the site plan requirements with the City. As of now they haven't specifically looked at lighting but will do so during that process and it would be brought up to code if required. Baker asked if they plan any improvements in the surface area of the paving around the building as there's a lot of dips and holes. Achen acknowledged they would want to improve the areas they can but don't want to affect any areas that are already non -conforming compliant. Baker asked about the commitment of 50% of the childcare for children on childcare assistance and if that was a requirement. Forbes explained it's not a requirement it just aligns with their mission and is something that's important to them, they want to address the lack of quality childhood education for primarily low-income children. Baker asked if that was the policy at the other places they run as well. Forbes stated again that it is not a policy, it is just something that they believe is important and ties into all childcare centers they run. Their centers are a blend of private pay children, children on childcare assistance, and some funding from the County and the State. Baker asked if at the other locations are they close to that 50% mark. Forbes replied yes and they anticipate they will be able to do so at this site as well because those are the hardest to find spots in Johnson County. Baker questioned how people will arrive at the facility, noting it was stated people would use the bus and bike or walk, has that been the experience at other locations because obviously this is Iowa and sometimes those other opportunities don't work very well for months out of the year. Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 8 of 11 Forbes stated she thinks that this particular location is a little bit different than their current center but it's always a mix, they also have a van that they currently use to pick up families that are living in shelter and anticipate they could use the van if there were barriers to access to this particular location for families, especially in the winter months. They would certainly address that on a case -by -case basis, because that's they operate mission wise. Baker noted at the other locations is it correct to assume that the high traffic area times are like early in the morning and then late afternoon. Forbes confirmed that is pretty consistent. Baker asked how they handle parents dropping off, do the parents have to park and bring the child in or is there a staff member picking up kids at the drive, he is worried about parking because if they all congregate around the same times it seems like a limited space to stack up. Forbes stated they require parents to get out and bring their child into the center, that is what the stacking parking is for, specifically for that drop off and pickup. She acknowledged at times there are going to be more people than nine cars potentially coming at some time but because of the requirements of one parking space per employee, and they have found that not all employees drive, some employees carpool, they don't anticipate that all of those spaces will be filled so they would have more parking available than just those stacking spots. Forbes reiterated one of the things that makes this location attractive is that it is close to a bus line. Susan Eberly (1840 Friendship Street) lives in the property straight south with her backyard bordering what will be the parking lot. She has watched this with considerable interest, the whole neighborhood has, and the thought of having it be childcare is wonderful. She is so pleased they are going to improve the alley because she worried about that with kids and travel. She has a question about her gate as that is the access to her backyard from the alley and has been the access ever since the house was built in 1955 or 1956. It is the only access to their backyard because of the way the property is laid out and the way it's fenced so she'd like that gate to continue to be available for her and is willing to talk about needing to put a lock on that gate or something. They have an interesting backyard with a fishpond that's an attractive nuisance and she worries about small kids getting over the fence to look at the fish. She is also curious what the S2 standard of screening entails. Lehmann explained the City has standards of S1 to S5 landscaping with S1 being very little and S5 essentially being a wall. S2 is what they use generally to try and shield adjacent property owners from parking, so it somewhat hides that there's parking there. Generally, it's called a variable height screen and is usually around four feet on center between plantings. Some of them would have to be taller, some of them could be a little shorter but that's the general standard. Eberly noted they have a fence there around four feet tall, it was there when they bought the house and she doesn't know if it meets the standard but as that all progresses hopefully someone will keep her posted on what's going to happen in terms of fencing along there. Lehmann stated from the site plan it shows there will be a 10-foot gap between their fence and Eberly's fence and that gap space will be maintained by 4Cs as it's on their property. Baker also noted there are boats stored on the property now and will those remain on the property. Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 9 of 1 t Tom Braverman (secretary, Odd Fellows Eureka Lodge #44) noted that members of the Lodge make a donation to the Lodge to store their boats there and that's why currently boats are stored there, however once the property is sold the boats will be moved to his nephew's farm. Swygard closed the public hearing. Parker moved approval EXC23-0008, a special exception submitted by Missie Forbes of Community Coordinated Child Care (4Cs) requesting a special exception to allow a daycare use in a Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone for the property located at 1839 B Street. 101M.IBr u • •, Baker asked is there any interest on the part of the Board to put an explicit cap on the number of vulnerable children. Parker stated they didn't feel it was necessary because parking will keep it to 140 or under and if they wanted to expand beyond that they'd have to come back anyway. Swygard stated her concern is still the outdoor lighting and concern about light trespass into the adjacent properties and would be in favor of putting a condition that the outdoor lighting must be brought into compliance with current City code. The Board agreed to add that condition to the finding of facts so there will be four conditions. Parker is concerned about sidewalks, if children who attend this center take the bus and/or walk, there isn't a sidewalk to get to this facility, however the neighborhood itself does not have sidewalks and they can't require any other property owner to install sidewalks, but it is a very big concern. Dulek stated their discussion could be forwarded to City Council and the planning of GIP because there have been additional sidewalks put in that neighborhood in the last year or two. Baker agreed it seems pointless to put a sidewalk on just the one property, the whole neighborhood has to be under consideration for sidewalks. Dulek noted Council will get the minutes but the Board could do an additional memo, it could be drafted by staff saying that was part of this discussion and the Board feels it's important for all neighborhoods to have a sidewalk. Staff can include it in the packet for next meeting. Parker stated regarding agenda item EXC23-0008 he does concur with the findings set forth in the staff report of meeting date, November 8, 2023 and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied except to add a fourth condition of bringing outdoor lighting into City code. So unless amended or opposed by another Board member he recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report for the approval of this exception. A vote was taken and the motion passed 3-0. Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 10 of 11 Swygard stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC23-0004: A request submitted by Jennifer Colville (Porch Light Literary Centre) to extend the deadline for the condition that 4 bicycle parking spaces be installed in compliance with Article 14-5A of the Zoning Code within 6 months of the date a decision of the Board of Adjustment was filed for EXC23-0004, a special exception approved to allow a religious/private group assembly use in a Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone and to reduce the setback requirements at 1019 E. Washington Street. Swygard moved to approve a request submitted by Jennifer Colville (Porch Light Literary Centre) to extend the deadline from six months to 12 months for the condition that for bicycle parking spaces be installed in compliance with Article 14-5A of the Zoning Code within 6 months of the date a decision of the Board of Adjustment was filed for EXC23- 0004, a special exception approved to allow a religious/private group assembly use in a Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone and to reduce the setback requirements at 1019 E. Washington Street. Baker seconded the motion. Swygard noted 6 months would move the exception to May 15, 2024. Parker noted bicycle parking is probably not going to be able to get done over the winter so this extension makes sense. A vote was taken and the motion passed 3-0 Swygard stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office. CONSIDER JULY 12, 2023 MINUTES: Baker moved to approve the minutes of July 12, 2023. Parker seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-0. 30Ll 1-L 11L0ltlil�3STI4iY .3 Lehmann noted the next meeting is scheduled for December 13 but staff has not received an application yet so he is assuming they will not have a December meeting. However, Lehmann added they will need to review the bylaws as those are to be reviewed relatively regularly. There are some minor corrections that staff would like to see so maybe they could do that in December or at another meeting that that looks relatively light. ADJOURNMENT: Swygard moved to adjourn this meeting, Parker seconded, a vote was taken and all approved. Board of Adjustment November 8, 2023 Page 11 of 11 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENDANCE RECORD 2023 NAME TERM EXP. 3/8 4/12 4/19 5110 6/14 7112 1 1118 BAKER, LARRY 12/31/2027 X X O/E X X X X PARKER, BRYCE 1213112024 X X O/E X X X X SWYGARD, PAULA 12/31/2023 X X X pi X X X X CARLSON, NANCY 12/3112025 X X X X X X O/E RUSSO, MARK 12131/2026 X X X O/E O/E X O/E Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused ---= Not a Member Item Number: 4.d. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Community Police Review Board: November 14 [See Recommendation] Attachments: Community Police Review Board: November 14 [See Recommendation] 4 - CITY OF IOWA CITY '! MEMORANDUM Date: December 13, 2023 To: Mayor and City Council From: Tammy Neumann, Community Police Review Board Staff Re: Recommendation from Community Police Review Board At their November 14, 2023 meeting the Community Police Review Board made the following recommendation to the City Council: (1) Accept CPRP Final Public Report for Complaint 23-07 (2) Accept CPRB Final Public Report for Complaint 23-08 (3) Accept CPRB Final Public Report for Complaint 23-09 (4) Accept CPRB 23-14 Summary Dismissal Additional action (check one) X No further action needed _ Board or Commission is requesting Council direction Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action S:RECform.doc FINAL/APPROVED COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD MINUTES — NOVEMBER 14, 2023 CALL TO ORDER Chair Melissa Jensen called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ricky Downing, Jessica Hobart, Melissa Jensen, Jerri MacConnell, Saul Mekies, Amanda Remington (arrived at 5:40 p.m.), Orville Townsend (arrived at 5:35 p.m.) MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Staff Tammy Neumann, Legal Counsel Patrick Ford OTHERS PRESENT: ICPD Chief Dustin Liston RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept CPRB 23-07 Public Report (2) Accept CPRB 23-08 Public Report (3) Accept CPRB 23-09 Public Report (4) Accept CPRB 23-14 Summary Dismissal CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by MacConnell, seconded by Downing, to adopt the consent calendar as presented. • Minutes of the meeting on October 10, 2023 • Email to Board re Police Officer Compliment— Received October 1, 2023 Community Forum Summary for meeting on October 3, 2023 • ICPD Use of Force Review/Report — August 2022, September 2022, October 2022, November 2022, & December 2022 • Office Contacts — October 2023 • Complaint Deadlines Townsend arrived at 5:35 p.m. Motion carried 6i0, Remington absent. Motion by Mekies, seconded by Downing, to reconsider the motion to adopt the consent calendar. Voice vote 6t0. Remington absent. Mekies requested an addition to the October 2023 minutes regarding his abstention from the motion titled "Motion to Close Nominations" to read as follows: Mekies abstained due to pending proposed changes to the process to be discussed at the November meeting and because he was on the nominating committee. Motion by Townsend, second by Mekies, to accept the October minutes and the Consent Calendar as amended. Motion carried 6t0. Remington absent. Remington arrived at 5:40 P.M. CPRB November 14, 2023 Page 2 f 7&n1�_R Discussion of ICPD Policy re: Use of Facial Recognition Technology — Dean Abel, Iowa City Resident, proposed a question at the October 2023 CPRB meeting asking if the Iowa City Police Department uses facial recognition technology. The item was deferred to the November meeting. Police Chief Liston reported that the Police Department does not use facial recognition technology, and as such, there is no department policy. He further noted that the Police Department follows the City's camera policy which does not address facial recognition specifically. Liston acknowledged that there are cameras being installed downtown, however, those belong to the Transportation Department. Abel asked how the cameras are being used and if the Police Department has access to the footage. Liston responded that Police Department investigators, station masters, and supervisors have access upon request. He further noted that any footage from private business cameras must be requested as well. Abel asked if the downtown cameras run continuously. Liston said that some are motion activated and some run all the time. Abel shared his concern with facial recognition technology noting it has been proven to be inaccurate. Discussion of CPRB Nominating Process — Mekies proposed that members of a CPRB nominating committee not be eligible for nomination. He also suggested that nominees be expected to share why they are a good candidate for the chair or vice chair position. Jensen said there needs to be more clarity on what is expected of the nominating committee. Jensen volunteered to write guidelines for future nominating committees. Townsend does not see an issue with nomination committee members nominating themselves as the outcome is based on a majority vote. Downing said that attending meetings with fellow board members provides enough information as to why they should be nominated without further explanation. Counselor Ford explained that there is nothing in the CPRB by-laws or in the ordinance that states there must be a nominating committee. Both Jensen and Townsend spoke of the value of having a nominating committee. It was determined that the board would visit this discussion again prior to the 2024 nominating committee selection in September 2024. Discussion of Process for Complaints that are Determined to be Untrue — MacConnell noted that at the bottom of the complaint form it states that filing a false complaint is punishable by law etc. She asked what the process is when a complaint is determined to be false. Remington stated she believes that determination would be the responsibility of the County Prosecutor. Liston agreed and explained that this is a standard statement that is included on many City forms. He noted that it is difficult to determine if it is an intentional false report or if the complainant simply misremembers the incident. He shared that all complaints that come into the Police Department are investigated, whether it be through the CPRB process or through other means, stating that he believes it to be his responsibility to do so. MacConnell suggested that perhaps the statement be removed from the complaint form. Liston again noted that it is a standard statement, and he hopes it encourages the complainant to be as truthful in their complaint as they can recall. Counselor Ford noted that there was a request in the past to include a box that must be checked prior to a person signing off on a complaint. He wondered if that was ever added. Neumann will follow up with the City Clerk. Discussion of CPRB Meeting Flow and Processes - Hobart said there seems to be some confusion at the CPRB meetings that may relate to Robert's Rules of Order. She questioned when it is appropriate to make a motion and ask for a roll call and when it is appropriate to simply ask for a voice vote. Discussion ensued amongst members about what the onboarding process was for each of them. There were various answers. Some sat down with Board Chairs, others were trained by the person they were replacing, and some were trained by the City Clerk or Clerk's office staff through in -person or virtual CPRB November 14, 2023 Page 3 meetings. Hobart received much of her training through documents that were emailed. Townsend believes the flow of the meeting is up to the Chair and how extensive their knowledge is of meeting processes. Mekies suggested that the Chair and/or Vice -Chair meet with new board members. Hobart said her observation is that there is some confusion amongst existing members, in addition to new members. Remington volunteered to put a summary of Roberts Rules and other meeting processes together to share with board members. Discussion of Legal Fees — Jensen explained that one of the responsibilities of the Chair is to review and approve the monthly legal invoices. She reminded the Board that requests to Counselor Ford should be reviewed by the Board or City Clerk Staff prior to reaching out directly. OLD BUSINESS None PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Abel asked when the Board started streaming the meetings. Remington explained that during the pandemic meetings were held via Zoom. Recently the Board began offering hybrid meetings again in hopes to offer better accessibility to the public. Abel asked if it is available to the public to watch. Remington said they are and that the public may participate in the meetings virtually as well. Remington asked if a media release was ever created and sent out letting the public know that these meetings are now available virtually. Neumann said she asked Communications previously to do so and will follow- up. BOARD INFORMATION None STAFF INFORMATION None. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS subject to chap e • December 12, 2023, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room • January 9, 2024, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room • February 13, 2024, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room • March 12, 2024, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room Mekies will be absent from the December 12, 2023 meeting and Jensen will be absent from the March 12, 2024 meeting. The Board agreed that no changes are necessary to the existing meeting schedule. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by MacConnell, seconded by Remington, to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. CPRB November 14, 2023 Page 4 Motion carried 7/0. Open session adjourned at 6:30 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 7:00 P.M. Motion by Remington, seconded by Downing, to accept the Public Report for CPRB Complaint 23-07 as written and to forward to City Council. Motion carried 7/0. Motion by Remington, seconded by MacConnell, to accept the Public Report for CPRB Complaint 23- 08 as written and to forward to City Council. Motion carried 7/0. Motion by Jensen, seconded by MacConnell, to accept the Public Report for CPRB Complaint 23-09 as amended and to forward to City Council Motion carried 7/0. Motion by Remington, seconded by Townsend, to summarily dismiss CPRB Complaint 23-14 per 8-8-3(D) "Complaints to the Board must be filed with the City Clerk within one hundred eighty (180) days of the alleged misconduct." Motion carried 7/0. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Hobart, seconded by Mekies to adjourn. Motion carried 7/0. Meeting adjourned at 7:06 P.M. F M N x x x x x x x I M x X x x x c x I b o� M N k X k k X k k I a m M h M M b N M 0 N N a k I X x X x x k o� N x I x x x x x X 0 M n 0 M N X I c x x x x x a 0 M c ( x x x c o x 0 N N x I x x x c x x L5I 6i M M e`I M M � M M d m a C q jot �w COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5041 DATE: November 14, 2023 To: City Council Complainant City Manager Chief of Police Officer(s) involved in complaint From: Community Police Review Board Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #23-07 This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint CPRB #23-07 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY: Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows: 1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(A).) 2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1): a. On the record with no additional investigation. b. Interview /meet with complainant. c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers. d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in the board's own investigation. e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses. f. Hire independent investigators. 3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report, because of the Police Chief's professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(13)(2)).) 4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify the Chiefs findings on/ if: a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious; or c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal, state, or local law. 5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a public report to the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact; and (2) a clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is either "sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(3)).) 