Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-04-07 Bd Comm minutes4bU4-U 1-10 (7 ) MINUTES APPROVED HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FEBRUARY 19, 2015 — 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ASSEMBLY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Byler, Andrew Chappell, Michelle Bacon Curry, Jim Jacobson, Bob Lamkins, Dorothy Persson, Christine Ralston, Rachel Zimmermann Smith, Angel Taylor MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Kristopher Ackerson, Marcia Bollinger, Tracy Hightshoe OTHERS PRESENT: Danielle Boffice, Kari Wilken, Tashundra Gathright, Richard Klausner, Al Persson, Brian Loring, Mark Patton, Roger Lusala, Casey Westhoff, RaQuishia Harrington, Bruce Teague, Kristie Doser None. Zimmermann Smith called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF JANUARY 15. 2015 MINUTTES: Bacon Curry moved to approve the minutes of the January 15, 2015 meeting. Chappell seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 9-0. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Mark Patton stated for the Aid for Agencies meeting that was held last month, the agencies were not notified of the meeting until around 10:00 a.m. the day of the meeting. He requests that in the future such communications are sent at least a week in advance. Bollinger commented that there have been a lot of staff transitions over the past few months and acknowledged that staff will try to distribute notifications a week prior to meetings. Housing and Community Development Commission February 19, 2015 Page 2 of 8 Patton stated that no funding was awarded to the Furniture Project and they don't believe they will be able to continue with the project now. Zimmermann Smith stated just so Mark knows, as a commission, they were informed that the applicants did not have to be present at the meeting and that applicants were not to address the Commission at said meeting unless directly asked a question by commission members. STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT: Chappell stated that he was double booked this evening and at 7:00 would need to leave the meeting to attend the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting as a representative of theCounty, but will return as soon as possible. Hightshoe introduced a new HCDC member, Bob Lamkins, who was appointed last week. Lamkins also noted he had to leave at 7:20 for a prior engagement. Jacobson made an announcement regarding the panel discussion on affordable housing on Wednesday, March 11. The Johnson County Affordable Homes Coalition is hosting the event. Hightshoe announced that the City allocated $75,000 to start providing small business loans up to $5,000 to income eligible business owners. The City is starting to advertise that program. Ackerson will be emailing notification out to the community and non -profits. CONSIDERATION OF FYI AID TO AGENCIES FUNDING: Zimmermann Smith announced that there was an agency that was overlooked at last month's meeting. Bollinger commented that the spreadsheet she prepared for the last meeting omitted Community Mental Health from the spreadsheet, but the information about the request was in the Commission's packet. It was a $10,000 request for support services and follow for patients with chronic mental health problems. Zimmermann Smith stated the Commission looked at all the requests $15,000 and over first, and did not fund any agency that requested less than $15,000 and therefore would not change her opinion on this application at this time. Hightshoe commented that at the time recommendations were made CITY STEPS had not been approved and that is why agencies were encouraged to apply for at least $15,000 — but it wasn't required. Persson stated she was questioned why the minimum threshold was set at $15,000. She felt there was not enough discussion on that. Hightshoe stated it was on the Applicant Guide, and City Council set that amount in CITY STEPS. Chappell said the time for discussion on that minimum threshold would have been before City Council adopted the plan. s. This Commission did review and recommend CITY STEPS with that language. Hightshoe stated that if the Commission wishes to keep the recommendation to Council that they made last month, then no action needs to be taken at this meeting. There was a consensus for no new action. Housing and Community Development Commission February 19, 2015 Page 3 of 8 DISCUSSION REGARDING APPLICATIONS FOR FY16 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME) FUNDING: Zimmermann Smith stated this meeting tonight was a question and answer session. Hightshoe explained that the question and answer session is an opportunity for the Commission to ask questions of all the agencies to get more clarification on the applications. Staff prepared a report on each application and if staff had questions they were listed in the report. The Commission recommendations are then due back to staff by March 2, 2015. The summary and rankings will be included in the packet for the March 12 meeting. Hightshoe noted that the funding amounts are what staff believes is available at this time; they have yet to confirm program income received as well as verify uncommitted funds. Therefore there may be allocation changes between now and March 12 due to updates. At this point there is $944,000 to allocate. Persson questioned if information was received from applicants that addressed the questions raised in the staff report. Hightshoe replied that the questions raised in the staff reports are for the Commission, not the applicants. If the members want to ask agencies these questions, this would be the time to do so. Zimmermann Smith stated the Commission will now begin to go through each application and questions from the Commission can be addressed to the applicant or the staff. CHARM Homes LLC, Affordable Rental Housing: Persson asked Staff for more information regarding the comment under the project budget discussion section that states the project may not meet the guidelines. Hightshoe replied that the services CHARM Homes provides does meet the needs of the community however staff has questions regarding their pro forma. Under "other income," the applicant listed $11,040. Staff needs clarification if this other revenue is allowed under HOME. Laundry and meals should not be listed under "other income," that is a separate funding category and not a HOME eligible expense. If Charms is receiving other funding for services such as laundry, housekeeping, etc. this does not go on the pro forma, but is a business expense under their Caring Hands business that provides such services. Teague explained that he sent an email to Ackerson and Hightshoe to clarify and explain exactly what the $11,040 amount included. It is related to the project and is part of the allowable costs. It is snow removal and lawn services. Hightshoe stated that HOME may require those specific costs for a SRO property to be built into the rent and cannot be charged as extra to the tenants. The applicant agreed to include those costs into the rents if required. Chappell asked if the last time CHARM received funding if they had trouble finding a site. The applicant confirmed they did have issues finding a site; there were very few 4 -bedroom units in all of Johnson County available so that was the issue. Chappell asked if the climate was better now and the applicant replied that after speaking with a real estate agent they confirmed there is a good inventory of real estate available. Hightshoe explained since the units are limited to people with disabilities, the Affordable Housing Location Model does not apply. Jacobson asked about the payment terms for this loan. Hightshoe confirmed the terms would be repayment after 20 years if that is the proposal and what the Commission agrees to. However under HOME rules, once the final costs are determined, the loan needs to be underwritten again. If the applicant shows sufficient cash flow the City might ask for repayment. If there is not Housing and Community Development Commission February 19, 2015 Page 4 of 8 sufficient cash flow, they structure as part grant, part loan. It would be based on the final numbers and known costs. Byler asked what the discount factor is on the loan. Hightshoe explained our HOME underwriting criteria focuses on cash flow, not the loan itself. Staff reviews the 20 year pro forma of estimated revenues vs. expenses, including debt, to ensure the project has sufficient revenue to operate throughout the affordability period. The applicant should put money aside in reserves over the 20 year (compliance) period to provide safe and decent housing. DVIP Shelter — Communal Bathroom and Door Rehabilitation: Byler asked about the project being over $100,000 and whether they would then be required to use sealed bid procurement and Davis Bacon wages. Hightshoe confirmed that was true. Byler commented that this request would not have been over a $100,000 if not for a few items added. The request is for $116,000 but the actual work is only $99,000. Hightshoe noted that at $99,000 she would encourage the sealed bid procurement as it is likely that the bid may come over $100,000. Hightshoe also recommended the applicant hire an architect for design and construction management. Hightshoe stated that staff recommends that for any public facility project at or over $100,000 an architect is hired. Most non -profits do not manage construction projects frequently at this scale and are not familiar with federal requirements once the project goes over $100,000. Chappell asked if there were a possibility for more competitive bids on this project. Persson asked about one of the staff questions — whether the applicant has requested or acquired funds from any other private entities due to serving clients outside of Iowa City. The applicant replied that they had requested funds from all the counties they serve and work very hard to keep the funds from those counties to serve those from the counties that supplied the funds. So anything that is received from Johnson County stays in Johnson County. Persson asked more specifically about the facility in Iowa City and if the counties contributed to the cost of the facility in Iowa City. The applicant replied that the current model they are using from the State does not bring individuals from other counties as the State has allowed for funding for hotels and safe homes. She stated they could look at using some of the County funds to help offset facility costs, but with all the restructuring it hasn't been a big issue in the past few years. Chappell asked about the list of counties served in the application and if they contribute. Doser replied that they get funds in some way from all the counties. However, most of it is through fundraising and is not coming from governments. The fundraising is through United Ways, direct solicitations, and other local human services agencies. Persson asked staff if there was a concern regarding the ability of these applicants to pay property taxes. Hightshoe noted it was on the application, but that most non -profits in Iowa City do not pay property taxes. It is more relevant to housing providers, whether there are for-profit or non-profit providers. Persson asked if it should be of importance to the Commission when they are completing their score sheets. Zimmermann Smith stated it was important when perhaps looking at two projects side by side where one might pay property taxes and the other might not. Chappell asked about if there had been any specific fundraising to try to address the long-range capital plans. The applicant replied that the Board has considered this and are working to update their plans but are in the infancy of putting that together. They are however continuing each year to set aside funding (about $30,000/year) for repairs and up -keep. (6:50 p.m. Chappell left meeting) Housing and Community Development Commission February 19, 2015 Page 5 of 8 Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity — Land Acquisition: Jacobson asked the applicant to speak about the applicant history where a previous CDBG/HOME approved project was not built according to affordable housing guidelines. Patton stated that the door was placed on the south side of the home rather than the north side, a mistake made by the construction manager. A second door is required in the design code, and it was in the approved design, but was then placed on the wrong side. Persson asked if the Commission were to not give the total amount requested, would they still be able to move forward with part of this project. The applicant replied that while it's been requested for them to try to find building sites in other parts of town, that would be a challenge if the full funding was not received. Bacon Curry noted that there was the question if funding was contingent upon lots outside of Census Tract 18 would Habitat proceed. Bacon Curry asked if HCDC could place this condition in their recommendation. Hightshoe confirmed the Commission could do so. The applicant noted that no matter where the home is built, the cost to own is less to the homeowner than rent would be. Persson also noted Habitat has a history of stabilizing neighborhoods through homeownership. Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program Home Project: Byler noted that in this pro forma, like the others, the expense ratio to the income is at 25% which for rental housing is very low and questioned how realistic that number is. Roger Lusala, for MYEP, stated that 25% is very realistic and they keep their costs low because of the people living there and the effort to keep the rents low. MYEP provides snow removal, lawn care and other expenses through fundraising efforts. Jacobson questioned that while the rents are low; the expenses to maintain the properties seem very low. Lusala stated that maintaining the properties is low due to having a facilities manager who is very knowledgeable on fixing things. Additionally they have friends in the construction fields that do repairs at cost or for free. Broadway Neighborhood Center Improvements, Phase II: Brian Loring, the executive director for the Neighborhood Centers introduced himself to the Commission. Bacon Curry noted this project started as the ground floor remodel and the expansion of the daycare facilities, and that those were about halfway finished when they become too expensive to complete. Loring confirmed that was true and there was a need to create more multi-purpose space in the basement and remodel the kitchen, which was completed. But the office space that was taken by the kitchen was not replaced, nor was the entrance to the daycare completed. They have been trying to achieve funding for the completion of this project since 2013. Hightshoe asked if they would continue to use the same architect to complete the project but Loring stated that all the design was complete so hiring an architect was not necessary. Jacobson asked what the expense was based on. Loring stated they have been through the bid process so the expenses are pretty set. Hightshoe noted that staff still recommends, and would add the cost to the grant, that a construction manager or architect oversee the project to keep it on time and budget. Persson asked if the Center's programming has increased. The applicant stated that the usage of the site is an after-school program and in the summertime they have programming in the space. Adult programs are also held in the space. Being unfinished the space can be challenging to use. Persson asked since they have completed phase 1, would phase 2 be completed in a Housing and Community Development Commission February 19, 2015 Page 6 of 8 timely manner? Loring confirmed that the lion's share of the work was done in phase 1, so phase 2 should be smooth. Byler asked Hightshoe about adding an architect to the project and what kind of cost that would add. Hightshoe answered that in the past this expense usually runs about 10-15% of the total cost. Due to previous problems with non -profits not completing the work on a timely fashion, poor material selection, Davis Bacon not being followed and/or failing to procure per federal requirements staff now recommends an architect familiar with federal funds. Most non -profits do not routinely manage large construction projects. If there are available funds, staff can administratively increase a project budget by 25%, up to $50,000, without going through an Annual Action Plan amendment. Loring stated that they had already paid for the architectural plans for this project, so they would not need to pay for a design again. (7:15 p.m. Chappell returned to meeting) Systems Unlimited Inc. 2016 Iowa City Housing Project: Casey Westhoff, director of Systems Unlimited introduced himself to the Commission. Jacobson questioned the expense ratio of 16% for the rental properties. Westhoff explained that they used their internal maintenance staff which helps keep costs down. The Housing Fellowship — CHDO Operation Funds: Affordable Rental Housing; Sabin Townhomes: Hightshoe clarified that THF applied for $15,000 or 5% of the HOME entitlement — whichever is greater. Based on the HOME entitlement amount they could go up to $16,000. Additionally there is a difference between CHDO set-aside and CHDO operations. Funding operations is not mandatory, but allocating enough funds for the CHDO set-aside is. THF is the only CHDO applying this year. Dick Klausner introduced himself as the president of the board of the Housing Fellowship. Byler asked if the Housing Fellowship wanted to prioritize their applications. Klausner stated that it would be difficult as there are only five or six CHDOs in the entire state and HUD compliance for CHDOs is extensive. One benefit of being a CHDO is that five percent of HOME funds can be awarded for operations and THF relies on this. Byler asked regarding the two Housing Fellowship development proposals, which one is prioritized. The applicant stated the seven unit request is a rehab. They were originally given money for land for the project but could not find affordable land appropriate for the project along with rehabilitating two homes they own that are deteriorating. The Fellowship is always looking to acquire property. Bacon Curry asked about the Davenport Street (UniverCity home) project. The City purchased this home to rehabilitate and sell for homeownership, not rental. Hightshoe explained that City staff approached the Housing Fellowship for two projects. One is the Sabin Condos. The developer's agreement requires the developer to sell three units to an affordable housing provider. The City was interested in affordable housing (not limited to certain tenants, such as elderly, disabled, etc.) so they approached THF. Staff also approached the THF about the UniverCity Home on Davenport Street because it only has on street parking and they are having trouble selling it to a homeowner. The City will continue to market, but due to its small size and on street parking, it may be more appropriate for a rental. THF does not typically rent to students, so it is likely a family would rent there. Bacon Curry asked about the Affordable Rental Housing application, and how many acquisitions Housing and Community Development Commission February 19, 2015 Page 7 of 8 did the application contain. The applicant stated it was five acquisitions and two rehabs. Bacon Curry feels that perhaps that should be separate applications. Klausner stated this was put in one application to ask for the $200,000 that the Housing Fellowship returned the previous year. The rehabs are each under $25,000. Chappell asked if the Davenport Street property was going to be rental anyway, it's preferred to be controlled by the Housing Fellowship. Hightshoe stated the home would continue to be marketed for homeownership, but if it doesn't sell by July, the City will evaluate their options, including renting or selling it for rental housing. Persson asked when the City gets involved in these properties isn't it to stabilize the Northside Neighborhood. Hightshoe said they are working to bring a balance between student and owner - occupied housing in University impacted neighborhoods. The Housing Fellowship doesn't typically rent to students; it's more likely to put a family in that unit. The City is not increasing the number of public housing units in Iowa City, so we would not be interested in owning or managing it indefinitely.. For the Sabin properties, the Housing Fellowship will acquire those from the developer, not the City. Jacobson asked if the City approached any other non -profits about purchasing the Davenport Street property or the Sabin Condos. Hightshoe stated no. Persson asked about the Davenport Street application, the application states the terms are 20 - year balloon payment at 0% interest; annual payment of $5,000 with a balloon of $100,000 at the end of twenty years. Minimum compliance period is 10 years. So does that mean they don't need to be in compliance for 10 years? Klausner replied that 20 years is the standard, and what they normally request. (7:30 p.m. Lamkins left meeting) Hightshoe noted that the Commission could make a recommendation about the Davenport house. The Housing Fellowship can acquire properties as part of this project, just not that particular one. Chappell stated the application noted that the fair market rent for the Sabin Townhomes is not being charged. The applicant responded that it would be the rent that the HOME rules require. Chappell asked Hightshoe about the Sabin property, and why no other non-profit was approached. Hightshoe stated the goal is to have affordable housing and that is why the Housing Fellowship was approached. The City was not going to limit to a certain clientele, such as the elderly or disabled. THF rents to a variety of households, which some tenants could be elderly or disabled. ADJOURNMENT: Byler moved to adjourn. Bacon Curry seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion carried 8-0. z O O U H z W 2 IL O J W W Z C_ CG G O C) 0 z Q z N 2 O U W w W V z D z W Q c� X X X X X X X X X T N W) x x x x x o o x T T N X 0 X X X X x T T 14 T co X X x x x X T a) X X p X LU O ui O T ca i X X X X x X T_ x x x x x x M CL w rZ N N N N N N N Cl N F- W J J W _ LLI z U_ W �_ W H F- W z J LLI z= LL, a -� Z 0 m O 0 2 U C7 z Z a a 0 z 0 O0 Q z O O O J = 7!w -i Q Z m CO v n a Ncn Valft- IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY 123 S. Linn St. • Iowa City, IA 52240 mc,o Sws Craig • wares 319-3565200 •w 319-356-5494 • www icpl.0'g BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes of the Regular Meeting February 26, 2015 Final Approved Members Present: Diane Baker, Thomas Dean, Janet Freeman, David Hamilton, Thomas Martin, Robin Paetzold, Jay Semel. Members Absent: Linzee McCray, Meredith Rich -Chappell. Staff Present: Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Kara Logsden, Patty McCarthy, Elyse Miller. Guests Present: Rev. Doyle Landry. Call Meeting to Order. President Paetzold called the meeting to order at 5:01 pm. Public Discussion. Rev. Landry expressed gratitude to Ms. Craig for her leadership and expressly for having Stefanie Bowers present to the Board at the January, 2015 meeting. Landry distributed information about the Iowa Commission on the Status of African-Americans and minutes from their December 5, 2014 meeting. Rev. Landry mentioned that May is National Mental Awareness month. He encouraged the Library to have a program about mental health in May. Approval of Minutes. The minutes of the January 22, 2015 Library Board of Trustees meeting were reviewed. A motion to approve the Minutes with the correction by Martin on the frequency of Iowa State Commission meetings from once a month to every other month was made by Baker and seconded by Freeman. Motion carried 7/0. Unfinished Business. Director Evaluation Process. In recent years the Evaluation Committee worked out its own process using different methods to evaluate the Director. There has not been a standard evaluation instrument. Craig said it is the Board's process and they determine the process. The Evaluation Committee typically has a member from the previous year to help with the process for the current year. Talking with library staff has been one method used since before we were in this building. Paetzold said the Evaluation Committee can decide on the format, or the Board as a whole can decide on the format. It was suggested the Committee, once appointed, can talk about the process and have the Board discuss at the next meeting. Semel feels the Evaluation Committee from last year should put together a document outlining their process for the Board to look at for next time. Craig said the process has always been orally based. Craig will draft the procedure we used last year for the Board to react to in March and the Evaluation Committee will recommend an evaluation process in April. Freeman would like other staff 1 besides managers be included in the evaluation process. A motion to set the Evaluation Committee in March and for the Evaluation Committee to recommend the evaluation process in April was made by Baker and seconded by Martin. Motion carried 7/0. Board Recruitment. There will be three vacancies on the Board; terms for McCray, Hamilton and Dean expire on June 30, 2015. These were posted February23, 2015 by the City Clerk at Council meeting this week. Applications are due in April. Craig asked if the Board wished to use any of the methods discussed by Bowers when she presented last month. Craig said we can get a poster ready for the lobby. Word of mouth is another method, with Stefanie Bowers' help. Two of the new appointees would need to be men. The third can be either sex to keep gender equity. Semel suggested we write to community agencies to let them know about Board openings. Craig will check to see if we can get to the schools in some way. The vacancies will be posted in all our social media. Hamilton suggested we approach the minority member of City Council, and suggested others who might be approached. Paetzold asked if Hamilton would be willing to write a letter to the editor of the Press -Citizen to let them know about this. Hamilton feels the more proactive we are the more likely we are to get results. Board presented many good ideas and strategies to try. Board members should personally reach out to possible new board members, or to others who might help recruit a more diverse board. The application is available on the City website under Boards and Commissions, under vacancies. New Business. FY16 Calendar. The building calendar for the next fiscal year is set in February. The Hours of Service policy is attached for your information. Every February when the budget is pretty much set, we set the calendar for the year to comply with scheduling per the contract. There is a holiday in the summer; Craig proposes the library be open on July 3 with holiday staffing; July 4th is on a Saturday this year. A motion to accept the building calendar for FY16 as proposed was made by Dean and seconded by Hamilton. Motion carried 7/0. Dean out at 5:39 pm. Board Policy #700: Community Relations. This is a regularly scheduled policy review. Logsden said it is nice to see how we have grown our community involvement and relationships. Having a specific policy for this purpose is both a guide and reminder for us to do so. A motion to approve the Community Relations policy incorporating staff suggestions was made by Baker and seconded by Freeman. Motion carried 6/0. Board Policy #701: Public Relations. This is a regularly scheduled policy review. The public relations plan helps staff identify all of the different ways we will communicate what we do. A motion to approve the Public Relations policy as amended by staff was made by Martin and seconded by Semel. Motion carried 6/0. Staff Reports. Director's Report. We are in bargaining with AFSCME right now and there is a tentative agreement. Byers asked Craig to let the Board know this is the reason she is not at the Board meeting. It was decided at the last contract negotiation the contract would only be open for issues related to finances. Advertising for the Children's Services Coordinator closes tomorrow. Pasicznyuk's husband has been in - 2 Colorado since September; Pasicznyuk remained in Iowa with their high school senior; her last day is May 21, 2015. Just a reminder we are collaborating with the City of Literature on One Book Two Book festival next weekend. There will be many activities all weekend long, all at the Sheraton Hotel. All the events and programs are free and everyone is encouraged to stop by for the festival. The UI Lecture Committee is trying to get JK Rowling to come for One Book, Two Book in 2016 and we will be helping with this. State Accreditation Application. Craig noted the level at which a library is accredited is based on these criteria. Paetzold wondered why we do not have a policy for emergencies. Craig said we have procedures for emergencies. This provides flexibility when changes need to be made to the procedures and procedures do not require Board action. She said smaller libraries often have these as policies. Martin asked about the Board education item. Craig explained Inservice Day and other opportunities offered to the Board to attend other meetings and conferences are considered here. Paetzold asked about replacement rate and how we compare with other libraries of our size. Craig said we often exceed these because the numbers are minimums for accreditation. - Departmental Reports: Children's Services. Family Fun(d) night was a lot of fun. However, not a hugely successful fundraiser and it was a lot of work. We've had programs like this before for teens and others after the building closes. As we discuss the future of the event it might just turn into a program. Collection Services. No comments. IT. Paetzold asked if there are other ICN locations in Iowa City if we discontinued its use in Room D. McCarthy said Kirkwood is the only location now. Craig said the Courthouse has one. Development Office Report. The Golf fundraiser is set for June 26, 2015. There is a Book End book sale this weekend and the Foundation Board meets April 1. Spotlight on the Collection. Paetzold appreciated the video of alternatives to Fifty Shades of Grey. Miscellaneous. No comments. President's Report. Paetzold thanked Semel and Baker for agreeing to sit on the Foundation Board. McCray, Rich -Chappell, and Hamilton have agreed to participate on the Nominating Committee. The purpose of this committee is to put together a slate of officers for the next year. Announcements from Members. Martin reminded the group that March 18 is ILA Legislative Day. The next day is Martin's last meeting as a Commissioner. Committee Reports. Foundation Members. None. Communications.None. 3 Disbursements. The MasterCard expenditures for January, 2015 were reviewed. A motion to approve the disbursements for January, 2015 was made by Martin and seconded by Freeman. Motion carried 6/0. Set Agenda Order for March Meeting. Policy. Evaluation discussion. Nominating committee. Adjournment. A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Freeman and seconded by Martin. Motion carried 6/0. President Paetzold closed the meeting at 6:02 pm. Respectfully submitted, Elyse Miller Board or Commission: ICPL Board of Trustees ATTENDANCE RECORD 12 Month KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting ; Meetinq Date Name! �. term Expiration 4/24/14 .: 5/22/14 6/26/14 7/24/14 8/28/14 9125/14 10/16/14 11/20/14 12/18/14 1/22/15. 