The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2013-09-05 Info PacketCITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 5, 2013 IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule MISCELLANEOUS I132 Memo from Public Works Dir.: Iowa City Gateway Project Work Session Presentations IP3 Copy of email from City Manager: Adam Bentley's Resignation IP4 Copy of letter from City Manager to participating jurisdictions: Status of New Animal Care & Adoption Center IP5 Invitation Synthetic Drug Awareness Open House IP6 Letter from Mediacom: Channel Changes IP7 Minutes from City Council Economic Development Committee — July 30 DRAFT MINUTES IP8 Housing and Community Development Commission: August 15 IP9 Planning and Zoning Commission: August 15 IN City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Subject to change September 5, 2013 CITY of IOWA CITY Date Time Meeting Location FRI low Tuesday, September 17, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall ( 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Emma J. Harvat!� Hall r:. x -ti.!I gk �Ij il�j'� 111 51011M, �� J Tuesday, October 1, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Emma J. Harvaa�ryt� Hall G7 �N�I F�i�tl� ti'hi. AN o s (9,GI�4 . Tuesday, October 15, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 6r, I � � , (�I� � l�I � RI, � 1II'�ffI��ii�IiI t �� 1� �pa4, Monday,October 28, 2013 4:30 PM Joint Meeting /Work Session IC Public Library NIiIh�Id' 2 i( �d a t � ��Ililhr� ,11 ..i � ��,i� 0,. f ,.� NO- � Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall NI, AR i�I "t I 1i „IiI ) , 7iC ' �7 � y ^ fn MEMO, I u—_ h Ia u ii TBA Noon -6PM Strategic Planning TBA %. � ar Piui) i,i i e �' ii ' i t {rti " i ia . �i,1 � `(14 IT� Ell 7iI (I 1 . I . '6. r� ; � Tuesday, December 3, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall ac a n�u �i 4,( .-i !t (�i�� :r ) Gin ^ii '�"�`I'V a1iaal r r t m�ii .! t„ k �� Ul l iy�G hts,�t� �' ('1i�iili i,!" �i l i ;Ja itlI a}d �� .: ,.I�,. �� m �,�iUM r.� Tuesday, December 17, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall I �Y. ®4„ CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM. DATE: September 5, 2013 TO: Tom Markus, City Manager FROM: Rick Fosse, Public Works Director of RE: Iowa City Gateway Project Work Session Presentations '- IP2 At the September 17th and October 1st City Council work sessions, city staff and our project consultant, HNTB, will facilitate discussion of the Gateway Project with the ultimate goal of establishing design parameters for the project. The September 17th meeting will focus on the project background, the process we have followed to date, funding sources and design options. The October 1 st meeting will focus on establishing the following three design parameters: • Level of protection for Dubuque Street • Backwater reduction goal for the bridge • Structural type of the bridge Options for these three decisions will be provided along with supporting information such as renderings, cross - sections, and cost estimates to help facilitate an informed decision. Both meetings will focus on answering the City Council's questions about the project. The two meeting format was developed specifically with this in mind. There may be questions at the first meeting that require more number crunching or research that can be answered at the second meeting. Also, the City Council will have a second opportunity to ask questions after contemplating the information from the first meeting. Given the complexity of this project and the level of public interest, we have attached the following materials for Council's review prior to the first meeting: • Flood Recovery and Mitigation Update (to put this project in the context of the City's complete flood mitigation strategy) • A Guide to Environmental Documents and the NEPA Process for the Gateway Project • Recap of the Process to Date with specific note of Public meetings, outreach and opportunity for public & agency input. • References and Links to Project - related documents • Funding Sources Summary • Project Schedule • Initial, Reasonable and the Preferred Alternatives • Cross - Sections • Historical and Adjacent Property Exhibits • Renderings I -4 CITY OF IOWA CITY -'�. MEMORANDUM To: Tom Marcus, City Manager From: Rick Fosse, Public Works Director i Date: September 3, 2013 RE: Flood Recovery and Mitigation Update Earlier this summer the five year anniversary of the 2008 flood was marked with the third largest flood since the Coralville Reservoir was constructed. This year's flood brought appreciation for lessons learned and for mitigation projects already implemented. It also renewed urgency to finish remaining projects. Outlined below is an update on our progress in this regard and it follows the same format as previous updates. Iowa City has identified 15 flood mitigation projects totaling approximately $152.3M that are related to the 2008 flood. We have secured $99.5M in state and federal assistance and continue to pursue more. The local option sales tax is expected to generate $34.3M, bringing our outside funding level to $133.8M. We will endeavor to design and construct remaining funded projects over the next three years. Outlined below are the following: • Mitigation strategies that define objectives • Flood mitigation project summaries, organized by objectives • Regulatory and Plan changes • Approximate schedule for remaining work Flood Mitigation Strategy Flood mitigation consists of efforts designed to reduce the city's vulnerability to future floods. This includes not only projects but also regulations and action plans. Iowa City's comprehensive flood mitigation strategy emerged shortly after the flood and has remained relatively unchanged. This overall strategy was outlined in a March 19, 2009 memo from Jeff Davidson and Rick Fosse to the City Council and is quoted below in italics. Updates or refinements to this plan are shown in bold. "The staff committee that has developed the funding proposals which you will receive on March 23 has tried to be consistent with the overall flood recovery strategy which you agreed to for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). To restate those objectives in priority order: 1. We will attempt to buy out residential property in the 100 -year floodplain of the Iowa River. This will involve purchasing some properties (approximately 40) at the present time, with the goal of buying out the remainder over the next 10 to 15 years. Those who refuse buyout funds will not be granted public funds for the rehabilitation of their homes, nor are they guaranteed that they may not be negatively impacted by future flood mitigation strategies. The area of residential buy out offers has been expanded to include most homes in the 500 -year floodplain. This strategy is the most effective flood mitigation strategy possible. It reduces risk on the highest flood - prone properties to zero. A property which is bought out cannot be used for anything except open space in perpetuity. 2. For the remainder of the flood - impacted residential neighborhoods in the 500 -year floodplain of the Iowa River, we will implement realistic protection measures that can be implemented at this time. This includes elevating roads in flood -prone neighborhoods, elevating structures, elevating mechanical systems within structures, backflow prevention valves, and attempting to provide secondary access to flood -prone neighborhoods. As noted above, the buyout program has been expanded to include most homes in the 500 year floodplain, thereby deemphasizing this objective. However the access component of this objective has been expanded to include access to areas that were isolated by the flood, specifically the Peninsula Neighborhood. 3. Our number one priority public infrastructure project will be the elevation of Park Road Bridge and Dubuque Street. This will assist flood -prone neighborhoods upstream by allowing water to be conveyed downstream more easily and not back up into the neighborhoods. Our second priority public infrastructure project is relocation of the North Wastewater Treatment Plant. These two projects are the focus of our local option sales tax efforts, but additional funding sources will be required as well. Iowa City voters approved a 1 cent local option sales tax to help finance these projects. The priority of this objective has moved up to the number 2 position. 4. If in the future the required funding for levees and flood walls is made available, we will consider such strategies in flood -prone neighborhoods. However, we do not believe such funding opportunities are realistic at the present time and do not believe that flood - impacted residents should be making decisions based on them occurring. We have done preliminary planning to know that these structures could cost approximately $34 million." CDBG funds have become available for three levee projects. The West Side Levee has been bid. There has been a policy decision not to proceed with the Taft Speedway Levee and a financial decision not to proceed with the East Side Levee (the project scope grew beyond the funding that was available). CDBG funds from these projects is being diverted to other flood mitigation projects. Additional projects have evolved involving critical and non - critical infrastructure. These projects are categorized as "Other" in the table below. Flood Mitigation Projects Project Cost Status Notes Objective #1 Buy -Out of $23.5M Complete for this 92 homes have been purchased. Residential Property funding source Demo of last homes remains. Buy -Out of $1.OM Complete for this Purchased properties in the Development Property funding source 100 year floodplain to prevent additional at risk development Single Family New $5.9M Ongoing Constructs 141 new homes Construction Unit outside the floodplain to Production Program replace homes removed in buyout program Aniston Village, LP $2.9M Complete Constructed 22 new rental homes Objective #2 Elevation of the $11M Preliminary Design No funding sources have Normandy /Manor been secured yet. Intersection Peninsula Access $3.OM Preliminary Design Elevation of Foster Road, or construction of an alternate route. Objective #3 Gateway Project $40.1 M Environmental $3M EDA secured (Elevation of Dubuque Review and $1.5M THUD secured Street & replacement of Preliminary $6.OM STP secured the Park Road Bride ) Design North Wastewater $55.2M Construction $22M EDA secured Facility Relocation $13M CDBG secured $5.5M I -JOBS secured (more is possib Objective #4 Taft Levee Will not proceed East Side Levee Will not proceed West Side Levee $5.6M Construction $5.6M CDBG secured Other Water Source Protection $1.6M Complete FEMA funds have been secured for this project Animal Shelter $3.OM Design Cooperative project with UI, Coralville, Relocation Development Johnson County & University Heights, $1.4M FEMA funds secured. Fire Training Center $1.OM Concept No outside funding has been Relocation secured for this project Rocky Shore Lift Station $6.6M Design $6.6 CDBG secured. and Flood Gates Cooperative project with U and Coralville River Street / Arts $1.01VI Preliminary Design This will be a joint project Campus Lift Station with the UI Riverfront Crossings $0.8M Planning Catalyst projects to encourage Redevelopment redevelopment Total $152.3M $133.81111 in outside funding secured including local option sales tax Regulatory and Plan Changes Updates to policies and practices represent various "non- structural" means to better prepare our community for future floods. They include changes to regulatory, planning, and action plans designed to guide development and better prepare for effective response to future floods. Regulatory Changes • Update of Estimated Flood Flows — After a flood of this magnitude it is important to update estimated flood flows to factor in the statistical relevance of the recent flood. The Corps of Engineers has completed a report entitled "Iowa River Regulated Flow Frequency Study" dated October 2009. In this report they estimate the new flows for various frequency floods based on information collected during the 2008 flood. Their findings are as follows: 100 yr / 1.0% chance — 30,100 cfs (formerly: 29,000) 200 yr / 0.5% chance — 36,430 cfs 500 yr / 0.2% chance — 45,260 cfs (formerly: 45,000) 1000 yr / 0.1 % chance — 52,210 cfs • Update Floodplain Map — The Iowa City Floodplain maps need to be updated to incorporate the new flood flow estimates noted above, reflect the impacts of flood mitigation projects, and to correct for "map drift" that occurred in FEMA's last revision to Iowa City's maps. The new maps will also benefit from the highly accurate hydraulic model of the Iowa River recently completed by the University of Iowa. Of these factors, the impacts from the flood mitigation projects will have the greatest impact. Because of the expense and difficulty in updating the floodplain maps, staff recommends waiting until Iowa City's, the University's and Coralville's major mitigation projects are nearly complete (roughly 2016) before updating the maps. • Update Floodplain Management Ordinance — After the 2008 Flood the state legislature considered changes to the state's minimum floodplain development requirements. After consideration they ultimately decided not to make any changes and continues to regulate to the 1% chance flood (100 year). However, cities can adopt standards that are more stringent than the state. In 2010 Iowa City joined Cedar Falls in adopting the 0.2% chance flood (500 year) as the standard for local floodplain management. Updates to Plans • Hazard Mitigation Plan — A Hazard Mitigation Plan has been developed for a wide variety of potential natural and human caused hazards facing the Iowa City area. FEMA has granted its approval to the plan. The adoption of this plan is a condition of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Funds that have been awarded to Iowa City to assist with flood recovery and mitigation projects. Johnson County is working on a Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Iowa Department of Homeland Security has requested all Johnson County communities be a part of the plan. Staff is working with ECCOG to update and incorporate the Iowa City Local plan into the Johnson County Multi- Jurisdictional Plan. • Emergency Operations Plan — The Fire Department has updated the City's Emergency Operations Plan that is a multi- hazard plan that addresses flood response. • Volunteer Coordination Plan — The coordination and management of volunteers required significant dedication of City staff and resources during the flood. Post flood, we evaluated other models for providing this service and ultimately landed on a solution using the United Way. The United Way of Johnson County has developed a program to solicit and coordinate volunteers for a wide range of activities from responding to natural disasters to assisting with community events. This new method of volunteer coordination and management was put to the test during the May /June flood earlier this year and it performed very well. Approximate Schedule for Remaining Work The following schedule represents the best case sequence of the remaining work, assuming that all projects progress to the construction phase and funding is available. 