HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-06-16 Bd Comm minutes3b(1)
Airport Commission
April 30, 2015
Page 1
MINUTES FINAL
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
APRIL 30, 2015 — 5:30 P.M.
AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING
Members Present: Jose Assouline, Minnetta Gardinier, A. Jacob Odgaard, Chris Ogren
Members Absent: David Davis
Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Eric Goers
Others Present: Matt Wolford, David Hughes, Carl Byers, Jeff Edberg
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
None.
DETERMINE QUORUM:
Chairperson Gardinier called the meeting to order at 5:35 P.M.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Gardinier opened with a review of minutes from the March 19, 2015, meeting. Ogren moved to
accept the minutes of the March 19, 2015, meeting as presented. Odgaard seconded the
motion. The motion carried 4-0. Next minutes from the April 7, 2015, meeting were reviewed.
Gardinier moved to accept the minutes of the April 7, 2015, meeting as presented. Ogren
seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
a. Airport Commission Meeting Schedule — Tharp noted that when the
Commission met for their special meeting on April 7`h they discussed scheduling
at that time. It was noted that several members may have some conflicts during
the next few months, and therefore the Commission asked to put this item on
their agenda. He added that Davis had wanted to be part of that conversation,
but that he is absent this evening. Assouline stated that he would move to select
a specific day and time, as they have done before, and to not have it moving
around. Those present noted that they would prefer this, that having a regularly
set meeting — third Thursday of the month — is easier to deal with. Ogren noted
that Davis had stated that he has taken on another Thursday commitment.
Gardinier asked the Commission what the consensus is on this, and those
present stated that they would like to stay with 6:00 P.M. on the third Thursday of
Airport Commission
April 30, 2015
Page 2
each month. Gardinier asked what other issues they need to address, and Tharp
noted that mainly it was to see what everyone's schedule is going to be for the
summer meetings, and whether there will be any problems in having a quorum.
Ogren asked if they could address this again at the May meeting, that perhaps by
then people will have a better idea of their summer schedules. Tharp noted that
it appears they will have a quorum for the May meeting. Gardinier asked if Davis
will be unable to attend the Thursday meetings. Tharp responded that he does
not have an answer to that. He added that the impression he got from the April
7th conversation was that Davis was not going to be able to attend meetings for
the next couple of months. Gardinier asked that everyone pay attention to their
calendars and to let the Commission know in advance of any absences. She
noted that June will be a conflict for her.
b. Airport Commerce Park — Jeff Edberg noted that the lot #7 sale will be
closing in the next few weeks. He added that he just heard this morning that on
lot numbers 11, 12, and 13 the builder and the buyer are now ready to move
forward. Once plans are finalized, they will be ready to close on this sale. Ogren
asked about the FAA situation. Edberg stated that this was a contingency, but is
not considered to be a real issue. He noted that he has discussed this with Sue
Dulek, from the City Attorney's office, and that all contingencies are being
released.
L South Commerce Park — Edberg then spoke to the South
Commerce Park area of the Airport. He shared with Members some
ideas of how they might develop this area. One would be to find an
aviation -related use that did not compete with Jet Air. Things like
hangars or radio shops would not be in competition, for example, but
Edberg stated that what he would like to find is something like an aircraft
leasing company that needs an acre under roof. Edberg then noted that
the City would like to build a training facility for the Fire Department, as
well as storage for the Police Department. He noted that he has found
them temporary space at this time, but that they definitely need more
space. Ogren asked where this issue stands with the FAA, and Tharp
noted that the initial response to the study by the FAA was to wait for the
completion of the Master Plan. The concerns initially were the height of
any buildings, and any smoke -producing events at the training facility.
Members then discussed these ideas, noting their concerns. Tharp
spoke to the needed dredging of the creek in this area, noting that it is
one of those projects that needs to be done for flood mitigation here.
Edberg stated that at this point they could begin slowly, find out if there
would actually be any aviation -related uses interested. Assouline spoke
to additional runways and whether this would be possible if they begin to
develop this area. Tharp stated that in the past they have discussed
grass landing strips and the feasibility of these. At the time, the land use
study did show that this would be possible. Gardinier noted that she is
not enthusiastic to lose what was the end of 18-36. She believes it
provides a safety runway if somebody needs to land, and that they have
been protecting and maintaining this area as such. Members continued
to discuss the South Commerce Park area, noting their concerns with
development here. They asked Matt Wolford with Jet Air what his
Airport Commission
April 30, 2015
Page 3
thoughts are on this area. He noted aviation -related businesses that do
painting and interiors of aircraft as possible ideas. Gardinier noted a
need for an avionics shop, as well. Edberg agreed, stating that he
believes a radio shop would be at the top of the list. He then spoke to
how the Commission could lease land for these types of uses, noting that
there are over 40 usable acres. Members agreed that Edberg should
continue researching possible uses. Edberg then shared a guidebook
that is for 'developing, leasing airport property,' noting that he looked
through it and did find some interesting sections in it. Gardinier
suggested that all of this information become part of the Master Plan
process. Tharp noted that the Master Plan will give a basic footprint on
how to develop the southern area.
C. Airport Master Plan — Carl Byers noted that Melissa Underwood would
be unable to attend this evening but that she gave him a brief summary to share
with Members. He noted that it states that the `aeronautical obstruction survey'
has been completed, that the data has been forwarded. The next Advisory
Group meeting is in the process of being scheduled for late May. Byers stated
that the purpose of this meeting will be to go through the data and discuss what
the alternatives are for either improving or getting more instrument approaches.
The group will also focus on facility requirements that the Airport needs, based
on the user survey responses and input from the open house. Underwood will
also demonstrate what can be looked up online and what you can do with this
data.
Byers then spoke to the southern area of the Airport, the South Commerce Park.
He noted that one of his first projects as an engineer was the rehab of runway
18-36 back in 1989. Speaking to an earlier comment, he noted that they may
need to decide if they want to reclaim this part of runway 18-36 as an actual
runway, instead of just an emergency one. He also spoke to several airports that
have fire service training facilities on their airfields. The restrictions, of course,
relate to building height, as well as any smoke generated, but that it appears with
planning, these uses work out quite well on the airfield. Tharp was then asked to
comment more on the possible flood mitigation needed in this area. He stated
that a study was done several years back regarding this and he noted some of
the options that could be used to mitigate the flood plain. At the time it was
estimated to be approximately a $2.2 million project. Tharp noted that a project
like this would be a 50/50 split with the FAA. Assouline stated that he believes
they need to have a better understanding of costs associated with such projects,
to get some real numbers as far as costs and also revenues. Members
continued their discussion, agreeing that they would like Tharp to meet with
Edberg and Wolford to further discuss these issues, and to see what type of
interest there might be in this area.
d. FAA/IDOT Projects: AECOM (David Hughes) —
i. FYI Obstruction Mitigation — Hughes stated that they are
continuing to work on this and have a conference call tomorrow to discuss
it further. They need to identify which parcels will be impacted and then
begin the coordination process.