2/26115 3/26/15 Diane Baker 6/30/19 X O/E X X X X O/E X X O/E X X Thomas Dean 6/30/15 X O/E X X X X X O/E X X X X Janet Freeman 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X X O/E X X David Hamilton 6/30/15 X X X X X X X X X X X O/E Tom Martin 6/30/17 X X O/E X X X X O/E X X X X Linzee Kull McCra 6/30/15 O/E X X X X X X X X O O/E X Robin Paetzold 6/30/17 X X O/E X X X X X X X X X Meredith Rich -Chappell 6/30/17 X X X O/E X X O/E X X X O/E X Semel, Jay 6/30/19 X X X X X X X I X I X O/E X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting ; r ®r CITY O F IOWA CITY 4b(3) M E M 0 R A N D U M Date: March 27, 2015 To: Mayor and City Council From: John Yapp, Planning & Zoning Commission Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission At their March 19, 2015 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the February 19 minutes with the following recommendation to the City Council: The Commission moved by a vote of 1-5 (Freerks affirmative) that the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District) be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Additionally under the Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with the proposed addendum to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. 2. The Commission moved by a vote of 6-0 to recommend approval of SUB15-00001, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a preliminary plat of Highlander Fourth Addition, a 17 -lot, 39.98 acre commercial subdivision located north of Northgate Drive subject to resolution of deficiencies and discrepancies noted below. 3. The Commission moved by a vote of 6-0 to recommend approval of amending Portable Sign requirements in City Code Section 14-5B 'Sign Regulations;' Table 5B-4 'Sign Specifications and Provisions in the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones' as shown in Table 1. Additional action (check one) No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction X_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action - Done MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks Paula Swyga rd, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: Phoebe Martin STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, John Yapp, Robert Miklo, Jann Ream OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Mondanaro, Rockne Cole, Beth Stence, Laura Bergus, Connie Champion, Ritu Jain, Nancy Quellhorst, Marc McCullum, Al Raymond, Joe Tiefenthaler, Jon Fogarty, Pam Michaud, Andrew Sherburne, Helen Burford, John Hieronymus, Duane Musser, Angela Villhauer, Beth Hieronymus, Joe Hughes, John Wyler, Brian Boelk, Nancy Bird Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. The Commission moved by a vote of 1-5 (Freerks affirmative) that the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District) be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Additionally under the Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with the proposed addendum to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. The Commission moved by a vote of 6-0 to recommend approval of SUB15-00001, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a preliminary plat of Highlander Fourth Addition, a 17 -lot, 39.98 acre commercial subdivision located north of Northgate Drive subject to resolution of deficiencies and discrepancies noted below. The Commission moved by a vote of 6-0 to recommend approval of amending Portable Sign requirements in City Code Section 14-5B'Sign Regulations;' Table 5B-4'Sign Specifications and Provisions in the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones' as shown in Table 1. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 15, 2015 Eastham moved to approve the minutes. Thomas seconded. Motion carried 6-0 with corrections noted. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 24 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque Street District). Yapp presented a map of the area. Hektoen asked if anyone on the Commission needed to disclose any conversations they have had regarding this item. There were none. Staff is recommending adding the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District to the Central District Plan including the addition of three goals to the Central District Plan: A. Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors B. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned / reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design Yapp explained that at the previous Commission meeting, as well as the work session held, there was discussion regarding historic properties. While the Central District Plan Map does not specifically identify potential historic properties, the plan does contain polices for the preservation of historic properties. These policies are based on the adopted and periodically updated Historic Preservation Plan, which is also an element of the Comprehensive Plan. A goal of the Preservation Plan is to identify historic properties. Identification of historic properties: Iowa Site Inventory Forms, which document the historic and architectural values of individual buildings, were reviewed for each property in the N. North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. Historic properties at 30 N. Clinton, 130 Jefferson Street and 115 N. Dubuque Street are included in the Jefferson Street Historic District and are therefore already protected by the Historic Preservation Commission. The only other property that is identified as being individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places is the Sanxay-Gilmore House at 109 E. Market Street. A copy of that Iowa Site Inventory Form is available upon request. Eastham asked what would be added to the Comprehensive Plan if this were approved. Yapp answered that the map showing the Central District Plan would be updated, showing the addition of the new area, along with the three goals Staff has recommended. The impact of adding this area to the Central District Plan is that the area then become subject to all the policies and goals within the Central District Plan. Eastham asked then if that would include the language regarding the possible historic eligibility of 109 E. Market Street. Yapp said it would not include the language regarding that specific property because the Central District Plan refers to the Historic Preservation Plan for specifics. The Historic Preservation Plan does not currently include that specific property (109 E. Market Street) but it does identify that larger area as one that has had a historic survey for which Site Inventory Forms have been documented. Freerks asked if the Historic Preservation Commission would be looking at these properties, and Yapp confirmed the Historic Preservation Commission would be discussing this at their meeting next week. Freerks opened public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 3 of 24 Jim Mondanaro spoke to support Staff's recommendations for the new P&Z. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham stated he was interested in the Historic Preservation Commission's opportunity to give their advice on this issue, and therefore moves to defer until the next meeting. Thomas seconded the motion. Eastham reiterated his motion to defer is to give the Historic Preservation Commission the opportunity to give their advice on the possible historic value of the properties in this area. Hektoen informed the Commission that to designate properties as historic is a rezoning action, and this issue is just discussing a comprehensive plan action. Freerks understands, and is not saying hearing from the Historic Preservation Commission will have any impact on the decision, but adding a few weeks to allow making sure all the pertinent information is gathered is the right thing to do. A vote was taken, motion to defer carried 6-0. Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District). Yapp began by showing a map of the larger Central District Plan, and showing that the Civic District in respect to that. Yapp stated the first focus would be the three blocks, south of Iowa Avenue, west of Van Buren Street, and Staff is recommending those three blocks be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. At this time, that area is largely occupied by municipal functions, the Unitarian Church property is at the northwest corner of this area. Next Yapp showed a map of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan indicating suggested building heights within that area, as well as for the three municipal blocks. The Downtown Plan recommends taller buildings on corner locations with mid -rise buildings along the block face. Staff is showing taller building 7-14 stories at the corners of College and Gilbert Streets, and Burlington and Gilbert Streets. Along the east half of the majority of the blocks would be building heights of 4-6 stories, and 2-4 story heights along the Iowa Avenue frontage. The difference for the Iowa Avenue frontage is due to looking at the Iowa Avenue Corridor, the majority of the buildings in that area are 2-4 stories in height. Staff has also noted a key historic building in that area, the Unitarian Church at 10 S. Gilbert Street has had an Iowa Site Inventory Form prepared and it is clearly eligible as a historic landmark. Consistent with the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan there are policies, including the use of transfer of development rights, bonus incentives and the reduction of parking requirements, which are intended to promote the preservation of historic buildings. Given that the City controls approximately 2.5 acres of surface parking lots within the Civic District, it may have role in providing sites for development transfer if the parking lots are to be developed. Yapp next showed the land use map for the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan and stated that Staff is recommending those three municipal blocks be shown as mixed-use designations. This would encourage both the municipal civic activities that currently exist and allow for mixed- use designation in the future. Dyer asked about the property along Iowa Avenue, heights being limited to 2-4 stories, but there Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 24 could be a bonus granted for preserving the Unitarian Church? And therefore if a development preserved the church, it could then be higher in that location. Yapp confirmed that the intention was to allow additional height along the Iowa Avenue frontage if the church was preserved. That would all of course have to be reviewed and approved by the City Council, including a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Dyer stated that then would defeat the purpose of keeping buildings along Iowa Avenue low. Yapp replied that the scale of the buildings would still be in line for the area, the intent was for a possible additional stories in the context of preservation. Hektoen stated that the code currently allows for certain density bonuses designation of an Iowa City landmark at a ratio of 3 square foot area to 1 square foot area reused. So there is a defined ratio that is allowed in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones. It is not the same as the density transfer that is allowed in the Riverfront Crossings form based zones. This area will still be zoned CB designations, not the Riverfront Crossings designations. Eastham asked if the Unitarian Church property is currently zoned CB -5, and is about 8000 square feet, so what would the maximum height be allowed under the current CB -5 zone. Yapp replied 75 feet with bonuses. Eastham then asked about the proposed height legend shown on the map, asking if it doesn't limit building height in any of those areas, the only limitation on the building height is whatever zone, and changes to the underlying zone could change the building heights. Yapp confirmed that is correct. He stated that comprehensive plans are not regulatory, they function as plans, the regulations would come into play if and when zoning requests for these properties at which time the Commission would review the rezoning request in the context of comprehensive planning document. So for example, if a rezoning request was received for a location that indicated 4-6 stories in height as appropriate, the Commission could either recommending rezone that to a zoning the allowed 4-6 stories in height or if a CB -10 zone was requested for example, the Commission could apply a conditional zoning agreement to limit the height to be consistent with whatever the adopted plan is for that area. Hektoen reiterated by adding this area to the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan that does not mean these properties will be added to the zoning for the Riverfront Crossings area or be rezoned to a Riverfront Crossings zoning designation. This is just the master plan, not the zoning code. Thomas asked at this phase if the impacts of the proposed heights of the buildings looked at from an environmental impact position such as traffic and parking. For example, a cluster of 7- 14 story buildings could demand quite a bit of traffic and parking needs for that particular area. Yapp stated the appropriate time to evaluate those types of demands is when there is a rezoning request with an actual project to evaluate. Freerks opened public hearing on the inclusion of the three municipal blocks into the Downtown Riverfront Crossings District. Rockne Cole (1607 East Court Street), chair of the Iowa Collation Against the Shadow, stated that at the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting there was a lengthy discussion of the transition zones and Ralston Creek being a natural barrier of a transitional zone and encourages the Commission to address that issue. Cole also noted that in the Staff report, exhibit C, outlines the possibility of 3 15 -story buildings within a block and a half. He Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 5 of 24 encourages the Commission to explore, especially how it pertains to Robert E. Lee, and if Staff is aware of any plans for the City to sell the Robert E. Lee Recreation Center to allow that sort of development. That would be a major departure in that particular area, people can differ on beliefs of what are appropriate building heights, but his group is particularly against such tall buildings and feels that height is a big deal and should be taken into consideration and if there are three tall buildings in a block and a half, especially within such a proximity to Iowa Avenue, and the view of the Old Capital, even a 75 foot building is a major departure of what is there now and a change to the sight line. Cole requests the Commission defer decision on this until the Staff can answer what they are going to do with the Robert E. Lee center, and the public has adequate input. Cole did commend the Staff, Commission and previous City Councils for adopting the Riverfront Crossings Plan, a lot of it made sense, that to the south of Burlington you would have more dense vertical development to take pressure off the neighborhoods. That