6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline the officer involved. BOARD'S PROCEDURE: The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on May 17, 2023, As required by Section 8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation. The Chiefs Report was filed with the City Clerk on August 10, 2023. As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chief's report. The Board voted on September 12, 2023 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: On the record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(13)(1)(a). The Board met to consider the Report on September 12, 2023 and November 14, 2023. Prior to the September 12, 2023 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint, the Police Chief's report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in -car camera footage showing the interaction between the officers and the complainant. FINDINGS OF FACT: On the evening of May 8, 2023, the complainant reported to the Calumet City Police Department in Illinois that her Smith & Wesson handgun was stolen from her apartment. She advised that her ex was the only one who had access to the firearm and could have taken it. On May 1011, 2023, the complainant reported that her ex was on his way to Iowa City on a bus and was in possession of a firearm he had stolen from her. Iowa City Police Investigators located the complainant's ex sifting on a bench in downtown Iowa City. He was arrested on outstanding warrants and the firearm was found in a bag he was carrying. The complainant later called and attempted to retract her report, claiming that she had just learned that the housekeeper had placed the firearm in her ex's bag without his knowledge. The officer explained that some of the charges were unrelated to the firearm, told her that if she wanted to rescind hev3nitial report, she would need to do it with the agency she made the report to, and added the addi'tibnal information to the report. COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #1 — Performance — 320.8. - -_ Chief's conclusion: Not sustained Board's conclusion: Not sustained ru Basis for the Board's conclusion: The officer reported information as it was presented to him, including the statements made by the complainant when she tried to rescind her report five days after the arrest. The officer did not falsify any information or engage in concerning conduct. The officer explained to the complainant multiple times that if she wished to rescind a report, she would need to do so with the agency she initially made the report with, which was not the Iowa City Police Department, COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #2 — Conduct. Chief's conclusion: Not sustained Board's conclusion: Not sustained Basis for the Board's conclusion: Upon listening to the recorded phone calls, the Board found no evidence that the officer was rude, racist, or disrespectful. There was no evidence that he engaged in any inappropriate conduct. COMMENTS: BE CD 0 Ca COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5041 DATE November 15, 2023 To: City Council Complainant City Manager Chief of Police Officer(s) involved in complaint From: Community Police Review Board Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #23-08 This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint CPRB #23-08 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY: Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows: 1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(A).) 2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1): a. On the record with no additional investigation. b. Interview /meet with complainant. c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers. d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in the board's own investigation. e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses. f. Hire independent investigators. 3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report, because of the Police Chief's professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2).) 4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify the Chiefs findings only if: a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious; or c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal, state, or local law. 5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a public report to the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact; and (2) a clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is either "sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(3).) 6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline the officer involved. The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on May 18, 2023, As required by Section 8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation. The Chief's Report was filed with the City Clerk on August 10, 2023. As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chief's report. The Board voted on Tuesday, September 12, 2023, to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: Request additional investigation by the Police Chief or City Manager, or request police assistance in the Board's own investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1)(d). The Board met to consider the Report on September 12, 2023, October 10, 2023, and November 14, 2023. Prior to the September 12, 2023 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint, the Police Chief's report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in -car camera footage showing the interaction between the officers and the complainant. FINDINGS OF FACT: During the processing of booking, the complainant became more vocal and uncooperative -with the officer's requests. The complainant continued to ignore orders from the officer, and, when 6P officer attempted to escort the complainant back to the bench a physical altercation ensued. Then - complainant was placed in handcuffs and the process continued. c COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #1 — Use of Force. Chief's conclusion: Not sustained cn Board's conclusion: Not sustained Basis for the Board's conclusion: The CPRB reviewed the document submitted by the Chief of Police regarding use of force, and discussed the incident with the new information. After the discussion and viewing available videos the complainant's allegation is unsubstantiated. COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #2 — Unprofessional Conduct. Chief's conclusion: Not sustained Board's conclusion: Not sustained Basis for the Board's conclusion: After viewing available video footage, the complainant's allegation is unsubstantiated. The officers' were professional and courteous throughout their altercation. COMMENTS: None COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5041 DATE: November 14, 2023 To: City Council Complainant o ; City Manager = --- Chief of Police u; Officer(s) involved in complaint From: Community Police Review Board Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #23-09 This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint CPRB #23-09 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY: Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows: 1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(A).) When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1): a. On the record with no additional investigation. b. Interview (meet with complainant. c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers. d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in the board's own investigation. e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses. f. Hire independent investigators. 3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report, because of the Police Chiefs professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2).) 4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify the Chiefs findings only if: a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious; or c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal, state, or local law. 5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a public report to the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact; and (2) a clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is either "sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(3)).) 6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline the officer involved. BOARD'S PROCEDURE: The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on May 31, 2023. As required by Section 8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation. The Chief's Report was filed with the City Clerk on August 29, 2023. As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chief's report. The Board voted on October 10, 2023 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: On the record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1)(a). The Board met to consider the Report on October 10, 2023 and November 14, 2023. Prior to the October 10, 2023 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint, the Police Chiefs report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in -car camera footage showing the interaction between the officers and complainant. FINDINGS OF FACT: On May 31, 2023, an Individual filed the following on-line CPRB complaint stating that an officer pulled in front of his parked moped. The officer stepped out, did not attempt to confirm his identity, and simply told him he had a warrant for his arrest. The Individual states he asked what the warrant charge was, and the officer responded, "driving while barred." The Individual asked what he was barred for, and the officer stated, "I don't know." The officer asked the Individual if he was coming with him and he refused, stating that without a basis for charging him he had no obligation to comply. The Individual stated that the officer grabbed him, twisted his arm, handcuffed him so tight that he had bruises, and threw him in the back of his vehicle. The Individual states that several officers were present and when he stated that his ID, glasses, and medication were in his moped they beat his moped trying to open the seat. The Individual mentioned to the officers that he had the right to view and know the charges on the warrant and further asked why he had not been read his Miranda rights. The Individual stated that one officer laughed and stated he didn't have to read him his rights. The Individual indicated that he stated to the officers that they were arresting him on unclear charges without his name was objectively racist, and ignoring his rights and depriving him of his freedom because he was poor and black was unjust. The Individual stated that one of the officers laughed and began to call him "stupid and ignorant". GUMPLAINAN 11S ALLEGATION #1 —Application of Handcuffs or Plastic Cuffs 302.4 - Inmost situations, handcuffs should be applied with the hands behind the person's back. Handcuffs should be double locked to prevent tightening, which may cause undue discomfort to the hands or wrists. Chief's conclusion: Not sustained Board's conclusion: Not sustained Basis for the Board's conclusion: The Individual submitted to handcuffing and did not physically resist. The officer applied the handcuffs normally, without undue tightness, and was able to fit two fingersbotQq_an the.; handcuffs and the individuals' wrists. The officer did not use force or handcuffing techniques that would have injured the individual, nor were there any visible injuries on his wrists based on the officers' body -worn camera video. COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #2 — Conduct. 320.5.91t) - Discourteous, disrespectful, or discriminatory treatment of any member of the public or any member of this department or the city. Chief's conclusion: Sustained Board's conclusion: Sustained Basis for the Board's conclusion: - Allegation #2 is sustained regarding the volume of the music and the "stupid and ignorant "comments. The Individual made repeated requests for the officer to lower the volume or turn off the music. Although the volume was not at an objectively egregious level that still allowed them to communicate, the Individual felt it was too loud and upsetting him. The officer should have lowered the volume and not disregarded additional requests to decrease the volume or shut it off. The officer told the Individual that he would increase the volume in response to comments the Individual made about the arrest being based on race. The officer proceeded to increase the volume but lowered it again fourteen seconds later. However, regardless of the duration of the higher volume, the officer's response to the Individual's comments to drown him out was unprofessional and discourteous. The officer referred to the individuals comments as stupid and ignorant, not the individual himself. Regardless, the officer's comments were unprofessional. COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #3 — Biased -Based Policing, GO 09-01. - To patrol in a proactive manner, to investigate suspicious persons and circumstances, and to actively enforce the laws, while insisting that members of the public will only be detained when there exists reasonable suspicion (i.e., articulable objective facts) to believe they have committed, are committing, are about to commit an infraction of the law, or there is a valid articulable reason for contact. Members are prohibited from using bias -based policing in all aspects of work including, but not limited to, traffic contacts, field contacts, asset seizure, and asset forfeiture. Chief's conclusion: Not sustained Board's conclusion: Not sustained Basis for the Board's conclusion: _ • _ -- There is no evidence that the officers' arrest of the Individual was based on race. The officer knew the Individual, had a valid warrant for his arrest and recognized him from a:previous', encounter. The officer took the Individual to jail on the warrant only and did.not charge Kim with additional offences. In addition, the officer did not make any comments based onibce, disparage the individual in any way, or otherwise indicate that his actions were based on the Individuals race or socioeconomic status. COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #4 — Civil Rights, GO 89.04. - It is the policy of the City of Iowa City and the Iowa City Police Department to ensure the civil rights of the residents of Iowa City are upheld. Members of the department shall ensure that all constitutional protections are afforded those parties with whom the department is involved. Chiefs conclusion: Not sustained Board's conclusion: Not sustained Basis for the Board's conclusion: The officer arrested the individual on a valid arrest warrant, based on a driving while barred charge from three days earlier. The officer told the individual multiple times the warrant was for driving while barred but did not provide specific reasons for the warrant paperwork. There was no requirement that the officer advised the individual of the Miranda warnings because he was not subject to custodial interrogation for the driving while barred charge or other offenses. Thus, the individual's rights to due process and his protection against self-incrimination were not violated. COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #5 — Personal Use of Social Media, Personnel Policy 8.13. - Employees are prohibited from using the internet or social media to post content that violates the City's harassment or discrimination policies even if occurring outside work hours, from home, and on personal devices. Such behaviors include but are not limited to posting comments on other content that is derogatory with respect to race, creed, color, sex, national origin, religion, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, mental or physical disability, genetic information, veteran status, or other classes or categories protected by federal, state, and law including epithets, slurs, and negative stereotyping, sexually suggestive, humiliating, or demeaning comments; or other behaviors that could constitute harassment or bullying. Chief's conclusion: Not sustained Board's conclusion: Not sustained Basis for the Board's conclusion: The Twitter post to which the individual referred to in his complaint was a retweet on the officers' account. Although the post relates to race in some form, it does not contain racist or derogatory language. An internet search was performed, and the same post was found after receiving the individuals complaint. The post could not be located after the officers' interview on August 4, indicating that he may have changed the settings on his account to more private filters. In addition, the post was not directed at the individual or any specific individual, nor did the officer include additional comments on the retweet. COMMENTS: None u� COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5041 CPRB REPORT OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL Re: Investigation of Complaint CPRB 23-14 PCRB Complaint #23-14, filed October 20, 2023 was summarily dismissed as required by the City Code, Section 8-8-3 D and 8-8-3 E. The complaint was not filed within 180 (one hundred eighty) days of the alleged misconduct. DATED: November 15, 2023 FILED' NOV 15 2023 City Uerk €owa CRy, Ion PCRBtrimeliness Report Form:4113199 Item Number: 4.e. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission: November 9 Attachments: Historic Preservation Commission: November 9 MINUTES APPROVED HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9, 2023 —5:30 PM E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Noah Stork, Deanna Thomann, Andrew Lewis, Christina Welu-Reynolds, Jordan Sellergren, Margaret Beck, Frank Wagner, Nicole Villanueva MEMBERS ABSENT: Carl Brown STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: Kevin Hochstedler, Stephanie Bennett CALL TO ORDER: Sellergren called the meeting to order at 5:30 p m PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA None. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: HPC23-0056: 610 North Johnson Street - GoosetownlHorace Mann Conservation District(porch reconstruction): Bristow stated the applicants have requested this item be deferred to the December meeting. MOTION Wagner moves to defer this item until the December meeting. Beck second the motion and a vote was taken and the motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Brown absent). HPC23-0059: 331 South Summit Street- Summit Street Historic District (porch reconstruction): Bristow noted this item is a key property and is currently covered with an aluminum siding. The owner does have an interest in someday uncovering it, but not now. This current project involves two areas of the house, both the front and the rear porch. On the rear porch, which used to be an open porch but now has been partially enclosed with storm windows and a storm door, they have built a deck that was approved. Now they want to switch the door from facing south to facing west and then switch the windows to the south side so that the door will enter directly onto the deck. The door will have a transom window above, and Bristow stated it will actually translate fairly well to switching to the other side, there just might be some trim adjustments. Additionally, the stairs and railing would be demolished because they'll just enter onto the deck which has its own set of stairs. On the front porch, Bristow stated that it is believed it was partially enclosed more than 50 years ago, it just has screens, and now they are going to open it back up again. In preparation for doing so they removed some of the aluminum siding on the inside and Bristow was hoping to see some more evidence of column footprints or other things on the wall of the house. Bristow showed images of the house and pointed out the decorative bargeboard and decorative dormers with lots of little divided light windows. They think this house is a free classic Queen Anne or a stick style because of the extra trim, so it would also have classical columns and some kind of spindled balustrade. This project would likely HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9. 2023 Page 2 of 10 remove a little bit of deteriorated porch floor and will be replaced with vertical grain Douglas fir that will be mitered and installed in the same way. The porch columns would be either wood or fiberglass, likely an eight -inch column which would work well with the brick pier because the brick piers are 12 inches so that leaves two inches on each side for a larger column base. The spindled balustrade will have to follow the guidelines both for the diameter of the spindles themselves, and the spacing so that it doesn't look too thin. Bristow said the porch guidelines states that if they are going to be replacing badly deteriorated elements it is treated the same as if they are missing and either match what is historic on the building or find a building or historic photograph that would match. Bristow stated they looked at 609 South Summit as a similar style of home. Regarding the guidelines about the windows for the back part of the porch, basically they should not detract from the overall fenestration pattern and that's why they're just flipping what's already there. Bristow stated the recommended motion on this project is to approve it with the following conditions, the columns are approved by staff and the new balustrade follows the guidelines for the spacing and sizing. MOTION: Welu-Reynolds moves approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 331 South Summit Street as presented in the staff report with the following conditions: that new columns are approved by staff and that new balustrades follow the guidelines. Villanueva seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Brown absent). HPC23-0065: 1031 East College Street - East College Street Historic District (addition to kitchen and alterations to earlier rear addition): Bristow began the staff report stating this house is a four square with an addition from 1985 on the back. She explained there are three areas of work for this project. The first area is on the rear of the 1985 addition. They've already gotten approval to build the deck on the back of the house and now they are replacing the windows there with a French door for the current project. On the side of the addition there is a door and a stoop and steps that they will remove because they will have the new rear door. The applicant stated they could replace that door with a window like the other windows on that addition and that is something staff would recommend. The third area is where they did a small kitchen bump out which was completed prior to application and review. Bristow explained the house was purchased by the current owners on May 13, 2021, and they applied for a building permit on April 13, 2022, the building permit was marked up pointing out that they needed to acquire historic review for any exterior modifications. Bristow met with the owner on May 5, 2022 and they did not mention that they had applied for a building permit already. At that meeting they went over all of the potential areas of work on the house and discussed the approval process. Bristow also pointed out this kitchen area would be difficult to add actual space to the house because of the location of the other addition. The contractor requested a meeting on site and Bristow met the contractor and owners and on site in July 2023. The contractor told Bristow he would rather ask for forgiveness than permission. During that meeting they discussed fixing the front steps and adding a rear deck, two things they have applied for and have been approved. Bristow also noted that they completed a kitchen addition without approval and the owner told her they replaced the roof without approval too. They then applied for historic review on August 30, 2023, but more information was needed so they ended up reapplying two additional applications on October 9 and 10, 2023. Bristow separated the work into staff approvable and Commission approvable items in the two new applications. Regarding the work, Bristow showed the rear of the house noting the tree on the photo no longer exists, it came HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9, 2023 Page 3 of 10 down after the derecho or one of those other storms. She pointed out where the deck is going