The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-08-21 Info Packet1 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 21, 2014 IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule MISCELLANEOUS IP2 Memo from Asst. City Manager: Mobile Vending Pilot Update IP3 Article from City Manager: `Sense of Place' is key to regional talent strategy IN Charter Review Commission Community Input Forum IP5 Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee: August 6 Minutes DRAFT MINUTES IP6 Charter Review Commission: August 12 IP7 Planning and Zoning Commission: August 7 City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule IN `► Subject to change August 21, 2014 CITY Of IOWA CITY Date Time Meeting Location Tuesday, September 2, 2014 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, September 16, 2014 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, October 7, 2014 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:00 PM Formal Meeting Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Monday, October 27, 2014 4:30 PM Joint Meeting /Work Session North Liberty Tuesday, November 4, 2014 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, November 18, 2014 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, December 2, 2014 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, December 16 2014 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting BAN CITY OF IOWA CITY iP2 MEMORANDUM Date: August 19, 2014 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: Geoff Fruin, Assistant City Manager Re: Mobile Vending Pilot Update The City is five weeks into the 2014 mobile vending pilot program that was launched on July 17th. This memo is intended to serve as an update on the application process and operational experience to date. The City received five mobile vending applications for the Chauncey Swan Park location. All applicants were offered spots and all accepted, paid fees and supplied necessary insurance. One applicant, Anthony Browne / Chicago Barbeque Company, has since informed the City that he does not intend to utilize the permit. The four remaining companies have been taking advantage of the vending opportunities in the park. The four companies are all local with one being from Cedar Rapids. Informal feedback to date from the vendors is that business has been slower than expected. However, the vendors are optimistic that the start of the school year will lead to a spike in traffic. A few vendors mentioned that the lack of visibility from Gilbert Street is problematic and that additional marketing would help drive people to the park during vendor hours. I have not actively solicited or received any feedback from nearby businesses or the general public. City staff has not experienced any negative ramifications such as litter, site logistics, damage to the park, etc. The flooding in City Park delayed the start of the mobile vending program in that location. However, one of our applicants expressed interest in that location and has started to vend on weekends. It is too early to gather any meaningful feedback on that location. At this time there does not appear to be vendor interest in the third location, the East Side Recycle Center. I will plan to check with the vendors again at a later date before dismissing this possibility altogether. As a reminder, a more complete report will be compiled after the program ends in October. This will help inform any policy decisions that may be considered over the winter months. Please let me know if you have any questions. `Sense of place' is key to regional talent strategy I Better! Cities & Towns Online Page 1 of 6 0 �j ! _, t-.`, 4 � '�� ` 3 �� i r�� j� C Better places, stronger communities. `Sense of place' is key to regional talent strategy Led by the Walton Family Foundation, Northwest Arkansas officials look to walkable urban solutions for future economic growth. economy Planning oD I a sprawl retrofit Robert Steuteville, Better! Cities & Towns Images for Fayetteville's downtown plan show a transformation that boosts `sense ofplace'that will appeal to prospective professional talent in the region. Images courtesy of Dover, Kohl & Partners, by Steve Price, Urban Advantage. The foundation funded by the Walton family — of Walmart fame — sponsored about 25 people to come to the Congress for the New Urbanism in Buffalo in early June. It was a remarkable group, including mayors, city council members, chamber of commerce officials, and representatives of regional planning commissions, economic development and transportation agencies, and others from four primary cities in Northwest Arkansas. The foundation's purpose is to steer rapidly growing Northwest Arkansas toward becoming a walkable transit - oriented place that is attractive to educated young professionals. The Walton Family Foundation initiative may seem ironic given that Walmart stores symbolize the single - use, big box format with large parking lots. Yet the foundation, which is led by a board of Walton family http: //bettercities .net /article / %E2 %80 %98sense- place %E2 %80 %99 - key - regional - talent- str... 8/14/2014 `Sense of place' is key to regional talent strategy I Better! Cities & Towns Online Page 2 of 6 members, is concerned with the economic future of Northwest Arkansas, the fastest growing region in the US. Three of the nation's Fortune 500 companies — Tyson Foods, J.B. Hunt Transport Services, and Walmart — are based in the in the region, which currently has 482,000 people. Because of Walmart, the largest retailer in the world, more than 1,300 vendors including Coca -Cola, Procter and Gamble, Unilever, Motorola, Nestl6, Dell, General Mills, Kellogg Company, and PepsiCo have set up corporate offices there. "People from all over the world are coming to work for these companies. We are in a race for talent," says Rob Brothers, director of the regional Focus Area for the foundation. The "talent" consists mainly of people with a college degree — who tend to favor mixed -use, walkable communities with a sense of place. Northwest Arkansas is historically rural. It's four leading municipalities — Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, and Bentonville — range from about 40,000 to 8o,000 people