was a good plan and feels this Commission should stick to it. However he feels that same theory is now being used to put pressure back on the neighborhoods and if there are 3 15 -story buildings within a block and a half next to a historic district, that is a major departure and this Commission should allow adequate public comment on that and delay decision on that, and the Staff should publicize that because this is the first time the public has seen a concept of possible 15 story development at the Robert E. Lee Center. Beth Stence (310 Golfview Avenue), is representing Trinity Episcopal Church at the corner of College and Gilbert Streets and is urging the Commission to vote against the proposed amendment Staff has recommended for the Civic District. She stands before the Commission on behalf of Trinity because they believe the changes that will follow from the revised Comprehensive Plan will significantly harm cultural institutions like churches and infringe on spaces that promote public discourse. She asks the Commission to take a moment to imagine if right outside the space they are meeting in tonight there were tall buildings, up to 15 stories, sunlight becomes scarce, making it harder for greenspaces to thrive, making outside public areas and the exteriors of existing buildings gloomy. Imagine the increased pressure on public parking as these large buildings do not supply adequate parking of their tenants. This becomes a barrier to events at surrounding businesses and cultural institutions, especially for those in the community that are not young or able-bodied. Rather than continuing to be an area where our community can congregate and thrive, it becomes an area to simply "get through". In the future, if this becomes part of the Comprehensive Plan, we anticipate specific zoning change requests would come before this Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission has previously argued against CB -10 type development in this area and the Church agrees with that previous decision. Changes to zoning that favor revenue generating development over the impacts to faith, cultural, and community facilities and public greenspaces will harm the quality of community life so she asks the Commission to consider all the impacts that could derive from this potential change and vote against the planned amendment. Laura Bergus (2231 California Avenue) and has lived in Iowa City for 34 years. She expressed she is really excited about the potential for downtown Iowa City to grow up, as so many parts of town continue to grow out. She used to live in the lot that is at the east of the very eastern edge of this district, and other locations in the downtown area. Where she is currently living there are developments with lots of cookie -cutter buildings and not a lot of architectural differences or types of uses, so what really excites her about the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is it would allow higher intensity, and higher density uses. She does agree that taller buildings do need to be considered with respect to the environmental impact, but when discussing places where people can gather, or people can congregate, people can live and participate in all kinds of community activities and higher intensity, higher density, mixed-use Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 24 areas actually gives those type of opportunities. She hopes the Commission will consider that as this amendment is not talking about buildings with one type of use, as no one probably wants downtown to just be a whole bunch more bars or more apartments, the whole point is mixing up the uses. Bergus reiterated she supports the staff recommendations and appreciates the opportunity to speak tonight. Connie Champion (430 S. Summit) totally supports the amendments to the Civic District and thinks it is exciting and has been dealt with for several years now. She likes the mixed-use, the density, the lack of urban sprawl it brings, and people like to live close to the core of the city. Ritu Jain (829 Kirkwood Avenue) is speaking on behalf of the CBC and is also a downtown business owner and feels developments like this would actually enhance the city. There have already been some high-rises downtown and it has changed the face of downtown and the community building for the downtown has been great. She hears a lot of people want to be living downtown and mixed -uses like this are bringing those people from what they call the suburbs to the core of the city, so she is definitely in favor of this plan. Nancy Quellhorst, representing the Iowa City Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber supports the Staff's recommendation for the Civic District Plan, they feel it is important that the Civic District remain in the Downtown Planning District and to be added to the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan and the Downtown Master Plan. Employers are losing opportunities to expand because they are struggling with obtaining talent acquisitions. It has been noted that mixed-use projects downtown are critical to attracting the workers that are so important to the success of businesses. These workers have a great desire for high density housing in an urban environment. It is also attractive to retirees who are increasingly attracted to walking ability and access to downtown amenities. The Civic District Plan fosters smart growth, yields affordable infrastructure and the highest revenue potential for the city which is very important to funding our social services and community needs. Quellhorst suggests that both Plaza Towers and 201 Washington, which are both high rise structures, have not created a gloomy environment at all and on the contrary have increased the vibrancy of the downtown area and that is very critical to attracting the workers needed to sustain the community. Marc McCullum (113 South Johnson Street) commented that at the last meeting Nancy Bird spoke about diversity in the downtown area, the blend of old and new, and the concern he has about this proposal is we are just going to get new. There is not anything being put in place to preserve the diversity in the neighborhood. He would encourage the Commission to think about why they would up -zone an area next to a historic neighborhood. He agrees with the ideas of walkable neighborhoods, but also need for small businesses and for density but doesn't feel it always has to be in a high-rise. McCullum does think the City should be looking at the Robert E. Lee area, and was surprised when the RFP for College & Gilbert they didn't look at that block as a bundle. He feels that area should be visioned like the East Village in Des Moines, with low- rise structures replicating areas of the downtown area, such as the 100 block of Dubuque Street where there are small retail outlets. The question is really how this development will play out next to a 150 year old historic park and historic neighborhood. His concern is losing all the historic structures in this area, seems like every church is being looked at as a lot development and it is a challenge to know how to allow some things to go forward without taking out the whole neighborhood. Al Raymond (1045 Westside Drive) wished to echo the sentiments of Marc McCullum, and that the folks opposed to this are not necessarily opposed to what it might bring to Iowa City. He Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 24 was a little hesitant about the high-rises that went up in downtown but they have not become part of the skyline and they do add something to that part of the city. His concern with this amendment is it will stick out like a sore thumb. This area already feels like it's fading out of downtown and into residential and this would create a disjoint that doesn't make sense. Additionally to say we need density to encourage people to come here and work, he would like to see that data backed up. Raymond encourages this decision to be deferred until there is more clarification on these issues. Beyond that, this all feels like a retroactive justification for the Chauncey Building. The City chose a project that didn't make sense to a lot of the community, that didn't even make sense to some of City Council, and now after the fact we are seeing adjustment to the Master Plan to kind of shoe horn this project in. He also feels some of the area in the Riverfront Crossings area south of Burlington would be excellent for these types of projects. Joe Tiefenthaler (222 Washington Street), Executive Director at Iowa City FilmScene and one of the Co -Executive Directors of the Mission Creek Film Festival, said that is seems at the last meeting and this one there is discussion about losing cultural centers. Tiefenthaler has worked in literary non -profits since graduating college and was headed to New York but was called back to Iowa City for the rarest of opportunities, a full-time arts job opening in Iowa City. Those type of positions aren't open or created very frequently and therefore Iowa City has lost a lot of talent to the coasts over the years. He chose to return to Iowa City for a chance to hone and build on a home grown not-for-profit cinema wing to the vision and commitment the Moen Group has shown for this community and for its growth. Growth in population, in opportunities, employment and business, and the art entertainment scene and mixed purpose and opportunities all imperial. In their first year, FilmScene has seen more than 30,000 movie goers through their doors. That is over 600 people per week, citizens and families that are seeing movies on critical topics, issues, kid's programming, special appearances and discussions, focusing on filmmakers, musicians, UI professors, community leaders and national experts. These are films from Palestine and Japan, from Poland and Chile, and films made right here in Iowa City. There are films and events that would not otherwise be possible without FilmScene. One possible benefit of the rezoning would be the Chauncey project and FilmScene, to see what they can do with two downtown locations and two screens, helping to redesign downtown not just in north and south terms, but in the vibrancy of east and west, helping to redesign Iowa City as an arts employer. Tiefenthaler has lived on or around College Green Park for 15 years, those are beautiful homes and they deserve preservation, but if those homes another block away are such a dissent for mixed-use zoning that is a different meeting and a different motion and he is fully in support of this recommendation for this rezoning. Jon Fogarty (708 Whiting Avenue) recalled the discussion last month to consider the daily impacts of these decisions. The truth is, you have to do this, we have no options, there are no other plays in the playbook, it is this or nothing. The proposed developments and the ideas in the three blocks are going to be magic and far better than anything else that is happening in Iowa City and it will save us. If you believe that, you might as well imagine Iowa City's downtown surrounded by a wall placed on a great mountain that is a giant horseshoe shape. The mighty Ralston Creek was discussed the last time as a buffer zone, and if you through in that 20 foot wide street that is Van Buren, you can't see that CB -5 development on Washington Street because of that magnificent buffer, transition zone, and that is what we need to be speaking about, the transition zone. There needs to be a transition zone from the larger developments and the historic neighborhood. The CB -5 development that is on Washington Street did not change the fabric of the neighborhood one bit, and those houses that were taken down, the houses next to it, and the houses up the block and around the corner are all Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 8 of 24 replaceable and that is why we have no options. Fogarty stated that was a big mistake and they did lose some of the fabric of the neighborhood, and it was preventable. These buildings aren't magic and they don't have to go there, and everyone that shares his viewpoint would be in favor of finding alternate locations. The title for the option is on the slide, that is what Riverfront Crossing is supposed to be about, or is that to be talked about and otherwise ignored. There are some great things going on in Riverfront Crossings and that area needs it, it is an area of downtown that has long been neglected, and presents a great opportunity for us to make this Central Business District probably three times as large as it is today. Growth, commercial, residential, you can put it there, it is a huge opportunity, and we need to seize it. The focus on these three blocks here, like they are the real estate messiah is baffling. Fogarty stated it has been seen over the past two years what happens if these options aren't explored, and the consequences to the day to day neighborhood. Washington Street is now radically different and all the things people love about downtown Iowa City and take place in this Civic District will be directly impacted. Just to imagine 4-6 story buildings on Van Buren where the Co-op and radio station currently are and to see a 6 story building rather than the Victorian houses. Ultimately what is being asked for is to consider the options and consider the impacts. The Victorian homes are not replaceable, and the fabric of a neighborhood is not redeemable. Pam Michaud (109 South Johnson) stated that the 4 story apartment building that was built in an insensitive block, the east wall of that building is 18 feet from her home's west wall. There is no buffer zone. The website of Neumann Monson says very politically "It is to build architectural enhancements to the surrounding neighborhoods not to fight or be distracting from the neighborhood". That did not happen. The public cannot trust that sentiment or the glossing over of the title of this amendment which is Riverfront Crossings Plan. Two years from now people will say "that was always Riverfront Crossings, you just misunderstood". Michaud says let's just call it correctly and say it will be CB -5 and that's it. What is next to her home is a 4 story building 45 feet tall. If you want 75 feet, just add 30 to that. That is monstrous next to a historic district and that is what you'd be adding by Iowa Avenue and Washington Street. That is not a sensitive transition zone to two-story Victorian houses. Michaud is happy to live in a historic district, and abide by the guidelines, and they have to ask for permission for a lot of things, and should get some respect and transition zone for that. Michaud is asking the Commission to defer this item based on the public input and the galloping development can gallop south of Burlington. The Comprehensive Plan was just updated six or seven months ago and now it's going to be changed dramatically. That is inconsistent and is not respecting all the work that went into the Comprehensive Plan for Iowa City. It's a laissez-faire movement. Andrew Sherburne (1204 Sheridan Avenue) is one of the co-founders of FilmScene and has lived in Iowa City for 11 years, having come here for his wife to go to school and never really planned to stay but rather move back to St. Paul where the arts opportunities are plentiful and lots of mixed-use areas, where we thought we could raise our children and experience the best of what a city has to offer. But something changed, and there was a certain gravitational pull in Iowa City and that Iowa City does have those cultural opportunities, you can find the same things you can find in a big city, but you can find it in a community that is tighter -knit and closer together. When we decided to stay in Iowa City and raise a family here, we knew we wanted to live near downtown. We wanted to be as close as we could be to those cultural opportunities and that is how we selected our home, and why we live within walking distance to downtown Iowa City. Founding FilmScene for him, and for this entire community, there was no other place an art house cinema could go but into the downtown. It's the cultural heart of the city and a place where the art can deliver 32,000 people the opportunities that FilmScene has delivered over the past year. And it's a place where the community can deliver just as much to them. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 9 of 24 Sherburne stated they were proud to be in downtown and this rezoning opportunity will allow them to strengthen what they've built over the course of the last few years. And not only have that, but to strengthen the gravitational pulled of Iowa City that draws us all closer, that brings us all in from far away, a signature development like the Chauncey will be a calling card for Iowa City and will provide that cultural home for FilmScene and allow them to expand and provide common spaces and housing so people will be able to live closer to these opportunities. Sherburne encouraged the Commission to follow the Staff recommendations, and he supports the rezoning. Freerks closed public hearing. Thomas moved to defer this discussion and decision until the Commission can hear from the Historic Preservation Commission. Eastham seconded. Yapp confirmed that the Unitarian Church property is the only property identified as historic in that three block area. Hektoen asked if the Historic Preservation Commission is looking at that property or if it has already been designated. Yapp replied that the Commission has requested to look at the entire area to see if any properties should be identified and will be doing so at their next meeting. Thomas also wants the Historic Preservation Commission to look at the amendment and see if they have any concerns about adding these three blocks to the Downtown District. Eastham stated that the Master Plan for the Downtown District does have language that says the historic character of the Downtown District is an important asset for the community as well as the businesses and people located there. There has also been a lot of discussion if buildings on College Street could be taller in height and if it would affect historic character. Eastham would like to ask the Historic Preservation Commission to give some advice or guidance on those questions. Freerks stated that this area is really about some parking lots, civic buildings, parking ramps, a park, and it is pretty clear there is a historic structure here. Yapp stated that in the context of the Comprehensive Plan identifying the Unitarian Church property as a key historic structure is about the most significant thing we can do for a comprehensive plan. Hektoen reminded the Commission that what they can do with a Comprehensive Plan amendment, again this is not a rezoning. The language in the Comprehensive Plan is already as strongly worded as it can be regarding this historic parcel. Freerks agreed, but wanted to make sure that if they defer they would be receiving additional information in the future to help formulate a decision. Miklo added that the Historic Preservation Commission's role is focus on historic buildings and district and it seems like what you are asking for is them to evaluate, which is the Planning and Zoning Commission's role. Eastham clarified he is asking for the Historic Preservation Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 24 Commission have an opportunity to inform the Planning and Zoning Commission about the historic aspects of these proposed plans. Miklo stated that is a valid question for the area to around these three blocks, and the area east of it, but for these three blocks it is not necessary. Hektoen stated the Historic Preservation Commission with regards to this particular application to amend the Comprehensive Plan; it is not their role to consider the impact of surrounding development on even further away historic buildings. Their expertise is to evaluate the historic significance of a particular property. This is the reason the Comprehensive Plan amendments come to P&Z first not Historic Preservation Commission. Freerks is concerned that with regards to this three block area, there is not any more information the Historic Preservation Commission can give to assist with the decision. Thomas asked if Trinity Church was identified as a historic structure, and Freerks answered yes however the real issue is the underlying zoning of the area and is unsure what the Historic Preservation Commission can give as added information. Theobald is in agreement with Freerks and doesn't see how the Historic Preservation Commission can assist with this particular area. A vote for deferral was taken failed 3-3. Eastham moved that the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District) be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Additionally under the Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with the proposed addendum to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Swygard seconded the motion. Eastham said he had tried to think about why these three blocks need to change from their current usage under the current comprehensive plan to something different, especially for higher density residential and commercial uses .He said he could not convince himself that there is an important rational reason to change the present character and use of these particular three blocks. He noted there are three major streets involved here, College, Washington, and Iowa Avenue and if he walks along any of those three streets heading west from College Green Park or about College Green Park the character of those streets is substantially different than the character after crossing Gilbert St. and entering the downtown district. He said that after crossing Gilbert St. he knew he was in the downtown district. Not crossing Gilbert St. felt like not walking in the downtown district and there is a transitional area east of Gilbert. He said these three blocks actually would do fairly well in the central district zone in terms of their eventual development. Thomas said his comments relate to the notion of transition, which we've been discussing for some time now. The way he has come to understand the notion of transition is, and it's basically been a City policy for 20 -some odd years, that as the Downtown expands beyond its current boundaries, it should preserve and reflect the character of the Downtown itself. And what is that character? That character is essentially a two- to six -story building. That is why the CB series (CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10) was developed. As the Downtown expanded, the CB -5 and Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 11 of 24 the CB -2 would provide for a quality to that expansion which would be very reminiscent of what you see in the Downtown itself. That was the idea behind this notion of the transition: as the city expanded, it shouldn't become denser than the Downtown itself. It should at most reflect the density of the Downtown. That quality was initially called for to the east and to the south. For years, the concept south of Burlington was the same thing. All properties, basically at the periphery of the Downtown, should be zoned CB -5. Expand the Downtown but keep the character of the Downtown. Ten years ago, that concept changed south of Burlington with the Hieronymus property: perhaps what we should be doing is actually going with CB -10 density south of Burlington. That area is of such a quality that going to CB -10 densities isn't going to radically affect it because it had basically been given up to redevelopment. The second argument was that it would preserve the residential neighborhoods north and east of the Downtown Planning District. Thomas stated that this concept has been maintained up through the (College/Gilbert) RFP of 2 '/2 years ago. The rezoning in 2005 for the MidAmerican and Unitarian sites was both CB -5. The MidAmerican site is part of what would become the Chauncey. That's how he understands the transition. It's an acknowledgement that the Downtown actually expands all the way to Van Buren Street. The question is, should it be the character of the Downtown as we know it, or something at a higher density? He argued that, unless the notion of a transition is to actually increase the density of the Downtown as it expands, the notion of a transition is of course to establish a gradient where it is no more than and eventually less than what you see in the Downtown. Eastham said that is a great expression by John, and he pretty much agrees with him. He wanted to add to what he said earlier by noting that the Riverfront Crossings District actually provides a huge opportunity to accomplish many of the goals that people have said they want for the Downtown District including higher residential density and access to office space. Those improvements are also available to a certain extent in the Downtown District under the master plan as it exists now which calls for much more dense redevelopment in the Downtown District. Freerks said she wouldn't necessarily disagree with a lot of the things Thomas said. City Council will do what it wants to. Thomas said he is only speaking for himself. He has been consistent on this since the (College/Gilbert) RFP came out. This was based on reading the documents. He is sorry that this has gone on and spent a lot of effort on everyone's part. He believes in the Downtown. He moved to Iowa City because he wanted to be near the Downtown. He understands density, but he also understands that there are places where certain kinds of densities are best suited for other locations. He said, if you read our Comprehensive Plan, it reflects that. Freerks stated there have been comments from people that it is a good thing though to add more density in areas where there are amenities, such as the Robert E. Lee Recreation Center or the Chauncey Swan Park. Thomas said CB -5 density allows up to 75 -feet. That's a six -story building. Since we began this discussion, we've approved the Riverfront Crossings regulating plan. With its base and bonus heights, most of Riverfront Crossings allows buildings over 6 -stories. This is an area that extends 3/ -mile south of Burlington. It's a large area. A vote was taken and the motion failed by a vote of 1-5 (Freerks affirmative). Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 12 of 24 Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that the remainder of the Civic District, north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St, be added to the Central District Plan Land Use Map as an addendum and shown as 'Mixed Use' as shown on Exhibit B. Additionally staff recommends IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed addendum to the Central District Plan Yapp showed a map (exhibit B) which was the area north of Iowa Avenue and east of Van Buren Street. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this larger area and the North Clinton/Dubuque Street area as areas that should be examined more closely and amended into the Central District Plan. This area north of Iowa Avenue and east of Van Buren Street, staff does recommend it be added to the Central District Plan making it subject to the Central District Plan policies. Staff recommends identifying the area as mixed-use in the land use map; the area is already largely mixed-use, containing residential, office and commercial development. Much of the area is currently zoned both CB -2 and CB -5. Yapp showed a map showing potential building heights within the larger area and the historic districts around and north of College Green Park. Swygard questioned if there were any single family housing zoned in these areas. Yapp does not believe so, it is all zoned multi -family. Freerks pointed out that the area is actually not representative of the underlying zone, due to the neighboring historic areas. She believes the whole area needs more reflection on the transition as one walks down College Street or Iowa Avenue and reusing the homes as commercial rather than building new CB -5 building therefore maintaining the feel of the area. This would include setbacks from the street, areas between structures, green space and so if we can't call them historic structures in this area, we find a way to maintain that sense and feel in the area and CB -5 does not do that. Eastham asked why designate these areas as mixed-use and Yapp replied because that is how they are being used. Freerks added that mixed-use needs more limitations for this area due to what might go there given the opportunity. This is the opportunity for the Commission to set as part of the goals to look at setbacks, greenspace, and whatever might replace these mid -block sections stay in character with the area. Freerks opened public hearing on this portion of the current Civic District. Marc McCullum stated he proposed some time ago a village type overlay, because of the rampant redevelopment the community is losing a lot of the little boutique stores and things like that and anything to encourage that would be good. Another thing to consider is the bundling of parcels in these areas to assure the development of scale. And perhaps if there is a restriction to do that, perhaps through special exception, that would then give the City a little bit more control over what happens there. Helen Burford (528 East College Street) stated she often feels her home is in the buffer zone of the historic district and supports what Ann just said because there has not been a significant consideration of what it means to recognize the historic areas, the setbacks that are needed, and in order to maximize the value of space you have to bundle parcels and then other considerations are needed to make them economical viable. Burford stated she believes this iteration of the plan does not address that. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 13 of 24 Pam Michaud stated they truly are the buffer zone and are exposed to a lot of different types of folks that come and go in downtown from rocket scientists to people that are struggling with their lives and there is room for all. Michaud shared her confusion on the map and the areas shaded brown. Some height restrictions are 2-5 stories and others are 4-6. It is hard to understand why there would be a 6 story building on the 500 block of Iowa Avenue, how did that line get established, and same with Washington. Why is that bumped up more than Burlington Street. The other point she would like to clarify is the three houses that she and her neighbors occupy are RM -12 and the RSN-20 is Washington and Johnson, just that one corner lot next to her RM - 12 (a very small one-story house). While that might not be the Commission's purview or concern, those houses are really small heights that cannot be replaced even if they are developed. Michaud mentioned that the streetscape is extremely important, we know how we often lament with Project Green and these wonderful green organizations and how we lost the Dutch Elms, well there is a beautiful tree canopy on the 500 block of College right now. And if a community is thinking of landscaping and canopies you can't replace an 80 year old tree. We need to keep the tree we have, with the setbacks Ann emphasized. It is a beautiful 500 block, and it contains about four mental health center buildings that are very functional, there is a beautiful 1880 brick house that has been kept up and is a multi -family building and another adjacent to it. So that whole 500 block of College on the south side is intact with original buildings setbacks and gardens and what she misses the most about her Washington Street 500 block are the gardens, not the Victorian houses. The space between the buildings is important and when you put in a block long building it is so depersonalized, so upscale in density, you lose the human scale. So that is why she would question why the Iowa and Washington Streets are anything over four stories. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham moved that this discussion and decision be deferred until the next regularly scheduled meeting. Swygard seconded the motion. Freerks stated she feels the Commission needs another informal work session meeting on this item. Freerks believes the three block municipal area will be what it is, and the wheels are already in motion for that area, however the Commission can work to help assure the surrounding area is protected and maintained. That even if buildings in that area need to be replaced, to replace them in a fashion where they are not so jarring. Freerks would like to give Staff time to come up with ideas to make sure we can maintain this beautiful part of the community. Eastham made an amendment to the motion to defer this item until the March 5, 2015 meeting. Miklo pointed out what happened on Washington Street in the CB -2 zone was the cause for the concern for the future of this area and Freerks is requesting Staff look at form -based codes or some other way to allow for redevelopment for non -historic properties in a way that protects the integrity of the neighborhood. Swygard seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 14 of 24 REZONING / DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ14-00008/SUB14-00008 Discussion of an application submitted by Hieronymus Family Partnership for a rezoning of 1.36 acres from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone to High Density Single Family (RS -12) zone and for a preliminary plat of Silver Slope, a 24 -lot, 17.85 acre residential subdivision located north of Muscatine Avenue and west of Scott Boulevard. Miklo began by showing a map of the area, a portion is zoned RM -12 Low Density Multi -family and the remainder is zoned RS -5, the proposal is to rezone a small area that is RS -5 to RS -12 to reflect the change in the design of the preliminary plat. Miklo said that the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of a preliminary plat for Silver Slope in June 2014. In that plan a cul-de-sac was planned as well as a Outlot B for preservation of a grove of trees and three residential lots on Muscatine Avenue, one has a small house on it, one is vacant, and the third has the Hieronymus family home on it. Prior to City Council consideration of the plat, the applicant requested that the plat and associated rezoning be put on hold. Now the applicant has redesigned the plat, it includes the same design for Silver Lane, the cul-de-sac, but no longer includes Outlot B or the three lots on Muscatine Avenue. When this was reviewed last summer, the Commission issued a waiver to the subdivision standards in terms of a cul-de-sac not connecting to adjacent properties. The rationale for that was the applicant wanted to preserve the open space and trees on Outlot B so that was accomplished with the previous version of the plat. Miklo said that the applicant is no longer perusing that plan, so now that Outlot B and adjacent lots have been removed from the subdivision, there is no longer a reason that Silver Lane can't be curved and extended to the south property line. This would provide the future development of the 3+ acres of land located between Silver Lane and Muscatine Avenue. Although the applicant may have no plans to further develop his property and sees no need to provide for future street connectivity, Staff believes that over time as property ownership changes, there will likely be demand for further development. It is best that it be planned for to avoid another non - connected street. Otherwise the property that has been removed from the plat could be subdivided in the future resulting in a cul-de-sac street that would run parallel to Juniper Drive. This as well as the currently proposed design for Silver Slope would be counter to the Subdivision Standards that call for street and pedestrian connectivity and discourage cul-de- sacs except where there is a reason, such as the preservation of open space. If the subdivision included the property shown as Outlot B on the previous version of the plat as open space, there would be a rationale to approve a cul-de-sac on Silver Lane. Based on non-compliance with the Subdivision Code's standards, staff recommends that this version of Silver Slope preliminary plat be denied. Staff also sees no reason to amend the zoning boundary until there is an acceptable subdivision design. Staff recommends denial of REZ14-00008, a rezoning of 1.36 acre parcel from single-family residential (RS -5) to multi -family (RM -12) and SUB14-000081 a preliminary plat of Silver Slope, a 19 -lot, approximately 12.48 -acre residential subdivision located at the northwest corner of Muscatine Avenue and Scott Boulevard. Hektoen stated that typically the zoning boundary follows the lot line so staff recommendation is that if the Commission does not recommend this plat you should also deny the rezoning because there is no lot line. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 15 of 24 Eastham asked with the proposed plat, what would the access be to the area zoned RM -12. Miklo replied that it would likely be off of Silver Lane, the site plans standards state that if there is an alternative to an arterial street the alternative street would need to be used. Miklo stated there is a concept plan for townhouse type housing on property and that would have to be amended and approved by staff if this subdivision is approved, the driveway would likely be off Silver Lane. Freeks opened public hearing. John Hieronymus is representing the Hieronymus Family Partnership that is proposing this development. That partnership consists of five siblings and they are all equal partners in the property. He pointed out the large number of properties across the street from his property in the Village Green area that are single road access properties. Hieronymus also showed a map showing the variety of housing in the area with the mobile home park down Scott Boulevard, the Legacy Point Senior Housing, currently right across Muscatine is a higher density residence area, then there is a big farm lot and then the Arlington Heights neighborhood with some more upscale larger homes and the Village Green neighborhood across the street and the neighborhoods of Court Hill that are more normal sized, modest homes. And there is the Scott Park area, a large green space with the Scott Trail, and there will also be the new school at the end of Muscatine down by Taft. That shows this is an area that needs some development and development is continuing. This particular area would have 22 townhomes on a 3 acre lot on Muscatine, and yes the access would be off of Silver Slope for those units. Then the 19 single family lots that would make up the remainder of the subdivision. Hieronymus said that the development would have a benefit to the City as the developer has been asked and have agreed to put a sidewalk along the entire area of Muscatine Avenue from Scott all the way to Juniper Street. That is not property of the developer but has been expected of us, and the cost to the family will be approximately $70,000 because in addition to removing all the trees and shrubs there also has to be a change of grading, a retaining wall put in along part of the area, and also moving utilities that are in the area. Hieronymus pointed out on the map the section that has already been developed, there are three properties there. The property on the right is about two acres, the property in the middle is his home, and then there is a one acre lot as well. Those lots were developed in 1950 and have a lot of mature trees and the biggest reason not to put the street through this area was because these were his family home and the area has become an arboretum over the past 60 years. Originally it was bare farm ground and now has over 200 variety of trees and shrubs and provides a habitat for lots of small animals and is especially rich in birds. It has been home to over the last two years to two great horn owls and lots and lots of song birds. The family has approached the heritage commission to put this area into a heritage trust, they took it to their board and because the area is not native plants and not native trees it didn't fit their mission and they didn't approve it. However, that is still a goal, to preserve the area as an arboretum, to live on it and to improve it. As a representative for the Hieronymus Family Partnership they believe that this proposal fits the requirements of the code specifically because in order to put this subdivision in, it has to go in as a cul-de-sac because with all of the surrounding areas already have been developed, there is no way to put in this subdivision without interfering with existing neighborhoods. Duane Musser, MMS Consultants, has been involved with this property since approximately 2011. Since then they have gone through several different designs, two separate construction plans and concepts with the Hieronymus family and City Staff. Musser believes this current design is the best fit for this property for many reasons. One being the location of the street off Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 16 of 24 of Scott Boulevard that is critical for the grading. The grading on this site is very challenging, there is well over a 50 foot of fall in a north/south direction. So that is very challenging for an engineering firm for trying to build sellable lots and keep the costs down and the dirt moving down and try to make the site balance. To make this site balance now with the current design, they are not tying the street to any adjacent property owners which gives them the freedom to not only grade the site to make as many walk -out lots as possible (as everybody knows, those are very popular) but also gives them the freedom to not tie the street to any other adjacent property and be able to balance the site and move the contours up and down. Some of the other advantages of that is the ability to control the water on the site and get the swales and water as required to the stormwater basin. Another advantage of not connecting the street is they are able to keep the street grades flatter, one of the challenges of running the street through is they were getting into excess of 8% street grades to try to get back in and tie into that south boundary. Now there are street grades of 5% or less. To connect the streets would have required quite a bit of dirt removal and that would have increased the cost of the development. Another factor with this design is the ability to get the same number of lots with a variety of lots and lot sizes. Hieronymus stated that City Staff is not recommending approval of the subdivision, and gave the family two alternatives. One was to put in a through street. He had MMS draw a quick sketch of what that would look like which shows the addition of little lots that couldn't be built on. There are many problems when you try to put in a through street, first the partnership that owns the 12 acres does not own any of those properties the through street would need to tie to, and the owners of those properties are not willing to sell it to the partnership. To try to curve that street, it eliminates three lots in the subdivision, and also it would provide a cut -through street that travelers could use to avoid the Scott Blvd/Muscatine Avenue intersection which is very busy. Hieronymus stated the next issue is that this is a wooded lot and only 50% of a wooded lot can be developed. He indicated on the map the trees that are grove trees (more than 12 feet in diameter) and they are all 40 — 60 years old. This tree grove provides a wind break for all the area around it, especially the Juniper Street area. If that street were to go through, and with all the grading and dirt removal and removal of trees obviously that wind break would no longer be there. Hieronymus said it is possible, so they've been told, that they can dead end a street right at the end of the property but that doesn't change any of these ultimate outcomes. If someone were eventually to develop the property, they would need to go ahead and put this street through, which would cause all these problems discussed and in the meantime it's a dead end street. Hieronymus provided the Commission with additional materials, one shows the exception and modification requirements, with the estimates of the costs if the through street went through. The exception also shows it does not hinder public safety in any way. Hieronymus doesn't think the proposal needs an exception, however if that is what the Commission needs to move it along to City Council he has provided the justification. Hieronymus continued with discussion of the detention basin, showing where it would be required to go. That area was originally a pond, it was filled with porous material when College Street was changed into a pedestrian mall and a lot of that fill was hauled out to this property and dumped out here. So it acts as a natural sink, what happens is the water that does drain from the ridge down into the basin goes right into the ground. At one point, to appease City Staff, Hieronymus was going to divide up his lot, but then was told he could not do that, and he could not phase this project in and make it a second phase it has to be a final plat. Additionally when this plat came before the Commission on June 5, 2014, he was informed by Staff on that Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 17 of 24 day it wasn't sufficient to put in a detention pond with a normal pipe that would take it away as stormwater that the property would have to be graded toward Muscatine Avenue so that if that pipe got filled, and the detention pond overflowed, the water would naturally flow to Muscatine Avenue. After that plat was approved, Hieronymus walked the land again the next day and called Staff and said it could not go before the City Council because it would not work. Hieronymus showed photos of the area, and explained how the grading would adversely affect the homes already in the area. Staff has also recommended that Hieronymus put a shared driveway between two of the lots, and that shared driveway would go right where trees are and a large bank. He showed another photo of the trees in the proposed subdivision area that they are trying to preserve. Hieronymus stated all the changes, even the ones from the plat that was previously approved are unworkable, and they destroy the value of both the existing lots. So in conclusion he would like to go back to what the Hieronymus Family Partnership is trying to do. They are trying to put in a 12 acre development, which includes 3 acres of multi -family housing, townhouse style, and 19 single family lots. It makes full use of the 12 