to sit right behind the house, and the pair of fixed windows and lower awning windows that will be replaced with the French door. Staff recommends that it's either just a pair of full light doors or maybe four but no more divided light pattern than that because the house itself does not have a divided light pattern in its windows. Bristow noted the second area is the removal of the step and stoop. She pointed out on a photo a small awning type window here noting there are two other awning type windows on the opposite side of the house as well. To avoid an open space of wall without a window since it is a bedroom, they recommend replacing that door with a similar type of awning window. The third area of work is the kitchen addition. Basically there was a notch out of the 1985 addition at this area. In the back wall of the historic portion of the house they had a sliding door and a deck in that notched area that went out to the west wall of the historic house and all of that was done before the district was created, so that deck did not have to go through any approval nor did the addition from 1985 have to go through any approval. Bristow next showed the drawing that was submitted for the building permit pointing out the note that states any alterations to exterior of home requires historical approval. The Building Inspector did not know that they were adding space to the house, he thought it was a reorganization of the interior space because these were the only drawings submitted. He also had some other notes like safety glazing, smoke detectors, carbon dioxide detectors, exhaust hood for the range, bathroom exhaust, etc. Regarding the guidelines there are a couple of guidelines that this addition does not follow and had staff seen this they would have recommended that they fill in the notch in the 1985 addition by claiming this extra space, extending the west wall of the 1985 addition north to the south wall of the historic house, and that way they could keep all of the overhangs and retain the building form which would follow the guidelines. Bristow didn't have any photos of what they did so she sketched a mockup of it and basically what they did is continued the west wall of the historic portion of the house south to enclose that notch and then closed that off so they have a bump out that's basically an extension of the historic house wall and is extended further than the roof overhang on the addition. Then in order to cover that portion, they continued the roof sloped down and ended it flush with the wall. Bristow shared what the staff recommendation would have been just to fill off that space, retaining the SW corner of the historic house and keep the roof overhang on the 1985 addition as well. There are several guidelines, the section 4.7 mass and roofline recommend preserving the original roof pitches and spans and preserving the original walls and vertical corners that define the massing of a historic building. However, by extending that wall further south, that guideline specifically is not being followed. There are other guidelines within the expansion of the building footprint and distinguishing between the historic structure and the new addition. In this case, had they sought and followed a staff recommendation they would have been filling in a notch in a 1985 addition so that would not have been a concern as there is already a distinction between the historic building and the 1985 addition. Bristow said that matching key horizontal lines on the existing buildings such as water table, eave height, window, height, and wards, etc., would also be required. Another guideline is related to the horizontal line of the roof edge, because now that they've extended further, they have a lower roof line as well along the new addition, so the key horizontal lines are not followed since they've created a bump out. The bump out did use a palette of materials similar to the historic structure and it is on the rear (two guidelines it appears to follow). Being consistent with the massing and roofline of the historic building, is not a guideline that's being met either since they did not construct the roof overhang and soffits and eaves so that they match the roof overhang on either they historic house or the 1985 addition. They don't have a roof overhang at all on the addition. The recommended motion is to HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9, 2023 Page 4 of 10 approve the project as presented in the staff report with the following conditions: window and door product information is approved by staff, for example the French door would be wood or fiberglass and a simulated divided light pattern and the new awning window would be either wood or metal clad wood Second, that the side door is replaced with a window as described in the staff report. And finally, that the rear edition is revised to follow the guidelines. Lewis asked about the bullet points and two of the four things have yet to happen and the third bullet points are to correct the thing that has already been done. Bristow acknowledged that was correct. Welu-Reynolds asked if in that correction the bump out with no eave overhang needs to be brought in and have a normal roof that matches the addition of 1985. Bristow stated that would be one interpretation of the guidelines which is why the staff recommended motion is just that it follows the guidelines. Typically, in a situation like this staff prefers to come up with a solution that helps but she doesn't know of a solution right now so by saying it needs to follow the guidelines it puts it on the applicant to come up with a way to follow the guidelines. Wagner asked why there were no elevation drawings submitted. Bristow believes it was because the Building Inspector thought it was to be all interior work. Kevin Hochstedler (Hochstedler Building and Development) are the contractors doing the work here and they got to know the owners a couple of years ago when they were buying it in the process. He knows they met and checked in with their realtor who checked all the historical guidelines and everything. They all walked through the house to make sure they understood the historical guidelines and regulations clearly before they went forward and purchased the house. When his company got involved they were told a few things but the owners also gave their opinion of the guidelines and that anything on the front had to be approved and not the sides unless they were totally visible from the street. Hochstedler acknowledged a misunderstanding however they did also submit a drawing of the original footprint showing the notch out with that so he is not sure if it just didn't get recorded. Hochstedler stated they have been building for 40 years and have a long-term relationship with the city of Iowa City so he apologizes for any misguiding or doing something they shouldn't have. They just tried to build the best product they could for their clients for the money. Hochstedler noted these were exuberant first-time homebuyers in an historical neighborhood where they always wanted to be so they were ready to set the world on fire. The project involved gutting most of the house while they were living there, a lot of stuff going on inside and out. He agrees that he would like to meet with staff on site and sketch out some elevations and overhangs which would be appropriate for the house and the district. Hochstedler stated the original decks and landing stair and railings were dilapidated and needed to be updated very badly, they just weren't safe. This was definitely a learning curve for them as first-time homeowners and in a historic district but at any rate they're here to do whatever they need to do to make this appropriate for the neighborhood. What they plan to do is to make it look like foundation with some Hardie plank cement board, which is made for weather and doesn't rot, and then they can stucco a plaster over it. The existing foundation on the historic house is plastered over with a very heavy grainy texture like stucco but its just an old block foundation. Stephanie Bennett (Hochstedler Building and Development) shared some pictures of the property and also apologized for not doing the proper steps but they definitely want to continue the integrity of the house and the neighborhood. The first picture is how the addition looks now from one angle and then the next picture is how the addition or bump out looks from another angle. She showed how they would continue the stucco look along the foundation to make it look contiguous. The fourth photo showed how they would continue around to the other side and by doing that also help make it look like it's just continuing. Bennett acknowledged moving forward they can definitely work together on how they need HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9, 2023 Page 5 of 10 to extend that roofline to meet the guidelines Bristow noted when they do a one-story addition on a two-story house they do set it in from the sidewalls so that the roof does not jet out from the side of the house when one is looking at the house Adding a roof overhang on the addition will project further than the wall of the historic house. Sellergren asked if to meet the guidelines the roofline would be extended approximately the same as the soffit on the 1985 edition. Hochstedler said he would have to measure to see if there is not a headroom issue, but they can do some things to make it look appropriate. Bristow stated the staff interpretation of the guidelines is that they retain the corner and then the eave line matches the soffit to have the same roof edge but with that bump out as it is, they cannot meet several of those guidelines so the Commission either needs to have the applicant follow the guidelines, evaluate whether or not what they're proposing right now follows the guidelines and if they don't think it does, they should tell them or if they do think it does follow the guidelines then approve that. Lewis noted that they are all seemingly saying is this already egregiously not following those guidelines so the correction to revise it to make it fit the guidelines is to bump it back in which is the way it would meet those guidelines. Welu-Reynolds asked if they were to extend that roofline so that it would match would it be the the original part of the house with the eave overhang would that follow the guidelines. Bristow stated the historic house has at least a two -foot overhang and the 1985 addition has an 18-inch overhang, so they don't match. Her concern is that if they put this eave overhang on the new addition and have that window next to it, they're going to be covering a portion of the window or blocking it because the window is higher than that adjacent roof on the new addition. Stork stated this whole situation is obviously a mess but really appreciates the contractor's willingness to work on trying to meet some of the historical guidelines, which again, are guidelines. It appears there is plenty of room to kind of match some of the roof lines and it's going to look fine. Beck doesn't see how this bump out can occupy the space it does and fit those guidelines, she would love to hear more ideas because she just doesn't know how they're going to make that roof look right because nothing lines up. She doesn't want to foreclose other possibilities but is afraid that adding a foundation there doesn't change the fact that block of space can't be there. The roofline is messed up and it's not inset in like it should be. Sellergren agrees and stated she doesn't see any possible way to meet guidelines with what currently exists no matter how it's revised. Welu-Reynolds noted they have a responsibility though to make a recommendation and this can be remedied the best that it can. She is concerned about the top board and having water going straight down that thing, it's going to damage if they don't have an eave overhang, and it looks like that top board already is split, so something has to be done with the roofline otherwise the damage done is just going to continue. Hochstedler stated he has been doing this for 40 years and there's many innovative ways to make things look appropriate and fit. He believes they could drive the neighborhood and find a similar circumstance with an appropriate way it looks and come back to with a proposal at a future meeting. Bristow stated if there is a guideline that the Commission would like to make an exception for in order to HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9, 2023 Page 6 of 10 approve the addition as is, they need to identify that guideline and state the reason for the exception as well. She thinks that it needs to be generally approved in some way unless for some reason the Commission just wanted to deny this and say go back and redesign it and come up with something. Otherwise, if they approve it with some type of guidance, the applicant could bring something back to her as staff and she can interpret the Commission's guidance and potentially approve without it coming back to the Commission. If she doesn't think they meet that guidance, or it's just unclear, it would come back to Commission. Welu-Reynolds agrees that adding the stucco on the bottom makes it more cohesive so the stucco thing needs to be done. She also agrees that there should probably be some roofline that comes out for the integrity of the condition of the structure. She believes at this point they'll come up with something that works. Sellergren stated she always has to raise the issue of precedent, which is that when the guidelines in a historic district are disregarded when a building project is begun, that sets precedent for this to happen over and over and over again, and as a Commission it's their responsibility to make sure that doesn't happen. That is an unfortunate reality and an organic part of what happens when they allow the guidelines to be violated in a historic district, it creates havoc. Welu-Reynolds asked in general how often that happens, that the guidelines were not really adhered to and the Commission is in this situation. Bristow replied it's the overall issue of the work without a permit and they've had quite a bit of that this year, more than normal this this year. Welu-Reynolds is appreciative they're here and trying to remedy this because some people wouldn't have been agreeable. She of course wishes they weren't in this situation to begin with but thinks they probably should come up with something rather than kicking the can down the road. Thomann asked even with alterations will this fit with historic guidelines. Welu-Reynolds replied no, not unless they tear off the addition and push it back because staffs original recommendation would have been to line up with the 1985 addition and maintain the roofline. Stork trusts staff and his vision generally aligns with Bristow's and he trusts her working with the contractor to achieve a solution. Sellergren reiterated if they approve this, they will be doing this over and over again for other future projects where the guidelines are disregarded. The project could be redone. Bristow stated if work is done already that does not matter to their review because it was a violation of the city code to do it without approval. They would review the project it as if it has never happened. Hochstedler stated the homeowner has mentioned they may just throw their hands up and put it up for sale and walk, then what happens? Sellergren noted it's unfortunate that the guidelines were ignored and that the building project proceeded without any adherence to them. Sellergren asked if Hochstedler has worked in historic districts in the 40 years he's been active. Hochstedler replied he has changed windows in houses and done minor porch work and stuff. Sellergren doesn't see what exception there is to be made unfortunately. She doesn't think the roof can be revised to meet any of the standards, or any other guideline. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9, 2023 Page 7 of 10 Wagner agrees and in general this wouldn't have been approved and therefore there isn't any reason they should accept it right now. Sellergren stated they have a responsibility to protect the guidelines and this is a situation where if that's not done it does open up floodgates to future violations. Historic Districts exist for a reason to maintain the historic integrity of the neighborhood and piece by piece every moment its violated, the integrity is degraded. Wagner suggested they recommend the motion just with the first two bullet points. Stork noted the one thing they haven't considered is how visible this is from the front of the house or the street. He understands that they don't want to be setting precedents, but they can make exceptions. Wagner stated the first two bullet points seem to be something that they would approve but that is the third bullet point is the issue. Sellergren noted this Commission has rejected proposals that have not met guidelines numerous times, stated it seems unfair to let it slide and make other homeowners oblige. Stork has a lot of empathy for new homeowners, especially in historic district being one himself. A lot of these additions were made before the Historic Preservation Commission was in place and they're trying to adjust to this house that's theirs. It's got historic and additions and yes everybody screwed up, including the City. Welu-Reynolds noted the Building Inspector clearly noted that any modifications were needed it must be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Was he aware of what they were going to do. Bristow replied he was not, he had thought it was to all be interior modifications, Thomann asked about pushing it back in and removing everything that was built there. It's a very small bump out, so would it take much to knock it back. Bennett explained the kitchen has already been done though the interior with the cabinets installed and $2,000 to $3,000 worth of tile. Hochstedler added 99% of this project was inside the house, master bath remodel, kitchen remodel, other remodels to an upstairs bathroom and all that was approved by the Building Inspector. Bristow was on site with the homeowner and they talked about the fact that would be a problematic area because they won't be able to add extra space without bumping out. Villanueva asked a hypothetical question, if the Commission tells them they have to go and move it back in and they sell the house do they have to disclose to the new buyers that they have to come and automatically fix this. Bristow is not sure about real estate law, but they do have an open building permit that wouldn't be closed out so if a potential buyer came and asked they could disclose that and the past work. Welu-Reynolds thinks the best option then is just to do this, to go with the motion and see what comes back but as described, according to guidelines. MOTION: Lewis moves to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 1031 East College Street, as presented in the staff report with the following conditions: window and door product information is approved by staff, that the side door is replaced with a window as HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9, 2023 Page 8 of 10 described in the staff report, and that the rear edition is revised to follow the guidelines. Beck seconded the motion. Thomann stated so in saying yes to this they're throwing it back to the homeowner to figure out how to revise within the guidelines. Bristow stated yes, if it was something that followed the guidelines she could approve that, but due to the complexity she would expect that there would probably be something that she would have to bring back to the Commission. A vote was taken and the motion carried on a vote of 7-1 (Stork dissenting, Brown absent). REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF Certificate of No Material Effect -Chair and Staff review HPC23-0062: 1025 Woodlawn Avenue - Woodlawn Historic District (chimney repair and reconstruction): Bristow noted this chimney is pretty deteriorated and therefore being repaired. Interestingly, below the chimney on the porch wall there's a chimney extension so they think that there was a fire at one point in time and so it was covered over and they're actually going to remove that and then just siding over it. HPC23-0068: 304 South Summit Street- Summit Street Historic District north wall reconstruction): Bristow stated the foundation failed on the side of the house, so a certificate of no material effect was approved to basically reconstruct the area of the wall. Minor Review -Staff review HPC23-0058: 331 South Summit Street- Summit Street Historic District (synthetic siding removal at porch.): Approval to remove the synthetic siding. HPC23-0064: 1031 East College Street - East College Street Historic District front step replacement and construction of new rear deck): Bristow stated this is a front step replacement and the construction of the rear deck were both approved by staff. HPC23-0067: 225 North Gilbert Street- Local Historic Landmark !deteriorated attic window replacement): The homeowners got a grant to replace the attic windows that were hardly hanging in there. Intermediate Review -Chair and Staff review HPC23-0066: 119 East College Street- Local Historic Landmark (commercial siqn at second Floor): This is a sign for a second floor business so the sign is higher than the staff -only approval allows. I.IF L•7 Lei 7a!9g3e/_19LOWMe] IT, Iky,I Y*3RIZ. NOVEMBER 9, 2023 Page 9 of 10 CK�I�yl�7dLle7Ra731Llt�llllLY ii]:Ail:J�:i MOTION Wagner moves to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's October 12, 2023, meeting, as amended. Villanueva seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Brown absent). COMMISSION INFORMATION: Bristow gave an update on 302 East Bloomington Street. They did draft a letter to the owner and sent it to him by mail and also sent a copy to his realtor. They have not heard back yet but it requests pretty much any time or place to meet with them. Since they know the owner really appreciates and cherishes his property they hope he will understand why they want to as well. At some point after they've met with him, they will submit the application for rezoning on the Commission's behalf and then proceed with the process. Bristow noted the March meeting is during the University's Spring break week and would like to change the meeting date to the week after if that works. She will work on rescheduling that. ADJOURNMENT: Thomann moved to adjourn the meeting. Wagner seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Brown absent). The meeting was adjourned at 6:45 pm HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2022-2023 NAME TERM EXP. 11/10 1/12 2/9 3/22 4/13 5/11 6/8 7/13 8/10 9/14 10112 11/9 BECK, 6/30/24 X X X X X X O/E X X X O/E X MARGARET BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/23 X X X X O/E X X — — — — BROWN, 6/30/23 X O/E O/E X X O/E X X O/E X X O/E CARL SELLERGREN, 6/30/22 X X X O/E X X O/E X X X X X JORDAN STORK, NOAH 6/30/24 X X X X O/E X X X X X X X THOMANN, 6/30/23 X X X X X X X X X X X X DEANNA VILLANUEVA, 6/30/25 X X X X X X X X X X O/E X NICOLE WAGNER, 6/30/23 O/E X X X X X X O/E X X X X FRANK WELU- 6/30/25 X X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X REYNOLDS, CHRISTINA LEWIS, _ _ X X X X X ANDREW KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E= Absent/Excused --- = Not a member Item Number: 4.f. I i CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Library Board of Trustees: November 16 Attachments: Library Board of Trustees: November 16 Iowa City Public Library Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes November 16, 2023 2"d Floor - Boardroom Regular Meeting - 5:00 PM FINAL Tom Rocklin - President Lucy Santos Green Robin Paetzold DJ Johnk - Vice President Joseph Massa John Raeburn Hannah Shultz -Secretary Claire Matthews Dan Stevenson Members Present: DJ Johnk, Joseph Massa, Claire Matthews, Robin Paetzold, Tom Rocklin, Lucy Santos Green, Hannah Shultz, Dan Stevenson. Members Absent: John Raeburn. Staff Present: Elsworth Carman, Kendall Earles, Anne Mangano, Jen Miller, Brent Palmer, Jason Paulios, Angie Pilkington. Guests Present: Trinity Ray. Call Meeting to Order. Rocklin called the meeting to order at 5:01 pm. A quorum was present. Approval of November 16, 2023 Board Meeting Agenda. Rocklin proposed a revision to agenda item 4A-Appoint Committee to Evaluation Library Director. Rocklin said the Board President makes the appointment and the Board does not vote on this item. Johnk made a motion in support of Rocklin's request. Shultz seconded. Motion passed 710. Public Discussion. None. Items to be Discussed. Appoint Committee to Evaluate Library Director. Rocklin said this process begins in November with aspirations to have a report in January or February. Rocklin asked Stevenson to chair the committee and asked for volunteers. Johnk and Massa volunteered tojoin the committee. Policy Review: 811. Theft, Defacement, Alteration. Santos Green entered at 5:04 pm. Matthews noted two typos and requested to change the parenthesis and capitalize "Libraries". Rocklin asked why statutes and codes are called out in the policy. Carman said this happens when there is direct correlation to a law. Johnk liked the revision which gives discretion to library staff. Johnk made a motion to approve policy 811 with Matthews suggested edits. Shultz seconded. Motion passed 8f0. Review Draft of Advocacy Committee Responsibilities. Paulios entered at 5:06 pm. Johnk said subcommittees can discuss and adjust the charge as group but the subcommittee meeting is at the pleasure of the Board President and is discretionary. Rocklin said the Bylaws clarify this. Rocklin asked Trustees If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact)en Miller, Iowa City Public Library, at 379-887-6003 orJennifer-millerOa icpLorg. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. who were interested to serve on this committee to email Rocklin before Thanksgiving. If he doesn't hear from three people he will assign members. Matthews asked for clarification on how often subcommittee meetings would occur. Rocklin said the subcommittee could decide this. Rocklin said it would be worthwhile for the committee to touch base on a reasonable frequency and be in discussion with the library director. Matthews said monitoring state and national trends is a continual task and drafting statements requires timely responses. Stevenson noted the Board only made two statements in the last year. Matthews said the next legislative session may require more statements. Rocklin said the committee will want to decide how often to meet. Santos Green noted the third bullet point, and said it might be worthwhile to identify public statements the Board wants to sign on to, similar to the City of Literature supporting statement. Johnk said this would make the Board more proactive. Santos Green suggested adding a fourth bullet point, or editing the language to preparing relevant draft public statements or identifying existing public statements. Paetzold asked Miller what the current minutes state for clarification. Miller read the rough draft minutes. Santos Green clarified the minutes should state preparing draft or identifying existing statements. Rocklin again requested Trustees let him know if they would like to serve on the committee. Staff Reports. Director's Report. Carman gave an update on the Library's budget meeting with the City Manager's Office and Finance Division. Ray entered at 5:12 pm. Carman reported that increases in the Library budget were requested in a few places, such as advertising and outside printing. Carman said that this budget meeting is a review of what was requested. Carman hopes to learn more when Finance completes the next draft of the budget. Carman will also have an opportunity to present the Library's request to City Council. Rocklin explained to Ray the current meeting was a Library Board of Trustees meeting. Ray exited at 5:15 pm. Carman submitted legislative priorities to be considered for inclusion in the City's priorities. Two of the proposed priorities were not included in the City's final report to City Council (supporting fair digital pricing and safeguarding intellectual freedom) and one was included (reinstating voter approved public library levies). There was discussion of how to approach future legislative priorities. An item related to this will be added to the Agenda Items and Order schedule for next September. Departmental Reports: Adult Services. Paulios discussed using YouTube to watch the events in his report. Paulios noted the Community & Access Services report shows cross departmental programing. Community & Access Services. Helmick absent. Rocklin congratulated Helmick on their ALA Presidency nomination. Pilkington said Helmick was currently meeting with Common Good. Shultz asked if there was a campaign for ALA president. Pilkington said yes. Rocklin asked when the election occurs. Santos Green said you have to be an ALA member to vote in March. Santos Green said the Presidency is celebrated during ALA's annual conference in June. Development Report. Roche absent. Paulios said the Friends Foundation's new website is about to launch. Pilkington attended the Prairie Lights Gala and said there was good turnout. Miscellaneous: News Articles. None. President's Report. Rocklin shared the Finance Committee has lapsed and he would like to solicit volunteers to create a charge for the Finance Committee. Paetzold volunteered. Shultz asked who was on the committee previously. Matthews said it was originally Kirsch, Matthews, and Paetzold. Matthews said the committee met with Carman to review quarterly financials and explain outliers, Matthews said Carman addresses these in his budget reports to the Board. Matthews discussed line items moving and clarifying the If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact)en Miller, Iowa City Public Library, at 379-887-6003 orjennifer-miller@icpt.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. City's line phrasing. Paetzold encouraged pushing the Board to be more familiar with their responsibilities and noted significant budget stressors coming. Paetzold felt the committee should work with the Library Director on strategy for the near future. Shultz agreed to help write the charge. Rocklin asked for the deadline from Miller to submit documents for the Board Packet. Miller replied the Thursday before the Board meeting. Paetzold said the commitment to be on the committee was not huge. Johnk agreed to volunteer. Rocklin shared he asked Carman to invite the City Manager's office to brief the Library Board on what they see the budget like going forward. Rocklin said City Manager, Geoff Fruin, will attend the January Board meeting. Carman said to bring specific questions to him before the January meeting. Rocklin suggested questions about the future of the City budget and what that means for the Library's budget. Announcements from Members. Matthews shared Lucas Elementary will be having a book sale during the Legislative Reception. Matthews discussed Scholastic book sales. Paetzold noted a Planned Parenthood book sale. Santos Green shared there is a collection of articles by researchers on book banning that is freely available and from an informative perspective. Santos Green said this is a good thing to share at the Thanksgiving table to explain the importance of the work of Library Trustees. Santos Green will share the link with Trustees. Committee Reports. None. Communications. None. Consent Agenda. Matthews made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Johnk seconded. Motion passed 8/0. Set Agenda Order for December Meeting. Rocklin said the next meeting will review the Library Cardholder Database policy. Rocklin looks forward to the Public Relations policy review in January. Rocklin shared the December meeting occurs on the third Thursday in December. Paetzold asked if Trustees should attend a portion of Inservice Day. Palmer said yes, an invitation will be coming soon. Palmer said lunch will be catered by Estela's and there will be good trainings. Carman said if Trustees wanted to come for the lunch portion only that would be okay. Adjournment. Rocklin adjourned the meeting at 5:41 pm. Respectfully submitted, Jen Miller If you wilt need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Jen Miller, Iowa City Public Library, at 379-887-6003 orjennifer-miller@icpiorg. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. .u. of Cammisslons: IOPI..W lTeusteel ATIFNOM'Q 0.E[DNO Neme i— EeyirzJan ]3RSROZ2 a/M/.O3 2j23/20a9 3/6(1023 3%]3(E0a3 9RJ/E0E3 SR6ROE3 6/EZ/E023 Z/21R023 8,4/202 9/2BR023 9/EBROE3 20/26j2M 11ASj2023 IV14/2023 12/21IM3 Iohnk.N 6/3M2025 % X X % % X % N X X OE X X Cntli' ml W3Mxaa3 % % N N X % iE TE TE TI 11TE xE 3E Kassa. 6/30/x02i X X % X X % % X X X X % % OE % NaMfewS. 6/3012023 % % % % OE % % X OE X OE % % u.. Ex[xuin' 6j30120u X X % % % % % X TE X OE X % Jaehu,ry 6R0/2021 N % OE % % % % % % John iucklin' 6/30ROx5 % % X % % X OE X % % X Samm 6)30(E039 OE % X OE % % OE OE G,eery Lu X % OE X % % OE Nnnah SYevenwry [Ye1N 6/30R02] OE % KEY: 85ENi Afl ENT O IUW OE NOMEDN.HO NM NO MFETN6 NE1➢ AE I pi TO LermEipi,¢tl Item Number: 4.g. I i CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Library Board of Trustees: December 14 Attachments: Library Board of Trustees: December 14 Iowa City Public Library Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes December 14, 2023 2"d Floor - Boardroom Special Meeting - 5:00 PM a NMI Tom Rocklin - President Lucy Santos Green Robin Paetzold DJ Johnk — Vice President Joseph Massa John Raeburn Hannah Shultz -Secretary Claire Matthews Dan Stevenson Members Present: DJ Johnk, Claire Matthews, Robin Paetzold, John Raeburn, Tom Rocklin, Dan Stevenson. Members Absent: Joseph Massa, Lucy Santos Green, Hannah Shultz. Staff Present: Terri Byers, Elsworth Carman, Sam Helmick, Anne Mangano, Jen Miller, Angie Pilkington, Anne Wilmoth. Guests Present: None. Call Meeting to Order. Rocklin called the meeting to order at 5:02 pm. A quorum was present. Approval of December 14, 2023 Board Meeting Agenda. Raeburn made a motion to approve the December 14, 2023 Board Meeting Agenda. Johnk seconded. Motion passed 6/0. Public Discussion. Byers addressed the Board as the Library's Union Steward and Chief Steward for AFSCME Local #163. Byers explained the proposed changes to the AFSCME pay plan, Administrative & Confidential pay plan, and the one-time bonus to all permanent employees. Byers shared City Council had previously approved the wage adjustments and bonus. Byers said the collective bargaining agreement bargaining rights have been crippled and have quickly lost pace with Police and Fire contracts. Byers shared the adjustments were a way to catch up to wages of Police and Fire and was a good way to thank employees who worked during the COVID-14 pandemic. Wilmoth addressed the Board as AFSCME Union Secretary and Steward. Wilmoth shared she is a Children`s Librarian at Iowa City Public Library. Wilmoth said the proposed wage adjustments address the extenuating and extremely unusual circumstances of the pandemic and tremendous inflation. Wilmoth said AFSCME employees feel that wages are not keeping pace with inflation. Quality of life is down and employee turnover is high. Wilmoth said the City is struggling to attract and maintain a quality workforce without offering good wages. Wilmoth said the Iowa City Public Library is a great place to work and she loves herjob and serving the community but nothing happens without a workforce doing essential services. Wilmoth said Megan Vollenweider & Quinton Bryant addressed City Council in October and then met with City Manager, Geoff I f you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contactlen Miller, Iowa City Public Library, at 319-887-6003 orjenmfer-miller@icpLorg. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Fruin, for potential offerings. Wilmoth said the 1.5%wage increase would be added to 2.25 increase. Items to be Discussed. Review and Consider Adoption of the FY 2024 ARPA Worker Retention Incentive. Rocklin shared City Council previously approved the incentive but that it is important for the Library Board to vote on this matter. Carman said the one-time bonus is for all permanent staff, both full and part time, with the exclusion of hourly staff. Carman said the City of Iowa City is estimating the bonus to be $1,600 per employee and will be paid with ARPA funds to bridge the gap between cost of living increases. The one-time special payroll would be issued on 12/22/23. Raeburn asked what Administrative and Confidential means and who does it include. Carman said it covers employees who work with confidential information, like personnel details. Rocklin said at the University of Iowa this is includes employees working with confidential information and are not part of a bargaining unit. Stevenson made a motion to approve the FY 2024 ARPA Worker Retention Incentive. Johnk seconded. Motion passed 6/0. Review and Consider Adoption of the FY 2025 Administrative, Confidential and Executive Pay Plan. Stevenson made a motion to approve the FY 2025 Administrative, Confidential and Executive Pay Plan. Raeburn seconded. Motion passed 6/0. Review and Consider Adoption of the FY 2025 AFSCME Pay Plan. Raeburn made a motion to approve the FY 2025 AFSCME Pay Plan. Matthews seconded. Motion passed 6/0. Adjournment. Rocklin adjourned the meeting at 5:14 pm. Respectfully submitted, Jen Miller If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contactlen Miller, Iowa City Public Library, at 374-887-6003 orjennifer-miller@icpLorg. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Boma of rnmmlsslons: icot 9oam.1 zees ATTENDANCE BECORD Nape icrm EXpiretion 1]f]5)E@3 3/36/2@3 3JZ3/3@0 3/0033 3/13J2023 OJ23(2@3 5/23/3@3 6(22/3023 7/23/202 0JUYS2i 6/M/2023 9IW20D 10126/20D IIJIS 3@3 E2/IA/3033 33/33J3033 I.Mk, EN 6/EWW2 5 % X X X A % X % % X X OE X X % t0s[M1, Catl SM/2023 % % % X X % X X TE TE TE iE TE TE TE lE Mazsa. 6/30J1 v % % X A X X % X X A X % % BE X MasNewz, 6f3Wi023 X A % X OE X % A 0E % OE X X % X % PiGZWtl. 6/30fE@3 X % % X % % N % lE X OE X X X X % XaeOum, 6/30J303} X A 6E % X X A % X X OE % BE X A AdilA * ram 6/30J3025 % A % X % X OE X X % A % X X % X Sanms 6/3012029 OE % % OE X % OE OE 6 B., luN Spulh. 6/3W2@5 % X % X X X X 0E A % X pE N % BE X Nmnh SFevenzpp, 6/3W202} B X X % X % OF X OE X X X X % X % KEY: X PRESENT O ABSENT BE .% IEDABSENT NM 00 MIIl NO HELD A B..E0 TE T—Evprtea Item Number: 4.h. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Parks & Recreation Commission: November 8 [See Recommendation] Attachments: Parks & Recreation Commission: November 8 [See Recommendation] r -: CITY OF I O W A CITY MEMORANDUM Date: 12/13/2023 To: Mayor and City Council From: Staff Member of Parks and Recreation Commission Re: Recommendation from Parks and Recreation Commission At their November 08, 2023, meeting the Parks and Recreation Commission made the following recommendations to the City Council: • Changing the use of the Ned Ashton House for Parks and Recreation Programming as long as the work and facilities of Project GREEN are not affected. • To keep the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center Pool hours as is for the upcoming Winter/Spring. Additional action (check one X No further action needed. Board or Commission is requesting Council direction. _ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action. IOWA CITY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 8, 2023 ROBERT A. LEE RECREATION CENTER — MEETING ROOM B Members Present: Rachel McPherson, Aaron Broege, Connie Moore, Alex Hachtman, Melissa Serenda, Caleb Recker, Members Absent: Alex Stanton, Missie Forbes, Brian Morelli Staff Present: Juli Seydell Johnson, Tyler Baird, Brad Barker, Gabe Gotera Others Present: Cindy Parsons, Pat Yeggy, Jill Fishbaugh, Justin Fishbaugh, Mitzi Read, Diane Allen, Larry Allen, Dhyana Kaufman, Linda Schreiber CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Hachtman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): Moved by McPherson seconded by Broe a to recommend keepina the RALRC Pool hours as is for the Winter/Spring. Motion Passed 6-0 Forbes Morelli Stanton absent). Moved by Moore seconded by Serenda to recommend chanaina the use of the Ned Ashton House for Parks and Recreation urogramming as long as the work and facilities of Project Green are not affected. Motion Passed 6-0 (Forbes, Morelli, Stanton absent). OTHER FORMAL ACTION: 6-0 PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 09, 2023 Page 2 of 12 SPRING RALRC DAYTIME POOL HOURS — Recreation Superintendent Brad Barker Supt. Barker discusses the Winter/Spring hours for the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center (RAL) Pool. Barker gives context, explaining that attendance numbers have been tracked for over a year now and that recently, at the recommendation of the Commission, RAL Pool hours were extended for the Fall season. Barker goes over the attendance numbers explaining that due to the entryway project at Mercer Park Aquatic Center (MPAC), the entire MPAC facility was closed September 1 through September 15, making the RAL Pool attendance during this time frame non -reflective of normal attendance. Barker looked at pool attendance from 6:15a.m — 1 p.m. from September 16 through the end of October and found that compared to previous numbers there was an increase in 6-7 people per day using the RAL Pool after the addition of two more open -swim hours. Barker says that the staff recommendation is to maintain the RAL Pool hours of 6:15 a.m. — 1 p.m. Monday — Friday for the Winter/Spring season. Barker adds that staff and the commission would revisit the topic in the summer to prepare for the Fall season. Commissioner McPherson refers to the RAL Pool numbers from September 1 — 15 that were not reflective and asks staff if these numbers were tracked. Dir. Seydell Johnson says that the September numbers were in the October 27 Commission agenda packet. Supt. Barker replies that there were some days with 50-60 people in addition to the Water Fitness classes, which is about double what is typically seen during that timeframe. Barker says that these numbers can be explained as swimmers from MPAC pool coming over during the closure. Commissioner Serenda asks if this response has made any consideration for expanding RAL pool hours further into the afternoon. Barker responds that there is not current consideration for expanding hours into the afternoon. Barker announces that Aquatics Program Supervisor Kate Connell has recently left her position vacant. Barker says that staff are working on filling the position but that this was also a factor into not adjusting the hours at the current moment. Moved by McPherson seconded by Bro a to recommend keeping the RALRC Pool hours as is for the Winter/Spring. Motion Passed 6-0 (Forbes, Morelli, Stanton absent). ASHTON HOUSE REAP GRANT — Parks & Forestry Superintendent Tyler Baird Supt. Baird announces that the department has received a REAP Grant worth $200,000 for improving the grounds at the Ned Ashton House. Baird says that this was worked for in coordination with Project GREEN. Baird says that staff are finishing up using REAP grants from previous years towards things like natural resources and woodland restoration. Supt. Baird explains that the Resource Enhancement and Protection (REAP) grant is a program through the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. The state legislature designates a certain amount of funds each year up to 20 million, which is split between cities with a different range of amounts applied for based the size of the city. For a community the size of Iowa City, $200,000 is the maximum amount of funding granted. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 09, 2023 Page 3 of 12 Supt. Baird details the improvements for grounds at the Ned Ashton House • Trail Amenities on a portion of the Iowa River Trail • Bike Repair Station + Bike Racks ■ Drinking Fountain • Increased Irrigation Access • Entry Enhancement off Normandy Drive • Soft Surface Trails • Fire Pit/Grill • Bird Blind Area • ADA Paths to the house • Ballard Lighting Dir. Seydell Johnson takes the opportunity to acknowledged Project GREEN, who is attending the meeting. Seydell Johnson says that Project GREEN came to the department with the idea for the project and was the powerhouse behind the entire process, for which the department is very thankful. Supt Baird says that the coordination with Project GREEN really strengthened the grant proposal, as Public Involvement and Engagement is a category for scoring. Supt. Baird says that there is no recommendation to make and that this item was for updating the commission. PROPOSED CHANGES TO ASHTON HOUSE USE — Supt. Brad Barker Dir. Seydell Johnson says that staff are looking for a recommendation from the Commission to possibly change the use of the Ashton House as Supt. Barker will discuss or to keep the use of the Ashton House as is. Seydell Johnson publicly apologizes to Project GREEN for a lack of communication between the department and Project GREEN when these changes were first being considered. Seydell Johnson explains to the Commission that Project GREEN maintains all the grounds around the Ashton House through thousands of hours of volunteer service. Project Green uses the garage of the building, meet in the Ashton House, and uses some storage in between the two areas. Seydell Johnson clarifies that their use of the facilities will not be affected by the proposed changes. Supt. Barker provides context on the use of the Ned Ashton House. The department has an event management contract with the Avacentre, a firm that handles the booking and management of events utilizing the Ashton House and the Terry Trueblood Lodge. Barker says that the idea behind the Ashton House since 2013 was that it would be used for weddings, social gatherings, and other functions of that nature. Barker states that the department has done a lot of marketing over the last 10 years to generate interest in the Ashton House, such as advertising in The Gazette's Wedding Guide every year. Barker says that in the last year, the Ashton House has seen 28 bookings generating around $11,000 in revenue. In contrast, the Terry Trueblood Lodge generated $102,000 in revenue. Barker states that the contracted management cost for the Terry PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November09, 2023 Page 4 of 12 Trueblood Lodge is about half of the revenue generated, while the contracted management cost for the Ashton House is about double the revenue generated. Supt. Barker talks about the Adaptive and Inclusive Recreation (AIR) & Outreach Supervisor, Malory Smysor. Barker says that Smysor has grown AIR programming over the past year, expanding from a focus on adult programming and Special Olympics to instead offering a wide variety of different program types such as life skills, social programs, dances, and youth programming. Barker explains that with so many programs there are a lot of needs for space, while the Robert A. Lee Rec Center is full during the evenings and weekends. Barker proposes the transition of the Ashton House from an event rental facility into more of an AIR programming hub that would house a lot of different programs. Barker explains that the accessible main level would be used for programming while the garage would continue being used for storage by Project GREEN. Barker lists other features such as the good quality kitchen with up-to-date food prep equipment that can be used for the life skills programs, the gathering space that can be used for drop -in hang outs, and an office space for the AIR Program Supervisor to use as a hub for staffing. Barker closes, saying that when looking at the growth in AIR programming, far more people could utilize the space and enjoy the grounds and facility than the amount of people that are utilizing the event rentals. Dir. Seydell Johnson clarifies that there would not be any major renovations inside the building and that the first year would act as a trial period before any facility changes would be made. Seydell Johnson explained that any prospective changes would be limited in nature due to the historic part of the building. Seydell Johnson says that the one renovation that would be done is to add a door/barrier at the top of a steep set of stairs. Seydell Johnson adds that while parking is a concern, a lot of the program participants are coming from group homes in buses or vans. Supt. Barker explains that the space has been used in the past by Recreation programs such as the annual Summer Camp, some AIR programs, and the yoga program. In particular, the yoga instructor and participants found the space to be much more relaxing and quieter than the rec centers. Barker adds that when programs and events are moved to the Ashton House, there could be more availability/space for community use at the rec centers. Dir. Seydell Johnson bring up the questions, "Couldn't the Ashton house still have rentals while also using it for a program space". Seydell Johnson answers that staff do not find that option feasible, and once programming moves over, it will completely take over the main level. Commissioner McPherson asks if the projected revenue loss would be $22,000. Supt. Barker explains that the current revenue loss is $11,000 after considering the $11,000 revenue generated. Dir. Seydell Johnson clarifies that if the Ashton House is used for programming, the department would not be paying the $22,000 event management cost from the Avacentre. Barker adds that the City has a 5-year contract with the Avacentre that is up for rebid in July of 2024, making it a good time for restructuring what the contract looks like. Commissioner Broege asks if wedding photos in the garden were ever looped into the wedding rentals. Supt. Barker responds that any wedding photos would have been subcontracted as photos PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 09, 2023 Page 5 of 12 are not a service provided by the Avacentre. Dir. Seydell Johnson replies that wedding photos could still be allowed to happen as outside use won't be changing. Cindy Parsons, Co -President of Project GREEN, is appreciative of the acknowledgement received and voices excitement for the REAP grant but says that it can feel like the nobody knows about the group. Parsons gives a short history on Project GREEN which was founded in 1968 and has had a 55-year partnership with the City to beautify and improve the grounds of City property and some school properties. In those 55 years, Project GREEN has raised and spent over $2.2 million in public improvements. So far in 2023, Project GREEN has had 957 hours of volunteer hours just at the Ashton House and at a conservative $30Jhr for skilled gardeners, have totaled $28,000 in donated labor. During 2022, over $14,000 was spent on planting and maintenance but Parsons believe it to be evener high for 2023 due to the recent droughts. Parsons says that Project GREEN would prefer for the Ashton House to remain public use due to the hard work from volunteers to make it a sort of botanical garden public destination. Parsons says that after meeting with Dir. Seydell Johnson and Supt. Barker, she understands the reasons for the proposed change but wants to make sure that three points are made on record. Project GREEN will require the continued use of the garage, some inside storage for documents, and the occasional use of the house for events. Parsons says that she would love for the Commission to see the gardens come next summer. Diane Allen, Co -President of Project GREEN, says that Ashton House has turned into a kind of secret garden and invites the commission to visit the beautiful place they've create. Allen describes starting work at the Ashton House in 2013 with chainsaws compared to today where they work with small spades. Allen says that in 2023, Project GREEN used an auger for the first time to dig holes for planting 31 boxwoods around the parking lot. Alien thanks Supt. Baird for always helping and taking her calls. Allen says that the Community is very fortunate to have Project GREEN, explaining how when Parsons and herself talk to numerous communities across the state, it is common to hear comments about wanting a Project GREEN in their community. Allen says that she would love for the Commission to learn more about Project GREEN, explaining how the work on College Green Park was the first project with many more since then. Allen informs the Commission that there is a newsletter regularly released with information on their work and that old reports can be found filed on the Project GREEN website. Commissioner McPherson says that it is an honor to meet anyone who has worked on College Green Park. Larry Allen says that the 957 hours of volunteer labor is an underestimate as Diane Allen spends about 30 hours a week for Project GREEN. Allen points out that when comparing the Ashton House with the Terry Trueblood Park Lodge, Project GREEN had given $75,000 for the Terry Trueblood Park Lodge, and that if that money had been transferred to the Ashton House instead, perhaps the difference in management cost would not be so discrepant. Allen says that more exposure would be good for the Ashton House and could come from having the gardens recognized by the Botanical Society, which would create a nationwide draw and bring in money into the local area. Allen says if an allotment of money/support could go towards that recognition, then it could benefit the entire surrounding area. Allan says that another route would be having an orchestra, either from the City or from the University to preform on the grounds and bring in a large crowd, bringing forth donations for the upkeep and care of the space. Allen thanks the department for their acknowledgement of Project GREEN. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 09, 2023 Page 6 of 12 Dhyana Kaufman introduces herself as a relatively new member of Project GREEN. Kaufman says that she fell in love with the volunteers and the gardens. Kaufman reiterates Larry Allen's thoughts that the gardens have the potential to become known in Johnson County as the local public botanical gardens. Kaufman states that the work the volunteers have completed with no budget and hard labor is amazing. Kaufman says that the City should give money for plants and mulch, which would allow volunteers to complete the beds that they work on. Kaufman says that she understands that there is a budget process but asks for it to be considered how can the department support the effort with money. Kaufman says that the Ashton House could act as a headquarters for the Botanical Society which could generate revenue, citing the Ryman Gardens of Ames. Linda Schreiber introduces herself as being with Project GREEN long enough to know founder, Nancy Seiberling who regularly spoke to City staff and the City Council. Schreiber explains how Seiberling had conceived many things that Project GREEN had worked on, specifically the garden forms that are given out every winter for decades. Schreiber describes the program as serving not only local gardeners but master gardeners as well. Schreiber details how prior to the pandemic, Project Green had started Open Gardens Weekend, a free event for the area that was hoped to eventually become a tourism event that attracted folks from around the country. Schreiber says that she hopes the commission will consider making some of the garden space accessible to those with adaptive needs. Chairman Hachtman voices appreciation for Project GREEN and their work and dedication to make the community beautiful. Hachtman describes the recommendation as, to change the use of the Ashton House from event rentals to Recreation program use. Dir. Seydell Johnson clarifies that the house is still public use and that there would not be any programming on the grounds unless it is in partnership with Project GREEN. Hachtman adds to the recommendation that Project GREEN will have continued use of some spaces for storage needs and the garage. Commissioner Serenda asks for confirmation that the City does not provide support, financial or otherwise beyond the space, the REAP grant, and that of similar nature. Supt. Baird responds that staff provides mulch as needed, disposes yard waste after Project GREEN work events, and have put thousands of dollars of tree removals in the last several years. Baird explains that staff does do work on the grounds, but that the purchase and labored upkeep of the annuals are from Project GREEN. Baird notes that if Project GREEN did not take care of the annuals, there would not be the budgetary means to do so. Baird adds that staff do contract a mower service for the Ashton House grounds that costs thousands for a season. Commissioner Serenda says that she is intrigued by the prospect of a botanical garden and feels that there is something sorely lacking in the area, asking if this has ever been something considered. Dir Seydell Johnson responds that she is not sure what that would entail beyond what it already there but that the topic can be discussed in the future. Seydell Johnson says the proposed change to the use of the house would not impact a possible botanical garden. Seydell Johnson clarifies that this change would only be for about a year to see if the programming would work and if it brings more foot traffic than there is currently. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November09, 2023 Page 7 of 12 Vice -Chairman Moore says that she is familiar with the area and finds it amazing. Moore continues that she believes that if the city takes it over, it will expand the use the area by bringing in more people through programming as opposed to a rental venue. Commissioner Serenda asks if it is possible to schedule a time for the Commission to tour the Ashton House. Dir. Seydell Johnson says that this is certainly possible and that there have been commission meetings at the Ashton House in the past. Vice -Chairman Moore voices that she would make the motion to recommend the proposed changes as long as the work and facilities of Project Greene are not affected. Moved by Moore, seconded by Serenda, to recommend changing the use of the Ned Ashton House for Parks and Recreation programming as long as the work and facilities of Project Green are not affected. Motion Passed 6-0 (Forbes, Morelli, Stanton absent). CIP BUDGET UPDATE — Parks and Recreation Director Juli Seydell Johnson Dir Seydell Johnson presents the attached PowerPoint on updates to the CIP Budget plan Commissioner Serenda asks if the Trail and Parking Lot Re -builds are resurfacing existing things or if these are new lots/trails. Dir. Seydell Johnson responds that that the parking lots and trails would not be new, adding that that some trails would be changing from asphalt to concrete and rebuilt into a more substantial structure. Commissioner McPherson asks why the trail rebuilds is so expensive at five million dollars. Seydell Johnson responds that the cost is from how many miles of trails there are that would be rebuilt. Supt. Baird explains that the change from asphalt to concrete was proposed because the price for either is currently comparable, but concrete is longer -lasting and easier to maintain. Commissioner Recker refers to the ADA Elevator Improvements and asks what elevator the project is in reference to. Dir. Seydell Johnson replies that it is the main elevator in City Hall. Recker asks why a City Hall project is included on the list of CIP projects. Seydell Johnson clarifies that Parks and Recreation includes Government Buildings which takes care of both Recreation Centers, City Hall, the Police Station, the Fire Station, and the Senior Center. Commissioner Broege refers to the Upper City Park restroom and shelter renovations being rolled into the City Park Pool replacement and asks for clarification on if the restroom/shelter renovations are coming from city staff or if the contractor will take over that as part of the City Park Pool replacement. Dir. Seydell Johnson clarifies that it would be all one project and that they were merged due to how the City bonds for the project work. Seydell Johnson explains that if the projects were bonded separately, they would each have their own individual budgets. If there were any leftover funds from the restroom/shelter project, they would not be able to be used on City Park Pool. By bonding the projects together as a single project, funds can be used for both. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 09, 2023 Page 8 of 12 CITY PARK POOL PUBLIC INPUT UPDATE — Dir. Juli Seydell Johnson Dir. Seydell Johnson presents the attached PowerPoint updating on the City Park Pool Public Input process. Chairman Hachtman leaves at 6:07 p.m Commissioner Serenda is surprised by the gender imbalance throughout the input and asks if this is reflective of pool usage or a lack of male engagement with Parks and Recreation. Dir. Seydell Johnson replies that consultants found this demographic to be what is typically seen at public input processes for Parks and Recreation departments. Seydell Johnson say that this is reflective of who wants to participate in public input. Commissioner McPherson asks if the Berry Dunn Consultants had conceived the design for the interactive public input. Dir. Seydell Johnson answers that it was the consultants who wrote the questions but credits City Communications & ITS staff for translating the questions onto an online survey. Dir. Seydell Johnson says that this is breaking new ground for the methods used and the amount of input gathered for this public process. Seydell Johnson says that it has been a lot of staff work due to the creation of new processes but that it will be worth while to have people feel like they had a hand in the process. 1'i ' IJ 71C��1i�►/JIMIIUt,'�II.TIJ1•l[�7�Y'L. Director of Parks & Recreation — Juli Sevdell Johnson Staff Changes: Dir. Seydell Johnson announces that there are 3 major staff changes happening. Facilities Manager Kumi Morris has left to take a job at the University of Iowa. Seydell Johnson says that interviews for the position have been completed with a decision expected to be made within the week. Aquatics Program Supervisor Kate Connell has left to take an aquatic consulting job. Applications are being accepted for this position for another week and a half before interviews begin. Seydell Johnson explains that in the mean -time Caylea Housh, the Recreation Assistant is working with Supt. Barker to keep the aquatics division moving. Michelle Wiegand, the Communications and Special Events staff is leaving later in the week to work for Johnson County on environmental programming. Seydell Johnsons says that staff are actively pursuing for the candidates for the vacant spots in Recreation. Budget: Dir. Seydell Johnson announces that earlier in the day, the first of two big operating budget meetings took place. Seydell Johnson explains that it will be like the capital improvement budget for the city, in that there is no extra money over the next several years. Seydell Johnson says that she is confident the department will be fine with staffing and that the level of services will remain similar, but that it will be a lot tighter on the budget side of things. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 09, 2023 Page 9 of 12 Cemetery: Dir. Seydell Johnson says that the Cemetery Rules and Regulations are being updated. Seydell Johnson explains that the updated document will be an item shown to the City Council soon. Recreation Suuerintendent — Brad Barker October Events: Supt. Barker states that October was a very busy time for Recreation staff. Barker says that the biggest event was the Farmers' Market every Saturday which has recently closed for the year while preparing for the Holiday Markets on November 11 and December 16 Supt. Barker says that there were 10 different Halloween events in additional to the Halloween Carnival. The Halloween Carnival has a great turnout for a lot of engagement with the City Park Pool process, and that there were lots of carnival games with partnership groups each making different spooky science experiments. Barker explains that nearly every nook and cranny of the Robert A. Lee facility were utilized, adding that it's great to see so many people in attendance. Supt. Barker talks about the Get Outside! outdoor recreation festival which took place October 8 in City Park from 10 a.m. — 2 p.m. Barker says that staff were blessed with a great day for outdoor activities, and that there was a huge turnout for the event. Barker states that the department worked with 14 partnership groups, each with their own activities to promote their department, including outdoor excursions or recreational opportunities for people to take part in hands-on. Barker adds that there were food trucks, a band, and a sky -diving demonstration. Barker says that this was a great first-time event and has shown what can be improved for future years. Supt. Barker talks about the Indigenous People's Day, another first-time event, which took place October 9 in the Terry Trueblood Recreational Area. There was cooperation with several partnership groups to create a good event and had a great turnout for attendance. Vice -Chairman Moore says that she heard great things about the Get Outside! event and was nice to attend. Barker responds that it was wonderful to see so many families and people come out and experience the event. Parks & Forestry Superintendent — Tvler Baird Winterizing: Supt. Baird announces that the winterizing process has begun for Parks staff. Baird explains that every year water fountains, and irrigation are turned off and all, but 2 restrooms are closed. The 2 restrooms in City Park and Terry Trueblood Recreational Area are kept open year- round because the facilities are heated. Baird says that in athletic complexes, staff have been aerating the heavily used turf areas such as athletic fields, playgrounds, and pick-up soccer fields. Baird explains that this is to help the turf breath over the winter while also overseeding grass seed, to allow the grass to catch up in the upcoming spring. Baird adds that Parks staff have been working with Streets crews to help with the leaf vacuuming program for the last month. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 09, 2023 Page 10 of 12 Projects: Supt. Baird says that contractors are finishing up several projects. Baird explains that the Kiwanis Park playground installation is waiting on the delivery of one crucial part, to replace the incorrect part mistakenly sent earlier in the project. Baird says that Parks staff are close to complete installation of the playground at Happy Hollow Park, explaining that the design had one two many steps on side, requiring the ordering of a correctly size piece. Baird clarifies that 80% of the playground is setup and was recently poured with concrete. Baird says that it is not uncommon for playground installations to get held up on the delivery of a single part. Tree Plantings: Supt. Baird announces that he has been working on preparing for tree plantings for 2024, including rights -of -way around town, near Mormon Trek Blvd. on the west side, and around the South of Six Municipal Improvement District. Baird says that there has also been work with community members and other City staff to utilize Heritage Tree Funds. Baird explains that in the spring there will be a tree planting in the Oakland Cemetery with a focus on Native species. Vice -Chairman Moore asks if she should be raking her leaves or not. Baird recommends watching a video from Communications and Channel 4 staff on the subject. Baird explains that he mulches the leaves on his lawn to provide "free fertilizer" for the lawn. Baird says that one can put a mulch kit on their mower or lower the mower flaps to keep debris from flying around. None COMMISSION TIMEISUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Commissioner Serenda asks about communications for trail closures. Serenda says that she has seen announcements for trail closures on short terms/small scales but heard nothing regarding the significant closure of the Sycamore Greenway trail. Serenda asks if this was an oversight and if there is some standard for when the public is notified of trail closures. Dir. Seydell Johnson agrees with Serenda's sentiment, explaining that the closure was handled through a different department, who has heard from the Parks and Recreation department on the matter. Seydell Johnson says that there is no formal policy regarding the announcement of trail closures but more so that staff know the steps needed to notify the public and that this trail closure had gone through a different pipeline than usual. Commissioner McPherson asks that the commission start to think about a women only swim time as suggested by City Councilor Mazahir, which would see more women and black folk in the pool. Vice -Chairman Moore explains that she is working on a project for a one -year -old child with mobility issues, to build a Jeep that can move at the push of a button. Moore thanks the department for donating a kickboard and pool noodles for the project construction. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 09, 2023 Page 11 of 12 Vice -Chairman Moore explains that a member of the community had spoken to her about an unfortunate situation. The community member, who is a lap swimmer and had recently started swimming laps more frequently, said that she was approached by someone who said that she needs to know that the City is trying to close the pool and they this person has to come every morning to count because the City is not counting correctly. Moore remained neutral in this interaction but says that it is unfortunate because the original community member was weirded out by the interaction. Moore states that while people are allowed to their opinion, people are allowed to swim without being accosted. Commissioner McPherson responds that that was one person and brings up that Mark Cannon has come up with a community outreach idea for filling the 9-10 a.m. slot with Water Mindfulness every Tuesday, explaining that while on one side there is a semi -aggressive nature there is the other side who are going with a calling -in approach. Moore agrees that there is a lot of positives coming from it but wants it known that there are people that feel intimidated by it. Vice -Chairman Moore adjourns the meeting at 6:31 p.m, PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 09, 2023 Page 12 of 12 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD NAME N M M M M M M M M OTERM n O M O M O N N N N N N N N N N N N EXPIRES 00 Aaron 12/31/24 * * * * * X NM X X X X X Broe e Missie 12/31/25 NM X O/E LQ X X NM O/E X X X O/E Forbes Alex 12/31/24 NM X X LQ X X NM X X X X X Hachtman Rachel 12/31/26 * X X LQ X X NM X X X X X McPherson Connie 12/31/25 NM X X LQ X X NM O/E X X X X Moore Brian 12/31/25 NM X X LQ X X NM X X X O/E O/E Morelli Caleb 12/31/26 * * * * * * * * * * X X Recker Melissa 12/31/23 NM X X LQ X X NM X X X X X Serenda Alex 12/31/23 * * * * * * * * X X X WE Stanton KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum * = Not a member during this meeting Item Number: 4.i. I i CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission: November 15 [See Recommendation] Attachments: Planning & Zoning Commission: November 15 [See Recommendation] r �.® CITY OF IOWA CITY ' '�at � MEMORANDUM Date: December 8, 2023 To: Mayor and City Council From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Re: Recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission At its November 15, 2023 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission set a public hearing by a vote of 6-0 (Elliott recused) for December 6, 2023 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from 2-8 Dwelling Units per Acre to 8- 16 Dwelling Units per Acre and an amendment to change the Southwest District Plan future land use map from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to Low Density Multi -Family Residential for approximately 0.78 acres of property. The Planning & Zoning Commission held this public hearing on December 6, 2023 Additional action (check one) X No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction _ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action MINUTES FINAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 15, 2023-6:00 PM —FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Maria Padron, Scott Quellhorst, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Kirk Lehmann OTHERS PRESENT: RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-0 (Elliott recused) the Commission recommends to set a public hearing for December 6, 2023 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from 2-8 Dwelling Units per Acre to 8- 16 Dwelling Units per Acre and an amendment to change the Southwest District Plan future land use map from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to Low Density Multi -Family Residential for approximately 0.78 acres of property. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEMS: CASE NO. CPA23-0001 LOCATION: 1201 W. Benton Street A request to set a public hearing for December 6, 2023, on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from 2-8 Dwelling Units per Acre to 8- 16 Dwelling Units per Acre and an amendment to change the Southwest District Plan future land use map from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to Low Density Multi -Family Residential for approximately 0.78 acres of property. Elliott recused herself and left the meeting because she is on the board of Oaknoll Foundation. Townsend moved to set a public hearing for December 6, 2023 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from 2-8 Dwelling Units per Acre to 8-16 Dwelling Units per Acre and an amendment to change the Southwest District Plan future land use map from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to Low Density Multi -Family Residential for approximately 0.78 acres of property. Wade seconded the motion. Craig noted a concern about parking. Hekteon said that will be discussed at the public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission November 15, 2023 Page 2 of 4 A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0 (Elliott recused). CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 4. 2023: Craig moved to approve the meeting minutes from October 4, 2023. Quellhorst seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 18, 2023: Quellhorst moved to approve the meeting minutes from October 18, 2023. Townsend seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Lehmann stated that most of the housing code, zoning code text amendments that were approved by this Commission have been adopted by Council. Those include everything except the ADU's, those will be considered at their meeting next Tuesday. Staff is expecting that they'll have a consolidated second and third reading because the first reading past 7-0. At the reading on next Tuesday, they'll be considering it as recommended by this Commission but based on discussion there's a chance that another ADU amendment will come down the line as there's been a lot of discussion about the owner occupancy requirement. Craig noted in the Council minutes it stated they might want to consult with P&Z, did they change their mind. Lehmann stated Council did talk about consulting and decided to approve it as recommended and then direct staff to bring a subsequent amendment. Hensch stated his understanding is that amendment may have something do with the University Impact Zone so if that does come before this Commission again, he'd request that University Impact Zone be defined for them so they know what the criteria are to be in the University Impact Zone. Additionally, he would like to know the date that University Impact Zone was approved, because it seems to him it's probably aged overtime. Lehmann stated the pro housing application has been submitted and although HUD has stated they will decide on it by January, Lehmann believes it more reasonable that they will hear back by spring. Staff will keep the Commission in the loop as that moves forward as that's going to have some planning and zoning work associated with that. Hensch asked about the student housing building that's being constructed at the intersection of Riverside and Myrtle and then the other student housing building being constructed on South Dubuque Street. How many units are going to be in those two buildings combined? Lehmann is not sure. Hensch stated it just seems a relevant piece of information they probably should know because they're both really large and its going to add some substantial availability. Lehmann stated staff does plan on providing another development update and will try to keep everyone in the loop on developments. Hensch noted they have not heard anything about the student housing that was approved a Planning and Zoning Commission November 15, 2023 Page 3 of 4 couple of years ago on Gilbert Street just north of the railroad tracks. Lehmann stated for 315 Prentiss, they have resubmitted for a site plan because their site plan expired but it's still proposed as student housing and the site plan is virtually unchanged from what it was previously. ADJOURNMENT: Townsend moved to adjourn, Quellhorst seconded and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2023-2024 11116 1217 12121 114 1118 2115 311 415 4119 6121 715 7/19 812 8116 1014 10/18 11t15 CRAIG, SUSAN X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ELLIOTT. MAGGIE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X X X X O(E X X X X X X PADRON, MARIA OJE X X X X X X X X X X O(E X X X X X QUELLHORST, SCOTT X X X X SIGNS, MARK 01E X X X X OIE CIE X --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- TOWNSEND, BILLIE X X OfE X CIE X X X X X X X OIE X X X X WADE, CHAD I OtE I X I X I X I OIE I X I X I X I I X I X I X I X I X I X I X I X KEY: X = Present 0 = Absent OIE = Absent/Excused — = Not a Member Item Number: 4.j. CITY OF IOWA CITY k� COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission: December 6 [See Recommendation] Attachments: Planning & Zoning Commission: December 6 [See Recommendation] r CITY OF IOWA CITY not MEMORANDUM Date: December 21, 2023 To: Mayor and City Council From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Re: Recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission At its December 6, 2023 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission have the following recommendations to the City Council: By a vote of 6-0 the Commission set a public hearing for December 20, 2023 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from Office Research Development Center to Intensive Commercial for approximately 61.72 acres of property. The Commission held this hearing on December 20, 2023. By a vote of 5-0 (Elliott recused) the Commission recommends approval of CPA23-0001, a proposed amendment to change the future land use designations of approximately 0.78 acres of property located at 1201 W. Benton Street from 2-8 dwelling units per acre to 8-16 dwelling units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan and from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to Low Density Multi -Family Residential in the Southwest District Plan. By a vote of 5-0 (Elliott recused) the Commission recommends approval of REZ23-0008, a proposed rezoning to change 0.78 acres of the property located at 1201 W. Benton Street from RS-5 to RM-12 zone subject to the following conditions: 1. General compliance with the footprint and scale of the concept plan to ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood development pattern. 2. The structure may not exceed one story. 3. City approval is required for a landscaping plan that preserves as much existing mature landscaping as possible. Additional action (check one) No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction _X_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action MINUTES FINAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 2023 — 6:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Scott Quellhorst, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade MEMBERS ABSENT: Maria Padron STAFF PRESENT: Madison Conley, Sara Hektoen, Kirk Lehmann, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: Brian Boelk, Kim Bergen -Jackson, Steve Roe, Jack Topp, Jordan Conrad, Kate Magsamen-Conrad RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-0 the Commission moved to set a public hearing for December 20, 2023 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from Office Research Development Center to Intensive Commercial for approximately 61.72 acres of property. By a vote of 5-0 (Elliott recused) the Commission recommends approval of CPA23-0001, a proposed amendment to change the future land use designations of approximately 0.78 acres of property located at 1201 W. Benton Street from 2-8 dwelling units per acre to 8-16 dwelling units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan and from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to Low Density Multi -Family Residential in the Southwest District Plan. By a vote of 5-0 (Elliott recused) the Commission recommends approval of REZ23-0008, a proposed rezoning to change 0.78 acres of the property located at 1201 W. Benton Street from RS-5 to RM-12 zone subject to the following conditions: • General compliance with the footprint and scale of the concept plan to ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood development pattern. • The structure may not exceed one story. • City approval is required for a landscaping plan that preserves as much existing mature landscaping as possible. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND REZONING ITEMS: CASE NO. CPA23-0002 Location: North of 1-80, West of N. Dodge Street, at the end of Moss Ridge Road A request to set a public hearing for December 20, 2023 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from Office Research Development Center to Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 2of17 Intensive Commercial for approximately 61.72 acres of property. Quellhorst moved to set a public hearing for December 20, 2023 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from Office Research Development Center to Intensive Commercial for approximately 61.72 acres of property. Townsend seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. CASE NO. CPA23-0001 Location: 1201 W. Benton Street A public hearing on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from 2-8 Dwelling Units per Acre to 8- 16 Dwelling Units per Acre and an amendment to change the Southwest District Plan future land use map from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to Low Density Multi -Family Residential for approximately 0.78 acres of property. Elliott recused herself due to her affiliation with the Oaknoll Foundation Board and left the meeting. Lehmann began by noting the subject property is located on the west side of town just south of the current Oaknoll campus. It's currently occupied by a single-family home and surrounded by low density single-family residential neighborhoods. The proposal is to expand the Oaknoll campus with a smaller scale multifamily use on proposed site that would be assisted group living. Doing so, the proposal would change the future land use category to low density multifamily residential which would allow such a use. In terms of the zoning as the zoning generally reflects the uses that are around it. Lehmann stated to the north is medium and high density multifamily residential zones that are in a plan development overlay and to the south, east and west is the low density single-family residential zone (RS-5). Low density single-family residential (RS-5) is also what the current the property is currently zoned but there's an additional concurrent amendment to the zoning code that would change that to RM-12 or low density multifamily residential. Lehmann shared the future land use map with the proposed change. He explained this is part of a two-part application that includes both a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a rezoning. The proposed changes would allow the assisted group living use they're proposing to house up to 12 residents in a single -story building on the subject property. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment is CPA23-0001 and the rezoning that's affiliated with it is REZ23-0008. With these changes the Comprehensive Plan would also change the Southwest District Plan, which this property is within, from single-family duplex residential to low density multifamily residential. Lehmann noted this is somewhat similar to a previous expansion of the Oaknoll campus that occurred in 2012 west across George Street that allowed 69 units of planned development housing and a medium density multifamily residential use. He stated that was a more substantial expansion at that time which also had a five -story building versus this one-story building proposed. Lehmann again showed the image of the future land use map noting the proposed property is within the Benton Hill Neighborhood in the Roosevelt subarea of the Southwest District Plan. This plan was initially adopted in 2002 and has been updated a couple of times Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 3 of 17 since then, including that previous Oaknoll expansion. There's also been some other changes to the south that have allowed additional multifamily uses. For Comprehensive Plan Amendments there are two approval criteria that the City considers found in Section 14-8D-3D of the City Code. The first is that circumstances have changed and/or additional information or factors have come to light such that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. The second is that the proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, including any district plans or their amendments. Lehmann stated staff reviewed those two factors and their analysis was included in the staff report. In terms of changing circumstances, the population of residents aged 65 and over has nearly doubled since the Southwest Plan was initially adopted in 2002. In 2000 the census showed that there were approximately 62,000 residents in Iowa City at that time and about 4500 of them were aged 65 plus, which is about 7% of the population. In 2020 there were about 75,000 residents and about 8600 of them are aged 65 or greater, which is now about 12% of the population, not quite a doubling from 2000, but it has increased, and they expect it to continue growing, and aging, especially as the baby boomer generation continues to reach those retirement and senior years. Therefore, the City will continue to need additional assisted living and nursing capacity within the housing market to accommodate that growing demand. In terms of the proposed change to the future land use map, low density multifamily generally does allow assisted group living uses as well as multifamily uses. This future land use category directly correlates to the RM-12 zone that's part of the proposed rezoning. Lehmann noted however, it is important to keep in mind that this zone provides a variety of housing options so careful attention needs to be paid to the site and the building design to ensure that it is compatible with adjacent uses and also with all the uses that are allowed within that zone. Overall, these trends do indicate that there's a public interest in reviewing the property's future land use category. The second criteria looks at whether it's compatible with other policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Lehmann stated generally multifamily housing should be located in areas with good access to urban services, the Comprehensive Plan especially encourages it along arterial corridors such as Benton Street. However, the District Plan does note that there are concerns about appropriate transitions between low -density single-family neighborhoods and high -density multifamily neighborhoods and this subject property that's being proposed would be a low -density multifamily neighborhood. There are already significant concentrations of high -density multifamily neighborhoods within the Roosevelt subarea but this Plan also encourages households of all types to live close to the University and downtown which includes elderly populations in addition to other folks such as single folks, families. etc. Again, Lehmann noted there are nearby areas that have been developed and designed as higher density uses that are adjacent to lower density single-family uses. There was the original Oaknoll expansion that happened in 2012, another example occurred in 2004 when the Hawk Ridge property was developed, which had a planned development overlay, and was medium density multifamily residential next to single- family uses but they tried to carefully design the setbacks to be appropriate with the adjacent single-family residential neighborhoods. Staff believes that the proposed amendment does achieve a similar result, especially as it will be a low -density multifamily use. Lehmann also mentioned some recommended actions that were included in the Southwest District Plan, there's the note about the avoiding concentrations of high -density multifamily zoning adjacent to low Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 4 of 17 density, but this is low density next to a low density, so staff believes that that's an appropriate use of future land use planning. There are also two notes that relate to multifamily residential design standards within the Roosevelt subarea that were incorporated with the 2005 zoning code update that occurred after this Plan was initially adopted. A lot of the things related to the design of the site are addressed with the City's site development standards that are incorporated within multifamily zones. Staff also has a recommended condition that will be presented during the proposed rezoning presentation. Finally, there are several goals within the Comprehensive Plan writ large, not the District Plan, that the proposed amendment would meet such as goals like ensuring that infill development is compatible and complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood, identifying and supporting infill development and redevelopment opportunities where services and infrastructure is already in place, and also promoting housing design and features that allow people to age in place. Therefore, based on this analysis staff does believe that it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends approval of CPA23-0001, a proposed amendment to change the future land use designations of approximately 0.78 acres of property located at 1201 W. Benton Street from 2-8 dwelling units per acre to 8-16 dwelling units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan and from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to Low Density Multi -Family Residential in the Southwest District Plan. Lehmann noted staff did receive some correspondence which was included in the agenda packet, most of the correspondence has been in support of the amendment but staff did receive a late correspondence that was opposed and that was distributed to the Commissioners at the start of this meeting. In terms of next steps, upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission a public hearing would be scheduled with City Council for both the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the rezoning. Staff would expect Council to set a public hearing for both items at their December 12 meeting with that hearing being held on January 2. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment only requires one meeting so that could be adopted by Council at the January 2 meeting, the rezoning requires three considerations, the first being at the January 2 meeting and the final consideration potentially being held at the earliest on February 6. Hensch asked Lehmann to define what a future land use map is and how it is used by the City. Lehmann explained a future land use map provides a general idea of what types of uses might be appropriate for various pieces of land in the future, looking forward in the next 20 to 40 years. It is intended as guidance; it is not law like a zoning code. The zoning code identifies specific pieces of property and states what can be used where, the future land use map is based more on the aspirations of the community and the goals that the City is trying to reach. It then tries to provide an example of how that may be reached accordingly. Again, it's an aspirational document that provides guidance as those legal frameworks such as zoning or subdivisions are considered. Craig has a question about parking, a residential unit that has 12 living spaces, what would be the parking required. Lehmann replied that would depend on the zone and the uses, and in the case of multifamily the number of bedrooms. For a multifamily zone that's zoned RM-12 it would Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 5 of 17 be one to two spaces per unit, but for assisted group living it's based on other factors that include staff on site and then 113 of the occupants of the site. Lehmann noted generally those things are covered by the zoning code and is not something that is typically considered at the stage of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Craig noted just thinking in the bigger picture five spaces isn't very much considering that there's no parking on Benton Street. Perhaps the residents are unlikely to have their own vehicles and be driving, but there are staff and visitors and if three kids come to see their mom three of the five spaces are taken up and there's no place else to park. Also, if down the road Oaknoll decides they don't like this facility and they abandon it, what's it going to become, she is just trying to think of the big picture and long term here and has a couple of concerns. Quellhorst noted that under the proposed zoning classification careful attention must be paid to the site and building design, how is that enforced by the City. Lehmann stated as part of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment it's not really part of that consideration, what they're looking at is the long-term use of the land and what uses might be appropriate there. Site and building design typically are addressed in conditions within a rezoning. For example, if a conditional zoning agreement is adopted, that's a legally enforceable way that to enforce careful site design. Hawks Ridge used their planned development overlay plan to address that but a lot of times it is in conditional zoning agreements. The City also has the zoning code designed to try and make sure that those sorts of factors are considered, looking at things like multifamily site development standards which include making sure that an entrance faces the streets, making sure that parking is screened from public right-of-way and not between the building and the street, trying to think about the bulk and the layout of the building, and those sorts of things. Parking is also considered and enforced within the zoning code. Quellhorst asked if there are any conditions associated with the proposed zoning code amendment. Lehmann confirmed there are, such as substantial compliance with the footprint of the building, built to scale and other general components compliant with the development concept. Wade asked if this Amendment is triggered based on a request from the property owner. He noted looking at the properties further to the east it goes from high density then to single family and now this will pop up as low density multifamily which creates a little bit of a gap versus strictly transitioning. Lehmann explained sometimes Comprehensive Plan Amendments can be City initiated, such as with the South District form -based code, however property owners can initiate amendments if they think the future use of their property might be more appropriate to be X, Y or Z based on factors within the Comprehensive Plan. Lehmann noted sometimes a Comprehensive Plan Amendment isn't needed to change the zoning because there is flexibility implanted into the way that the Comprehensive Plan is an aspirational document and provides guidance. Within the Comprehensive Plan it specifically notes that the comers of arterials they should also consider higher density or higher intensity uses and it might be appropriate for commercial or multifamily without requiring a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. In this case, there's specific guidance in the Southwest District Plan and therefore staff felt that Comprehensive Plan Amendment was appropriate for this subject property. Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 6 of 17 Wade asked with a multifamily low density pairing up to single family does that change the setback requirements or will that be discussed in the rezoning request. Lehmann replied it would not affect the setbacks other than within the zoning code the low density multifamily zone has standards about if it's going to be more than two stories then it has to be set back a certain distance from adjacent properties. The zoning code also has standards about not having balconies facing adjacent properties if within a certain distance, so there are standards that are influenced by having lower density zones next to multifamily. Regarding setbacks specifically, the zoning would honor the RM-12 setback requirements which is 10 feet for side setbacks instead of 5 feet for RS-5. Wade asked about the process and what the Commission is voting on. Hensch explained first the Commission will vote on the right to change the land use map, and then go onto the rezoning and vote on that item. Lehmann noted however, for the rezoning to be approved, it must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan so the Comprehensive Plan Amendment would have to be approved for the zoning to be approved. Hensch opened the public hearing. Brian Belk (Axiom Consultants) is here representing the applicant and noted this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is a little interesting because it is tied into the rezoning. Regarding those items such as the architectural style, the building, the bulk, the size and everything else, some of the slides in the rezoning presentation will answer those questions. However, Belk did touch on a couple of things such as this has been a very thought-out process since Oaknoll acquired that parcel in terms of what can fit in this area, knowing there is single-family residential around it and also serve the needs of the community. Oaknoll needs a nursing facility but wants it to look just like a really large single family residential single level type of home facility and that architecture really fits that well in terms of the site. Similarly, they have thought out centralizing the building so that they have the most setbacks and buffer around it from all sides, specifically east/west and south where there are other residential homes, but also fitting in with the existing trees and tree lines to save as many trees as possible that are currently on the parcel, again to act as additional buffer. The driveway is already existing and following the same alignment in terms of facing Benton Street so not a lot of change there. Belk noted they would get into additional details on parking once they get to that site plan process, obviously the concept that was part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is simply a concept, but they do understand that there would be certainly a lot less need for parking then seen in a typical multifamily because this is more of a nursing type facility. Parking has been discussed in terms of number employees and things like that. Belk also wanted to note that they've really looked in depth at the topography of this site, as well in terms of the drive and the spacing so that the building itself doesn't stick out at all. Kim Bergen -Jackson (Administrator, Oaknoll) is a nurse by training and wanted to speak about the vision of what this small house would look like. Right now they themselves in a position where Oaknoll needs to grow as their independent living numbers grow, their assisted living and health care facility numbers need to grow as well. However, they don't want to build a regular old nursing home, they want to do something innovative and creative and more home -like. This example of a small house would bring just what they need for the 12 people that would be living Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 7 of 17 there. They would not be driving, they would be at a nursing facility level of care and would be assisted completely dependent on staff but living in a home -like environment. Part of the reason that the small house movement makes sense right now is that as they experienced COVID as a nation one of the things they learned is that they need independent rooms, private rooms, and small group settings, small bubbles, to create a better infection prevention plan. Oaknoll was very fortunate during the pandemic because it had different areas for people to be in, and lots of private rooms. People don't want to live in long corridors and models of nursing homes that were created after the hospital model. They have been moving more and more towards a home -like environment and so this project is exciting to be able to build a house with 12 bedrooms for people to live with a large open concept dining so they can see the food being prepared, they can weigh in on the menus and the grocery list and they can help participate in household tasks. It's very normalizing as people age to have things to do around their homes. Bergen -Jackson also hopes there'll be a dog there sometime, or at least a cat, to make it feel like home. The staff will have access to park at the house and if there's an excess, the staff have access to park at Oaknoll across the street. The lot is perfect as it is right across the street from the main campus, it has all the trees and will feel like a neighborhood for people. She can see lots of Sunday suppers sitting around a big kitchen table and that really is the intention behind this, to just provide a more home -like environment for the residents that they serve, that's what they're starting to ask for and that's their responsibility to provide that for them. Hensch asked if this will this be licensed as a skilled nursing facility. Bergen -Jackson confirmed it would be and therefore none of the residents will be driving. Hensch asked if parking for staff would be across the street on the north side. Bergen -Jackson replied that depends, at night staff will park at the house, there's a one car garage and they could park in the garage or they could park in one of the other accessible stalls. However, in the daytime the staff are probably going to park on the Oaknoll property and come across the street. Bergen -Jackson added they will also have space out in front of the house in case they need a driver for transportation for medical appointments or on the off chance they need an ambulance. Craig noted parking is a concern of hers, she assumes these people will have visitors. Another concern is Benton Street and people having to cross Benton Street. Her understanding of the Oaknoll model, and one of the beauties of it, is that if someone has a partner and they both move to Oaknoll in very decent health and then one needs a higher level of care, they can move into that but the other partner is still close by and can visit that person, sometimes multiple times a day. Her concern is that in good health, but older, person is going to have to cross Benton Street to see their loved one in this new house, it's difficult for her to see how that's going to work. Bergen -Jackson acknowledged her concerns and concurred they've had concerns about Benton Street for a long time but does think that they'll be able to manage that. Yes, people will visit, she hopes lots of people and all of the kids will visit, and they'll accommodate as best they can. Bergen -Jackson noted if it's not working with the parking spaces that they have, they'll figure out a bus to go back and forth across the street if it's too hard to get people across the street. It is however directly across the street from George Street. She added originally the model was all under one roof but they have figured out over time with their east expansion campus and their apartment condos at One University Place that they don't really need to be under one roof to still Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 8 of 17 provide the additional services across the board. They have people driving every day to visit loved ones now and that seems to work. Craig noted not too long ago this Commission had a proposal to add a similar kind of care units at the eastside Oaknoll, is this similar to that. Bergen -Jackson explained that the east Oaknoll campus is strictly independent living right now. It would be nice if they had assisted living to add to that campus and that is still part of their long-term plans. Steve Roe (CEO, Oaknoll) has been employed and serving the residents of Oaknoll for 24 years. They are excited about this option and when the property became available it came from the grandchildren of somebody who Oaknoll cared for about 20 years ago and when their mother passed away unexpectedly, they inherited the property and didn't have a need for it so reached out to Oaknoll who jumped at the opportunity because of its proximity to the main campus. Then as they started to explore options for this property, knowing the need for nursing care that they have, they really wanted to explore the small house model of nursing and believe that this would be an ideal situation. Yes, it would be nice if Benton Street didn't exist between the main campus and this property, but it does and they will deal with that. As Bergen -Jackson mentioned one of the options for dealing with that may be to transport somebody to the other side of Benton Street and delivering them to safely to the property at 1201 West Benton. Roe stated regarding the question about Oaknoll East's assisted living, they did work through that process and received a rezoning approval for that potential project. They have not started anything there yet, primarily because it's just so expensive and the construction cost for that particular location relative to the revenue that will be generated from a 16 unit assisted living, they have just not been able to find a way to justify financially how to move forward with that. Therefore, this is an alternative potentially that will help with managing the care of the residents they have. Hensch asked if the engineers ever talked to the City about traffic calming measures on Benton Street because that's a really busy street with a lot of speed and maybe there needs to be some controlled pedestrian crossing there at George Street or something. Roe agreed that might be a first step. Jack T000 (OPN Architects) stated they are very excited about this project and have been talking and discussing about all the options. Oaknoll has been looking at other options around town to try and see if they could expand even beyond the east campus, to see about their services and being able to service their residents that they have now. This design of the facility on 1201 Benton Steel is one story, it's not intended to be multi -story, so it has a very small presence on the site. Also, the vegetation has been looked at quite intensively around the site to try and keep the as much of the existing vegetation as possible, there's some old trees and shrubs and bushes that are quite nice to keep and they'd like to make sure that they can achieve that. Topp also stated that this particular model of housing and care is only requiring two full time staff so there aren't multiple people going back and forth between the existing facilities and this facility, there would be two full time staff that would be monitoring and taking care of the folks at this home. Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 9 of 17 Hensch asked what the maximum height for this facility would be. Topp replied they are looking at 15 feet and if it was single family residential the height of a typical home would have the pitch of the roof at 15 or 20 feet. Hensch asked what's the square footage of this building and the lot. Topp stated the gross square footage is 8720 which will cover about 26% of the lot. Jordan Conrad (905 Weeber Street) lives right around the corner from this proposed property and is opposed to the rezoning of this property. The neighborhood is a residential neighborhood, and he believes that changing the zoning in this particular property would lead to future development beyond residential use. Conrad believes this is just the first step in an area that is already marked by high density apartment complexes and the facility at Oaknoll. This would further that development beyond residential use. Conrad has a few other issues with changing the zoning, and then the building specifically. Like Commissioner Craig had mentioned, parking, this is an 8000 plus square foot property and three quarters of an acre, it will take up a rather large footprint on that property. Parking in that area has always been a problem, Oaknoll regularly has events and their parking is not sufficient and the people that show up to those events spill over onto George Street even though there's very clear no parking anytime signs. Guests to Oaknoll regularly park on Weeber Street, way down into Weeber Street, and backup the opposing hillside even though there's no parking signs there Monday through Friday, nine to five, and it creates a significant traffic problem in their residential neighborhood. On top of that, Benton is a very dangerous street, especially where that house is located, even after the resurfacing project that they just completed weeks ago. People are flying through there at 45 miles per hour fairly regularly and it's a problem. He crosses that road twice a day to go to work and adding even more density on that property is going to create additional problems. One of the criteria was that circumstances had to change and he is happy that Iowa City has a very diverse population and that a healthy number of older adults in the community, but he doesn't think that it's necessary to put them in that location, they have an east campus and they can build this same facility over there. They can build out on Rohret Road or on the west side where there's current development going on. Adding and expanding their campus into a residential neighborhood is a really bad idea and Conrad strongly opposes this plan. Kate Macsamen-Conrad (905 Weeber Street) just wanted to add that the way she found out about this project was actually through a neighbor that lives at the top of the hill, at the corner of Weeber and Benton Streets. Oaknoll has approached him for a very long time and continues to approach him to purchase his house. The person who talked to their neighbor has a list of other addresses and the person who came to talk to him told him that the idea behind this is to acquire each of these properties one at a time so that they can put a more massive facility on that property. Obviously, she didn't talk to the person herself so this is hearsay, but she does know there was a paper that they tried to get people to sign on to saying that they agree Oaknoll is a good neighbor and they want this this facility in their neighborhood. Looking at that list that she has actually has and having this conversation with her neighbor, there's more in plan here than just this single facility and while she has concerns at the outset about a single facility for all the reasons listed, including lines of cars on George Street with little signs that say event parking, an even bigger concern is to get the foot in the door here and eventually Oaknoll extends and takes over a huge portion of the neighborhood. Magsamen-Conrad would prefer to exist in this low- Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 10 of 17 density neighborhood that they have currently. She thinks that the facility itself is a fantastic idea she just would like to see it built in zones that are already accommodating that kind of structure. Steve Roe (CEO, Oaknoll) feels a need to reply to the to the last comment as that was hearsay and categorically untrue. They have not approached any property owners along that street, they invited people to a meeting to tell them what they would like to do but have not extended any offers to anyone, nor do they have any plans to do that. The gentleman in question, Roe did meet with him personally and got the impression that he was interested in selling to Oaknoll at some point, but it was not something that Roe initiated. Hensch closed the public hearing. Craig moved to recommend approval of CPA23-0001, a proposed amendment to change the future land use designations of approximately 0.78 acres of property located at 1201 W. Benton Street from 2-8 dwelling units per acre to 8-16 dwelling units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan and from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to Low Density Multi - Family Residential in the Southwest District Plan. t •CP7i�'[ -IT iL[T[ii u • • I Craig noted from the comments she's made people can see she is very conflicted here but thinks there are good reasons both ways. Her biggest concerns are the traffic on Benton Street, she does think Oaknoll has the resources to do what they said and accommodate people at Oaknoll who need to get to the other side of the street. She also thinks traffic calming on Benton Street would be a good idea. Unfortunately, there just have been times when people come and ask for rezoning based on a proposal of something and then the Commission finds out a year later for good reasons that the project has changed significantly, so there is some caution. She is in favor of this particular project and would reluctantly support it with cautions but is concerned that if it doesn't come to fruition that they have changed the Comprehensive Plan, and possibly the rezoning, and something that she wouldn't be a favor of is going to go in there. But they can only vote on what is in front of them at this point and time. Townsend asked if the unit itself takes up a very small portion of the land, about a fourth, so why isn't there more parking built into that project. Hekteon stated she would caution them from away from considering the specific plan, this is about changing the land use map from two to eight dwelling units to eight to 16 dwelling units. Townsend noted then there could possibly be 16 units built in that same space if this is approved. Hekteon stated they could impose conditions on any rezoning, this is a two-step process, the Comprehensive Plan is more conceptual and should be a guide for any user of this property or any rezoning application for this property. Townsend asked if at this point they are only talking about one unit, why are they rezoning for a possible 16 units. Hekteon noted again, this is the Comprehensive Plan and it would allow for a greater range of zoning designations for this property, that's the question that they're being asked to decide at this stage. Hensch has really strong feelings and has been very consistent about this over time that any development for older adult living in Iowa City in particular is a good thing and they need more of Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 11 of 17 it. He might have been the only person on the Commission at the time but if people remember the rezoning for Grand Living, when they came in the Grand Living at Bridgewater, which is now built in North Coralville, that beautiful structure was going to go in that open area by St. Andrew Presbyterian Church but all the neighbors, in Walnut Ridge in particular, came to complain and now they don't have that beautiful senior facility in Iowa City. He feels like this is something he really strongly supports, it is of course just the map, they can cover the minutiae of the rezoning and particular concerns can be covered as conditions under the rezoning, but just as the concept he fully enthusiastically supports this. Quellhorst stated he would support this amendment and thinks it's an important cause. He also thinks it's in a reasonable place for our employer of zoning, particularly given the other large structures on Benton Street, and this is an arterial street. However, he does think that at some point, whether in this proposed amendment or in a broader revisitation of the District Plan, it'd be helpful to clarify the extent of the development that the City is willing to permit in this area, to provide some comfort and predictability for the people that live there, particularly west of George Street. The whole purpose of the Comprehensive Plan, and the District Plan, is to give people notice of what's going to happen in their neighborhoods and where they live. When the City is doing this in sort of piecemeal fashion, and bringing