each. The growth pattern is dispersed and single -use, because it has mostly taken place in the last 40 or 50 years. Retaining the young and educated The concern is that the young and educated will choose to locate elsewhere if the amenities they are looking for — particularly the diverse neighborhoods served by transit — are lacking. "The goal is to attract and retain the kind of quality people at all levels that we need," Brothers says. Tyson Foods has already taken tangible action — it is moving its headquarters back to downtown Springdale. "They have 5 acres, which was the site of their original building, which has been derelict and abandoned for some time," says Matthew Petty, city council member of Fayetteville who works at the University of Arkansas Community Design Center, and a CNU attendee. After the meeting at CNU, the group discussed potential strategies to improve the sense of place, Petty says. The first is a regional form -based code (FBC). The City of Fayetteville has a citywide, optional, form - based code, which developers are choosing to use because by right they receive administrative approval of projects. The success of that code and the CNU experience — where many sessions covered FBCs — is helping Northwest Arkansas officials to feel comfortable with the concept, Petty says. The second idea is to set up an training program in walkable urbanism, perhaps tied to CNU accreditation — as other places like El Paso, Texas, and Beaufort, South Carolina, have done. Overall strategy The strategy for improving talent has four components, according to Brothers. • Improve local primary education • Create international - caliber culture • Foster economic development • Create a "sense of place." The last component, sense of place, is correlated with economic development. http:llbettercities.net /article / %E2 %80 %98sense- place %E2 %80 %99 - key - regional - talent- str... 8/14/2014 `Sense of place' is key to regional talent strategy I Better! Cities & Towns Online Page 3 of 6 There are six components to "sense of place," according to Brothers. • Increase nature trails and use of natural amenities • Boost public green space • Downtown revitalization • Coordinate infrastructure and transportation networks • Improve water quality • Increase the knowledge base of local leaders in urban planning techniques and quality of life issues Northwest Arkansas has a head start on this knowledge base from Fayetteville's downtown plan and form - based code written by urbanists Dover, Kohl & Partners 10 years ago, followed by the citywide code written by city planners. As for transportation, the region is fortunate in that all four cities are located on a single line. Despite the sprawl of recent decades, this geographic layout sets up the region for future public transit improvements. "The whole region originally grew with support by rail," Petty says. "All of the downtowns are on a historic rail line — which still runs right next to the downtowns." But the most important factor could be that, with the foundation help, key officials in the four cities seem to be pulling together. "When this is developer- driven, it takes 10 years at least to make a difference," says Greg Hines, mayor of the City of Rogers. "When the city recognizes a need for it, you can see it happening in a meaningful way in a few years." Key to this cooperation is the growing recognition, Petty says, that "The labor force chooses where they are going to live first, and then they look for a job. Times have changed and have to focus on different strategies.' The initiative doesn't yet have a name but these ideas have been brewing for some time, Petty explains. Two years ago, the foundation began to require that cities receiving grant funds for nature trails have a downtown master plan. "That was the first signal that they were zeroing on urban amenities as a solution to their talent challenges," he says. Robert Steuteville is editor and executive director of Better Cities & Towns. This article appears in the July August print issue. For more in -depth coverage: • Subscribe to Better! Cities & Towns to read all of the articles (print +online) on implementation of healthier, stronger, cities and towns. • Get New Urbanism: Best Practices Guide, packed with more than 80o informative photos, plans, tables, and other illustrations, this book is the best single guide to implementing better cities and towns. Posted by Robert Steuteville on 07 Aug 2014 http: //bettercities .net /article / %E2 %80 %98 sense - place %E2 %80 %99 - key - regional - talent- str... 8/14/2014 WHERE: City Hall, Emma J. Harvat Hall 410 E Washington Street, IC The Charter is the document that determines how the government of Iowa City is organized, and provides the legal basis for: • Composition and election of the City Council and Mayor • Employment and duties of the City Manager • Relationship with City Boards and Commissions • Restrictions on campaign contributions • Procedures for referendums and initiatives (Find the City Charter at www.ic.gov.org under City Charter or at the City Clerk's office in City Hall) QUESTIONS & COMMENTS: Send your questions or comments to the following by Monday, September 15th, for consideration by the Commission: Please include full name and address. (All correspondence is public) Charter Review Commission Or e-mail to: % City Clerk citycharter @iowa- city.org City of Iowa City 410 E Washington St Iowa City, IA 52240 The forum will be taped for rebroadcast. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COMMITTEE: AUGUST 6, 2014 To listen to meeting audio click here. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Update and Direction Regarding Addressing the Needs of the Jail, Including but not Limited to Plans and Process for Necessary Repair and Maintenance Projects and other Related Issues........................................................................................................... ............................... l Update and Direction Regarding Addressing the Needs of the Courthouse, Including but not Limited to: Design of a Courthouse Annex, Cost Estimate, Bond Referendum, Vacation of Harrison Street, Public Education and Outreach and other Related Issues ...........................2 Reports and Updates from Subcommittees ........................................................ ..............................2 Update on Membership and Structure of Committee and Subcommittees ......... ..............................2 Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members ..........................3 Other................................................................................................................... ..............................3 Supervisor Neuzil called the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee to order in the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building at 4:33 p.m. Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members present were: Supervisor John Etheredge, Supervisor Pat Harney, Supervisor Terrence Neuzil, Supervisor Janelle Rettig, Supervisor Rod Sullivan, 6th Judicial District Department of Correctional Services Supervisor Jerri Allen, MECCA Director Ron Berg, Iowa City Community Representative Simone Frierson, University of Iowa Student Representative Evan McCarthy, Bar Association Representative James McCarragher, 6th Judicial District Judge Douglas Russell, Consultation of Religious Communities Representative Dorothy Whiston, Iowa City Community Representative Karen Fesler. Absent: Iowa City Police Department Crime Prevention Officer Jorey Bailey, Iowa City City Council Member Kingsley Botchway 11, Bar Association Representative Thomas Maxwell, Iowa City Public Library Adult Service Coordinator Kara Logsden, State Public Defender's Managing Attorney Peter Persaud, Iowa City Community Representative Professor Emeritus John Stratton, and Johnson County Community Representative Diane Werzer. UPDATE AND DIRECTION REGARDING ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF THE JAIL, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PLANS AND PROCESS FOR NECESSARY REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE PROJECTS AND OTHER RELATED ISSUES Venture Architects John Cain reported on the upgrades to the Jail and on the project timeline. He said the public hearing is targeted for September 18th, the bid letting targeted for October 7th, with construction expected to begin mid - December. Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Minutes: August 6, 2014/ page 2 Venture Architects Staff Marty Wickland and Cain replied to Board questions. UPDATE AND DIRECTION REGARDING ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF THE COURTHOUSE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: DESIGN OF A COURTHOUSE ANNEX, COST ESTIMATE, BOND REFERENDUM, VACATION OF HARRISON STREET, PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH AND OTHER RELATED ISSUES Neumann Monson Architects Principal Kim McDonald displayed the proposed courthouse annex renderings and presented updated design plans which incorporate recommendations from the Public Input Work Sessions. He discussed inmate movement, employee and public accessibility, mechanical and storage space, and cost estimates. McDonald noted these changes to the original design promote greater opportunity to pursue LEED certification. He provided assurance that this design does not include the Jail. Venture Architects Design Director and Principal John Cain participated via teleconference. McDonald and Cain answered questions from CJCC members concerning compatibility with the current Courthouse, Green features, parking, budgetary increases, future building expansion, cost cutting measures, and adequate space for Jail Alternatives and Treatments. Mike Carberry spoke about some publics' perception of this project vis -a -vis the Jail. CJCC members discussed a realistic project cost as it relates to the bond referendum. REPORTS AND UPDATES FROM SUBCOMMITTEES Public Information and Outreach Subcommittee Chair Jim McCarragher said courthouse annex updates are now available on the County website. He spoke about creating an FAQ brochure, community meetings schedule, a schedule for Courthouse tours. Harney said the Facilities Subcommittee discussed the proximity of handicap parking to the courthouse annex, garbage removal sites, emergency exits, deliveries, and Clerk of Court window needs. UPDATE ON MEMBERSHIP AND STRUCTURE OF COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEES Executive Assistant Andy Johnson said the Board appointed new members to the CJCC and sent a press release seeking members to join CJCC subcommittees. Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Minutes: August 6, 2014/ page 3 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COMMITTEE MEMBERS University of Iowa Student Government Representative Evan McCarthy said he wants to create a public forum to increase voter turnout for the November 4th Bond Referendum and to discuss student safety, Green initiatives and campus sexual assaults. OTHER The next CJCC meeting is scheduled September 3rd at 4:30 p.m. Adjourned at 5:55 p.m. Attest: Travis Weipert, Auditor Recorded By Kymberly Zomermaand Finalized on August 19, 2014 Charter Review Commission August 12, 2014 Page 1 MINUTES CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 12, 2014 — 7:30 A.M. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL DRAFT Members Present: Steve Atkins, Andy Chappell, Karrie Craig, Karen Kubby, Melvin Shaw, Adam Sullivan, Dee Vanderhoef (arrived 7:36) Members Absent: Mark Schantz, Anna Moyers Stone Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Marian Karr RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None CONSIDER MOTION ADOPTING CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED: a. Minutes of the Meeting on 07/22/14 —After the `Correspondence' review, Chairperson Chappell asked if there were any changes to the meeting minutes. b. Correspondence — (1) Linda Schreiber — Chairperson Chappell called the meeting to order and noted that in reference to the Consent Calendar, they have correspondence from Linda Schreiber, who is present to speak to the Commission this evening. He asked Schreiber to go ahead and describe what her proposal is. Schreiber addressed Members, noting that the League of Women Voters has a long history in Johnson County of hosting forums. These are public forums where questions