2013 • Continue construction of the North Wastewater Facility Relocation • Begin construction of the West Side Levee • Begin construction of the Rocky Shore Lift Station 2014 • Complete construction of the North Wastewater Facility Relocation • Complete construction of the West Side Levee • Complete construction of the Rocky Shore Lift Station • Begin construction of the Animal Shelter • 2015 • Begin construction of the Gateway Project • Complete construction of Animal Shelter • Demolition of North Wastewater Plant • Relocate Fire Training Facility 2016 • Complete construction of the Gateway Project • Upgrade the Riverside Drive /Arts Campus Lift Station • Update Floodplain Maps A Guide to Environmental Documents and the NEPA Process for the Iowa City Gateway Federally- funded or permitted transportation projects must be conducted in accordance with National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). This requires that before design and construction, projects must be evaluated in terms of impacts to both the natural and man -made environment. How is the environmental evaluation done? NEPA outlines a process where possible impacts, including the impact of doing nothing (typically called a "No- Build', are evaluated and then made public through the environmental document. That document is designed to help agencies, elected officials and the public make sound decisions about federally- funded or approved investments. There are three general types of environmental documents: • Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) —An EIS is produced for areas where improvements are likely to have a significant environmental impact, requiring in -depth analysis and efforts to avoid or minimize those impacts. • Environmenta /Assessment (EA) —An EA is produced for areas where the degree of environmental impact caused by improvements is unknown and yet is not expected to be significant. • Categorical Exclusion (CE) — A CE is produced for areas where no significant environmental impacts are expected. For the Iowa City Gateway project, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) determined that an EA would be prepared. This decision was made primarily due to the project's location in an already - developed and disturbed urban corridor where impacts to the natural and man -made environment are not expected to be significant. Why are environmental documents produced for future transportation projects? Environmental documents are required by the federal government for projects that will seek federal funds and /or federal permits. Beyond the legal requirements, environmental documents also help state and federal agencies and local communities make well- informed decisions about future projects. Additionally, environmental documents give the public access to the same information used by state transportation departments and the responsible Federal agency in selecting a preferred alternative for future projects. Each document answers the following basic questions: • What is the purpose and need for the improvement? Why is the study being conducted? What is the problem that needs to be solved? A study's formal Purpose and Need serves as a guide throughout the evaluation process. • Howmight the improvement impact the natural environment? For example, how does shifting Dubuque Street to the west impact wetlands or threatened and endangered species? Would the project impact air quality or the quality of rivers and streams? • How might the improvement project impact the cultural and social en vironments? How does elevating the roadway or constructing a new Park Road Bridge impact historical or archaeological sites? Would it impact public recreation lands like City Park or Terrell Mill Park? Would it change how people get to their jobs, schools, shopping and other services? How would it impact the local economy? Would it change land uses? Would it change social relationships and interaction within a community? How would economically disadvantaged groups be affected? • How would the proposed improvement work? Does it address the Purpose and Need? How much would it cost to construct and to maintain? What is the overall process for EA development? While each project has unique aspects, environmental documents work to adequately answer the questions outlined above. The process to develop those answers typically works as follows: Develop a proiect Purpose and Need The "Purpose and Need" guides the rest of the project by defining the problem to be solved and the standards that will be used to evaluate possible solutions. State and federal agencies provide feedback on the Purpose and Need to help ensure coordination with other projects in the area. The public is also invited to weigh in on the project Purpose and Need. Develop Alternatives The project team then develops a range of alternatives to solve the problem. Depending on the project, there may be a wide range of alternatives or only one or two. Each is looked at for feasibility and critical flaws. Alternatives are typically refined several times during the study process. Public Involvement NEPA calls for opportunities for public involvement during the evaluation process. That can be achieved through a variety of methods, including public meetings, advisory groups, newsletters, web sites, or presenting information at neighborhood and business meetings, etc. NEPA also has specific requirements for public hearings and comment periods so that all interested parties can review the draft document and its recommendations prior to its review by the responsible federal agency. A Guide to Enwronmenta/ Documents and die NEPA Process for die Iowa City Gateway 2 For the Iowa City Gateway project, two public meetings, a drop -in center, and a combined drop - in center and formal Public Hearing were held. Our process provided opportunities for citizen input at each of these meetings, along with continuous and on -going opportunities to view project information and to provide comments by contacting staff directly or by making requests through the project website at www.iowacitvoateway.oro. Impacts are Evaluated The impacts of each alternative, including doing nothing, are evaluated. For the Iowa City Gateway EA process, the following factors were evaluated: • Social and Economic Characteristics • Land Use • Demographics Social Characteristics • Economic Characteristics • Natural Environment • Air Quality • Physical Setting • Water Resources • Water Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Hazardous Waste Sites • Visual Quality • Land Use Impacts • Impacts on Existing Land Use • Consistency with Comprehensive Development Plans • Social Impacts • Neighborhood and Community Cohesion • Travel Patterns and Accessibility • Public Parks and Recreation Areas (Section 4(f) Process) • Other Public /Semi - Public Lands and Facilities • Safety Issues • Environmental Justice • Right -of -Way Acquisition Impacts • Potential Residential Acquisition Impacts • Relocation Policies A Guide to Enwronmenta/ Documents and die NEPA Process for die Iowa City Gateway 3 • Economic Impacts o Short -Term and Long -Term Economic Impacts • Noise Impacts • Noise Abatement Criteria • Traffic Noise Modeling • Abatement Measures • Water Resources Impacts • Stream Impacts • Wetland Impacts • Compensatory Mitigation • Water Quality Impacts o Surface Water Quality Impacts • Floodplain Impacts • Floodplain Encroachment • Flooding Risks • Permits • Regulatory Permits • Construction Permits • Natural Terrestrial Communities • Natural Communities • Forest Communities • Wildlife Impacts • General • Threatened and Endangered Species • Historic and Archeological Preservation (Section 106 Evaluation Process) • Historical and Archeological Preservation • Mitigation Measures • Hazardous Waste Sites • Hazardous Waste Site Impacts • Mitigation Measures • Visual Impacts • Views Of and From the Road • Aesthetic Considerations / Visual Enhancements Selection of Preferred Alternative • Construction Impacts o Water Quality • Air • Noise • Vibration • Traffic Impacts • Secondary and Cumulative Impacts Based on the evaluation process and public input, a Preferred Alternative was identified as a preliminary recommendation for future improvements. The recommendation is only made final following the FHWA formal review process and City Council approval The Environmental Document While EA documents might be organized slightly differently from project to project, they all include the following basic information: Purpose and Need- This chapter provides a brief history of the project, describes the specific study area, and identifies the transportation problems that would be addressed by proposed improvements. Aitematives - This chapter describes in detail the benefits and consequences of the reasonable alternatives, or options, considered. It also explains how those alternatives were narrowed to the recommended preferred alternative. Affected Environment- This describes the existing natural and man -made environments of the study area. The types of information presented include population statistics, demographics, information on the impacts to wetlands, lakes, rivers, parklands, as well as historical or culturally sensitive areas, and threatened and endangered species. Environmental Consequences - This part of the document discusses both the potential negative and beneficial impacts to the environment. This allows the reader to compare the environmental and socio- economic impacts of the reasonable alternatives. Comments and Coordination - This chapter summarizes the public involvement and agency coordination activities carried out over the course of the study. It also typically provides a summary of public input gathered through meetings and other events. Section 4(t) - Some documents include a chapter titled "Section 4(f)." This name refers to a portion of federal law mandating that special efforts be made to preserve public parks and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and significant historic sites. The Iowa City Gateway EA included a Section 4(f) Chapter that also documented the Historic and Archaeological Evaluation process (Section 106 process). If any of those assets are impacted by improvements, it must be shown that (1) there is no prudent and feasible alternative to avoid the site, and (2) details the efforts that will be made to minimize harm. A Guide to Enwronmenta/ Documents and die NEPA Process for die Iowa City Gateway 4 What is the typical formal process for EA review and approval? Development of an EA calls for a thorough investigation of possible impacts, and can take anywhere from several months to several years to complete. Once the EA document, which details the investigation and analysis, is complete and ready for the formal review process, Federal and state guidelines and policies direct the process for review and approval, which includes the following steps: Document Distribution and Review (30 days) The EA document is submitted to the following list of agencies for review and comments. Depending on the specifics of the project, additional agencies or organizations may also be included in the distribution: Federal Agencies • Federal Aviation Administration • Federal Emergency Management Agency • Federal Transit Administration • Federal Highway Administration • U.S. Coast Guard • U.S. Department of Agriculture (NRCS) State of Iowa Agencies • Department of Natural Resources • State Historic Preservation Office • State Emergency Management Agency City and County Agencies • City of Iowa City Departments • MPO 3C • U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers • University of Iowa • Johnson County Citizens (via placement of the EA document at City Hall, downtown branch of the Public Library and online for downloading at www.iowacitvoateway.oro). Comment Period (same 30 days) Anyone can review the document and make comments. The formal review period for an EA is 30 days. Comments on the Iowa City Gateway EA were received by postal letter, email, and written comments made during the drop -in center and Public Hearing. Public Hearing (same 30 days) During the comment period, there is also a public hearing on the project where anyone can provide comments on the document, its findings and recommendations. The Public Hearing for this project was held on April 0', 2013. A Guide to Enwronmenta/ Documents and die NEPA Process for die Iowa City Gateway 5 The final document is basically an update of the initially published EA. It includes substantive comments and responses, as well as the results of any additional evaluations or analyses performed in response to the comments submitted. Document Approval The FHWA (the responsible Federal agency) has responsibility for ultimately approving the EA for the Iowa City Gateway Project. The FHWA considers substantive comments and responses to the EA, as well as the results of any additional evaluations or analyses performed in response to the comments submitted by the agencies and public during the public comment period. After the comments are incorporated and responded to, and the document approved, the FHWA publishes a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for Environmental Assessments. The FONSI announces the selected alternative for improvements which then can proceed to the next phases of development — additional evaluations as needed, design, right of way acquisition and construction (all dependent on available funds). A Guide to Enwronmenta/ Documents and die NEPA Process for die Iowa City Gateway 6 IOWA CITY — GATEWAY Recap of process to date: • The NEPA environmental evaluation process kicked