a change to the Comprehensive Plan, along with a change the zoning code, he doesn't think people get quite the degree of advance notice that might be ideal. Therefore, he will support this request here today, but will be reluctant to support similar requests in the future. Wade agreed he will also vote in favor of it, he understands the neighbors' concerns but because he sees as a transition area from the east to this location this does provide a transitory area from single family residential to a higher density location. A vote was taken and the motion was approved 5-0 (Elliott recused). CASE NO. REZ23-0008 Location: 1201 W. Benton Street An application for a rezoning of approximately 0.78 acres of land from Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5) zone to Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM-12) zone. Conley began the staff report noting this rezoning is in tandem with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-0001 that was just approved. There is an existing single-family home on the parcel at the moment and across the street is Oaknoll's main campus. The subject property is bordered by single family homes with RS-5 zoning to the east, west and south and RM-12 residential multifamily high density with an overlay across the street to the north. The proposed zoning for the subject property is RM-12, which is the low density multifamily residential zone. The RM-12 zone is created to provide a diverse variety of housing options in neighborhoods throughout the City. This zone particularly allows multifamily assisted group living, community service, general educational facilities and others, whether that be through permission, provisional use or special exception. Additionally, compliance with the multifamily site development standards in 14-213-6 of the Iowa City Zoning Code would apply to any development going into the RM-12 zone. The maximum density listed in multifamily has a maximum of 12 units allowed Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 12 of 17 in this particular zone. Additionally, assisted group living facility would have a maximum of 45 roomers, and that calculation comes from the provisional use section in the Code, there is also a maximum height of 35 feet. Additionally, like previously mentioned there are some requirements depending on how close the proposed structure is to an existing single-family structure, if it is 15 feet there would be a maximum limit of two and a half stories for that proposed structure. Conley next showed the development concept provided by the applicant, the footprint site plan concept for the proposed assisted group living facility. It would house 12 residents in 12 units. The square footage of the building would be 8720 square feet and covers approximately 26% of the lot. There are five parking spaces with the access to West Benton Street. Conley also showed a 3d model of how the structure would look on the property. Regarding the general development approval criteria for a rezoning, it must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and be compatible with the existing neighborhood. The future land use map will be updated due to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment going from two to eight dwelling units to eight to 16 dwelling units per acre. Additionally, the Southwest District Plan will be updated as well going from single-family duplex residential to low -density multifamily. In the Comprehensive Plan there are three parts that support this type of proposed development and rezoning, first is to ensure that infill development is compatible and complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood, second to identify and support infill development and redevelopment opportunities in areas where services and infrastructure are already in place, and finally to promote housing design and features that allow people to age in place such as universal design. Additionally, Conley noted Benton Street is an arterial street corridor with access to City services. She stated this plan does encourage high quality multifamily housing compatible with the surrounding development in order to meet the needs of a variety of households. In addition to the Comprehensive Plan this property is also in the Southwest District Plan, and there are some concerns in that plan, one being high density multifamily zoning is excessive for the area. Number two, transition is lacking between low density single-family and high -density multifamily zones. Third is building bulk and scale, parking lot size, bright lights and noise adjacent to single family homes. There are some recommended actions stated in the Southwest District Plan to help combat this, such as avoid concentrations of high density multifamily zoning directly adjacent to low density single family zones, facilitate downzoning multifamily property where appropriate and apply the multifamily residential design standards contained in Section 14-5H- 5N of the City Code to the Roosevelt Subarea. Staff is recommending a condition that there should be general compliance with the footprint and scale of the concept plan to ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood development pattern. Additionally, to talk about the compatibility with existing neighborhood, staff noted that this is seen as an extension of Oaknoll's main campus which exists to the north and is bordered by single family homes to the east, west and south. This condition includes development concept notes, such as it being 8720 square feet, a one-story structure, and can only house 12 residents. The recommended condition that staff has created would help to ensure compliance with the existing neighborhood uses because regulating that building bulk and scale would be one of the ways to ensure that this development meets the existing neighborhood development pattern. Staff recommends approval of REZ23-0008, a proposed rezoning to change 0.78 acres of the Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 13 of 17 property located at 1201 W. Benton Street from RS-5 to RM-12 zone subject to the following condition: • General compliance with the footprint and scale of the concept plan to ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood development pattern. Hensch asked about the condition of general compliance of the footprint and scale of the concept plan, one concern is that if this is rezoned to RM-12 and Oaknoll, for some reason, decides they can't proceed with the plan can someone decide to just build some apartments there. Stating general compliance to the footprint and scale of the building does that mean that if it's 10% deviation from that or 50% deviation, then it the rezoning is no longer valid. Conley stated it means that they aim for the concept to comply with what is found in the Code regarding multifamily development standards, specifically the building bulk and scale and making sure that whatever development does come in would comply and be compatible with the existing character of the neighborhood. Russett added staff really focuses on bulk and scale for the condition to ensure that they wouldn't allow a large block scale apartment building. Through the condition, they are not restricting uses nor restricting number of units but are trying to say is that the project must fit within approximately 8700 square feet and a one-story building. There may be some flexibility such as if they propose a one and a half story building staff would have to look at that and see if it is generally in compliance, maybe it's not 8700 square feet, maybe it's 8800, so there is some flexibility but general compliance. The project needs to meet the intent of the condition that its going to fit in terms of bulk and scale with the existing neighbors. Hensch noted the architects said that this facility will be about 15 feet tall so they would be limited to something essentially 15 to 20 feet and if they wanted to change it for some reason, they're not going to get the 35 feet. Russett stated if the Commission wants to put a cap on that, they could add specificity to the condition. Russett noted conditions can go either way, it provides specificity, but it also it can act as a constraint, especially if something changes in the future. As long as staff can ensure that the condition proposed is to meet a public need caused by the rezoning and it can be supported staff would be supportive of adding specificity. Hensch believes it does need to be more specific because the whole thing about character in a neighborhood, if they put a 35-foot building there, versus a 15-foot building, it will not be consistent with single family residential dwelling, a 35-foot building would be out of character. Russett noted the RS-5 zone has a maximum height of 35 feet as well so this zone doesn't allow a higher building than as it's currently zoned. Quellhorst noted they all share a general sentiment that this project appears to be tasteful and well done but there are concerns that they don't want to deviate too far from it. With that in mind what conditions would staff recommend to not cause too many problems for future owners or conveyances but at the same time assure that they're sticking relatively clear way to what's been proposed here today. Russett stated staff believes with their recommended condition of general compliance in terms of bulk and scale, which is talking about the height and the footprint, will assure compliance. If the Commission wants to limit it to a certain number of stories, that's Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 14 of 17 something that could be considered, there were also discussions regarding landscaping and tree preservation that is not included in the staff condition, so that might be something to require for the future. Hensch stated they have done that in the past and in other times they've had the City Forester sign off on the landscaping plan. He feels that seems reasonable to do again as a condition for this. Craig stated she would like to see a compliance related to the height; in this neighborhood it should not be more than one story. Hensch noted the current zoning height allowed is 35 feet, so currently somebody could build a 35-foot building right there without getting a rezoning. Russett noted the difference is that at the current zoning it only allows single family and duplex uses and at 35 feet is more likely with RM-12, but there could be a two-story duplex or a three- story duplex. Wade noted oftentimes with a new regular residential multi -unit building, it has some kind of fee in lieu or affordable type unit requirement, what has affordability requirements versus what does not. Russett replied the affordability requirements are in Riverfront Crossings, there is no affordability requirement here. Hensch stated since they're talking about conditions, he is interested in the condition of the landscaping plan and having that signed off by the City Forester because it makes sense to try to maintain as many trees as possible to stay with the character of the neighborhood. His other concern is given how busy Benton Street is, five parking spaces does seem a little light, and perhaps a condition regarding if there's room for additional parking spaces to be constructed, could they add them. They're expecting people to walk across Benton Street and there's not any pedestrian crossings there. Could they add a condition about the engineer working with the City about making a designated pedestrian crossing, because the whole neighborhood needs it. It seems pretty reasonable for the safety of the visitors, guests, employees, and then just for the neighborhood that it needs to be investigated to have a designated pedestrian crossing area that the City has signed off on for the safety of everybody. Hekteon stated they could pass on that request to the City traffic planners. Craig is confident staff will pass along traffic concerns to the appropriate City officials. Hekteon stated if they wanted more feedback from staff they can ask but she would hesitate to recommend imposing it as a condition of the rezoning without further information from staff. Hensch noted they can ask the applicant's engineer about this. Russett added alternatively, if it's something the Commission wants to investigate with City staff they could defer. Craig stated she is comfortable to do City staff will do the right thing here. Hensch opened the public hearing. Brian Boelk (Axiom Consultants) stated with regards to engineering they are certainly happy to work with City staff, Public Works, Engineering Traffic, both in terms of the discussion, certainly Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 15 of 17 with Benton Street as a whole, but as well as crossings along Benton Street there as well. Oaknoll will not have any issues with that, it's certainly in their best interest for safety as well as Oaknoll is a major employer and needs to be investigated if they're asking staff to cross the street to go to work. In regard to the parking, Belk doesn't think Oaknoll will have any objection to adding more parking there either. This is just a concept drawing, this isn't the site plan that would really get into the depths of all that and in terms of on the concept plan, parking was somewhat limited based on anticipated use with the history of what skilled nursing facilities require and need based on what they've seen over the many years, as well as just trying to limit the amount of impervious area and impact to the property as a whole in terms of a footprint. However, if looking at some additional parking is required, they're not against that, they could move the house a little bit forward and get some additional parking in there. He did note they do have another handicap stall there as well as a space that could be in front of the garage so really there's more like seven parking spaces shown on that concept versus five. Hensch stated it's the sense of the Commission that they're a little light on parking, and also listening to the other people who spoke at the public hearing parking is already an issue around there during times, so they don't want to add to that. Belk reiterated they can definitely look into additional concepts, again they will have to go through the code process with the site plan to make sure they're first meeting the Code, and then can go from there. Hensch asked if they are going to do a landscape plan with concept. Belk replied they will, that would always go with the site plan process and again, certainly the desire that was really pointed out by Oaknoll and directed to them was to position the house there to keep as many of those beautiful trees as they can. Additional landscaping will be based on the site plan and the zoning. Jordan Conrad (905 Weeber Street) stated he still objects to this rezoning and if they are talking about adding more parking spaces that is going to change the feel and start to look like a commercial zone and not a residential neighborhood. He adamantly is opposed to this plan, it's changing the neighborhood and he is rather disappointed that nobody else seems to be concerned about that. Hensch closed the public hearing. Townsend moved to recommend approval of REZ23-0008, a proposed rezoning to change 0.78 acres of the property located at 1201 W. Benton Street from RS-5 to RM-12 zone subject to the following condition: • General compliance with the footprint and scale of the concept plan to ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood development pattern. Wade seconded the motion. Craig asked to amend the motion to include in the conditions that structure may not exceed one story and City approval is required for a landscaping plan that preserves as much existing mature landscaping as possible. Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2023 Page 16 of 17 Townsend agreed to amend her motion, all members of the Commission seconded the amendment. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: NOVEMBER 15, 2023: Craig moved to approve the meeting minutes from November 15, 2023. Townsend seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett gave a couple updates; first City Council did adopt the two zoning code amendments that the Commission had seen recently regarding all of the housing code amendments including the accessory dwelling unit amendments which were passed with the Commission's recommendation to maintain the owner occupancy requirement. Second, Tuesday night the Council will to discuss the RNS-12 maximum height reduction from 35 feet to 27 feet. Townsend noted every time she drives up Kimball Road where they knocked down that house there's been a crane there for the past three or four months just sitting there and it just looked like it was sitting on a slope. What are they building there. Russett will check on a building permit and get back to her. ADJOURNMENT: Townsend moved to adjourn, Quellhorst seconded and the motion passed 5-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2023.2024 1217 12121 114 1118 2/15 3/1 415 4119 6121 715 7119 812 8116 10/4 10118 11/158 12/6 CRAIG, SUSAN O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ELLIOTT, MAGGIE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X PADRON, MARIA X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X O/E QUELLHORST, SCOTT X X X X X SIGNS, MARK X X X X O/E O/E X TOWNSEND, BILLIE X CIE X O/E X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X WADE, CHAD I X I X X I OlE I X I X X X X I X I X I X i X X I X I X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member Item Number: 4.k. I i CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 2, 2024 Public Art Advisory Committee: November 2 Attachments: Public Art Advisory Committee: November 2 Approved, p.1 Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 111212023 Minutes Public Art Advisory Committee November 2, 2023 Emma Harvat Hall Public Art Advisory Committee Members Present: Ron Knoche, Steve Miller, Andrea Truitt, Anita Jung, Nate Sullivan, Jeremy Endsley (remote) Members Absent: Jenny Gringer, Juli Seydell Johnson Staff present: Rachel Kilburg Public Present: Ray Michels, Ethan Wyatt Call to Order Miller called the meeting to order at 3:34 p.m. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda None. Consider minutes of the September 7, 2023 PAAC meeting Truitt moved and Sullivan seconded that the minutes from the September 7, 2023, meeting be approved. Motion passed (6-0). South District Bus Stop Bench Project Michels and Wyatt presented an updated budget proposal (attached to the meeting minutes). Jung expressed concern over the budget nearly doubling and noted that more precise budget estimates are still dependent upon a new bus stop location being selected. Michels described their process for narrowing down possible stop locations and shared that proceeding with the hand design is a top priority of the South District Neighborhood Association. Miller asked about the artists' confidence in the budget, and Michels described how he developed cost estimates. Endsley asked whether existing concrete slabs at the bus stop could be used as the foundation and Michels explained they are not adequate to support the proposed structure. Kilburg reviewed the current status of the Public Art budget, noting approximately $20,000 in unencumbered funds. Miller expressed support for increasing the project budget. Jung made a motion to increase the project budget up to, but not to exceed, $24,000, Endsley seconded. Motion passed (6-0). Kilburg stated staff will work with the artist team to continue advancing the project and provide routine updates to the Committee. Consider Lucas Farms Neighborhood Indigenous History Art Project RFQ Kilburg reviewed the draft RFQ and late handout of specific criteria requested for inclusion by the Lucas Farms Neighborhood Association (attached to the meeting minutes). Committee members discussed the proposed timeline and suggested an extension in order to conduct additional outreach targeting Indigenous populations. Approved, p.2 Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 111212023 Endsley asked for clarification about how the art installation is expected to incorporate wayfinding. Kilburg explained the long-term vision of the neighborhood is that this installation would serve as the main attraction or "first stop" of broader neighborhood wayfinding signage to be built out in future phases. Committee members agreed the RFQ needed edits to clarify the role of wayfinding and type of art project being sought. Truitt noted the additional funding previously reallocated to this project should be incorporated. Sullivan made a motion to approve the RFQ with edits, Jung seconded. Motion passed (6-0). Kilburg noted she may have to shift the timeline depending on when she was able to obtain clarification from the neighborhood. Miller stated an early January submission deadline would be preferable. Committee members asked Kilburg about the budget timeline, and Kilburg explained discussion of the Fiscal Year 2025 budget could take place in the Spring. Consider Retirement of Wooden Kovalev Sculptures (Willow Creek Park) Kilburg explained that Dave Dennis, who was contracted to restore the Wooden Kovalev sculptures has conducted extensive research and been unable to identify a viable restoration method. Due to the level of deterioration, the sculptures are being recommended for decommissioning. The Parks Department would plan to keep the sculptures installed as long as their condition allows before being removed. Committee members suggested signage be placed near the sculptures to explain the City's plan for decommissioning and Kilburg stated the sculptures would be removed rather than adding new signage. Sullivan made a motion to decommission the Wooden Kovalev Sculptures, Endsley seconded. Motion passed (6-0). Discuss Planning for 2024 Public Art Matching Grants Kilburg reviewed the 2023 Public Art Matching Grant timeline and asked the Committee how they would like to provide direction to staff on timing, budget, or any other desired changes to the program. Committee members suggested staff prepare program updates for review and discussion at the next meeting. Staff Updates Kilburg noted the Call for Creativity for the 20th anniversary of Herky on Parade was included in the agenda packet and encouraged Committee members to share that opportunity through their networks. Kilburg also shared she accepted the position of Economic Development & Public Art Coordinator and was excited to continue staffing the Committee. Finally, she mentioned three upcoming vacancies on the Committee. Adjournment Knoche moved to adjourn at 4:35 pm. Miller seconded. Motion passed (6-0). Approved, p.3 Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 111212023 Public Art Advisory Committee Attendance Record 2022-23 Name Term Expires 11/3122 1211122 115/23 2/2/23 416/22 5A/22 618/23 7/6/23 813/23 9f7/23 11/2/23 Ron Knoche X X X X X* X X X X X* X Juli Seydell- X* X X* X X X X X X X O/E Johnson Steve Miller 12/31/23 X X X X O/E X X X X X X Eddie 12/31/24 X X X O/E X O/E O/E O/E O/E 0 Boyken Andrea 12/31/25 O/E X X X X X X X X X X Truitt Anita Jung 6/30123 O/E O/E X X X X X O/E O/E X X Jenny 12/31/23 X X X X O/E O/E X X X DYE O/E Gringer Jeremy 12/31/25 O/E X X O/E O/E X X O/E X 0 X Endsley Nate 6/30/26 — — — — — X X X X Sullivan Key X = Present X* = Delegate attended 0 = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a member