can be proposed on a variety of current issues. Schreiber added that the League would like to be able to provide the citizens of Iowa City with an update, via one of these forums (suggesting November 17th), about the Charter Review Commission's work. Chappell responded that currently the Commission is working its way through the Charter, doing a cursory review of each section. Those sections that will need further discussion are being tabled, while those that are basically noncontroversial are being given a tentative approval. He noted that once this has been completed, they will then be ready to host several public hearing type of events. Chappell added that he would be happy to participate in anything that the League would like to host, and he asked what other Members think of participating. He asked Schreiber for some clarification on what type of forum the League would like to see. Schreiber stated that the League is more than willing to work with the Commission on whatever type of forum they would like, that they want to be part of the overall discussion of the Charter Review process. Sullivan added that he believes this would be a great idea, and that the League should decide if they want an informational type of meeting or if they want some back - and -forth dialogue to take place. After some discussion of just what type of forum should be held, all agreed that if the Commission is not done with their review by November, which is the date the League would like to hold a forum, they probably should wait to schedule this. Schreiber added that perhaps after the first of the year would be a better time to look at this again. Charter Review Commission August 12, 2014 Page 2 Members continued to discuss this issue, questioning if they should do a co- sponsor event with the League, or continue as they had planned. Chappell then suggested that Schreiber speak to the League, letting them know that the Commission is interested in some type of collaboration, but that they want to know more specifically what type of forum this will be. This could be either a Q & A or some type of interactive forum, for example. Chappell added that a November date may not be too early, that they really just need to know what type of forum to expect. Schreiber stated that she will speak with the other League members and will be back in contact with the Commission as soon as possible. Kubby stated that they should look at a November date that is after the elections, so that there is no confusion about any of these issues being on the ballot. Schreiber will be in touch with the Commission once the League has had time to discuss this further. Chappell noted that they also have correspondence from Member Mark Schantz that states he is working on some language for the Preamble and also a discussion draft for amendments that would provide for the direct election of the mayor. Karr noted that Schantz was distributing this information to Members now so that they can discuss at a later meeting. Chappell asked that Members review this information prior to the next meeting, and asked Karr to include in the next meeting packet for Members' convenience. Atkins moved to accept the Consent Calendar as presented, seconded by Sullivan. Motion carried 7 -0, Schantz and Stone absent. REPORTS FROM MEMBERS AND STAFF: Karr stated that information was included in the meeting packets regarding elections. This was requested at a previous meeting. Also included was the red -line version of the 2005 revision to the Charter to help Members see what changed from the last time to what they have before them now. She added that there is also correspondence from City Atty. Dilkes in the packet. Kubby spoke to why they requested the election information. The question was raised on whether the City could avoid some of the costs of a primary. She added that in looking at the information provided, it does not look like there is any savings to be had. Members briefly discussed this issue. Chappell spoke to Dilkes' memo regarding campaign contribution limits and that no changes appear to be needed here. Kubby stated that she has some questions regarding Citizens Untied vs. the FEC, that the popular interpretation of this is that 'money is speech, and you can't limit speech.' She then questioned how they can have a limit on contributions. Dulek responded that it has to do with spending the money, versus giving it to someone — contribution versus expenditure. The question was raised as to whether the current amount is agreeable, especially since it has not been changed for the past ten years. Chappell stated that he is, that he believes limiting the amount is a good thing. Kubby stated that even with this limit, candidates have still been able to raise fair amounts. Next Chappell reviewed Dilkes' memo regarding initiative and referendum. The first issue — the requirement that petitions be signed by qualified electors. There is no constitutional problem with this. Second, is the requirement in the Charter that petition circulators be qualified electors legal. The response from Dilkes was probably not, with her reasoning analysis suggesting no. Charter Review Commission August 12, 2014 Page 3 Kubby stated that another questions was should there be any kind of qualification, such as residency. Chappell stated that they can either discuss this now or when they get to this section. He suggested that if Members have specific questions about Dilkes' memo, they should ask those of Asst. City Atty. Dulek at this point. REVIEW CHARTER: a. Specific Sections to be Addressed: * Additional Commission discussion of Preamble through Article VI — Craig asked at this point if they are open to going to other groups, such as what the League is suggesting. Chappell stated that he believes they should be open to speaking with or listening to anyone with interest in their mission. He believes the question becomes are they going to do this as a group or individually. He stated that he has not had any other requests. Karr stated that she has received several inquiries, where some groups are waiting for the initial review to be completed before they will be wanting to take part in some kind of conversation. Chappell suggested that the initial