off in December, 2010. • As part of the process, a Purpose and Need statement was developed to guide the development of alternative solutions. The purpose and need statement included the following: • Maximize the reliability of the Dubuque Street and Park Road corridors • Minimize flood backwater rises created by the Park Road Bridge • Address roadway deficiencies related to pavement and safety. • A large range of conceptual design alternatives were developed to respond to the issues detailed in the purpose and need statement. Multiple alignment options of Dubuque Street, flood protection elevations for the roadway, the Park Road Bridge location and flood protection elevations, and structural types were considered. • Various environmental studies for the project area were performed, including a mussel survey of the Iowa River, a noise analysis, archeological and historic architecture studies, hydraulic and floodplain analyses, wetlands delineations, and various others. • The conceptual design alternatives were then evaluated based on potential natural and social environmental impacts, engineering feasibility and constructability, Iowa River hydraulic impacts, and estimated construction costs. • What emerged from the evaluation process was a "hybrid" preferred concept that incorporated elements from the various conceptual design alternatives. The potential impacts of the Preferred Alternative were then documented in an Environmental Assessment prepared for approval by the Iowa DOT and Federal Highway Administration. • The EA was approved for public review and comment by the FHWA in mid - February, 2013. The formal public comment period began March 14, 2013 and extended to April 15, 2013. The EA was distributed for review and comment to federal, state, and local agencies. Similarly, the EA document was available at City Hall, the public library, and for download via the Iowa City Gateway website. Comments on the document were received by letter, email, and through comment forms provided with the EA document at City Hall and the library. • A drop -in center and formal Public Hearing were held April 4, 2013. Approximately 60 people attended, including City and consultant staff members. • Prior to FHWA's signing of the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), local citizens appealed to the Iowa DOT Cultural Resources Section to re- evaluate the finding of a Conditional No Adverse Effect to historic resources in the Dubuque Street corridor. • As a result, Iowa DOT Cultural Resources engaged the Highway Archeology Program (HAP) to conduct an independent review of the Section 106 Historic Evaluation process. The conclusion of the independent review agreed with the finding of Conditional No Adverse Effect on cultural and historic resources in the project area. • Local citizens appealed to the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) to rescind its letter of support for the Iowa City Gateway Project. On July 26, 2013, the HPC voted 7 -1 with one abstention to amend the previous letter of support with strong recommendations to: • Minimize grading and tree removal on historic properties; • Address drainage issues at 1818 N. Dubuque Street; and o Adopt design methods that would allow a thinner bridge deck therefore lowering the proposed grade of the Dubuque Street and Park Road intersection. • Local citizens also appealed to the Advisory Commission on Historic Preservation (ACHP) to review the project's effects on historic properties. ACHP reviewed project materials related to the Section 106 process during August, 2013. As a result of the review, the FHWA considers the Section 106 process complete. • A draft FONSI is currently being finalized to include information regarding the Section 106 process reviews. The FONSI is anticipated to be submitted to Iowa DOT and FHWA the week ending September 6. Recap of Public Engagement and Outreach: • 01/03/2011- 1st meeting with Joe Coulter in engineering office • 2/01/2011— Meeting with Joe Coulter at his home. • 2/17/2011— 1st call with Dr. Colby • 2/23/2011— Visited Dr. Colby's home to discuss the project • 3/3/2011 Public Meeting #1— More than 150 attendees had an opportunity to learn about the project process, provide input regarding corridor needs, ask questions, sign up to receive project information, and see a short presentation and the project and its current status. The meeting was publicized via postcards mailed to over 2,000 addresses within and adjacent to the study area, paid advertising in six issues of the Iowa City Press - Citizen and online edition, and press releases sent to the local media and posted on the city web site. • 4/6/2011— Bella Vista Neighborhood Meeting — was extended to all, but Scott McDonough & Barbara Latenser, past owner of 12 Bella Vista (Pink house) attended. Jim Harris & Dr. Colby did not attend & 6 Bella Vista was for sale /unoccupied. • 7/13/2011 Public Meeting #2 — More than 100 persons attended an open -house from 4:30 to 5:30, followed by a presentation and short question and answer session. This meeting included information on improvement alternatives, reasonable alternatives, alternative screening criteria, and bridge alternatives. The meeting was advertised via postcards mailed to over 2,000 addresses within and adjacent to the study area, email notifications to past meeting attendees who had provided valid email address, paid advertising in six issues of the Press - Citizen and advertising in the Daily Iowan, press releases to the local media, and the presentation was recorded and aired by local access cable TV. • 8/01/2011— Meeting with Joe Coulter, engineering office • 11/30/2011— Meeting with Joe Coulter, engineering office to discuss 3 alternatives to be presented at Drop -in Center • 12/8/2011 Drop -in Center to present 3 alternatives — Because of wide public interest in the project, the draft alternatives were posted to the project website on November 25, 2012. Those that wanted to review maps, ask questions, or submit comments in person, a drop -in center was held on December 8, 2012 at the Robert A. Lee Community Center. Approximately 30 citizens attended the drop -in center. • 3/8/2012 —Channel 4 Interview (available online) with Tom Markus, City Manager. • 8/29/2012 — Special Meeting with Historic Preservation Commission. • 2/19/2013 — FHWA signed cover sheet of the EA. • 4/2/2013 — Phone call with Dr. Colby, followed up with an email to all Bella Vista Residents to share information. • 4/4/2013 Drop -In Center and Public Hearing —The April 4, 2013 Public Hearing included a drop - in center from 4:30 -6:00 pm and a formal presentation and question and answer session at 6:30 pm. At the meeting, roughly 45 attendees had an opportunity to learn about the recommendations in the Environmental Assessment. Attendees also had the opportunity to provide formal comments that are recorded in the official Public Hearing Transcript provided to Iowa DOT and FHWA along with all other comments provided during the public comment period from March 13 to April 15, 2013. • 4/4/2013 — Phone call with Andrea Clark about maintaining access to 900 N. Dubuque Street. • 4/12/2013 — Meeting at Joe Coulter's house with Rick Fosse, Bob Miklo to discuss Historic Preservation. JB Barnhouse was present as well to discuss moving the garage to the north side of the property and providing an alternate access. • 5/29/2013 — Final version of the Finding of No Significant Impact ( FONSI) document is sent to the Iowa DOT. Post -NEPA Public Engagement and Outreach: • 5/23/2013 — Tom Markus, Jeff Davidson, Ron Knoche and Melissa Clow all met at Tony Colby's residence (5 Bella Vista) to discuss the details of the project. In attendance were Laurie Cummins (12 Bella Vista), Scott McDonough (10 Bella Vista), Jim Harris (8 Bella Vista), Steven Tannen & Deb Talan (6 Bella Vista), Tony Colby, Jen Wagner (4 Bella Vista) and Joe Coulter (1818 North Dubuque Street) were all in attendance. • 6/1/2013 — Bella Vista Residents reach out to the Iowa DOT Cultural Resource staff during the last week of May. It is agreed that the City will request a Highway Archeology Program to be completed by the Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA) at the University of Iowa. • 7/11/2013 — The OSA completed their review of the project and a finding of support for the Conditional Finding of No Adverse Effect was issued, in agreement with the Iowa DOT. • 7/11/2013 — Meeting with the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission at the request of the Bella Vista neighborhood to revisit the Commission's support of the project. Public comment and input was heard, followed by a presentation from City staff with question and answer. No determination was made at the conclusion of this meeting. • 7/25/2013 — Second meeting with the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission. Comments were not taken from the public. A brief question and answer was held with staff before the Commission upheld their letter of support for the project with recommendations to pay special attention to grading and tree removal on historic properties, address drainage concerns at 1818 North Dubuque Street and approach the bridge design with the reduction of elevation at the Dubuque Street and Park Road intersection in mind. • 8/26/2013 — After an additional review of the project by the American Council on Historic Preservation, the FHWA considers Section 106 (Cultural Resources) of the EA closed and they are ready to move forward with getting the FONSI signed. IOWA CITY GATEWAY Links to project - related documents: Iowa City web site home page: http://www.iowacitygateway.org Project Location Map: http: / /www.iowacitygateway.org /wp- content/uploads /50670 DubuqueStreet ProiectArea.pdf Environmental Assessment document: http: // icgpreferredalternative .businesscatalyst.com /ea- document.html Maps of the preferred alternatives, including grade change info, cross sections and elevations, temporary construction impacts and right of way changes: http: // icgpreferredalternative .businesscatalyst.com /index.html 04/04/2013 Public Hearing transcript: http: / /www. iowacitygateway.org /wp- content /uploads /HearingTranscriptl . pdf Public comments submitted during the official comment period, 03/14/2013 - 04/15/2013: http: / /www. iowacitygateway.org /wp- content /uploads /AllComments20l3- 05 -17. pdf Previous Public Meetings and Information: http://www.iowacitygateway.org/get-involved/ IOWA CITY — GATEWAY Funding Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration (EDA) o $3 Million Financial Assistance Award received on April 30, 2010 o Funding is available for the NEPA Process, Design and Engineering o The design criteria for the final plans and specifications shall be no less than one foot above the 100 -year flood elevation Transportation, Housing & Urban Development (THUD) o $1.5 Million of Congressionally Directed Spending as part of the THUD Appropriations Act of 2010 o The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) will administer these funds o The funds are available as a Surface Transportation Priority (STP) item, sponsored by Senator Grassley. 0 100% Federal share, no requirement for local share 3. Surface Transportation Program o $6 Million SAFETEA -LU Surface Transportation Program o Funding allocated by localities for use by Federal -aid highway and bridge projects from the State's apportionment o The FHWA and the Iowa DOT will administer these funds 0 80% Federal share, 20% local share 4. Local Option Sales Tax o $25.8 Million currently Projected for this Project 5. Other General Obligation Bonds will be used for the Remaining Expense The City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program includes $4.4 Million for the North River Corridor Trunk Sewer Reconstruction Project and $1.44 Million for the Park Road 3rd Lane Improvement. Both of these projects will be constructed in conjunction with the Iowa City Gateway Project. * Project Cost Opinions are currently being prepared and will be included in next week's Information Packet to Council. m O v E a) +., CL v m S U Lf) 3 a- 0 LJ 4- U a 3 0 TR (6 -� - - - -- m H o o N C 14 o U o 0 U _■■-■■■■■■ i a) v +0 n N c 0 _■■-■■■■■■ � C v v � V L _■■-■■■■■■ c °D a c ate) O a0 Q CO _■■-■■■■■■ v d N O 2 D ci q\O _■■-■■■■■ O c c-I N ,j ■ 1 _■■-■■■■■ O � a) N ■ CO _■■-■■■■■ O n a) U ■ _■■-■■■■■ GO C -0 mG0 c 31- V Q d c v c M ON■■SOMM■■ MEN U O O _■■-■ m®mm® _■■-■■■■■■■ D ■ ■ ■■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ "M■■ ■■■■■■■ ° M■■ ■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■ __■■ r m■l C) _ Monona= ®E®®M®M® N _ *A =m®m®mm® . LU t E • , - TR (6 -� - - - -- m H o o N o U o 0 U u i a) v +0 n N c 0 � C v v � V c °D a c ate) O a0 Q v d N O 2 D ci q\O O c c-I N ,j 0 O � a) N = O n a) U GO C -0 mG0 c 31- V Q d c v c N U O o D a TR O 2 0 . GO O 7 31- 0 a a) ) O a) d dF c v v c o o U o 0 U u a) = +0 n N c 0 � V v � v c °D a ate) O a0 v d N 2 D d O 2 0 . GO O 7 31- 0 a a) ) O a) d dF N i I, q C :ttI � �. 77 - aC ti ? „l ■ r or - 41 ,dig i w: y. a- i N I i � y IPG�eSi �7T lot xv ) I or T Am h Ml - - f M - i I Arm \ y r r, R' F ITW 2 +50 0 15 30 60' a_ Dubuque Street 6�oo 0 15 30 60' 69J buJ {�• •; —! 600 Dubuque Street 1s.00 0 1s 30 60, 710 70s r sr M Dubuque Street 25+oo 0 15 30 60' ET _o m ° s " �zo° N=m `- £ y N D 0 El m ^ N N W Dubuque Street 2e +50 o is 30 so' Dubuque Street 37+5o o 15 sD 50' Dubuque Street 41+50 0 15 3C 60' O n o m m 0 < w N q uQ o � ;,17 mo o 0 m u' 0 m v £ Park Road 6�oo 0 15 30 60' Park Road 16.00 o u 3c no n a m m w N o o ^ F < 0 o x 0°Q = 7 u o A m W m ? = £O m :E N � � N C n 3 N 9 LL Q 3 O 3 � N f0 N U a o - N v OI c w O 0 o w z U s O LL O LL S LL � O o a LL � IL W �_ ma 0 LL N'j Tm Tm 88 00 LL LL mm f 1 W F M, C) U C N a N N L 3 cco .a V ^� UW 'L) ^ W 3 Q 7 Q 7 J Q J d] i Iowa City Gateway Cultural Resources ' Dr. HH & Sylvilla Jacobsen House o zs so ioo „�,,,, 52 -05067 - 1818 N Dubuque Street �� Iowa City Gateway Cultural Resources Englert- Ball - Pownall House o 125 25 so „�,,,, 52 -05068 - 1501 Ridge Road 11 iEw. 6TJ- Iowa City Gateway ' Cultural Resources o zn an m Brown Street Historic District �d rrewr Ira lnc6 Potential Mitigati n Grading Impacts along Dubuque St totaling 0 44 ac Uti lize minimum of 41 slope, shift Dubuque Street to the west to minimize imi acts Inditidual wl unteer trees may be removecl on 729 and 1W2 Dubuque St Trees will be replotted! In accordance wth City Code for Presenztion of Existing Trees Tempomry construction Impacts totaling 014 ac Prepemy w1l be respond to existing conditions No structures w1l be Impacted INIA ROW acquisition forwidening of Dubuque Street totaling 0004 ac jimbbiperty ovmers will be compensated per FHWA, to a DOT, and City of lcv City policies LegeM ret a.. xi :w. o.ea -are. .i�o u.m -aiumaw r. e.nm•.m -m.r.mumri.. -w.. rzmwarc.aem.. u.m -m.r.mumri.. -sm..0 � 1032N Dubuque St I oao See Seperaie Exhibits for Impacts to Intlivitlual Pmperiies 1032 N Dubuque 51 816 N Dubuque 51 804 N Dubuque 51 ` ]29 N Dubuque 51 I k o ' 1 L -- !