Airport Commission
April 30, 2015
Page 4
ii. Fuel Tank Rehabilitation — Hughes stated that he will discuss the
fuel tank rehab and the north t -hangar electrical project together as they
comprise the 2015 State projects. There were pre -construction
conferences on both of these projects today. The fuel tank rehab project
painting should take place in August, according to Hughes. Wolford is
trying to coordinate a couple of tanker trucks that they will need while the
tanks are being painted. Members briefly discussed this, noting that they
do not like to see it being pushed out so far. Tharp added that they could
shut the system down and have nothing, but what they are trying to do is
maintain fuel sales at the Airport during this rehab. As for the north t -
hangar electrical projects, Hughes stated that they plan to start on this at
the end of May. This will be a two- to three-week project and the impact
will probably be one or two days of no electrical service. Hughes stated
that they will give everyone as much advance notice as possible on this.
iii. North T -hangar Electrical Service & LED lighting — (see above)
iv. FY2016 IDOT Grant Application — Hughes turned this over to
Tharp, who noted that Members have a memo on this in their meeting
packet. He noted two specific projects — retrofit hangar A doors to electric
versions, and begin phase one of a joint and crack sealing program in
order to maintain the runways. Continuing, Tharp noted that at the
Aviation Conference there was a lot of push -back on what was deemed
`routine pavement maintenance,' where the Office of Aviation again stated
that they would not approve pavement maintenance. None of the
applications were approved last year, according to both Tharp and
Hughes, and the intention is to not approve pavement maintenance this
year either. Tharp stated that the State is going to be capping the grant
awards for what they consider 'general aviation vertical infrastructure,'
which is what the hangar door project would fall under. The discussion
turned to possible phasing of this project, with three or four doors being
done per year. Gardinier spoke to having different categories of hangars
— some with electrical doors, some without — which could have different
rental prices.
Members continued to mull over how they might accomplish these
projects, in light of funding declines. Tharp responded to Member
questions and concerns. He then spoke to the LED lighting that they
have been working on over the past few years, noting that a big piece of
this project will be building F, the shop, as well as some airfield signs.
Gardinier stated that she would like to find out whether they should be
performing maintenance on pulley doors, and if so start doing it.
Members continued to discuss the issue, with Odgaard pressing for
upgrading to electric doors. Gardinier stated that she believes it will be
more cost effective to do the LED lighting upgrades. Tharp noted that the
pot of money they are trying to tap into is only $750,000 total, which is
why the State will be capping the awards. The discussion continued, with
Members trying to decide which projects should be part of this grant
submission. Tharp stated that if they did the door replacement with a
25% match, and the others at the minimum match levels, they would have
enough for all three projects — apron expansion, electrical, and doors.
This would come at a cost of $110,000 to the Airport. The topic of
Airport Commission
April 30, 2015
Page 5
upgrading old hangars versus building new was also discussed. Hughes
noted that many airports upgrade their hangars as the cost of building
them is quite high. Spending the money to upgrade would be money well
spent. Odgaard asked if the money they are counting on as a 'match' will
disappear if they don't spend it. Tharp stated that he is unsure, that once
the money has been allocated to the Airport, it is theirs to use. However,
since the money is tied to a certain scope of projects, he is not sure if
what they are proposing would be covered. Members continued to
discuss priorities in which projects should be addressed once funding is
known. Tharp stated that he is hearing consensus for applying for all
three projects.
Members asked Tharp and Hughes for further information on the
pavement part of this project. Hughes noted that it is extending the
existing apron. Tharp further explained what this would entail, noting that
they need to start this process in order to preserve the apron they have.
Hughes noted that they will do some research on the pulley doors, per
their conversation this evening.
e. Airport Operations —
i. Strategic Plan- Implementation — None.
ii. Budget — Tharp stated that the Budget Committee will need to
convene in the next month or so to briefly go through where they are
currently.
iii. Management — Tharp noted that he received Gardinier's email
about newsletter edits. He hopes to get this out by tomorrow afternoon.
Ogren asked about the window issue, and Tharp noted that the contractor
is behind in a different project, therefore putting him behind in this one.
Ogren suggested that Tharp get more aggressive with the contractor, in
order to move the project forward.
f. FBO/Flight Training Reports —
i. Jet Air — Matt Wolford with Jet Air shared the monthly
maintenance reports with Members. He noted that they have been able
to paint more rooms recently, including his office and the women's
restroom. There has been a lot of spring cleanup, as well, such as
picking up branches and sticks, and trash. He noted that they have put
up signs regarding the gate codes. Wolford added that they did purchase
a push mower, to help with some of those areas that the riding mowers
can't reach very well.
Wolford then spoke to the FBO side, noting that they suffered a major
loss with Brett, their shop manager, going to Rockwell Collins. He will still
be helping out in the evenings and on weekends, however. Wolford
noted that another employee, Elwin Stutsman, will be stepping up to help
out until a replacement is found. Wolford noted that he also attended the
Aviation Conference this year, and he shared his experiences there. He
stated that they were able to sell a Citation to a Des Moines customer.
He added that they have had an increase in sales lately, selling two of
their Skyhawks, a Piper Saratoga, a 421 C, and a Citation I to a customer
Airport Commission
April 30, 2015
Page 6
in South Korea. He then responded to Member questions regarding what
other aircraft Jet Air has in its fleet.
Tharp then explained where they are with needing to approve the
Maintenance Agreement and the Janitorial Services Agreement with Jet
Air. He explained the City's policy on such services and how Jet Air still
offers them a lower price than if they were to open this up. Also, with Jet
Air's expertise at the airfield, there is a safety issue with opening up such
services to outside firms.
1. Consider a resolution approving Maintenance
Agreement — Ogren moved to approve Resolution
#A15-08, Maintenance Agreement with Jet Air.
Assouline seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-
0.
2. Consider a resolution approving Janitorial Services
Agreement — Ogren moved to approve Resolution
#A15-09, Janitorial Services with Jet Air. Assouline
seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.
g. Commission Members' Reports — Assouline stated that he saw the
airport in Aspen, Colorado. He noted that it is a small airport. Gardinier
stated that she flew down to Venice, Florida, and saw their nice little
airport. She added that she always thought they should have a cafe at
the Airport. Ogren stated that she was with a group where a young child
was talking about the Airport, and she suggested they get the word out
even more about the Airport and all that happens there.
h. Staff Report — Tharp noted that the week of June 11 to he will be out of
the office on Friday and in Des Moines that weekend. Gardinier asked
Tharp if he has heard anything further on the Young Eagle Flight. He
stated that he did send an email.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR:
The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, May 21, 2015, at
6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building.
ADJOURN:
Gardinier made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:50 P.M. Ogren seconded the
motion. The motion carried 4-0.
CHAIRPERSON DATE
Airport Commission
April 30, 2015
Page 7
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2014-2015
Key.
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
TERM
O
o
A
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
�
O
NAME
EXP.
N
"
0
"
0
N
0
0
0
co
co
o
to
co
O
•i
W
o
N
-
A
A
A
to
cn
cr
0
Cn
cn
cr
to
to
Minnetta
03/01/19
X
X
O/
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Gardinier
E
Jose
03/01/16
X
X
O/
X
X
O/
X
X/
O/
X
X
O/
X
Assouline
E
E
E
E
E
Chris
03/01/18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ogren
A.Jacob
03/01/18
X
X
X
O/
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Odgaard
E
David
03/01/17
O/
X
X
O/
X
X
O/
X
X
O/
X
X
O/
Davis
E
E
E
E
E
Key.