public hearing very well may help shape the major discussion from that point forward. Atkins noted that if a neighborhood association, for example, wanted to share their feedback, one of the Commission Members could be assigned to attend a meeting and listen to what the residents have to say. Then the Member could report back to the Commission. * Article VII — Initiative and Referendum - Chappell then moved to Section 7.01A for review and read this aloud. He asked Dulek how much of this section is dictated by State Code. She responded that she believes it all to be organic as the initiative and referendum are really a City creation, but that she would have to double -check this. Chappell then asked Karr if Section 7.01A(3) has changed much — the definition, the measure, and the limitations thereof. Karr responded that she did not believe it had changed much, other than the last noted change. Members briefly discuss the wording here. Karr added that at the last review this change was seen as more of a clarification than anything else. Chappell asked if anyone had any questions about the distinction between initiative and referendum. He gave Members some examples of an initiative versus a referendum — proactive versus reactive. Members discussed this issue, noting what a citizen can do if they are wanting to change a law or enact a law. The conversation then turned to the issue of the signatories having to be qualified electors, as opposed to eligible electors. Chappell noted that this is different from the requirements to change the Charter, which are set by State Code. Sullivan stated that he believes the current rules to be problematic in that they defy the spirit of the Election Day registration law, which he believes is meant to make it as easy as possible for citizens to participate in democracy. Members continued to address this issue, speaking to 'eligible' voters versus `qualified' ones. This led to the discussion of residents who may not be U.S. citizens. Vanderhoef stated that she would be asking people this question, first thing, before having them sign a petition. Craig spoke to the issue of getting people registered to vote, while attempting to gain signatures on a petition. She noted that this is a good way to get people more involved and to get them registered to vote. Sullivan noted that he too wants to see more involvement, but that he does not believe the current system is working. Karr spoke to Charter Review Commission August 12, 2014 Page 4 the procedure her office follows in ordering voter rolls once the petitions are turned in. Chappell stated that he believes the same -day voter registration process definitely makes it easier now, getting people more involved and paying attention to what is happening where they live. Sullivan stated that he believes it can still happen where you sign someone up to vote, and yet they still do not actually go out and vote. Chappell stated that at least if they are registered, they are saying they might vote — that there is a better chance they will. Sullivan spoke to the younger generation of voters and how he believes they approach it. He believes they need to make it easier for people to participate in their democracy, but that they also need to be aware of whom they are affecting in real terms. Chappell asked Karr about the petition process, more specifically how long before she checks the voter registration against the signatures. She responded that once the process starts you have a certain number of days to return it, followed by a set number of days to certify the petition, and then it is deemed either 'sufficient' or 'insufficient.' The petitioner is then allowed a second chance to get the required signatures, if needed. The conversation continued, with Members addressing the various issues at play here. Being a university city, the student population is one issue, while the transient nature of many of the residents is another when it comes to being a registered voter. Chappell noted that with two Members absent today, they will definitely need to have this conversation again, letting them weigh in on these issues as well. The conversation then turned to 7.01 B(1), with Sullivan reading this section aloud to the Commission. Members briefly discussed this subsection, moving on then to (2). Questions arose over the time period, with Karr clarifying how the Council handled the sunset clause provisions. Kubby spoke to how this has come into play with issues such as the 21- ordinance. She gave examples of how a two -year time period is really not that long, adding that it should be at least a 4 -year period. Shaw noted that people could, if they wanted, use that to their advantage — having initiatives around the clock, knowing that it takes four years. They could then work hard to get a Councilor elected that agrees with them, continuing the initiative. Kubby stated that it is quite an organizational task to do this, and that it would take a larger group to accomplish it. Chappell stated that he is open to more than two years, and Sullivan stated that a Council term (four years) sounds reasonable to him. Vanderhoef stated that she is still a bit concerned about unintended consequences of such changes. Members continued to discuss two years versus four years, and how this might affect citizens trying to make changes. The majority of Members appeared to find two years too short, but they struggled over a specific timeframe. Building a review period into the wording was also discussed as a possible measure. Chappell noted the meeting time and that they need to wrap things up. He asked if everyone was agreeable to stop at this point and begin with 7.01 C at the next meeting. b. Commission Discussion of Other Sections (if time allows): DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Craig stated that she noticed in the information they received about the previous Charter Review Commission that they meet the day before and the day after their public forum. She asked why this occurred and if they should be considering something like this. Karr responded Charter Review Commission August 12, 2014 Page 5 that that particular commission had finished early, so they decided to finish their overall report