■1) Pak oatl { 4. 816 N Dubuque St f M' >� � 804 N Dubuque St Grade Return to Exil Grade 730 - 740 -750 N Dubuque St 729 N Dubuque St 720 N Dubuque St _ 716 N Dubuque Bt -,'t 702 N Dubuque Bt 703 N Dubuque St No Impacis to. 703 N Dubuque 51 702 N Dubuque 51 716 N Dubuque 51 720 N Dubuque 51 ]30- 740 -]50 N Dubuque 51 IN0.1 EHJ- Iowa City Gateway ' Cultural Resources 0 so 100 200 "Prat Rood' Potential Historic District F6d §., Iowa City Gateway Cultural Resources Kappa Sigma (now Phi Kappa Alpha) 0 5 10 z0 , 52 -05074 - 1032 N Dubuque Street �a §., Iowa City Gateway Cultural Resources Beta Theta Pi Fraternity (3rd Location) 0 5 10 m , 52 -01542 - 816 N Dubuque Street �d §., Iowa City Gateway Cultural Resources Beta Theta Pi Fraternity (2nd Location) 0 5 10 m , 52 -01541 - 804 N Dubuque Street �d Iowa City Gateway ' Cultural Resources 0 10 20 a0 Phi Delta Theta Fraternity v „�,,,, 52 -01540 - 729 N Dubuque Street �� IOWA CITY — GATEWAY Index of DRAFT Renderings: 1. View looking South at Park Road Bridge, Hancher and City Park from 1032 N. Dubuque Street A. Existing B. Proposed - Haunched Girder Bridge, 500 +1 flood protection elevation C. Proposed – Deck Arch Bridge, 500 +1 flood protection elevation D. Proposed – Cable Stay Bridge, 500 +1 flood protection elevation 2. View looking South from the Patio of the UI Beckwith Boathouse at Terrell Mill Park A. Existing B. Proposed– Haunched Girder Bridge, 500 +1 flood protection elevation 3. View looking South from the entry to the UI Mayflower Residence Hall A. Existing B. Proposed – 500 +1 flood protection elevation 4. View looking South from the Cliff house Apartment Building, just south of Ridge Road A. Existing B. Proposed – 500 +1 flood protection elevation 5. View looking South from the Foster Road Intersection A. Existing B. Proposed – 500 +1 flood protection elevation 6. View looking East from City Park toward 1032 N. Dubuque Street and Mayflower Residence Hall A. Existing B. Proposed – 500 +1 flood protection elevation C. Proposed – 2008 +1 flood protection elevation D. Proposed– 100+1 flood protection elevation * Use the Sigma Pi letters and the City Park trees to observe differences 7. View looking East from Park Road near Upper City Park and the new Hancher Auditorium A. Existing B. Proposed – 500 +1 flood protection elevation Q LL LL ry 0 �u Im m � LL LL Q ry 0 F � U � H LL Q ry F � H LL Q ry F � LL Q LL ry 0 co C14 LL ry r-) . . § �� © \ \\ j \- : \ j/ \: \ � "Z. �/ ©. l» «- ,��,� Nr '4!v or A 0 LL Q LL ry 0 I a 0 .or El x P. LL Q LL ry 0 tT .f 'L•C m LL LL ry Q C E f 1. I tT .f 'L•C U LL ryH Q } 0 LLLL ry r-) 9 r� - WILA'aw I zoos, _ y:' i zoos, _ y:' e } .I rya. I � sl Marian Karr —1P3 From: Tom Markus Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 12:54 PM To: *City Council & All Dept Heads Subject: Adam Bentley's Resignation Adam has submitted his resignation as he has accepted the position of Assistant City Manager of Manhattan, Kansas. Adam has grown in his managerial capabilities and as such is now in a position to move up to a more senior managerial position. We knew this was possible when we brought Adam on board but like most things it occurred too quickly. Adam's employment has given Adam a chance to grow but has also added greatly to our management staffs capabilities in responding to our community's needs. We wish Adam great success in his new position which is a normal progression for Adam in his quest to become a City Manager. We can all take great satisfaction and pride in Adam's "promotion" knowing that the staff, elected officials and our citizens helped a young man from Iowa City advance his career. Adam will always be from Iowa City and will spread the word about our great city to all those he meets along his career path. Possibly, we may even see Adam back amongst the city staff in some future role if the right circumstances evolve for him and the city. We all wish Adam the best of luck in his new endeavor. September 5, 2013 Thomas Markus City Manager 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mr. Markus, ' alai CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 -1826 (3 19) 356 -5000 (319) 356 -5009 FAX www.icgov.org Please accept this letter of resignation from my position as Administrative Assistant to the City Manager effective October 4th, 2013. 1 have accepted a position with the City of Manhattan Kansas, home of Kansas State University, as the Assistant City Manager. I am hopeful that I will be able to assist in any transition of my responsibilities in the interim. Iowa City is my hometown, I grew up here, I made life =long relationships here, my family lives here; I know the community and I take stock in all the experiences I have had here. In college, Iowa City was the place I came back to visit, knowing that I always had a support structure here. Now, as I leave Iowa City, 1 am thankful to the community that saw me mature and offered me a chance to set me on my career path. I want to thank staff for their support of me and the manager's office during a time of transition for the City. I hope you continue to support the leadership of this organization and know that the work you do as a City every day is what makes Iowa City such a great place to live and visit. I am excited to see things you do to keep making Iowa City the best community in Iowa. After my time in Wichita, it was my hope to find a mentor who could offer me the chance to grow in the management profession and stretch my skillsets•:_ I found that mentor in Tom. Sometimes we take a chance on someone to help them achieve their goals and I cannot begin to express my appreciation for the time, thoughts, advice, and orientation Tom afforded me to get me on my path. Tom, I thank you for your kindness, your challenges, your patience, and your example. It will not be forgotten and I guarantee you it will be paid forward to others like me as I progress through my career. Like Tom, I appreciated the time and advice Geoff ; afforded me. Geoff s perspective, inherent curiosity, and willingness to help, are all values I hope to express throughout my career. Geoff, thank you for your example and the many hours. of. conversations we've had regarding my growth and development. Again, thank you all for your service to Iowa City and for your commitment to the organization. You have all set the bar very high and I look forward to seeing what you accomplish in the years to come. My v ry i am� September 5, 2013 Kelly Hayworth, City Administrator 1512 7th St. P.O. Box 5127 Coralville, IA 52241 Dear Kelly, Identical letters sent to: C Oipy Johnson Cou7183oard upervisors City of CoralvCity of University Hegts The University of Iowa IN CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City. Iowa 52240.1826 (3 19) 356 -5000 (319) 356 -5009 FAX www.icgov.org This letter is to provide an update to jurisdictions participating in the new Animal Care & Adoption Center as to the current status of the design process. The design development plans are nearing completion and the project will go out to bid in the coming months. Throughout the design process, many components of the facility were removed or altered in an effort to meet the estimated $3 million project budget. Approximately 3,000 square feet, or nearly 25 %, of finished space has been removed from the facility concept that was presented in the spring of 2012. This is a 7,000 square foot reduction from the programming study that was presented to neighboring jurisdictions in January 2012. Estimated cost reductions associated with building materials and mechanical systems alone have totaled over $600,000 in the most recent design, alterations. One of the facility components initially removed due to budget constraints was the geothermal system. The incremental cost of this system is approximately $100,000, with an estimated payback period of eleven years. This system is too integral to the rest of the facility's design to bid as an alternate or to add to the design at a later date; the decision regarding geothermal has to be made at this point in the process. At the September 3 work session, City Council determined that facility design would move forward with a geothermal system, given the cost savings and environmental 'benefits associated with reduced energy consumption. All jurisdictions in the facility's service area will reap the benefits of this reduced energy usage through their annual operational contract. After the receipt of bids for this project, we will of course have better information to share as to the cost implications of this decision. City staff will keep our partners informed of progress throughout the bid process, and we will revisit design decisions as necessitated by bid amounts. Please contact City staff with any questions related to the facility's current design or budget. Regards, r- G� o Markus City Manager City of Iowa City cc: Johnson County City of University Heights The University of Iowa You are invited: Synthetic Drug Awareness Open House! Coralville Public Library September 26th, 2013 6 -8 p.m. — M- 1- b57'.' IP5 Learn facts about synthetic marijuana and see what the community is doing to combat this deadly drug! Fun, interactive booths will be family friendly. All ages welcome! Agitation and paranoia Inform yourself E=> Vomiting Increased blood pressure and heart rate about the real Body temperature fluctuation Seizures Depression dangers of spice Hallucinations and bath salts! Exaggerated ghtsofsuicide Excessive Sweatinatin Psychosis Panic Attacks Heart Attacks Difficulty Breathing toxwxa ' L 1 wcw ixsa IOWA On srxrxur 2cx l'tkiMUNCCY C"` arnorn.w,mc, Orr or IOWA CITY CORALVILLE Synthetic Drug Awareness Week September 23 -29th, 2013 Inform yourself about the real c dangers of spice and bath salts! IOWA CITY ccxu+u�rrr 91 ]�IWIDR]WCf l Agitation and paranoia Vomiting Increased blood pressure and heart rate Body temperature fluctuation Seizures Depression Hallucinations Exaggerated thoughts of suicide Excessive Sweating Psychosis Panic Attacks Heart Attacks Difficulty Breathing Ni CITY OF IOWA CITY CORALVILLE Mediacom August 23, 2013 Ms. Marian Karr City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 -1826 Subject: Channel Changes Dear Ms. Karr, As we announced last year when we launched our partnership with Iowa State University, we are giving Cyclone TV its own channel. Beginning on August 30th, 2013, Cyclone TV will be carried on Family cable channel165and HD family cable channel 798 in your community." If you have any questions please call me at 319 - 395 -9699 ext. 3461 or e-mail me at lerassley @mediacomcc.com . Sincerely, utv& 4 W, t Lee Grassley Senior Manager, Government Relations Mediacom Communications Corporation 6300 Council St. NE • Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 • 319 - 395 -7801 • Fax 319 -393 -7017 IP6 CIR 17 T--. Mediacom Communications Corporation 6300 Council St. NE • Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 • 319 - 395 -7801 • Fax 319 -393 -7017 IP6 CITY OF IOWA CITY --IM-05-i 3 MEMORANDUM �� Date: September 3, 2013 To: Mayor and City Council From: Wendy Ford, Staff of City Council Economic Development Committee Re: Recommendation from City Council Economic Development Committee At their July 30, 2013 meeting the City Council Economic Development Committee made the following recommendation to the City Council: 1. Hayek moved approval to provide a CDBG Economic Development loan to Carrie Van Orden for Max Effect, a Spinning and Fitness Studio, for $30,000, as discussed. Payne seconded the motion. The motion carried 3 -0. 2. Hayek moved to fund the Creative Corridor project $10,000 as discussed and recommended by staff. Payne seconded the motion. Motion carried 3 -0. 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 APPROVED MINUTES CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE JULY 30, 2013 CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL, 8:00 A.M. Members Present: Susan Mims, Michelle Payne, Matt Hayek Staff Present: Wendy Ford, Tracy Hightshoe, Jeff Davidson, Tom Markus, Geoff Fruin Others Present: Chuck Peters (Gazette Companies); Amanda Styron (Creative Corridors Project); Molly Brown (Hills Bank); Pat Shaver (Corridor Business Journal), Carrie Van Orden RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Hayek moved approval to provide a CDBG Economic Development loan to Carrie Van Orden for Max Effect, a Spinning and Fitness Studio, for $30,000, as discussed. Payne seconded the motion. The motion carried 3 -0. Hayek moved to fund the Creative Corridor project $10,000 as discussed and recommended by staff. Payne seconded the motion. Motion carried 3 -0. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Mims at 8:04 A.M. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS: Chairperson Mims welcomed everyone and asked that those present to introduce themselves for the minutes. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The first action was to review the minutes of the June 11, 2013, Economic Development Committee meeting. Hayek noted that on page 3, at end of the second full paragraph, where it says, "Recommend an increase funding yet..." that the sentence should probably have an "in" or "of' before funding. The minutes will be corrected for the approved version. Payne moved to approve minutes from the June 11, 2013, meeting as submitted. Hayek seconded the motion. Motion carried 3 -0. CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO PROVIDE A CDBG ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN TO CARRIE VAN ORDEN FOR MAX EFFECT, A SPINNING AND FITNESS STUDIO: Tracy Hightshoe introduced Carrie Van Orden, owner of Max Effect, and briefly explained that Van Orden has applied for a CDBG Economic Development loan for her new business, Max Effect ... A Spinning and Fitness Studio. The fitness studio will be located at 1012 Gilbert Court and offer spinning, a fitness studio, limited childcare, personal training, aerobics, and nutritional products. Hightshoe noted that in Van Orden's business plan, she estimates startup costs will be approximately $213,000. Hightshoe noted that Molly Brown is here on behalf of Hills Bank, the commercial lender for the project. Hills Bank has sent a commitment letter of $135,000; EDC July 30, 2013 however, they require $50,000 of the owner. The $50,000 equity may include CDBG funds, along with owner funds, according to Hightshoe. The Small Business Development Center helped Van Orden in developing her business plan. According to Hightshoe, Hills Bank believes the projections are realistic. Staff is recommending a $30,000 loan with 0% interest over 7 years, with a lien on Van Orden's vehicle and a personal guarantee. Hills Bank will cover $135,000. Payne asked about the $213,000 startup costs and questioned whether the bank's $135,000 plus the owner equity and proposed CDBG loan, totaling $185,000 would come close enough to the $213,000 or leave her undercapitalized. Van Orden noted that the $213,000 was projected when the plan was originally prepared, and included some cushion. Hayek stated that he believes this is a very strong application and he appreciates the vetting already done by staff. Mims agreed, adding that she too is glad to see this business opening in this location as they work towards redevelopment in the Riverfront Crossings area. Van Orden shared her excitement of opening the business, saying she believes good things are going to happen in the Riverfront Crossings neighborhood and she was excited to be in on the ground floor. She responded to Members' questions, noting that she is ready to sign the lease on the building once the finances fall into place. Hightshoe reminded the Members that the full Council no longer has to vote on these types of recommendations to the Council. Members were unanimous in approving the loan to Van Orden, who thanked them for their help. Hayek moved approval to provide a CDBG Economic Development loan to Carrie Van Orden for Max Effect, a Spinning and Fitness Studio, for $30,000, as discussed. Payne seconded the motion. The motion carried 3 -0. CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION FOR FUNDING THE CREATIVE CORRIDOR PROJECT: Wendy Ford spoke to Members about this request. The Creative Corridor is a group that came together with the main goal of marketing the Corridor to attract and connect creative people and business. Ford noted that the idea was to get people to come to the corridor to live, work, play, etc., and to get the new 'Iowa's Creative Corridor' brand ingrained in their minds. The new campaign, We Create Here, spreads the word with buttons, window clings, and videos to get the word out. Ford shared a brief video with Members designed around the concept. Ford continued, noting that a big new initiative, 'creative week' will be the third week in October this year, the 19th through the 26th. This event will highlight all of the innovative things happening in the corridor. All of the intiatives are geared toward attracting young, creative, professional people and companies to the area which directly aligns with our strategic planning goals in economic development. Ford noted staff believes the City should participate in this endeavor and is recommending the request for $10,000 be granted. Next, she introduced Chuck Peters and Amanda Styron with the Creative Corridor group. Peters gave a quick recap of his visit last October with Members about the Creative Corridor Project. He spoke about how the group aims to make positive image changes about the corridor. Styron also spoke about the newest campaign, noting that they have had the opportunity to partner with multiple creative agencies around the corridor while working on this initiative. Getting people connected is a major factor in this effort, and Styron shared how they have a weekly profile story in their newsletter to aid in this connectivity. She then spoke briefly about some of their goals as they attempt to draw more and more people to the corridor. EDC July 30, 2013 Payne shared that the video was great and would be appealing to a wide range of audiences. Peters spoke to the challenges in getting people to come to the area to begin with. By having multiple tools — buttons, videos, brochures — they hope to reach a wider audience. Discussion ensued about the branding or marketing aspects of this latest campaign and what they hope to accomplish. Hayek then asked if there is a plan in place to address the 'trailing spouse' challenge we have in this area. He spoke about how difficult it can be to bring in double- income families as finding employment opportunities for two professionals simultaneously is difficult. It was noted that the University has such a program in- house. Payne asked Peters and Styron how they are able to work with multiple jurisdictions. Mims added that you have to look at what each organization's mission is. She further explained what she meant and shared how a Chicago suburb handles their economic development challenges. Payne spoke about how other areas handle their economic development, and Peters added that a trip to a city such as Minneapolis might be a good idea. Styron shared that their mission is to get everyone to collaborate and work together in order to better themselves as a whole. She also noted that in November they will be looking at their programs, and that perhaps the 'trailing spouse' issue could be added to their agenda. Hayek moved to fund the Creative Corridor project $10,000 as discussed and recommended by staff. Payne seconded the motion. Motion carried 3 -0. STAFF TIME: Davidson noted that there are several projects happening in the area. Midwest One has taken out permits for the renovation of their historic building. He added that their designers have been in constant contact with the City. He also noted that the Court/Linn Street site is generating some interest. The City Manager's office and Planning have been in contact with several developers regarding this parcel. He then noted the University's belief that the Jefferson Building is an underutilized resource for the community. They have requested that the City coordinate a master planning process, including them, the City, and the private property owners in the area. Davidson then noted that the Bruegger's business is coming back from the ashes. The Van Patten property, which also burned, now has a design team working for them. The Park at 201, according to Davidson, has only two or three residential units left. The building is approximately half completed and almost all of the residential units are sold. There has also been a lot of interest in leasing office space. Davidson continued, noting that the University has some world -class projects in the works with the Art and Music buildings. He noted the hotel projects in the works, and how the need for hotel rooms is still there. As for the industrial sector, Davidson noted that two local employers have been meeting with the City about possible expansions. A third existing business is going to be adding 50 jobs, according to Davidson. ICAD is also ramping up their marketing of the industrial park. Davidson stated that they do have an interested prospect in the industrial park, and due to its 'shovel- ready' status, it has put the city in competition with other cities. Payne noted that the second building is up in Towncrest. Hightshoe added that Eye Associates and Towncrest Dental will be moving to the new spaces. She spoke to some of the other areas in Towncrest where there has been interest in redevelopment. Hightshoe then briefly filled Members in on upgrades downtown, such as the Bo James building, the Atlas, and Quinton's. EDC July 30, 2013 COMMITTEE TIME: Hayek urged the group to continue to look at economic development holistically. He stated that the fact that there is demand for more office space in the downtown area speaks to the over- growing need. Davidson added that they are starting the park planning process at the north wastewater treatment plant site. They have a grant opportunity that they are pursuing which may fund the demolition of this site and enable the City to get it ready for an actual park. Payne asked about Sycamore Mall and what is happening there. Markus stated that they are working on things there. OTHER BUSINESS: None. ADJOURNMENT: Payne moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:51 A.M. Hayek seconded the motion. Motion carried 3 -0. EDC July 30, 2013 Council Economic Development Committee ATTENDANCE RECORD 2012-2013 Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused TERM O O O O NAME EXP. w N --I O Michelle 01/02/14 X X X X Payne Matt 01/02/14 X O/ X X Hayek E Susan 01/02/14 X X X X Mims Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused IP8 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2013 — 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ROOM 208 28 S. LINN STREET, IOWA CITY MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Bacon Curry, Andrew Chappell, Cheryll Clamon, Charlie Drum, Holly Jane Hart, Jim Jacobson (arrived after staff /commission comment) MEMBERS ABSENT: Scott Dragoo, Christine Ralston, Rachel Zimmermann Smith STAFF PRESENT: Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Long, David Purdy OTHERS PRESENT: Ali Suntken, Sandy Pickup, Becci Reedus, Beth Ritter Ruback, Brian Loring, Barbara Vinograde, Kari Wilken, Dottie Persson, David Hacker, Mark Patton, Steve Long, Maryann Dennis, Ron Berg RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: 1. Motion to recommend to City Council to allow Mayor's Youth to retain the FY14 CDBG funds to be used for rehab at the existing or new site based on their preference. Motion passed 6 -0. 2. Motion to recommend to City Council the following budget for the FY14 Annual Action Plan Amendment: $60,000 to the City of Iowa City UniverCity program; $74,997 to The Housing Fellowship; $100,000 to the Crisis Center; and staff will administratively increase Free Medical Clinic's FY14 allocation by $5,000. (Source of funds: uncommitted funds and program income). CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair Andrew Chappell at 6:30 p.m. APPROVAL OF JUNE 20, 2013 MINUTES: Drum moved to approve. Clamon seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 5 -0. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None received. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2013 PAGE 2 of 6 STAFF /COMMISSION COMMENT: Chappell presented certificates of appreciation to departing commission members Drum and Hart. Hightshoe expressed her thanks to them. Hightshoe reminded the Aid to Agency applicants in attendance about the new procedures for the Joint Funding Application for Iowa City Aid to Agencies funds. Chappell reminded the Commission that next month they will elect officers. Discuss Mayor's Youth Request to use FY14 CDBG Funding at a new Project Site Recommendation to City Council Hightshoe explained that Mayor's Youth was allocated $70,000 to renovate the upstairs of their current facility to use as administrative offices. She said due to the increase in office space at that location they needed nine additional parking spaces based on City Code. She said Mayor's Youth was unable to secure nine spaces at this time. She said they did, however, find a new site that they have an accepted purchase offer on — the former Hope Methodist Church on Court Street. Kari Wilken, MYEP, said in order to conform with City Code at the new site, they would need to install a sprinkler system for about $70,000 and expand the parking lot at a cost of $70,000. She said because of cost, the project may not be possible. She said MYEP was supposed to be on the agenda for the Board of Adjustment's August 21 meeting, but the site plan submitted by MMS Consultants was not acceptable and a major site plan is needed at a cost of around $7,000. She said they are waiting for their Director, Roger Lusala, to return from abroad to make a decision if they can spend that money, so the earliest they could be on the Board of Adjustment agenda would be the September 11 meeting. Wilken asked if they purchase the Court Street building, would the Commission allow them to transfer the $70,000 to the new site. She said if this is not allowed, what would be the deadline to continue to pursue the nine needed parking spots at the current location. Hightshoe said MYEP has the option to finish less space and that would reduce the parking requirements. She said instead of finishing the entire upper level, they could do a portion. Hightshoe said for the Action Plan amendment they have to know what they are doing with that $70,000 as it may be a change in location and would necessitate an Action Plan amendment. Chappell asked if the parking lot upgrade is for the Court Street side. Wilken said they would lose about 15 spaces in the parking lot by upgrading the parking lot for bus turn - around. She said with the number of staff and clients they are required to have about 70 spots. She said the purpose of the building on Court St. is to expand their services significantly. Clamon asked what they would do with the old building. Wilken replied that it would become administrative with minimal programming and with less build -out of the second floor. Bacon Curry asked if not building out as much is their only option for compliance with the parking requirements. Hightshoe said they could go through the Board of Adjustment but Sarah Walz has said that with the parking issues in that neighborhood it would be difficult for the BOA to waive those requirements. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2013 PAGE 3 of 6 Chappell said he is comfortable with voting for changing the site, since the use will be the same. He asked if the Commission recommend that they allow for either site and then they'll have to work with staff on when the "drop dead" deadline is. Wilken said by September 1 St they will know how to proceed. Hightshoe said the Annual Action Plan will go for a thirty -day public comment period before Council reviews it October 1St, so she said if they know before September 1 st they can structure the amendment based on the outcome of whether or not they are going forward with the Court St. property. Drum moved to recommend to City Council to allow Mayor's Youth to retain the FY14 CDBG funds to be used for rehab at the existing or new site based on their preference. Hart seconded. Motion carried 6 -0. DISCUSSION REGARDING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME) REQUESTS FOR FUNDING • Review Project Ranking • Discuss Average Allocation Worksheet • CDBG /HOME Budget Recommendation to City Council Chappell said they are required to discuss the high priority items first. Hightshoe said the Commission had $240,000 to allocate and out of that, $105,000 must to go to HOME - eligible activities. Chappell said they were going to try and limit their funding to two or three applicants because of reduced administrative funding /time, but it is ultimately Council's decision how to fund. Hightshoe said they are looking at CDBG and HOME projects that be approved and started immediately. The City remains in danger of not meeting HUD timeliness measures. In May, HUD released the City from a required Work Out plan. The City received four times its CDBG entitlement in program income due to the State allowing the City to retain a disaster recovery loan repayment in FY11. The City can only have 1.5 times its entitlement in the City's line of credit. The City must continue to spend the funds as timely and efficiently as possible to avoid increased HUD monitoring and the possibility of reduced future funding. The Commission started the discussion with the City of Iowa City — UniverCity program. Hightshoe explained that this is for home ownership. The City would acquire a home, rehab it with HOME funds and then sell it to an income - eligible homebuyer (under 80% median income). Discussing funding for The Housing Fellowship, Bacon Curry said it seems like a win -win. She said you get upgraded existing rental homes in neighborhoods and keep them affordable. The next organization discussed was the Crisis Center. Drum said there are so many agencies that depend on the Crisis Center that it's the place to put the money as far as he's concerned. Other commissioners chose to rank this much lower because of the caution to fund only a few projects so they had to make hard decisions. Chappell said he doesn't see the point of additional funding for Mayor's Youth for the new site due to the uncertainty of the new location and there is another round coming up. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2013 PAGE 4 of 6 The Commission agreed that MECCA serves a large geographic area and only a small percentage are Iowa City residents. Willing to fund MECCA in the future, but for this round will consider other projects. Brian Loring of the Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County explained where they are in their remodeling and what the requested funding would do to complete that work. He said they will partially complete this project if they didn't get full funding, but he didn't know how much work would take how much money. The Commission then discussed their lower priorities. Chappell said there seemed to be agreement not to fund Habitat for Humanity this round. He and others agreed that they would like to see the majority of Habitat projects in the pipeline completed before they fund Habitat again. The Commission didn't feel that the City of Iowa City Fagade Improvements really fit into the ideal of what it wants to fund. Barbara Vinograde of the Free Medical Clinic said after hearing what everyone else has to say today, she would like to change her request for funding to $10,000. This funding would be used for some painting and repairs and a little more work on the bathroom. Bacon Curry asked if the Crisis Center could do anything on the parking lot with partial funding. Reedus said the parking lot would cost a minimum of $100,000. She said they have experienced a lot of flash flooding in the last few years and have lost cars, lost their lift, and had seepage into their warehouse. She said all the engineering work has been done to try and get the water away from the Crisis Center. Hightshoe asked if full funding is allocated for the Crisis Center and it costs more than the estimated $100,000 can they complete it with their own funds. Reedus stated they would complete the project. Chappell asked to hear from the three commissioners who were not supporting full funding for the Crisis Center. Jacobson said he felt there were more important projects. He said he wouldn't vote for full funding. Clamon said she would agree that the Free Medical Clinic is not as urgent as she thought it was so she'd be willing to forego that but would still like to see the Neighborhood Centers get something. Jacobson said he would be willing to move the MECCA money to the Crisis Center, but that's as much as he would be willing to fund and his priority is the Neighborhood Centers project. Bacon Curry said her rationale for fully funding the Crisis Center was because it sounded like Neighborhood Centers would need to come back again at some point anyway. She said that the Crisis Center does have a timeliness issue with getting this project done and December occupancy. She said she ranked this way based on the preference to fund only two or three projects for higher amounts There was discussion about what amount of funding the groups had gotten in the last two fiscal years and why. Chappell said that Loring has implied that if they don't get full funding this round, they will potentially be back in January. He asked the Crisis Center if they got full funding this time, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2013 PAGE 5 of 6 would they be back in January for the next round. Reedus said they would not. She said they only have this fall to get this work done and there are no other phases of the project. Drum said that these are all good projects and they're all going to be back, but it's a cycle — sometimes organizations get full funding and sometimes they don't. Chappelle took a reading of the commission and there was a majority in favor of giving full funding to the Crisis Center. Drum said the big factor for him is that they are talking about more than one agency encompassed within the Crisis Center. The Commission discussed what to do with the $5,000 left over from funding the Crisis Center $100,000 and agreed to put that toward the Free Medical Center. Bacon Curry moved to recommend to City Council the following budget for the FY14 Annual Action Plan Amendment: $60,000 to the City of Iowa City UniverCity program; $74,997 to The Housing Fellowship; $100,000 to the Crisis Center; and staff will administratively increase Free Medical Clinic's FY14 allocation by $5,000. (Source of funds: returned funds and program income). Drum seconded. Motion carried 5 -1 (Jacobson in the minority) DISCUSSION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CELEBRATION Hightshoe recommended that they move the local CDBG celebration to April. This is the national week and legislators typically return to their communities. As funds are being cut, it might be more effective to align with the National week and have federal legislators attend, if possible. Consensus of members to hold during the National Week, details to be worked out. ADJOURNMENT: Hart moved to adjourn. Bacon Curry seconded. Motion carried 6 -0. NC I.I. O V W T W Z N cl T C N Z W H Q z O O U H z W m CL O J W w O D O UM 0 N Q In co o�Q z¢n. N ` N � 7 � W m C (D N N c0 N .0-0 O �- <<Z w, YXOO X X X X X X W_ O w_ O N cc W O X W O W O W O ' X X X X X X X X X X X X M x X X X X X X X X X X X X 0 X X X T X X X X X X X X X X X X X T o X X X O X O X X X T O X X X X X X X O X tC co X X X 0 X X 0 X 0 lZ X X X X X X X °- It LO � M M LO ch � LO LO W E T O N T O N T O N T O N T O N T O N T O N T O N T O N T O N aI W H T C) T 0 T rn T 0) T 0) T 0) T 0) T 0) T 0) T 0) J J J J W W Z ~ �— Z O W O T v1 V J J V O = Q ' J 2F Z m Z O V Z = N m 0 O J �J W W a s = a�� a Q �(L) Z m 0 m 0 C N ` N � 7 � W m C (D N N c0 N .0-0 O �- <<Z w, YXOO IP9 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY AUGUST 15,— 7:00 PM — FORMAL EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Anne Freerks, Phoebe Martin, Paula Swygard, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: Mary Gravitt, Duane Musser, Glenn Siders, Alan MacVay, Lori Dockery, Clifton Young, Tim Furman, Kevin Monson, Nick RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: 1. The Commission voted 7 -0 to recommend approval of REZ13- 00019/SUB13- 00012, a rezoning of a 1.31 acre area from Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) to Planned Development Overlay /Low Density Multifamily (OPD- RM -12) and a preliminary plat of The Westwinds Second Addition, a 1.31 acre, 2 lot subdivision located south of Melrose Avenue and west of Westwinds Drive subject to the following conditions: • Restoration of the existing stormwater detention facility on the subject property and a plan for maintenance of the facility (Staff recommends a Homeowner's Association be required for the proposed units to ensure that the owners will be responsible for long -term maintenance). • City Engineer approval of stormwater calculations and construction plans prior to final plat approval. • An easement to share the private driveway that provides vehicular access to the subject properties from Westwinds Drive. • An easement to allow Lot 3 of Westwinds to use the existing parking spaces on the proposed Lot 1 and 2 of the Westwinds Second Addition. • Review and approval of the building design by the Design Review Committee. • Provision of a pedestrian access along Willowwind Place to Westwinds Drive. • Provision of an accessible pedestrian route from the proposed 7 unit building to Melrose Avenue. 2. The Commission voted 6 -1 ( Theobald opposed) to recommend approval of REZ13- 00020, a request to rezone approximately 2.13 acres of land located east of Conklin Lane, southeast of Dodge Street and west of Dodge Street Court from Community Commercial (CC -2) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) subject to the following conditions and to amend the second condition to add the words "and appearance from Dodge Street ": • Development within 80 feet of Dodge Street Court will be limited to single family, duplex or townhouse style dwelling units; • A development plan, including a landscaping plan, building designs, and site plan be approved by the Design Review Committee and be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 2 of 12 Planning and Zoning Commission for review and approval to ensure compatibility with adjacent residential properties and appearance from Dodge Street; • If development on this property has vehicular access to Dodge Street Court, the developer shall install improvements needed to bring the street up to City standards to the point of access (driveway location); • The applicant shall dedicate sufficient land along the entire property frontage to widen the Dodge Street Court right -of -way to 50 feet. • The applicant installs sidewalks along the Conklin Lane and Dodge Street Court frontages, and provides pedestrian connections from the development to the sidewalk on Dodge Street; • Development on the subject properties shall be designed to drain on -site stormwater away from Dodge Street Court. 3. The Commission voted 7 -0 to recommend approval of an amendment to Title 14:2C -8 of the Zoning Code Central Business Site Development Standards to allow additional building height and floor area, and alternative ground floor transparency and building articulation standards for properties zoned Central Business Support (CB -2) that are located in the Riverfront Crossings District as set forth in the staff memo for this meeting of August 15, 2013. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Mary Gravitt of 2714 Wayne Avenue said she's concerned with all these outdoor restaurants. She said she thinks the City is allowing too many of them, and takes particular issue with the one on College and Linn Streets where the outside eating takes up two- thirds of the sidewalk, leaving people in wheelchairs at risk of tipping over into the street due to the slope of the outer portion of the sidewalk. She also took issue with the way the benches were placed and said it makes it hard for pedestrians to get around, especially disabled people. Gravitt also had some complaints about the landlords at The Town and Campus apartments not being responsive to the disturbance that some of the tenants' visitors make. Rezoning Items / Development Item: REZ13- 00019/SUB13- 00012: Discussion of an application submitted by Willowwind Properties, LLC for a rezoning from Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) zone to Planned Development Overlay /Low Density Multifamily (OPD -RM12) zone for 1.31 -acres of land located at Willowwind Place and Westwinds Drive and a preliminary plat of The Westwinds Second Addition, a 2 -lot residential subdivision. Miklo said they had received a revised plat that took care of some of the deficiencies noted in the staff report. He said staff is recommending approval subject to a number of conditions. Theobald asked if the oak trees along Melrose would be preserved. Miklo said if they tied into the existing walkway they would not be touched. Freerks asked if any of the sidewalks along Melrose Street are being dealt with as a Code issue right now. Miklo said yes, and with the new development, the City will be able to deal with the Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 3 of 12 Homeowners Association about removing snow from that walkway. Eastham asked if access to this development is going to be provided solely by private drives from Westwinds Drive. Miklo said that's correct. Eastham said he has concerns about the snow removal and long term maintenance of Willowwind Drive as well as the stormwater detention basin being maintained by the homeowners associations. Miklo said the one Homeowners Association would be required to maintain the stormwater basin. He said snow removal is currently done by the condominium association to the south, but during the negotiations for an easement, perhaps they will negotiate some sharing of that requirement. Freerks said when people buy a condo, they will be informed of their obligations. Eastham said from personal experience, he knows that you don't always get all the information you need when you buy a condo. He said right now he is a bit leery of providing access across a private driveway maintained by an existing homeowners association, adding another one, and assuming that the two groups are going to work out a way of sharing and managing the maintenance of Willowwind