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
r 1 U13-10-10
r �.'% C 1 T Y C) F I U W A CITY 3b(2)
-� MEMORANDUM
CITY OF IOWA CITY
UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE
Date: June 4, 2015
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Tim Hennes, Board of Appeals
Re: Recommendation from the Board of Appeals
At their May 18, 2015 meeting, the Board of Appeals made the following recommendations
to the City Council: Recommended by a unanimous vote (4-0) to proceed with the adoption of
the 2015 International Building Code with amendments, the 2015 International Residential Code
with amendments, the adoption by reference of the State Plumbing and Mechanical codes and
the 2015 International Fire Code with amendments.
Recommended by a unanimous vote (4-0) to proceed with the adoption of an amended
Licensing Code
Additional Action (check one)
No further action needed
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
_x_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
MINUTES APPROVED
IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALSLF�i/7ii�r:i�y
MONDAY, May 18, 2015
EMMA HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
410 E. WASHINGTON STREET
IOWA CITY, IA 52240
MEMBERS PRESENT: John Roffman, Scott McDonough, Andrea French, John Gay
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Tim Hennes (Sr. Building Inspector), Sue Dulek (Asst. City
Attorney), Doug Boothroy (Director, Neighborhood and Development Services)
Jessica Bristow (Historic Preservation Planner), John Yapp (Development Services
Coordinator), Jann Ream (Code Enforcement Specialist, acting as minute taker)
OTHERS PRESENT: Joan Tiemeyer and Karyl Bohnsack, Iowa City Homebuilders Association
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Recommended by a unanimous vote (4-0) to proceed with the adoption of the 2015 International Building
Code with amendments, the 2015 International Residential Code with amendments, the adoption by
reference of the State Plumbing and Mechanical codes and the 2015 International Fire Code with
amendments.
Recommended by a unanimous vote (4-0) to proceed with the adoption of an amended Licensing Code.
CALL TO ORDER:
John Roffman called the meeting to order at 4:02 PM
ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
French moved to elect John Roffman as chairperson of the Board of Appeals. McDonough seconded.
VOTE: Roffman was elected as chairperson of the BOA by a 4-0 unanimous vote.
McDonough moved to elect Andrea French as vice -chair of the Board of Appeals. Gay seconded.
VOTE: French was elected vice -chair of the BOA by a 4-0 unanimous vote.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES:
Minutes from March 24, 2014 meeting were reviewed. McDonough moved to adopt the minutes. French
seconded. The minutes were approved by a unanimous 4-0 vote.
Discussion and possible recommendation to City Council regarding the adoption of the 2015 International
Building, Residential and Fire Codes.
Tim Hennes started the discussion by pointing out the memorandum in the meeting packet that delineates
the most notable changes in the 2015 codes. He said he would briefly go through the changes and board
members could ask questions as he went over them.
He explained a new amendment that would require a building permit for roof replacement and street facing
exterior door replacement for single family and duplex structures that are located in a Historic District or
are designated an Iowa City Historic Landmark building subjecting them to Historic Preservation review.
2
APPROVED
This would be a change since, currently, no permit is required for roof replacement or for replacing street
facing exterior doors in single family and duplex structures; and, therefore, roof and door replacements are
not now subject to Historic Preservation review. This new proposed amendment would not apply to single
family and duplex structures in Conservation Districts. The Historic Preservation Commission had asked
for this revision for all districts and, after staff discussion, it was limited to just Historic Districts and
Landmark structures. The commission was amenable to this compromise.
Roffman asked if the requirement for a building permit to replace windows was going to be removed from
Conservation Districts since this new amendment was not going to apply to Conservation Districts.
Hennes explained that current regulations were not going to change. The proposal was to simply add this
new regulation to Historic Districts and Historic Landmark buildings.
McDonough said he could see the reasoning for front doors but asked why roof replacement was should
be subject to HPC review.
Bristow gave a short power point presentation that illustrated why the Historic Preservation Commission
was requesting this new regulation. She explained that HPC guidelines allow for metal roofs to be
replaced with asphalt shingle roofs and vice versa and showed slides of examples. However, recently,
several structures in historic and conservation districts installed new metal roofs that were not "standing
seam" roofs but were what is commonly referred to as "agricultural" metal roofing. Instead of flat metal roof
sections with standing seams, the roofs have a corrugated appearance. Bristow explained that this type of
roof is inappropriate for historic properties. She also explained that, according to the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, installing this type of roof on a registered property could get it
removed from the register of historic properties.
Bristow went on to explain that the Historic Preservation Commission also wants to review the
replacement of front exterior doors to make sure that they are being replaced with doors of the appropriate
materials and design.
Roffman asked if the commission had considered removing the requirement for a permit and, therefore
HPC review for the replacement of windows in a Conservation District. Hennes stated that staff had
discussed that but the proposal was not to change existing regulations.
Roffman said it would seem more consistent to have the same regulations apply to roofs, doors and
windows.
Hennes explained that if this amendment was passed, notification would be sent to property owners in the
districts explaining the requirement for building permits and HPC review for replacement of front doors and
roofs. This would be in addition to the yearly notification that is sent to property owners in all Historic and
Conservation Districts concerning Historic Preservation regulations.
Bristow said that the commission had not considered lessening any regulations.
McDonough expressed concerns about the enforcement of these new regulations — he felt getting permits
for roofs and doors would be difficult and enforcement would be "after the fact". He also asked for
clarification as to how the review process would work. Since roof replacement is so weather dependent, he
wanted to know if approval could be done administratively and not have to go through the whole
commission at a monthly meeting. Bristow thought that could be accomplished through approval by staff
and the commission chair. That administrative process is already available for several other types of
projects.
Boothroy added that the reason staff was recommending review for roofs and doors only in Historic
Districts and for Landmark buildings is that the awareness for historic review is greater among these
property owners than owners in conservation districts and that should help with the enforcement issue.
Hennes continued explaining the notable changes. Staff is proposing amendments that would remove
certain requirements that are in the 2015 codes. House to garage doors would not be required to be self-
closing. The requirement to protect the underside of floor/ceiling assemblies in unfinished basements
would be deleted. Hennes explained that amending out this requirement provides consistency with
building codes in surrounding jurisdictions.
APPROVED
The 2015 code reduces the minimum habitable room size from 120sf to 70sf. Staff is proposing to amend
this out and leave the habitable room size at 120sf. This maintains consistency with the Iowa City Housing
Code. Roffman asked if closets were included in the square footage requirement. Hennes said that
storage areas were not included in habitable space as wells as hallways and bathrooms. McDonough
asked if maintaining this standard wasn't contrary to the small house movement. Boothroy answered that
the 120sf had been a national standard for the past several decades and his research showed it would not
be contrary to the small house movement.
The requirement for guard protection on windows that are less than 24 inches above the floor would be
amended out as it has been in previous code cycles. Hennes explained that this is consistent with other
jurisdictions.
The requirement to install a fire sprinkling system for single family and duplex structures would be
amended out.
Hennes explained that in the last code cycle, the City added eight provisions to implement universal
design features in dwelling units. Staff is proposing to add those same provisions again. Hennes clarified
that these provisions apply only to new structures or if an addition that adds more than 25% of the floor
area to the structure. Even in the case of the addition, the provisions would only apply to the new addition.
The house would not be required to be retrofitted.