and end the commission's time. She stated that they also used subcommittees to work on specific issues, and in general had a quicker turnaround time. Kubby stated that it would be a good idea to meet fairly soon after the public forum, while ideas are still fresh in everyone's mind. Chappell suggested that Members bring their calendars to the next meeting so that they might look at dates and get something pinned down. Karr noted that as they approach fall they can still use the second and fourth Tuesday meeting times, but that Members need to let her know if their schedules change. Chappell stated that he will not be able to meet for six to eight days after their public hearing date, as he will be out of state. Karr then asked if there were any comments regarding the approach for the September forum. Craig noted that on page 59, there needs to be an "A" in front of Community Forum. Also at the bottom of the page it says "board," and Craig suggested this say "Commission" instead. Karr asked if Members want the September 23 forum taped or broadcast live. This was briefly discussed, with Members agreeing that they would prefer taped for further rebroadcast. Chappell asked that on the next meeting's agenda, Karr add under "Public Involvement" a separate bullet for setting a tentative date for their second forum. Vanderhoef then asked if they could check with Public TV about listing at the end of their meeting two or three times that they know the public forum will be rebroadcast. Karr stated that she will check into this, but that Public TV doesn't always know the exact schedule on these types of rebroadcast. She added that they could add a graphic at the end of the taped broadcast with these dates. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. TENTATIVE THREE -MONTH MEETING SCHEDULE (Second & fourth Tuesdav of each month): August 26 September 9 September 23 — tentative public forum (proposed start time of 7:00 P.M.) October 14 October 28 ADJOURNMENT: Sullivan moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 A.M., seconded by Vanderhoef. Motion carried 7 -0, Schantz and Stone absent. Charter Review Commission August 12, 2014 Page 6 Charter Review Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2014 Key. X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting - -- = Not a Member at this time TERM O O O O O O O O A. M M W W NAME EXP. W c N N CD 46 Ah Ah Ah Ah Ah 4/1/15 X X O/ X X X X Steve E Atkins Andy 4/1/15 X X X X X X X Chappell Karrie 4/1/15 X X X X X X X Craig Karen 4/1/15 O X X X X X X Kubby Mark 4/1/15 X X X X X X O/ Schantz E Melvin 4/1/15 X X X X X X X Shaw Anna 4/1115 X X X X X X O/ Moyer E Stone Adam 4/1/15 X X X X X X X Sullivan Dee 4/1/15 X X X X X X X Vanderhoef Key. X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting - -- = Not a Member at this time M IP7 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY AUGUST 7 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, John Thomas, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Paula Swygard, Phoebe Martin MEMBERS ABSENT: Jodie Theobald STAFF PRESENT: John Yapp, Kirk Lehmann, Sara Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: Mary Gravitt (3714 Wayne Avenue #6), Nick Bettis (1860 Boyson Road, Hiawatha, IA), John Roffman (1314 Burry Drive) RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Commission voted 6 -0 to recommend approval of REZ14- 00012, a request by St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church for rezoning 33.37 acres located north of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and east of Camp Cardinal Road from Interim Development Single Family Residential (ID -RS) to Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5), subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement requiring the reconstruction of Camp Cardinal Road to City collector street standards and the extension of water and sewer lines to the north and west property lines. Construction plans for Camp Cardinal Road and water and sewer infrastructure must be approved by the City and under construction prior to issuance of any building permit. All other site development code requirements including construction and emergency vehicle access to the construction site and extension of water lines to the site are required prior to issuance of any building permit. A final certificate of occupancy will not be issued until all infrastructure improvements are complete and accepted by the City. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Mary Gravitt asked if the property at College Street and Gilbert Street was rezoned. Yapp explained it was not. Gravitt asked if an application was submitted to rezone it. Yapp replied no application has been submitted. Rezoning Item REZ14 -00012 Discussion of an application submitted by St. Andrew Presbyterian Church for a rezoning of approximately 33.37 acres of property from the Interim Development Single Family Residential (ID -RS) zone to the Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5) zone located at the east side of Camp Cardinal Road, north of Camp Cardinal Boulevard. Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2014 - Formal Page 2 of 6 Lehmann introduced the site by showing the location maps from an aerial view. He explained that the Walnut Ridge subdivision was to the east, Camp Cardinal Boulevard was to the south, and Camp Cardinal Road abutted the property to the west. Lehmann noted that the site is currently Interim Development because Camp Cardinal Road, the only street access to the site, is currently an unimproved rural road with no sidewalks, gutters, or pavement. He continued that environmentally sensitive features are on the site with woodlands, a stream corridor, and critical and protected slopes to the south and two ravines with steep slopes protruding into the center of the property. He added that wetlands may be present on the site, but that St. Andrew had not yet heard back from the Corps of Engineers. Lehmann noted that it is likely development would require a sensitive areas site plan or sensitive areas development plan which would require an OPD designation. Lehmann said that St. Andrew Presbyterian Church owns the land, so the purpose of the rezoning to Low