acres, it best fits the contour of the land, it provides for different types of housing, it meets the requirements of the code, seeing how the existing area around it, completely surrounds it with existing development. It doesn't have a negative impact on the existing neighborhood and they have considered all the alternatives they or the staff could come up with and none of the alternatives are workable. Freerks asked Miklo to bring up the plat that was approved in June to see the area where the detention pond was to go. Miklo pointed out the already plotted lots and the area in question regarding the drainage issues but was unsure of where the detention basin was for that portion of the property. Miklo also addressed the question of the shared driveway and he was unsure if the location of the shared driveway was ever identified. Miklo asked Musser to show the detention pond area. Musser explained that they are talking about a second stormwater detention basin that would be needed if John Hieronymus' personal property was also developed. Freerks stated she is still struggling with what the Commission approved before with the requirements now for the additional detention basin and shared driveway. Hektoen explained that those requirements would only need to take effect if the property was developed, it was not necessary for final plat Hieronymus stated however that if they followed through with that plat that was approved in June, it would devalue the one acre lot and he would not be able to sell that one acre lot if desired. He does expect sometime in the future to sell off that one acre lot. Freerks did state that the Commission has to follow the subdivision policies however and use those as guidance and adhere to them. Miklo stated that the individual lots that already are plotted can be sold tomorrow, they are not contingent on the subdivision design. The importance is to get Outlot B protected, so one solution is to plat that area to establish the Outlot B. Angela Villhauer (912 Juniper Drive) stated that her husband and her have followed this discussion from the very get -go and it keeps bringing up a few concerns. They were concerned when the proposal was a dead end street, with the idea of putting a through street should it be further developed, and does see the likelihood that people will cut through there from Scott Blvd to get to Muscatine to avoid the high traffic areas. Villhauer stated she is not against subdivisions or developments as new homes in her development will help stabilize values, it will attract new families to the neighborhood, but she does think it is important that those subdivisions dovetail what is already there. And by totally changing the whole landscape and adding a through street doesn't really dovetail it. Miklo stated that the through street is not on the table at this point. Villhauer reiterated that her husband and she support the subdivision, Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 18 of 24 and they don't want the through street and as the discussion has been brought up about grading, they live on the downside of that area and even with a water retention and piping it changes the way the water flows to those homes and they currently already have a sump pump that runs year round because it is a low area and water runs that way. So in looking at this, putting in a cul-de-sac is the best plan, leaving that whole entire property to the Hieronymus family without having to do additional grading or additional water detentions, really supports everyone. It provides green space and also tax dollars, they have to pay property tax, they have to maintain it, and they do keep that property up. Beth Hieronymus (3322 Muscatine Avenue) and owns the property that is the overriding question and would support a motion to defer. Her question is as the homeowner of the private property that has nothing to do with the development, would be Outlot B. Who would maintain that property if it were set aside, because right now the Hieronymus family maintains it and it is part of the property they pay property taxes on. When she looks at the value of her property she has her home, and she has property. If she were to take two acres out of her property then they have devalued that lot as a whole. The family purchased this property to maintain and enjoy all the lovely trees, animals, etc and knew the obligation of keeping that property maintained. And if someone down the road wants to subdivide that property the City has the right to say no. Miklo asserted that if the subdivision meets the zoning, the City cannot deny. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham moved that this item be deferred until the next formal meeting. Theobald seconded the motion. Eastham asked Miklo to summarize exactly what is at issue for this item. The staff recommendation is for the development of single family homes in a multi -family area with streets connecting with Muscatine and Scott. Miklo corrected that the staff recommendation is the plat that was approved last summer which has the cul-de-sac with single family homes on it, it preserves the wooded area as Outlot B, and then the three lots that the Hieronymus family owns be included. Miklo feels that they can look at this property and explore not including the existing lot on Muscatine that the Hieronymus family owns as part of the subdivision, provided the grove of trees is set aside an outlot. If the wooded area is not set aside as an outlot then the plat does not meet the exception for the subdivision codes. Eastham asked if he recalls correctly that when this plat was recommended for approval in June, there was discussion of public safety concerns regarding the subdivision being connect to Scott Blvd rather than Muscatine Avenue as they are both arterial streets. Freerks confirmed that was discussed a length at that time. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. DEVELOPMENT ITEM (SUB15-00001) Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a preliminary plat of Highlander Fourth Addition, a 17 -lot, 39.98 acre commercial subdivision located north of Northgate Drive. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 19 of 24 Miklo explained that the rezoning of this property was approved at the last meeting of the Commission. It had been zoned Interim Development -Office Research Park (ID -ORP) and in January the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and recommend approval of a rezoning to Commercial Office (CO -1). The rezoning is currently pending before the City Council. The applicant is now requesting approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide the property into 17 lots. Initially street access to this property will be via Northgate Drive, which intersects with Dodge Street (Highway 1) Northgate will be extended to the north side of this subdivision where it will end in a temporary turn around. In the long-term Oakdale Boulevard is planned to cross the northern portion of this property to provide additional access to Highway 1. This subdivision will provide for the dedication of the right-of-way for Oakdale Boulevard, but rather than install the street at this time, the developer will pay the cost of the construction of a 28 foot wide street (the City pays the oversize cost for collector and arterial streets). Construction of Oakdale Boulevard will be delayed until plans for the street to the west are solidified. A temporary turn around will be provided at the end of Northgate Drive and Century Drive until such time Oakdale Boulevard is built. The subdivision complies with the City's subdivision polices. Outlot A located on the south side of the subdivision contains stormwater management facilities that were installed with previous phases of the Highlander development. These basins will be enlarged to provide stormwater management for the larger subdivision. Preliminary stormwater management calculations should be submitted to the City Engineer for review. The sensitive areas map indicates potential wetlands on Outlot A. In 2002 the when the Highlander Development 3rd Addition was reviewed, it was determined that this area does not contain jurisdictional wetlands and is not subject to the sensitive areas provisions of the zoning code. The applicant should verify that a Section 404 permit is not required prior to development activity. A water main extends on fees of $415 per acre and sanitary sewer tap -on -fee of $895 per acre apply to this subdivision. Payment of these fees will need to address the legal papers at the time of final plat approval. There are a couple of issues that have not been resolved, and that is the naming of the east/west street. It is thought that it will eventually connect to Highway 1 and then would intersect with Moss Ridge Road. So following the City's naming conventions, it should be named Moss Ridge Road rather than Clear Ridge Road and that is a deficiency that will need to be resolved. And also there are a few technical items that need to be correct for the City Engineer, they have not finalized their review of the plat. At this point Staff recommends approval that SUB15-00001, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a preliminary plat of Highlander Fourth Addition, a 17 -lot, 39.98 acre commercial subdivision located north of Northgate Drive subject to resolution of deficiencies and discrepancies noted in the staff report. Freerks asked about the minutes and discussion from the January 15, 2015 meeting because there was a lot of discussion about buffer and that the specifics would be incorporated in the platting stage and yet it is not mentioned in the staff report. Miklo replied that the buffering conversation would be better to have at the development stage when landscaping is reviewed for each individual lot. Freerks believes it should still be mentioned at this stage as well, and it should be noted at all stages that there was a great deal of conversation regarding buffering around this property. Hektoen stated that it was referenced in the rezoning ordinance that will be reviewed by Council. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 20 of 24 Eastham mentioned receiving another email from people that have offices out in this area regarding the need for secondary access, and asked Miklo if there is a way to address those concerns. Miklo replied that the transportation planners did look at this and there is a point of secondary access for emergency vehicles at the Steindler Clinic and the adjacent hotel and secondary access for all will happen eventually when Moss Ridge Road and Oakdale Boulevard is built. Freerks opened public hearing. Joe Hughes, Southgate Development Companies, as the applicant and the developer. There is a need for this subdivision because they are down to only one available lot so it's time to build some more so we can have more businesses come into Iowa City. A few things to specifically address, they purposely submitted the plat with the road that is going to eventually, if the neighboring property develops, meet up with Moss Ridge Road, we purposely named it something different, similar but different, because they don't feel it is appropriate for a street named after an adjoining development to come through another development. It is on the other side of Highway 1 and in the Gazette this past month the owner of that development, Steve Moss, said that development will be called Moss Ridge Campus so that street is the gateway into that development and Hughes feels it would be confusing for people to be looking for Moss Ridge Development but to take Moss Ridge Road into a different development. Therefore they are in favor of the road being named something other than being named after the development across Highway 1. Hughes stated they are still in support of screening for the farmhouse but prefer not to get into too many details at this level but understand that both sides want and need screening. Hughes asks that the Commission vote in favor of this item. Freerks asked Miklo about the street name issue. Miklo noted that in the long run people are not going to know the area as Moss Ridge Development of Moss Ridge Office Park, they are going to refer to street addresses just like where there are other developments where the street was first laid out there were other developments that hooked onto them and the street continued. There are places where street names do change, for example Mormon Trek Blvd becomes McCollister Blvd and those become confusing and that is why as a convention the City tries to keep streets that connect the same name. Hektoen mentioned that it is helpful for the fire department to have consistency on street names John Wyler is the owner of the property that is to the west of this development. He mentioned that he was not aware of this subdivision proposal until two days ago and was not given a chance to discuss if this is the best way for the road to go through their property. He knows similar conversations were had years ago, and again wants to state that he does not want the road to go through his house. Therefore he asks that the Commission defer the decision until he has time to review this item and the new road placement. Also he had looked at purchasing this property some time ago and chose not to because there are a couple of lagoons on the property and was very concerned about the hazardous waste that was left on the property. Miklo said that letters were sent to property owners within 300 feet. Wyler said they only got the letter two days ago and never got a letter in January regarding the rezoning. Hektoen stated that the plat at this time is just a concept for the property, it is not final and could change a bit where the road is placed. Brian Boelk, HBK Engineering, worked on the preliminary plat that is being viewed this evening. He noted that Mrs. Wyler was at the good neighbor meeting that was held, however as Hektoen Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 21 of 24 noted this proposal is not dependent on those roads going through, or requiring them at any specific point in time. They did align Clear Ridge/Moss Ridge Road to the west thinking it would better develop and get that lined up with the intersection at Highway 1. With regards to lagoons once on the property, that is where you see the stormwater management so there is no jeopardy for buildings. Freerks closed public hearing. Thomas asked Miklo his concerns regarding the adjacent property owner and his request to defer. Miklo stated that the Wylers and the Furhmeisters will have options to develop when the road is put through, but the pattern shown on the preliminary plat shows for a reasonable development in the future, it's a logical street pattern but the timing of it will be up to the individual property owners. Freerks mentioned that it is always good for the neighbors of developing properties come to some type of agreement for where infrastructure crosses and that it not become some type of feuding. Miklo checked his files and the Wyler's were notified of the rezoning on January 7 so something may have happened to the mail, but the records show it was mailed. Eastham asked if the subdivision ordinance provides the City with any kind of options for Moss Ridge/Clear Ridge Road would be located. Miklo stated that the intersection with Highway 1 is already established. The DOT would not want another access point onto Highway 1 so that location is set. In terms of the house, as long as the house is there Moss Ridge/Clear Ridge Road will not be running through this property. It may be years from now when the property is sold and those owners choose to develop and that is when that road will also be developed. Eastham moved to recommend approval that SUB15-00001, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a preliminary plat of Highlander Fourth Addition, a 17 -lot, 39.98 acre commercial subdivision located north of Northgate Drive subject to resolution of deficiencies and discrepancies prior to Council consideration. Swygard seconded the motion. Freerks commented that the application is a pretty good outline for future development and does not have any concerns about how the streets are stubbed right now. Eastman shared his uncertainty of what options the Commission has regarding the future development of Moss Ridge Road. Freerks stated that they can always ask City Council to change the name. Eastham agreed that the need for the same name to aid emergency vehicles is valid. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ITEM Discussion of a proposed amendment to City Code Section 14-513 'Sign Regulations' regarding placement, size, and conditions related to portable signs Ream stated that her memo explained the issues that have occurred over the years. What she can add to the memo is 16 years of enforcement of the code and the difficulties it has Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 22 of 24 presented and the frustrations it has presented both on staff side and business owners downtown. Ream stated that everyone has travelled to other cities and see portable signs used with no problems and customers appreciate them and with regulation and control it is something that Iowa City should move forward with. It is probably one of the most divisive issues staff has had with business owners downtown, signage is very important to them, and to their businesses. They really do see it as an unfair situation when one business is allowed to have that sort of portable sign because of the configuration of their entrance allows them to put it on private property and if they have a storefront that goes completely across the front of their property they aren't' afforded that luxury. Ream stated that the Downtown District has tasked staff with looking at some overall design standards for downtown facades of which all signage, not just portable signs, will be a part of a review staff will be doing hopefully with a third party consultant. So there may be some tweaking that may come back to this at a future date, but that is really months away and this is a good thing to move forward with now. Freerks asked about the memo stating that the amendments were discussed with the legislative committee and Nancy Bird, who is the legislative committee? Ream explained that was the legislative committee of the Downtown District. Swygard asked, knowing they will work on the design standards, but it does say they can't be directly illuminated can people do other decorative things like hang balloons on them? Ream said that balloons are specifically prohibited. Eastham asked if portable signs sit on the ground it can be a hazard to people with visual impairments. Ream said the very first meeting they had with the legislative committee they brought in two representatives of people with disabilities to specifically address that question and they did not have any concerns about it. What they made clear was not that hazards present themselves in public walkways, because that is something they deal with all the time, they were fine with it as long as they could consistently know where those hazards may be. If there is an eight foot sidewalk, people are likely to walk in the middle of the sidewalk, not up against the buildings and the visually impaired are not different. Freerks opened public hearing. Nancy Bird, the Executive Director of the Iowa City Downtown District, began by thanking the Commission for allowing comment on this issue. She also wanted to commend Staff for taking the time to talk with the legislative group of the Downtown District, and there are a number of committees that work on policy issues or regulatory issues that they think they can help support or find a better solution for. The signage boards out on the streets are one of those issues, and City Staff works really hard to enforce the rules that are on the books right now, and what happens is because its complaint based, some of those signs are left out because no one is complaining about them, and others are complained about, so which leads to infighting within the business district. So, if this is something that cannot be enforced, what else can be done. Additionally Bird wanted to address the issue of signage in general and some of the things they have been researching with their retail strategy. Bird stated that the Downtown District's goals are the same as the City's goals but in the process of understanding what our business community needs to thrive they are seeing some patterns that are challenging and hope to be able to support businesses that are complimentary. In regards to signage the retail strategy that they have developed with the consultant support, Downtown Works, one suggestion was to hire a retail recruiting expert to go out and prospect and not be commissioned based, they just want to place the right business for the community and also that design matters. In larger Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 23 of 24 cities you'll see great examples and they spend a lot of time on design and those layers are there for predictability for the community. Without that predictability of what type of process someone will go through, if there are policies and tools in place to help support the right thing then at least they will know. The Downtown District cares about that predictability and wants to work with some kind of design guidelines and will support that. The portable signage is the first step towards better design guidelines. Bird also wanted to state that she feels they need more City financial support for the design guidelines it can alleviate so much of the community conversation. To have design guidelines people can see and understand. Freerks remembers signage discussions a long time ago and it's important to remember there is a reason for the tables and the guidelines Freerks closed public hearing. Thomas moved to recommend approval of amending Portable Sign requirements in City Code Section 14-513'Sign Regulations;' Table 5B-4'Sign Specifications and Provisions in the CB -2, C113-5 and CB -10 Zones' as shown in Table 1. Eastham seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. PLANNING & ZONING INFORMATION Hektoen pointed out that the Commission's recommended denial of the comprehensive plan amendments will go onto Council but unlike a rezoning they do not have to provide an opportunity to consult with the Commission, but it does require a super majority vote if they are not going to follow the recommendation. Miklo reminded the Commission that Monday they had a joint meeting with the Council and they do have a meeting with another committee at 5:00 with the goal of that meeting being done at 5:30 so if the Commissioners could be here by 5:30 that would be good. This meeting is the discussion of the landmark designation of the cottages on Dubuque Street. ADJOURNMENT Eastham moved to adjourn. Swygard seconded. Motion carried 6-0. Nxxxoxxx Ln ;xxxxxxx T 00 NXxxxxxx T r�XXXXXX T TXXoxXIXx �-Xxlxxxxx ZO � X X X X X X w 'xxxxxxx -IXIxIxIXIXIxlx N gw(0towr--mm n �X0000000 w w Z uj �2Zwa0Z =CLQ=aoO UQYZQOaOQ 2 � LU 0 > Q � Q 2 2 GWLL2NHF- NXxxxxxx 00 °T°xxxxxxx 20 ,xxxxxxx 01 Z Ou Z L) LU �XXXXXX0 N X X X X LLI w W W X N w Z N ZOQ� N�XXXXXXX Q w m J L 5 Npo g ad ZN � Lr) In 'LO �-x0000000 � O Z~ OU. 00X W X X X X w 0 X Z za w w Z >-aZWQOZ Q ti ZXXXXXXX J D JXZOa' =UQ= J a� CL LX- X U<�e2E< X X X X wHw�0� 0m 'xxxxxxx -IXIxIxIXIXIxlx N gw(0towr--mm n �X0000000 w w Z uj �2Zwa0Z =CLQ=aoO UQYZQOaOQ 2 � LU 0 > Q � Q 2 2 GWLL2NHF- NXxxxxxx °T°xxxxxxx 01 N X X X X X X X N NXxxxxxx w m J L 5 ► 5 Lr) In 'LO �-x0000000 W w w Z >-aZWQOZ M J D JXZOa' =UQ= a� -O y U<�e2E< wHw�0� 0m xx ZaWLa LL2w 4b(4) IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION APPROVED MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2015--5:30 P.M. CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST. -TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY MEMBERS PRESENT: Alexa Homewood, Nick Kilburg, Bram Elias, Laura Bergus, Matt Butler MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Ty Coleman, Mike Brau OTHERS PRESENT: Bond Drager SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Coleman said that the Cable TV Office has been preparing for Government Programmer Jerry Nixon's retirement by examining how duties can be reorganized. As more emphasis is put on productions for the City, which require more time to produce than community-based programming, the balance of programming will likely change. Coleman said he would send out a draft version of the revised PATV contract by email in advance of the March meeting for review. It was agreed that a public hearing on PATV's performance and proposed contract would be held prior to the March Commission meeting. Bergus said the Commission has the option to recommend to the city council that the city should initiate a request that the IUB review Alliance Technologies compliance with their franchise and determine if it should be revoked. Kilburg said that it does not appear the city is interested in pursuing the issue at the IUB. Elias said he would prefer the Commission communicate their concerns to the council rather than make it a formal recommendation or an agenda item for the city council. Kilburg and Homewood agreed with that approach. Bergus said communicating with the city council on this issue would indicate that the Commission is paying attention to important regulatory issues and the city is not asleep at the switch. The Commission agreed that Homewood would write a letter on behalf of the Commission to City Manager Tom Markus and the city council stating the views of the Commission. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Kilburg moved and Butler seconded a motion to approve the amended February 10, 2015 minutes. The motion passed unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENT OF COMMISSIONERS None. SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS None. ONSUMER ISSUES Homewood referred to the report in the meeting packet and noted all issues have been resolved. MEDIACOM REPORT Coleman said that Grassley had nothing to report. Mediacom is transitioning to a new email server and is still experiencing some problems. Less than 1% of subscribers will need to make changes to their settings. CABLE TV OFFICE REPORT Coleman said that the Cable TV Office has been preparing for Nixon's retirement by examining how duties can be reorganized. As more emphasis is put on productions for the City, which require more time to produce than community-based programming, the balance of programming will likely change. PATV CONTRACT Coleman said he had sent Commissioners an email regarding plans for a public hearing on PATV's performance at the March Commission meeting. Coleman said he would send out a draft version of the revised contract by email in advance of the meeting for review. The proposed contract would allow PATV to charge fees of Iowa City residents. It would also change the geographical restrictions on who can use PATV. The addendum that clarifies the disposition of equipment purchased with funds other than those provided by the city will be rolled into the proposed contract. PATV has requested language be added that would permit PATV to use their equipment and assets in the event the contract is terminated. Bergus and Homewood volunteered to serve on a subcommittee to assist in developing PATV's contract. It was agreed that a public hearing on PATV's performance and proposed contract would be held prior to the March Commission meeting. CABLE TV OFFICE BUDGET Elias said it does not appear the city administration will make any changes to the proposed Cable TV Office budget. Elias suggested that Fruin be invited to a Commission meeting the during the FY 2017 budget cycle. ALLIANCE TECHNOLOGIES FRANCHISE Coleman said the city is waiting until it becomes more clear if a competitive provider will enter the market before considering contacting the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) regarding Alliance Technologies failure to provide service. Bergus said the Commission has the option to recommend to the city council that the city should initiate a request that the IUB review Alliance Technologies compliance with their franchise and determine if it should be revoked. Kilburg said that it does not appear the city is interested in pursuing the issue at the IUB. Bergus said that if the Commission were to make a recommendation to the city council that they would likely want someone to explain the Commission's position. Elias said that he would not want the city council to think the Commission is more focused on this issue more than other areas. There are other issues that may come up in the future. Elias said he would prefer the Commission communicate their concerns to the council rather than make it a formal recommendation or an agenda item for the city council. Kilburg and Homewood agreed with that approach. Bergus said the city often receives comments from the public that they desire a competitive provider. In this case there is a company that indicated they would provide a competitive service but failed to do so. The city should perform its due diligence by stepping in when a company is not performing as required. Elias said it is not the role of the city to balance any action at the IUB and a possible action by Mediacom. Bergus said the Commission has not brought any issues for action before the city council. There may be other issues, such as the status of the local access channels, that could arise in the future. Communicating with the city council on this issue would indicate that the Commission is paying attention to important regulatory issues and the city is not asleep at the switch. The Commission agreed that Homewood would write a letter on behalf of the Commission to City Manager Tom Markus and the city council stating the views of the Commission. Coleman said that Metronet will have field engineers in Iowa City in March. Coleman said he has been asked by the city administration to research Metronet's customer service satisfaction. There could be a decision by Metronet within a few months. LOCAL ACCESS CHANNEL SURVEY Brau said responses are still being gathered. An ad was placed with Facebook to try and get more responses from 18-25 year olds. The ad is to run through February. A draft report should be ready for the March meeting. ADJOURNMENT Homewood moved and Kilburg seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was at 6:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, N"W Michael Brau Cable TV Administrative Aide TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 12 MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD (X) = Present (0) = Absent (O/C) = Absent/Called (Excused) Elias Ber us Kilburg Butler Homewood 2/24/14 X X X 0 0 3/24/14 X X X X X 6/2/14 0 X X X X 6/23/14 0 X X X X 7/28/14 0 x x x 0/c 8/25/14 X X X X X 9/22/14 X X X X o/c 10/27/14 X X o/c o/c X 11/24/14 O/C O/C X X X 1/26/15 X X X X x 2/10/15 X X X o/c X 2/23/15 x x x x X 3/23/15 X X L X X x (X) = Present (0) = Absent (O/C) = Absent/Called (Excused)