The 2015 code now requires storm shelters for any new school building. Previously, the code only had
requirements for storm shelters if they were installed. Now they are tied to occupancy so even an addition
that increases the occupancy of a school by 50 persons would not only require a storm shelter be installed
but also require that shelter accommodate for the occupancy of the entire student body. Hennes said there
was a lot staff discussion about this requirement and communication with State building officials. Staff is
proposing an amendment to make it clear that the provision applies to new schools only excluding
additions and portable classrooms and will be consistent with the State building code.
Hennes explained several other amendments that were included in previous code cycles and then went on
to explain the proposal to adopt Appendix J of the code — Existing Buildings and Structures. The purpose
of these provisions is to encourage the continued use or reuse of legally existing buildings and structures.
Hennes said staff runs into issues with ceiling height and the rise and run of stairs in existing buildings and
this appendix will give good guidance on dealing with these issues.
Hennes explained that the city will adopt by reference the State Plumbing Code and the State Mechanical
Code. This is consistent with the current separate codes now adopted and will keep the City codes up to
date as the State adopts the codes in the future. In other words, the City will not have to continue to
separately adopt the plumbing code and the mechanical codes as they get updated. The State will adopt
the codes and the City code will reference the State code.
Hennes then pointed out the notable changes in the 2015 International Fire Code. He explained that Fire
Department personnel were unable to attend the meeting but that the changes were fairly self-explanatory
and he could answer any questions the board might have. McDonough saw the prohibition against
untethered "sky lanterns" and wondered what "sky lanterns" were. Hennes explained that they were
Chinese lanterns with attached candles that get lit to warm the air inside and float the lantern which then
gets released. The prohibition was based on the possibly of the lanterns coming down on flammable
materials like roofs so now they are required to be tethered.
Roffman asked if there were any other questions and noted that there were two representatives of the
Iowa City Homebuilders Association in attendance and asked if they had any comments.
Joan Tiemeyer stated that the Homebuilders Association has always had a good relationship with the Iowa
City Building division and that the association appreciates that the Building division discusses code
revisions with them and has shown willingness to work the Homebuilders on certain issues. She stated
that Homebuilders still had some concerns with the historic preservation revisions.
Hennes stated that Iowa City tries to coordinate the adoption of building codes and amendments with
other jurisdictions such Coralville, Johnson County and North Liberty but he thought Iowa City was unique
4
APPROVED
in having historic districts. However, he reiterated that owners buying property in Historic Districts or
buying a landmark property should be aware of what they getting into. Conservation District properties are
not so obvious to buyers. Roffman stated that he did not see much difference between Historic Districts
and Conservation Districts. With no further discussion, Roffman asked for a vote on the agenda item.
MOTION: Gay moved that the adoption of the 2015 International Building Code with amendments, the
2015 International Residential Code with amendments, the adoption by reference of the State Plumbing
and Mechanical Codes and the 2015 International Fire Code with amendments be recommended to City
Council. McDonough seconded.
VOTE: The motion passed by a unanimous vote 4-0.
Discussion and possible recommendation to City Council regarding amending the Licensing code
Hennes explained the State of Iowa had taken over the licensing of Electrical, Plumbing and Mechanical
contractors several years ago. This proposal would update the licensing section and
reflect this change. Nothing else in the section would change.
MOTION: French moved that the adoption of the Licensing code as proposed be recommended to City
Council. McDonough seconded.
VOTE: The motion passed by a unanimous vote 4-0.
OTHER BUSINESS:
None.
Roffman adjourned the meeting at 4:21 PM
/;"/Ifairperson�`/d of Appeals Date
?ll
m
d
CL
CL
O
m
MO
W
LO
T-
CD O
N
4
IrlO
N
V
L
v
d
v
G
Q
U)
R
XXXX
LO
QZ
Q
l`C
Z
LO
r
=
�
CD
Z
LL
LO
r
R
Z
tv
�
dZ
G
>
O
Z
Z
vZ
O
v
1
CL
2
d
Z
U)
3
Z
Q
r
MZ
d'
r
c
�
Z
�Z
v
Q,
Z
Q
N
W
ti
r-
(D
Un
a
N
N
N
N
Wr
M
N
M
N
M
N
M
N
W
r
r
r
r
F-
�
C
L
O
C�
`
O
a
WO
G
C
O
C
X
CD
E
Q
o
9
E
o
O
C
C
o
E
O
E
..
C
Z
a
LL�
0
>.
o
a
4)
w
o
n
o
co
m
LD
o��C�
ami
��
l3
c0Z
II
o
O
a
y—_
c-
r---
S
v=
C;
C
}
W11
a
II
W
I I
II
II
�Q,
--.0
c�
°
1XOOZ
IX
FINAL/APPROVED
CITIZENS POLICE REVIEW BOARD06-16-15
MINUTES — April 7, 2015 31
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Melissa Jensen called the meeting to order at 5:31 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Royceann Porter, Mazahir Salih (5:42PM), Joseph Treloar
MEMBERS ABSENT: Fidencio Martinez
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Kellie Tuttle and Patrick Ford
STAFF ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: Sargent Chris Akers of the ICPD
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
(1) Accept CPRB Report on Complaint #14-11
PRESENTATION BY EQUITY DIRECTOR — Increasing Diversity on City Boards &
Commissions
Equity Director Bowers presented a PowerPoint. (PowerPoint is archived in the meeting
packet)
CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by Treloar, seconded by Salih, to adopt the consent calendar as presented or
amended.
• Minutes of the meeting on 03/10/15
Motion carried, 4/0, Martinez absent.
OLD BUSINESS
Community Forum — Tuttle notified the Board that notices regarding the forum had been
posted and sent out. The first press release had been done and included in a City Council
packet. Extra copies of the notice were given to Board members to post. Jensen mentioned
that Jennifer Hemmingsen from the Gazette contacted her to do a guest editorial regarding the
forum. Tuttle informed the Board that the CPRB video would not be ready for the forum
because of the recommended name change. City Council was giving direction on the Charter
Review Commission's recommendations that night and they would not be finalized by the 28tH
NEW BUSINESS
None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
None.
BOARD INFORMATION
None.
STAFF INFORMATION
None.
CPRB
April 7, 2015
Page 2
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion by Salih, seconded by Porter to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section
21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by
state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that
government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal
information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities,
boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports,
except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications
not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its
employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government
body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could
reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that
government body if they were available for general public examination.
Motion carried, 4/0, Martinez absent. Open session adjourned at 6:00 P.M.
(Salih left at 6:09 P.M.)
REGULAR SESSION
Returned to open session at 6:52 P.M.
Motion by Treloar, seconded by Porter, to forward the Public Report as amended for CPRB
Complaint #14-11 to City Council.
Motion carried, 3/0, Martinez and Salih absent.
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change)
• April 28, 2015, 6:00 PM, , IC Library, Room A, Community Forum
• May 12, 2015, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm (Moved to May 20th)
• June 9, 2015, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• July 14, 2015, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
Treloar stated she would be unavailable for the May 12th meeting. After discussion the Board
agreed to move the May 12th meeting to May 20tH
Motion by Porter, seconded by Treloar to move up the May 12th meeting to Tuesday, May 20th
Motion carried, 3/0, Martinez and Salih absent.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion for adjournment by Treloar, seconded by Porter.
Motion carried, 3/0, Martinez and Salih absent.
Meeting adjourned at 7:09 P.M.