Density Single Family Residential is to build a church. He noted that religious institutions are allowed as special exceptions in RS -5 zones, but that any specifics regarding the church, like lighting, parking, or landscaping, will be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Lehmann said St. Andrew had been in discussions with the property owner to the north about the possibility of an RS -8 zoning designation for the northwest corner of the property or senior housing adjacent to Camp Cardinal Road, but that this requires a future rezoning application. Lehmann said the Comprehensive Plan shows the area as low to moderate density single family residential uses (2 -8 units per acre), and that churches are allowed in single family residential zones. He added that the surrounding properties to the north, west, and south were undeveloped, but that the land to the east has been developed as a large -lot subdivision (Walnut Ridge). Staff believes RS -5 is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and surrounding areas. Lehmann continued that some issues needed to be addressed before the site could be developed. He pointed out that Camp Cardinal Road needed to be improved for adequate street access to the church and future development. He also noted normally the subdivision process was when water and sewer lines are extended to adjacent property lines, but that in this case staff is recommending these infrastructure requirements as a condition of rezoning, as the Church may be constructed without a subdivision. He concluded that staff recommended making the reconstruction of Camp Cardinal Road to collector street standards and extending water and sewer lines to the north and west property lines should be conditions for the rezoning to allow future development in the adjacent properties. He added that this recommendation was revised and has been distributed to the Commission. He said that infrastructure improvements should be planned and construction underway before the issuance of building permits. He ended his presentation by showing additional pictures of the site. Freerks asked if all sites with wetlands and sensitive areas required an OPD. Yapp responded that if the development activity was nonintrusive enough, it was not necessarily required. He added that there is a difference between a Sensitive Areas Development Plan and a Sensitive Areas Site Plan, and the required plan depends upon the sensitive areas inventory in combination with the eventual development plan for the property. He concluded that there is a chance a Sensitive Areas Development Plan may come to the Commission. Freerks asked for the staff report to better reflect this. Yapp agreed. Eastham asked for clarification regarding drainage through the possible wetland. Yapp said that if it is a wetland, then it a mitigation strategy would need to be discussed with the applicant. He added that this may include drainage from the area, depending on the wetland delineation. Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2014 - Formal Page 3 of 6 Martin asked where the parking lot would be. Yapp replied the applicant brought a conceptual development plan of the church for when he speaks. Eastham asked about the rationale of rezoning the entire site to RS -5 when the immediate plan for a church only requires a small portion of the land. Hektoen noted that it is currently under common ownership and that the applicant chose not to do so. Eastham asked if it had to be rezoned RS -5 for the construction of the church. Hektoen said that is the application before the Commission. Freerks opened public discussion. Nick Bettis of Hall and Hall Engineers introduced himself as representing the owner. He showed the preliminary conceptual plan for the church. He noted that the presence of a wetland could alter the current layout; the church is planned for between the two ravines and parking is on the edges of the building. He added that there was discussion with the neighbor to the north of sharing road improvement costs and that the plan shows single family lots in the northwest corner but those are subject to change. Bettis also pointed out that trails were planned for the open space on the site's east side. He said they had a public meeting with neighbors and that their primary concern was parking lot lighting and the trail location. Eastham asked if stormwater management was determined. Bettis responded that they have preliminary stormwater basins at the bottom of the ravines. Freerks asked if they have to figure out stormwater before their special exception hearing. Bettis said they did, but that plans the Commission is seeing are all preliminary. Eastham asked if the trails would be public. Bettis said that current discussion wasn't that detailed other than that members wanted nature to be involved in their church. Yapp noted that these considerations are typically overseen by the Commission in the subdivision process, but this may not occur in this circumstance. He continued that if they build without subdividing, these issues would be addressed by the Board of Adjustment. Freerks asked if that included sensitive areas. Yapp said that it would. Freerks ask for clarification about whether the Board of Adjustment typically reviews these issues. Yapp noted that this situation was unusual, but that staff would require all these issues to be addressed. He added that if sensitive areas are being disturbed and an OPD was required, then it would return to the Commission. Dyer asked why the proposal was coming to the Commission in this preliminary stage. Yapp responded that the residential zoning needed to happen before a special exception application was made. Eastham asked if any other residential development is currently being considered for the east side of the site. Bettis responded that at this time, the church is keeping that as open space. Bettis finished by showing an architectural rendering of the church. John Roffman introduced himself as the Chair of the St. Andrew Building Committee, and said he wanted to address Eastham's question about the land to the east. He continued that secondary access to the east is difficult because of the sensitive areas and that members wanted their