Place. Miklo said in terms of staff recommendations, approval is subject to the developer securing an easement with their neighbor, Lot Three, so this association has a lot of leverage in what they negotiate in exchange for allowing access for their property. Eastham said the idea must be that they will use that leverage to make sure there is reasonable cost sharing in terms of maintaining those private streets. Eastham asked if he is correct that the homeowners association that would include the seven new units as well as the two units in the existing duplex will be a separate association that will be responsible for maintaining the stormwater detention basin. Miklo said that was correct. Eastham said, then, that those nine units will be responsible for maintenance for a basin that provides stormwater management for more than Lots One and Two. Miklo agreed. Eastham asked if the staff had confidence that those nine homeowners are going to be able to bear the expense of that maintenance. Miklo said the maintenance is basically mowing and any buyer will know upfront about their responsibilities. He said he doesn't think there is a way the City could impose a condition retroactively on the existing units. Eastham said that may be a substantial financial burden on those nine units. Greenwood Hektoen said that is the developer's risk to take. Thomas asked how many other units are tied into that basin. Miklo said at least the twenty -four units on Lot 3 but it may serve a larger subdivision. Theobald asked if the City Forester has looked at what trees have been selected to screen the existing duplex. Miklo he hasn't reviewed this latest version. Dyer asked if the detention pond has been maintained up to now. Miklo said it hasn't been. Freerks opened public discussion. Duane Musser of MMS Consultants said there is a large area that drains into the stormwater basin, and the applicant is aware that there's considerable expense involved to get the basin up to Code. He said once they get into the final design they will have to prove that they have the volume to meet the City standards. He said once it is established, there shouldn't be any expense for maintenance other than mowing and keeping trees out of it. He said the applicant has secured an easement agreement for the private drive. He said they are still working on the pedestrian access route. He said they are sensitive about keeping as many trees as possible Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 4 of 12 along Melrose. Eastham asked if the stormwater detention basin is actually functioning now. Musser said the water does go into it and drain out, but he doubts if it meets the current design standards, and it hasn't been properly maintained. He said they plan to dredge it and reshape it so it functions correctly. Eastham asked if Musser estimates that it will have to be maintained at some cost over time. Musser said he thinks it will be the same as mowing a yard, and he estimates that it will need to be mowed four to six times a year. Theobald asked if junipers were going to go in as the shield along the building. Musser said the trees they originally planned on were deemed too small as screening, so they went with something larger. Theobald said junipers get leggy and don't provide good screening. Musser said staff had wanted a variety of trees in case of disease. Theobald expressed her concern with the nice spruces on the edge of the stormwater basin. Musser said they would do their best to save trees, but they will have to grade and reshape to get their capacity. Freerks closed public discussion. Thomas moved to recommend approval of REZ13- 00019/SUB13- 00012, a rezoning of a 1.31 acre area from Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) to Planned Development Overlay /Low Density Multifamily (OPD- RM -12) and a preliminary plat of The WestWinds Second Addition, a 1.31 acre, 2 lot subdivision locate south of Melrose Avenue and west of Westwinds Drive subject to the following conditions: • Restoration of the existing stormwater detention facility on the subject property and a plan for maintenance of the facility (Staff recommends a Homeowner's Association be required for the proposed units to ensure that the owners will be responsible for long -term maintenance). • City Engineer approval of stormwater calculations and construction plans prior to final plat approval. • An easement to share the private driveway that provides vehicular access to the subject properties from Westwinds Drive. • An easement to allow Lot 3 of Westwinds to use the existing parking spaces on the proposed Lot 1 and 2 of the Westwinds Second Addition. • Review and approval of the building design by the Design Review Committee. • Provision of a pedestrian access along Willowwind Place to Westwinds Drive. • Provision of an accessible pedestrian route from the proposed 7 unit building to Melrose Avenue. Eastham seconded. Eastham said his major concern is that this stormwater basin will have to function well for the area right around it as well as for a much larger area, and the only mechanism available to provide long -term maintenance and functioning is nine residential units. He said they don't have any information what the cost will be per each unit per year. He said it would be different if the stormwater basin was serving only the two existing units, but it will be serving a much wider scope. He said he thinks the plan is based more on expectations than on acceptable assumptions, but he doesn't see any other way around it. Freerks said she agreed that this isn't ideal, but this lot has been a blight for a long time, and it had one owner who chopped it off and created this issue. She said you have to weigh the opportunity to create something better and create housing options against nine people being in charge of payment for the basin, but if it's maintained well, she hopes it doesn't become a huge Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 5 of 12 expense and most of all that people will know up front what they are getting into when they buy or rent those units. Theobald said her concern is the maintenance. She said some of the trees are lovely and she sees that as a really nice thing to build on if they can be saved. Thomas said it's problematic to him that the detention basin is serving the development to the south as well as the drainage from the street to the east and that the basin is the responsibility of nine units. He said it seems to be more of a legal issue than one of planning and zoning. Miklo said that if the larger subdivision was being developed today, the legal papers in the developer's agreement would address all this. Thomas said in this case there is a considerable burden on this property in terms of the renovation and maintenance of the basin. Dyer asked if the people in the existing duplex had any responsibility for the basin up to now. Miklo said they have not. He said the owner of the duplex is responsible. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0. Rezoning Item: REZ13- 00020: Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Company, Inc., for a rezoning from Community Commercial (CC -2) zone to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) zone for 2.19 -acres of land located east of Dodge Street, north of Conklin Lane and west of Dodge Street Court. Miklo said since the last Commission meeting, staff has met with the applicant and discussed the concern voiced about Dodge Street Court and the language in the Comprehensive Plan about residential development on Dodge Street Court being similar to what's in the neighborhood. He said the applicant has agreed to an additional condition that would limit any development from the first eighty feet to single family duplex or townhouse style done in a way to be compatible with the residential across the street, which may still allow the possibility of an apartment building in the area closer to Dodge Street. He said the access is likely to come off Dodge Street with no curb cuts or driveways onto Dodge Street Court. He said staff is recommending approval with the additional condition mentioned above and also continuing with the recommendation that the Design Review Committee review and approve a plan that will be forwarded to this Commission for review and approval, as well as the condition that vehicular access be limited to Dodge Street unless the Dodge Street Court is upgraded. He said staff is asking for additional right -of -way for Dodge Street Court as well as sidewalks being provided on Conklin Lane and Dodge Street Court, and that drainage be directed away from Dodge Street Court. Eastham asked if the staff considered requiring pedestrian access from the development to Dodge Street Court. Howard said it's the general standard in the Zoning Code that you provide pedestrian routes out to public sidewalks, so the applicant would have to show a pedestrian circulation pattern for the development. Eastham said he was concerned with how pedestrians from the development would get to Dodge Street Court. Greenwood Hektoen said that would be examined at the time of preliminary platting. Freerks opened public discussion. Glenn Siders of Southgate Development Services, representing the applicant, said they have no Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 6 of 12 problem with any of the conditions imposed by the Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). He asked that the Commission keep in mind that they are giving up about eight thousand square feet to accommodate the fifty foot right -of -way for future improvements onto Dodge Street Court, should they ever happen. He said they don't anticipate access from Conklin Lane or Dodge Street Court. Alan MacVay of Conklin Lane said he was pleased that the developer would need to present specific plans for this site. He asked about the density. Miklo responded that he estimated a total of twenty -four to twenty -eight units at the most could be built. McVay said they would have to be very careful about doubling the density on a very small plot. He said he want to be sure that this is developed in an attractive way and is welcoming as a gateway to Iowa City, as well as being appropriate for the neighborhood. Miklo said at the last meeting Eastham had requested adding reference to this being an entrance to the city, and that was left out of the conditions, so the Commission could make that a condition of approval. Lori Dockery of 1110 Conklin Lane said she likes the idea of duplexes and townhouse —style units but would like clarification on exactly what is meant by townhouse - style. Miklo explained that in this case each unit would have a front and back door but there is no visual separation between the units. Clifton Young of 1124 Dodge Street Court asked where the cars will be parked for all the buildings that will be constructed. He said people with garages already park out on Dodge Street Court, and if they add thirty -two more family units, that could be up to sixty cars. He said his other concern is the density. Miklo said the most efficient way to put parking on this site would be to put garage or parking behind the units. He said you might see a twelve unit building and single family duplex or townhouses on this site but there won't be a twenty -four unit building on the site. Freerks asked what the maximum number of bedrooms would be in this zone. Miklo said it would be three. Eastham asked how the current parking requirements for development work out well for this kind of development in terms of adequate on -site parking. Miklo said in this zone one parking space would have to be provided per bedroom. Freerks said it doesn't have to be three, and it could be built with fewer bedrooms. Miklo clarified if these were built as single family and they were subdivided into lots only one parking space is required. He said most single family provides two. He said if they were duplexes two parking spaces would be required. He said if they were townhouse style, which is technically multifamily, then three spaces would be required. Tim Furman of 1263 Dodge Street Court said he would urge the Commission to consider the Comprehensive Plan in their decision. He said the Plan states that "if it is not possible to achieve a mixed use development adjacent to Dodge Street Court the preferred use is residential similar to the existing residential development in the area ", not the first eighty feet of Dodge Street Court so he thinks this is some tricky wording. He said the area is all single family and he thinks RS -12 is the highest density that should be granted. Miklo corrected his previous statement and clarified that since this isn't a University Impact Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 7 of 12 Zone, only two parking spaces are required for a 3- bedroom unit. Freerks said it's in the best interest of the developers to offer guest parking with apartment buildings and the Commission likes to see it, at least with the twelve -unit building. Eastham noted there is little if any on- street parking available in this area. Freerks closed public discussion. Eastham moved to recommend approval of REZ13- 00020, a request to rezone approximately 2.13 acres of land located east of Conklin Lane, southeast of Dodge and west of Dodge Street Court from Community Commercial (CC -2) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) subject to the following conditions and amending the second condition to add the words "and appearance from Dodge Street ": • Development within 80 feet of Dodge Street Court will be limited to single family, duplex or townhouse style dwelling units; • A development plan, including a landscaping plan, building designs, and site plan be approved by the Design Review Committee and be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission for review and approval to ensure compatibility with adjacent residential properties and appearance from Dodge Street; • If development on this property has vehicular access to Dodge Street Court, the developer shall install improvements needed to bring the street up to City standards to the point of access (driveway location); • The applicant shall dedicate sufficient land along the entire property frontage to widen the Dodge Street Court right -of -way to 50 feet. • The applicant installs sidewalks along the Conklin Lane and Dodge Street Court frontages, and provides pedestrian connections from the development to the sidewalk on Dodge Street; • Development on the subject properties shall be designed to drain on -site stormwater away from Dodge Street Court. Martin seconded. Eastham said this is a reasonable approach to development of this site, which does have some considerations in terms of assuring compatibility with the existing developments along Dodge Street Court and Conklin Lane as well as complying with the Comprehensive Plan. He said he interprets the Plan for this area that the compatibility with existing buildings should definitely obtain along Dodge Street Court. He said other language in the Plan calls for more dense or multifamily development along areas served by arterial streets, and he thinks there will be good visual separation between existing homes on Dodge Street Court and any modest sized multifamily building toward the northern part of this parcel. He said he will be looking forward to a good plan consisting of internal circulation and communication. Martin said that this area being a residential area is appropriately welcoming as a gateway to Iowa City. She said she is looking forward to something residential going in there and thinks it's a nice beginning. Thomas said for him the issues of density and compatibility are the critical ones, and the opportunity the Commission will have to review the plans for this site will give the Commission the opportunity to evaluate if the compatibility is realized. He said he thinks higher density should strive toward higher quality, yet he feels that in Iowa City multifamily has a reputation as something to be dreaded. He said when they promote higher density, he would like to see a higher quality result from that, and that's what he will be looking for at the next review. Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 8 of 12 Theobald said she said she has concerns about the density and the compatibility with the existing housing. Freerks said she thinks having townhouses adjacent to the subject property has potential to blend in. She said she agrees with Thomas's comments about quality, because this is a gateway and she wants what takes place there to create a welcoming and pleasant environment. Dyer said she supports it also. She said it was a good idea to eliminate access on Dodge Street Court and Conklin Lane, although making a left turn onto Dodge Street is difficult and you will have two of those turns fairly close together. Miklo clarified that his approval would not necessarily eliminate it but would make it unlikely. Swygard said she would encourage that the next step involve the neighbors as much as possible in the design and the use of screening and she would the applicant to keep in mind that the proper landscaping can make the neighborhood feel less encroached upon. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-1 with Theobald opposed. Zoning Code Amendment: Discussion of an amendment to Title 14: Zoning, to allow additional building height and floor area, and alternative ground floor transparency and building articulation standards for properties zoned Central Business Support (CB -2) that are located in the Riverfront Crossings District. Howard explained that MidWestOne Bank is designing a new office building that will be located at the corner of Clinton and Harrison Streets on the site of the former Sabin School parking lot. She said the proposed building will replace the former MidWestOne building torn down at the corner of Burlington and Clinton Streets for the new music school. She said the parking lot was rezoned when the property was transferred to MidWestOne to Central Business Support (CB -2). It was zoned CB -2 because this zone allows drive - through facilities, and the bank wanted to retain that function. Howard said when the CB -2 zone was chosen it was recognized that eventually this zoning designation would be replaced with the anticipated form -based code for Riverfront Crossings. Howard said the staff expected the Riverfront Crossings Code to be in place by the time the building was built, but MidWestOne Bank wants to start construction sooner than originally anticipated, so they have asked staff what kinds of zoning issues they would have if they want to start this fall. Midwest One is proposing a 6 -story office building. She said the proposed building would be consistent with the Riverfront Crossings Plan in that taller, larger buildings are anticipated in that area. She said this is the only property zoned CB -2 south of Burlington Street, so the proposed zoning code amendment would only apply to this particular property. Howard emphasized that this amendment is an interim zoning solution and will only affect this property. She said in this case they anticipate that the CB -2 zoning of the property will be replaced when the form -based Code is adopted. Howard said the zoning issues staff identified are that the proposed building exceeds the maximum FAR and building height for the current CB -2 zone. In addition, the Harrison Street facade does not meet the ground -level storefront window standard that applies in the Central Business Zones. She noted that most of the central business district, retail and restaurants are Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 9 of 12 the intended predominant uses so the storefront transparency requirements are very important. In this case, the entire building is an office building and has office space on the first floor where privacy is more of a consideration. She said in the Riverfront Crossings Plan there are primary and secondary streets identified. Primary streets will have the highest standard for first floor transparency and secondary streets will have a lower requirement. For the Midwest One property, Harrison Street is the secondary street and Clinton is the primary street. She said the MidWestOne Bank building plan is consistent with the window standards anticipated in the Riverfront Crossings District for these two streets. Greenwood Hektoen asked if when the Riverfront Crossings Code is proposed would it create a non - conforming situation. Howard said there is no guarantee, because the code has not been adopted yet, but staff is relying on the work in progress and the plan itself that's been adopted already. Miklo said it's consistent with the working draft of the Riverfront Crossings Code. Swygard asked staff to define mid -rise and high -rise buildings. Howard said they don't have a particular definition of those terms in the Zoning Code. She said high -rise buildings tend to be taller than the right -of -way is wide. Miklo said the right of way in this case is 80 feet on Harrison and 100 feet on Clinton. Dyer asked if this neighborhood is likely to be rezoned in the manner they are proposing for this proposed building. Howard said it would. Howard said in the form based code it will be mixed use, which is a bit more flexible and allows residential uses along the same frontages as commercial uses. Dyer said the new building on the pedestrian mall isn't very appealing, but the worst thing about it is that on the east side there is brick straight up. She said the other building that didn't take into account the neighbors is the Oaknoll addition, where the back of the building is just a wall of plain ugly. She said she'd like to see the expectation that building walls that will be visible from all four directions will be reviewed accordingly. Howard said she has elevations of what all four sides of this building will consist of. She said all four sides in this case will be largely glass, although of varying transparency. Freerks noted, and Dyer agreed, that Dyer's comments were directed toward the future and for Riverfront Crossings in general. She said she has to agree. She thinks perhaps there was another way to design the building on the pedestrian mall so the elevator shaft and other mechanical equipment didn't necessitate a plain wall. Greenwood Hektoen explained that part of it is fire code regulations, and if you build up to the property lines, you can't have openings. Dyer said maybe they shouldn't be building up to the property line. Freerks said she has heard from a number of people, and it's something they need to look at in the future because if you are going to have a skyline perhaps all these things should be taken into consideration. Eastham said perhaps there could be a drawing or art on that side of the building Thomas said the Commission didn't get to see that side when it was made public Dyer said she wouldn't have voted for it or for Oaknoll. Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 10 of 12 Swygard asked if the same kinds of plans for sidewalk width and landscaped parkways noted in the Riverfront Crossings Plan for the Clinton Street Promenade will have to be put forth in this application. Howard said that's in the public right -of -way. She said the Zoning Code addresses regulations on private property. She said after the building is constructed, the streetscape will have to be installed according to the Plan. Martin asked if the Sabin School itself is going to be affected. Howard said the University will tear down the building and there are discussions between the City and Midwest One to construct a mid -block parking structure with residential units along Dubuque Street. Freerks opened public discussion. Kevin Monson, chairman of the board for MidWestOne Bank, said they believe this is exactly what Riverfront Crossings is and should be about. He said they are in the process of restoring the main MidWestOne building downtown and before they can finish that, they need to relocate employees to this proposed building. He said it's a very transparent and energy efficient building, showed renderings to the Commission and explained what features they will have. He said the building is five floors above grade, and the top floor has one room as a conference space, and then a rooftop garden. He said the rule of thumb for what constitutes a high -rise is a building that exceeds 75 feet. Dyer asked about the back of the building. Monson replied that the building is about the same on all four sides, although they do have different types of glass. Eastham said from the renderings the ground level on Harrison Street side doesn't look very eye- catching. Monson explained how this wall is designed to allow light to penetrate through the translucent glass, but not views in order to afford privacy to the employees and the bank's mortgage clients. He noted, however, that the main lobby entrance at the corner and the elevator portions will be highly transparent. Freerks closed public discussion. Eastham moved to recommend approval of an amendment to Title 14:2C -8 of the Zoning Code Central Business Site Development Standards by adding Subsection R as set forth in the staff memo for this meeting of August 15, 2013. Swygard seconded. Eastham asked if the proposed seventy percent requirement in paragraph 3. of the memo and forty percent requirement in paragraph 4. are compatible with the proposed design standards in the Riverfront Crossings plan. Howard said staff feels this is an improved standard for the primary streets in Riverfront Crossings. Theobald asked if there is a bike trail planned along Clinton Street. Howard replied that Clinton has enough right -of way to accommodate bike lanes, parking, busses and pedestrians. Planning and Zoning Commission August 15, 2013 - Formal Page 11 of 12 Eastham asked if it was a fair assumption to think that the four nice trees along Harrison will have to be removed for the building construction. Howard said that was a fair assumption. Freerks said she's happy to see MidWestOne investing early in Riverfront Crossings and she's delighted by the sketches that she sees here. She does wish that the Sabin School were salvageable. She said at the very least she would like a portion salvaged and recycled. She said if this is the first office building since urban renewal, there's a great need for additional business. She thinks this is a wonderful project and will be supporting it. Eastham said he's delighted MidWestBankOne is going ahead with this project. He said he thinks will be a great attraction to the area south of Burlington Street. Swygard said she's excited to see there's a rooftop garden, and she hopes they will promote it that so other businesses will follow that lead. Thomas said he's excited to see the development of Clinton Street moving forward, as he thinks that's the key to Riverfront Crossings. He said he likes the height and scale of the building. Dyer said she likes the idea of a contemporary building setting the pace rather than something that tries to look historical and isn't. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: July 18 and August 1. 2013 Eastham moved to approve all minutes. Swygard seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0. OTHER Eastham brought up a comment made during public discussion, and said some of the outdoor seating that has been approved is not necessarily something that people using wheelchairs are comfortable with. Thomas said there is the workshop process under way for the downtown streetscape plan and would encourage the Commission to give Eastham's thought some consideration. Freerks said she was glad Gravitt showed up to give her comments concerning this, and she hopes City Council will see them. She said she has heard from people about what's taking up parking places, and safety is also an issue. Theobald said she, too, has heard comments. ADJOURNMENT: Swygard moved to adjourn. Martin seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 7 -0 vote. z O N N V Z Z N 06 z z z J a D O W w W 0 a D Z w M r O N N r 0 N O Z H w W a O LL Ln LnXXXXXXx; XX -XXXX � X X X X � X X XXXXXXX; ti AXXXXXXX �oXxxxxx; � oXXXXXX �Xxxxxx0 zqxxxxoxx M Nxxxxxxx %mxxxxxxx; oOXXXXX� �XXXXXXx ao 0XXX0 ao %-XXXXx ; XX 4XXXXX V-XXXXXXLU ; XX MXXXXX ; XX �xXXxoXo M -XXXX ; XX ; -x Nxxxxx cotXXXXXXX Nxxxxx;XX �XXXXxxx X X X X X X X wd F- X000000o Z?sZ?5LnLnU) InZ?5 �XXxxx w o x NNWN If (DwMP-U)w0M r r r r r r r r WX00o0000o Z OL)4(x W 0 Q yao''� W � W J Z Z M Q J 00<X 2 Q>- w Q 0O- 2 Q ZGWLL N CL w LU (/j J WdPwwF-"W_a�N LU �8QWQ C3 Ow ZGWLL2V)0H� O z H W W Q O LL z LO %-XXXXXXX XX -XXXX � MXXXXXXX AXXXXXXX � oXXXXXX zqxxxxoxx M Nxxxxxxx oOXXXXX� ao 0XXX0 V-XXXXXXLU �xXXxoXo zaoxxxX00 cotXXXXXXX �XXXXxxx U) �W COCOMI��AM wd F- X000000o Z?sZ?5LnLnU) InZ?5 w w -QZW Z OL)4(x 0 Q yao''� QaW N Q>- Q= W ZGWLL Q w 2U) -': v X E Q) o CL Z n n u n XOo w Y