CITIZENS POLICE REVIEW BOARD
(Formerly Police Citizens Review Board)
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2014-2015
(Meeting Date)
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
TERM
5/13
5/19
6/11
8/26
9/15
10/13
11/10
11/25
12/3
12/8
12/2
2/10
3/10
4/7
NAME
EXP.
9
Melissa
9/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Jensen
Donald
9/1/15
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
King
Joseph
9/1/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
Treloar
Royceann
9/1/16
X
X
X
X
O
X
O
O
X
X
X
O
X
X
Porter
Mazahir
9/1/17
X
X
O/E
O
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
Salih
Maxime
9/1/15
---
---
---
X
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Tremblay
Fidencio
9/1/15
---
---
---
---
---
---
X
X
X
X
WE
X
X
O
Martinez
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
CITIZENS POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319) 356-5041
April 7, 2015
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #14-11
This is the Report of the Citizens Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the
investigation of Complaint CPRB #14-11 (the "Complaint").
BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation.
(Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the
following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1):
a. On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview /meet with complainant.
c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers.
d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in
the board's own investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses.
f. Hire independent investigators.
3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of
review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report, because
of the Police Chiefs professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2).)
4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police
Chief reverse or modify the Chiefs findings only if:
_C=
p•
To: City Council
Complainant
-
oa
r'""
City Manager
_
Sam Hargadine, Chief of Police►
Officer(s) involved in complaint
.a~
r
From: Citizen Police Review Board
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #14-11
This is the Report of the Citizens Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the
investigation of Complaint CPRB #14-11 (the "Complaint").
BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation.
(Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the
following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1):
a. On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview /meet with complainant.
c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers.
d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in
the board's own investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses.
f. Hire independent investigators.
3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of
review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report, because
of the Police Chiefs professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2).)
4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police
Chief reverse or modify the Chiefs findings only if:
a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or
b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious; or
c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal,
state or local law.
5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a
public report to the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact;
and (2) a clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint
is either "sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(3).)
6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to
discipline the officer involved.
BOARD'S PROCEDURE
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on 12/31/14. As required by Section
8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation.
The Chiefs Report was filed with the City Clerk on 02/25/15.
The Board voted on 03/10/15 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report:
On the record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-
(B)(1)(a).
The Board met to consider the Report on 03/10/15 and 04/07/15.
On 03/10/15, the Board reviewed audio and/or video recordings of the incident.
FINDINGS OF FACT
On October 3, 2014 police responded to investigate a motor vehicle accident involving a
cement truck and a passenger car. These vehicles collided when the cement truck was
backing in to a construction site.
Alienation 1 — Officer failed to sufficiently investigate the motor vehicle collision as
directed by ICPD General Order 99-09, Section IV, Procedures.
Upon examination, the Citizen's Police Review Board has determined that the offiggr did
sufficiently investigate this motor vehicle collision as directed by ICPD GenMI Omer 99-Q9,
Section IV, Procedures. The officer interviewed both drivers, surveyed theiftoft eV the`
accident, and assessed vehicle damage. � � ---
a� �
Allegation 1: Not sustained _ -v
Mit
2,0 w 0
b
r
Allegation 2 — Officer's determination that the Complainant was at fault in the accident
was incorrect and the traffic citation for following too closely should not have been
issued.
The Citizen's Police Review Board (CPRB) watched the videos of this incident and examined
all available evidence in this case.
The officer was heard on the video telling the complainant "When he started to back up you
were too close and he hit you." The officer is also heard to say "Why would you not try to go
backwards" to the complainant. These statements indicate that the officer believed the
complainant was stopped when she was hit and did not run into the truck, but the truck backed
into her vehicle.
The Board feels that the officer's determination that the complainant was at fault was incorrect
and took the following ordinance into consideration:
In the Iowa City Code, in Chapter 3: Rules of the Road, Section 9-3-9: GENERAL DRIVING
RESTRICTIONS, (D) states:
Moving Vehicle Backward On Highway: A person shall not cause a vehicle to be moved in a
backward direction on a highway unless and until the vehicle can be backed with reasonable
safety and shall yield the right of way to any approaching vehicle on the highway or
intersecting highway which is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. (1978 Code §23-
127; amd. 1994 Code; Ord. 97-3788, 6-3-1997)
The CPRB determined that the above ordinance may more appropriately apply to this
situation.
Allegation 2: Sustained.
Allegation 3 - Officer did not listen to the Complainant's point of view in regard to how
the accident occurred.
The CPRB reviewed the video and the conversation and it was clear that the officer did listen
to the complainant's point of view in regard to how the accident occurred. The officer did not
agree with the complainant as to who was at fault, but he did listen to her views on the
incident. 4
Allegation 3: Not sustained JIMA
Allegation 4 - Officer's threat to take the Complainant to jail was inap 4riaTe unpar
these circumstances.GRP
JK
The CPRB reviewed the video and the conversation and did not feel that t officer acted
inappropriately or threatened to take the Complainant to jail. It was evident that Nie
complainant did not seem to understand that by signing the citation, she was not pleading
guilty to the offense, but was just promising to appear in court. She seemed to be resistant to
signing the citation as she did not want to be admitting fault in this incident.
Allegation 4: Not sustained
Allegation 5 - Officer issued the Complainant a citation because she is not an
"American".
The CPRB reviewed the video and the conversation and did not feel that the officer indicated
in any way that he was biased against the complainant because she was not an "American".
The officer did make a statement that the driver of the truck had a right to use the highway.
However, the officer was expressing his belief the driver of the truck had the right of way at
that time.
This may have been why the complainant believed that the officer was inferring that the
complainant did not have a right to use the highway because she was not an "American". The
officer did not state, nor did he give the impression that he implied the complainant was
receiving the citation because she was not an "American".
Allegation 5: Not sustained
COMMENTS
None.
N
G7�
W
3b(4
FINAU
CITIZENS POLICE REVIEW BOARD
COMMUNITY FORUM
April 28, 2015, 6:00 P.M.
IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY
123 South Linn Street, IC
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Melissa Jensen called the meeting to order at 6:02 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Melissa Jensen, Royceann Porter, Fidencio Martinez,
Mazahir Salih
MEMBERS ABSENT: Joseph Treloar
STAFF PRESENT: Legal Counsel Patrick Ford and Staff Kellie Tuttle
(Transcriptions are available)
INTRODUCTION OF THE BOARD & BRIEF OVERVIEW.
CONSIDER MOTION TO ACCEPT CORRESPONDENCE AND/OR DOCUMENTS
None to accept.
PUBLIC
DISCUSSION The following individuals appeared before the CPRE:
Julie VanDyke
Fatimah Omar
Brianna Gore
Robert Smith
Adam Sullivan
Shawn Gerden
Heidi Kuchta
Harry Olmstead
Joseph Hall
Latisha McDaniel
Tessa Heeren
Annie Tucker
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 7:08 P.M.
3635490 1h St SW, IC
423 Waterway Dr, IC
429 Southgate Ave, IC
1131 Maple St, IC
1819 Chelsea Ct, IC
Iowa City
1918 1 St, IC
1951 Hannah Jo Ct, IC
1826 G St, IC
Iowa City
327 N Johnson, IC
1425 Oaklawn, IC
(Forum Summary will be submitted to Council)
CITIZENS POLICE REVIEW BOARD
(Formerly Police Citizens Review Board)
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2014-2015
(Meeting Date)
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
TERM
5/19
6/11
8/26
9/15
10/13
11/10
11/25
12/3
12/8
12/29
2/10
3/10
4/7
4/28
NAME
EXP.