church's ministry to include nature as much as possible. He added that the church didn't think the revenue would have been sufficient to justify its development. Freerks closed public discussion. Thomas moved to recommend approval of REZ14- 00012, a request by St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church for rezoning 33.37 acres located north of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and east of Camp Cardinal Road from Interim Development Single Family Residential (ID- RS) to Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5), subject to the Conditional Zoning Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2014 - Formal Page 4 of 6 Agreement requiring the reconstruction of Camp Cardinal Road to City collector street standards and the extension of water and sewer lines to the north and west property lines. Construction plans for Camp Cardinal Road and water and sewer infrastructure must be approved by the City and under construction prior to issuance of any building permit. All other site development code requirements including construction and emergency vehicle access to the construction site and extension of water lines to the site are required prior to issuance of any building permit. A final certificate of occupancy will not be issued until all infrastructure improvements are complete and accepted by the City. Martin seconded. Eastham said that he thinks it is a fine site for a church and that there will be plenty of vehicular access for the site, but that he wanted to make sure the sensitive areas codes are applied. He added that he is worried the area may be too big to rezone all at once when the church only needed a fraction of the site. Freerks said she thinks it is hard for a growing church to find enough land within the city, so she likes that they are trying to be good stewards of the land. She added that she sees no problem with rezoning the whole area because it will be utilized. Thomas said it seems like they are dealing with a procedural issue and that the site has many sensitive features. He expressed concerns that the church and parking may have a negative impact on the site's natural features. Martin liked that the church is paying attention to the land and that the view from the sanctuary church was considered important to the church. Eastham asked if there was a way to make the rezoning contingent on the ownership of the church so that if the land was sold to a developer, they would have to rezone it again. Yapp replied that zoning is tied to the land, not the owner. Hektoen agreed. Yapp added that there have been some discussions about residential development, but that any applications would be made in the future. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: July 17, 2014 Dyer moved to approve the minutes. Swygard seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0. OTHER Yapp clarified that one of the Board of Adjustment standards for special exception applications was that all City codes must be followed. He added that this is when a sensitive areas inventory would be made, and either a sensitive areas site plan, which is administrative, or sensitive areas development plan, which comes to the Commission, would be created. Yapp continued that Jesse Allen, the developer of the project discussed at the consultation with Council, has withdrawn that application for a planned development and has submitted a new single family application for the August 21St agenda. He noted that the consultation was an hour Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2014 - Formal Page 5 of 6 long and that Eastham led the discussion. Yapp said he thought the Commissioners articulated their rationales for and against the application very well. Eastham asked the Commissioners if there was still interest in hearing about the design process for Sycamore Street by the new elementary school. Freerks asked how far the street design's progress was. Yapp said it is under design so that it can be constructed in time for the school's opening in August, 2015. Eastham said that scheduling a discussion about road design had been mentioned before and that he was concerned that the street segment as currently marked may not be conducive to the integration of that neighborhood as it developed. Eastham asked for a discussion with traffic engineers and acknowledged that the Commission has no authority over the design process. He added that he thought the Commission was responsible to provide infrastructure to new development. Yapp replied that Bob Miklo has talked with the City Engineer and Transportation Planner about coming to the Commission to explain the street design process and indicated that presentation of the Sycamore Street design could be a part of the presentation. Freerks agreed that street design was important to discuss, but she wasn't sure the best way to do it. Hektoen said this should be added to the agenda if the Commissioners were interested. Yapp agreed that it should be scheduled and said he would invite Sarah Walz to bring in the bigger picture for the South District. The Commission agreed. Yapp added that public workshops for the South District Plan are tentatively scheduled for late September or early October and that staff would keep the Commission informed. ADJOURNMENT: Martin moved to adjourn. Swygard seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 6 -0 vote. z 0 N O V z_ z N z z z IL 0 0 0 w w W V z z W H a le T O N ch T O N 0 z W W J NQ 0 LL z N oo xxxxxox x x x x x N ti �XXXXXXX NxxXXXXX ti � XXXOXXX �XX�XXXX T CMXXXXxxx wxxxxxxx �XXXXXXX LO XXXxXXX ti �xXXXXXX 000OMI,Inwu-) w a X Ln 0 LO 0 LO 0 u.) 0 Un 0 LO 0 U-) 0 W 4XXXXXX0 w NXXXX�XX W z M J O Ovz0QOO Oa O Nxxxxxxx Q= N �aYZama z w N X X X X X X X W G Q W ww LL Elm 2= I- F- J to �� XXXXXX 0 LL C4 XXXXXXX o� N X x x x x x x T LO X X X O X X X T T T-XXXXXXX T �U= COCOMIl- LO OIn 0 0 0 0 0 0 -X0 w w w Lu z >-Qzw<oz w J 0 J =QOM a�Na�avi wmPw�00� Q Z0WU.EU) - 0 z W W J NQ 0 LL z N x x x x x x x N NxxXXXXX � XXXOXXX T CMXXXXxxx �XXXXXXX o� = %= 000OMI,Inwu-) w a X Ln 0 LO 0 LO 0 u.) 0 Un 0 LO 0 U-) 0 W w W z m� J O Ovz0QOO Oa Q= �aYZama J 2 Q>- LUw Q� o0 � z G Q W ww LL Elm 2= I- F- -0.o w O N C to 0 O a¢az� n n u n n XOw O� r w Y