Melissa
9/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Jensen
Donald
9/1/15
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
King
Joseph
9/1/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Treloar
Royceann
9/1/16
X
X
X
O
X
O
O
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
Porter
Mazahir
9/1/17
X
O/E
O
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
Salih
Maxime
9/1/15
---
---
X
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Tremblay
Fidencio
9/1/15
---
---
---
---
---
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O
X
Martinez
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
Qww
KIC LIBRARY
123 S. Linn St. • Iowa City, IA 52240
u (T(*SuunCraig.t,«)w3l9-356-5200-j,,3193565494.www.icpl.org
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Minutes of the Regular Meeting Final Approved
April 23, 2015
Members Present: Thomas Dean, Thomas Martin, Linzee McCray, Robin Paetzold,
Meredith Rich -Chappell, Jay Semel.
Members Absent: Diane Baker, Janet Freeman, David Hamilton.
Staff Present: Terri Byers, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Patty McCarthy, Anne Mangano, Elyse Miller, Vickie
Pasicznyuk, Brent Palmer
Guests Present: Monique Washington.
Call Meeting to Order. President Paetzold called the meeting to order at 5:03 pm.
Public Discussion. None.
Approval of Minutes.
The minutes of the March 26, 2015 Library Board of Trustees meeting were reviewed. A motion to
approve the Minutes was made by McCray and seconded by Rich -Chappell. Motion carried 6/0.
Unfinished Business.
Director Evaluation Process. Baker, Dean, and Semel are the Evaluation Committee. They met on
Monday to discuss the process they will use to evaluate the Library Director. They will interview
managers and the Union representative after sending out questions ahead of time. The Evaluation
Committee will send Craig a self-assessment ahead of time. They plan to solicit feedback from Board
members, and, after conducting interviews, will write a report and discuss with Susan. The official
evaluation will be during the June meeting. There was some discussion about involving staff throughout
the library in addition to the managers and the union representative. The Committee decided that
managers would comment on behalf of staff they supervise and the Union representative may also
share.
New Business.
AFSCME Contract. Byers is back in attendance as union negotiations are complete. The contract was
approved at the City Council's April 7 meeting and covers three years of wages and insurance. Byers
said the union ratified the contract on March 12. The same financial agreements carry over to
administrative/confidential/ plans. Staff recommend Board approval. Dean made a motion to approve
the AFSCME contract as ratified by the union and approved by City Council, with Martin seconding.
Motion carried 6/0.
Library Board Policy #803: Event Board. Rich -Chappell asked if Children's has fewer postings now that
there isn't a dedicated space for them. Pasicznyuk said there's a community notebook and some
postings are on the Children's Desk. Paetzold asked how we prioritize City events. Paetzold thought
choosing by audience rather than by city government might be another consideration for prioritizing
postings. Craig said that there aren't many conflicts with the City, and space unavailability does not
happen often. Byers, who has responsibility for the area, said there aren't many City events that require
posting; usually other City departments provide pamphlets or brochures. Clark said the biggest concern
with space occurs when people post their own materials on the Event Board without proper vetting by
library staff. Craig remembered a heated conversation with a mother whose daughter was giving violin
lessons. Craig had to explain that we do not promote or advertise commercial activities. Craig
suggested alternative places to the mother and the mom left happy. Dean asked if "downtown" is
specific enough in the policy. It was agreed this can be revisited if a more specific description is
necessary. A motion to approve the policy with the recommended changes was made by Rich -Chappell
and seconded by McCray. Motion carried 6/0.
Library Board Policy #804: Free Materials Distribution. Staff noted patrons sometimes remove free
materials they do not like. Byers said hunting and fishing pamphlets are often removed by the public.
Paetzold asked who restocks; Byers said staff inventory items to be distributed and restock them. A
motion to approve the policy with the recommended changes was made by Martin and seconded by
Semel. Motion carried 6/0.
Library Board Policy #805: Displays for Public Use. Craig said the public appreciates having display
space. We have had several requests this spring to have things projected onto or off of the building. A
City group is meeting next week to discuss temporary display of art including projected art. Craig said a
display can often be the most controversial thing in a library. Paetzold asked how far in advance
displays are booked. Craig said it can be a year in advance. Dean said the memo for this policy suggests
a language change in 805.1 but it is not reflected in the policy included in the packet. After discussion it
was determined to proceed with the policy that was included. A motion to approve the policy with the
staff recommended changes was made by Dean and seconded by McCray. Motion carried 6/0.
Staff Reports.
Director's Report. Orientation for new Board members has been scheduled. In May, the Board will
discuss bookmobile service. Staff will bring concept and information. There are a lot of materials in the
packet about the State Historical Society (SHS) and its current situation, which is uncertain. Craig said
there have been rumors about the SHS since she has been at the library. Currently, there is a new low
staffing level and hours have been reduced. Clark and Craig met with the new State Archivist this week.
They shared our interest in providing access for citizens to historical materials. We send patrons to the
SHS all the time. The State Archivist expects that reports will be complete by the end of June/early July
and then issues may be prioritized. Clark is trying to make arrangements to have him speak at the ILA
conference in October. The SHS collection is poorly accessible and much hinges on what the State
Legislature does with funding. The building in Des Moines has been plagued by physical issues since it
z
opened. Craig reminded members the Volunteer Recognition event is next Wednesday, 4/29/15, at
6:30 pm in Meeting Room A.
Departmental Reports:
Children's Services. This is Pasicznyuk's last report. Her last day is May 21. Paetzold asked if we have
increased prizes, etc. for Summer Reading Program. Pasicznyuk said they've increased by 25% in
anticipation of more participants this year.
Collection Services. No comments.
IT. Board members went to see the new scanner at 5:41 pm. Board members returned at 5:48 pm.
Development Office Report. McCarthy said the DO is gearing up for a couple of upcoming fundraisers.
There are 61 reservations for the Looking Forward event. Pancheros is delighted to participate again this
year, supplying lunch for the golf event on June 26. There is a discount if you register your foursome by
May 1. McCarthy mentioned the 35' anniversary of the library's Volunteer Program; there are nice
things planned for the event.
Spotlight on the Collection. No comments.
Miscellaneous. No comments.
President's Report. None.
Announcements from Members. Martin said the state of Kansas announced today six school districts
will not be able to complete the school year because Kansas is out of money. He thinks this is
unbelievable. His point is that reducing taxes has consequences. Craig said McCray's program on
quilting last week was one of the best programs ever at the library. McCray said the library, Beth Fisher,
and Maeve Clark, did a great job helping set up the program and taking care of any IT concerns. Clark
said the quilts were hung up front and attendees were able to touch the quilts.
Committee Reports.
Foundation Members. None.
Communications. None.
Quarterly Financial Reports. Craig said we are comfortably where we need to be financially.
Quarterly Use Reports. Craig said circulation is down; if it is down less than 3% for the year she'll be
happy. Building usage is up; and she believes this will plateau. The number of library cards issued is up,
which pleases Craig as well.
Disbursements.
The MasterCard expenditures for March, 2015 were reviewed. A motion to approve the disbursements
for March, 2015 was made by Rich -Chappell and seconded by Semel. Motion carried 6/0.
Set Agenda Order for May Meeting.
Report on Bookmobile.
Meet as Corporate members of Friends Foundation.
Policy review.
Adjournment. A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Semel and seconded by Rich -Chappell.
Motion carried 6/0. President Paetzold closed the meeting at 6:04 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elyse Miller
4
N
V
O
M
L
10
O
In
J
IL
M
Op
'y u
W
W
O u
u a s
D *'
Z o
W
m Q V4
N
V
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
N
O
N
N
\
O
x
O
O
X
X
X
X
M
a
X
N
V.
x
X
X
w
O
X
X
X
X
t0
X
M
N
X
X
X
X
X
LLJ
X
LU
io
O
X
N
N
!�
LLI
X
LU
X
X
O
X
X
O\
N
O
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N
ei
X
x
X
x
X
x
x
rl
LU
X
X
x
X
X
X
LLJ
O
X
O
'i
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
a
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
x
x
w
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
X
a
C
LLI
LU
x
x
x
x
O\
x
X
X
s
0
Ql
L!7
Ol
lli
L!1
r,
Ol
�
0
0
C)
C)
C
0
C)
l0
to
l0
l0
ko
ko
l0
ko
ko
c
C
O
0
to
�,
p
NN
E
c
_
+y
-Neco
fu
-
m
co
U -N
=
m
Y
4-
'O U
E
72
Z
0
0
CC
°C
VI
06-16-lrl
3b(6)
MINUTES APPROVED
PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE
THURSDAY, May 08, 2015
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM — CITY HALL
Members present: John Engelbrecht, Tam Bryk, Brent Westphal, Sayuri
Sasaki Hemann, Mike Moran, Ron Knoche
Not present: Bill Nusser
Staff Present: Marcia Bollinger, Stefanie Bowers, Chris O'Brien
Public Present: Ricardo Rangel Jr
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: (to become effective only after
Council action)
none
CALL TO ORDER
Meeting called to order at 3:30pm.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
There was no public comment of items not on the agenda.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 5TH, 2015 MEETING
MOTION: Bryk moved to approve the March 5th, 2015 meeting minutes. Westphal seconded.
Motion passed 6:0.
INCREASING THE DIVERSITY OF APPLICANT POOL FOR THE PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE
Stefanie Bowers introduced herself. She stated that she is the Equity Director/Human Rights
Coordinator of City of Iowa City. She was at the meeting to present to the Public Art Advisory
Committee some suggestions to increase the diversity of applicant pool for the committee.
Bowers stated that when she talks about increasing the diversity of the applicant pool for City
boards and commissions, it actually is an initiative that comes from two different sources; one
part is the City of Iowa City's Equity Action plan and another part from the Strategic Plan for the
Iowa City City Council. She stated that when we talk about diversity, diversity is basically all the
ways in which we are different, whether it is race, color, nationality, religion, and sex. She stated
that numerous studies have shown that we all know that diverse organizations tend to contribute
to better outcomes, which for local government results in better services and programs. Bowers
stated that her office recently reviewed the demographics of City boards and commissions
based on a survey recently completed. 80 of 131surveys were returned which is a 61 %
response rate - considered very good. Based on those responses, the majority identified
themselves as white, over half identified being married, over the age of 65, and a little less than
half put the annual household income over a hundred thousand. She stated that slightly more
males replied to the survey than females. And when they compared this information to the 2010
census, it was determined that boards and commissions could do better when looking at race
and also age. She stated that gender is addressed because Iowa law requires boards and
commissions to have gender balance. But other minority populations are underrepresented.
Bowers stated that City officials and City Council believe that there are qualified individuals of
color here in the community who for whatever reason, either don't know about position
openings, don't know the variety of the boards and commissions, or we just don't know why they
don't apply. She suggested the committee try to gather information to help increase those
numbers and also to encourage applications form more diverse groups.
She introduced efficient ways to advertise, including fliers, handbills, and speaking with groups.
She stated that the Human Rights Commission and the Public Library do well in distributing
fliers throughout the community notifying the public of vacancies. She stated City buses will
display posters as well as recreation centers.
NICK KLEESE — GREEN LETTERS PROJECT & MATCHING FUND PROGRAM
Engelbrecht asked Bollinger about the Green Letters Project. Bollinger stated that there were
actually two items that would not to be discussed. Nick Kleese of the Green Letters Project ran
into some conflicts so that he could complete some critical tasks and the Matching Fund
Program was going to need a bit more time before the committee can discuss it.
HARRISON STREET PARKING FACILITY PUBLIC ART PROJECT
Chris O'Brien introduced himself as the Director of Transportation Services for the City of Iowa
City. He stated that the Harrison Street Parking Facility Project is a lease/purchase project that
the City will eventually own. The facility also includes some condominium units. As a part of the
parking ramp project, there is an art component included in the stair well portion and lower level
of the parking ramp along Harrison Street. O'Brien presented some concept images to the
committee. He stated that the parking structure will be owned and maintained by the City of
Iowa City and provide 600 parking spaces for public parking, townhome tenants, and office
building employees. The parking structure will also contain maintenance space for City owned
vehicles and equipment. Bollinger asked what Public Art budget was for the project. O'Brien
replied that it was $150,000 to $200,000 including design, fabrication, and installation. The
committee discussed the interest in encouraging local artists to participate. O'Brien explained
that the project is primarily privately funded but the parking ramp will, at some point in the future
be owned by the City, the committee should have input into the project. The committee
suggested that the focus of the project seemed appropriate and to keep them informed as the
project progressed.
GREEN COLLEGE PARK-STAIRART
Bollinger stated that the committee had decided to fund an art project on the steps of College
Park and the funding would be provided by FY 16 money which would be available July 1, 2015.
The intent is to have the project completed this summer before the students arrive back for fall
classes as the pedestrian traffic count is pretty high when the students are in town. Bolllinger
stated that she went to some neighborhood resident living in the area because there are people
have invested quite a bit of money into the properties in this area and she wanted to make sure
they were aware and had any comments about the theme of the project. The committee
2
discussed the timing of the improvement work on the steps due to erosion issues under the
steps. Knoche stated that it would be reasonable to take three weeks from August 1st to around
August 20st to finish it before students coming back. Bollinger stated she will adjust the
schedule. The "historic" theme was discussed and if there was flexibility in that focus. Bryk
suggested expanding the theme to "nature" as well. Bollinger said she would adjust and get
the committee in June. Bryk also suggested using this opportunity to collect artist contact
information.
UPDATES: BENCHMARKS, BLACK HAWK MINI PARK ART PROJECT,
ARTSFEST/KIDZTENT, POETRY IN PUBLIC, MISSION CREEK FESTIVAL ART PROJECT
Bollinger stated that she and Bryk had participated in Benchmarks review about six weeks ago
and her overall observation is that the quality of proposals was really good. Bryk stated that
there were many proposals to choose from. Engelbrecht stated that some artists already started
to work on benches. Bollinger explained that the visit by Cecil Balmond, the artist selected for
the Black Hawk Mini Park Art Project would be rescheduled to sometime in June. The Kidztent
would be held on June 6th and 7th in this year. Bollinger stated that she needs help from the
committee members to pick up donations on Saturday while on Sunday she needed people help
sell those donations to kids. Hemann stated that she can do 10am to 12pm on Sunday.
Engelbrecht and Westphal stated that he can do on Saturday. Then Bollinger moved to Poetry
in Public. She stated that the project is in the process of displaying posters in recreation centers
and in the public library windows. The goal is to have them installed before Artsfest. Bollinger
stated that the Mission Creek Festival Art Project mural never happened because they decided
to do some constructions and the wall to be painted on would be removed.
No other news.
ADJOURNMENT
Bryk motioned and Westphal seconded a motion to adjourn at 4:35 PM.
Minutes created by Qilu Chen.
N
0
N
r
O
N
L
XXXOXXX
M
X
X
X
X
X
N
X
X
X-
LU
X
X
X
LU
N
X
X
X
�
;
;
X
0
T -
X
X
-
X
X
ti
--
X
X
X
O
;
;
X
ti
�xx--o
;
;X
Lo
0
X
X
X
X
CD
LO
I-
ti
w
-
L Q-
N X
O
O
T-
O
r-
O
T-
O
i -w
o
0
0
0
0
Y
CO)
t
CO)
R
1Q
m
C
.Q
L
L
C
as
H
N
E
0
i
Z
coW
Z
X
Y
a
U)
W N
c "' E
N
into N N
T-0-0 o
a<<z
u u ii n
ICT
-06-16-15
3b(7)
IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION APPROVED
MONDAY, APRIL 27,2015--5:30 P.M.
CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST. -TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Alexa Homewood, Derek Johnk, Bram Elias, Laura Bergus
MEMBERS ABSENT: Nick Kilburg
STAFF PRESENT: Ty Coleman, Mike Brau
OTHERS PRESENT: Josh Goding, Bill Cooney
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
Goding said PATV would be sending a staff member to the regional Alliance for Community Media
(ACM) conference this weekend. Coleman said he and one of City Channel 4's producers would also
be attending the conference. Information on station management and alternative ways of getting
programming to the public are among the topics to be addressed. Wisconsin also moved to a state
franchising process that resulted in a loss of funding for many public access channels. Coleman said
he hopes to learn how they have adapted to the changes. Coleman said it appears the PATV contract
will go to the City Council on the second meeting in May. Homewood will draft a letter and forward it
to the rest of Commission for review. Elias said it appears the process to petition the Iowa Utilities
Board to revoke the Alliance Technologies franchise was set in motion before the Telecommunications
Commission minutes were available to the city council. Coleman said the city administration decided
to follow the advice of the Commission. Alliance Technologies responded to the city's IUB petition
by withdrawing their franchise effective May 1. The municipal franchise with Mediacom will be in
effect 90 days later. Elias said the local access channel survey should be sent to Metronet, Imon, and
Mediacom. This will demonstrate that Iowa City has an engaged municipal government that conducts
such projects as the survey and is proactive in developing programs and strategies to better serve the
community. The Commission agreed to send the survey out to the access channels and the potential
providers as well as Mediacom. The Commission could follow up with the access channels after they
have had a chance to review it.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Elias moved and Johnk seconded a motion to approve the amended March 23, 2015 minutes. The
motion passed unanimously. Elias moved and Johnk seconded a motion to approve the minutes from
special public access comment meeting of March 23, 2015. The motion passed unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS
The Commissioned welcomes Johnk to the Commission.
SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
CONSUMER ISSUES
Homewood noted the complaint report in the meeting packet and that all issues were resolved.
Coleman said some citizens informed him they did not want Metronet to come onto their property.
Metronet may access the areas of the public right-of-way but not the easements that rest on private
property. Johnk said he shared information regarding the possibility of Metronet providing service
with his neighborhood association and received a lot of positive responses.
MEDIACOM REPORT
Coleman said he did not have contact with Mediacom officials.
LOCAL ACCESS CHANNEL REPORTS
Homewood noted that PATV and the City Channel had written reports in the meeting packet. Goding
said PATV would be sending a staff member to a regional Alliance for Community Media (ACM)
conference this weekend.
CITY CABLE TV OFFICE REPORT
Coleman said he and one of City Channel 4's producers would also be attending the ACM conference.
Information on station management and alternative ways of getting programming to the public are
among the topics to be addressed. Wisconsin also moved to a state franchising process that resulted in
a loss of funding for many public access channels. Coleman said he hopes to learn how they adapted
to the changes.
PATV CONTRACT
Homewood said that some amendments have been added to the draft PATV contract. Coleman said it
appears that the contract will go to the City Council on the second meeting in May. Homewood said
the Commission could send a letter recommending approval of the contract and the minutes of the
public access comment meeting. Homewood will draft a letter and forward to the rest of Commission
for review. Elias said he appreciated that the Commission was fully informed at every step of the
process.
ALLIACE TECHNOLOGIES AND THE IOWA UTILITIES BOARD
Homewood asked about the city council response to the Commission's discussion regarding the
Alliance Technologies franchise and the possibility of it being revoked by the Iowa Utilities Board
(IUB). Elias said it appears the process to petition the IUB was set in motion before the
Telecommunications Commission minutes were available to the city council. Coleman said the city
administration decided to follow the advice of the Commission. Alliance Technologies responded to
the city's IUB petition by withdrawing their franchise effective May 1. The municipal franchise with
Mediacom will be in effect 90 days later.
LOCAL ACCESS CHANNEL SURVEY
Homewood said it was interesting to find that the lack of information regarding program schedules was
a factor limiting viewership of all the access channels. Brau said the report is now complete. Elias
asked where the survey might be distributed. Brau said there is not likely a great deal of interest in the
community as a whole, but it would be available to the public through the City Channel 4 website.
The primary audience is the local access channels themselves. A meeting of all the local access
channels could be held to discuss the survey findings and how they could use the results. The
Commission could also brainstorm ideas in cooperation with the local access channels. Brau said he
would be sending the survey out to each of the access channels. Elias said the local access channel
survey should be sent to Metronet, ImOn, and Mediacom. This will demonstrate that Iowa City has an
engaged municipal government that conducts such projects as the survey and is proactive in
developing programs and strategies to better serve the community. The Commission agreed to send
the survey out to the access channels and the potential providers as well as Mediacom. The
Commission could follow up with the access channels after they have had a chance to review it.
ADJOURNMENT
Bergus moved and Elias seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously.
Adjournment was at 6:08 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
FY-"%
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
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
X
X
X
Johnk
4/27/15
x
x
/c
X
X
6/1/15
X
X
X
X
x
(X) = Present
(0) = Absent
(O/C) = Absent/Called (Excused)
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
12 MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD
(X) = Present
(0) = Absent
(O/C) = Absent/Called (Excused)
Elias
Ber us
Kilburg
Butler
Homewood
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
X
X
X
Johnk
4/27/15
x
x
Pic
X
X
6/1/15
X
X
X
X
x
(X) = Present
(0) = Absent
(O/C) = Absent/Called (Excused)
June 15, 2015
LATE HANDOUTS
11 1
J!
+� ®revi
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826
(3 19) 356-5000
(3 19) 356-5009 FAX
www.icgov.org
Information submitted between distribution of packet on Thursday and close of business on
Monday.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Actions:
ITEM 3a (4) June 8, Special Formal & Complete
Wnutehif—of Boards & Commissions & Recommend
ITEM 3b(8) Planning & Zoning Commission: May 21
ITEM 3c(26) Resolution to issue Cigarette Permits: See revised listing
Resolutions:
ITEM 3d(3) FIBER INFRASTRUCTURE, DUCT INSTALLATION -- See revised
resolution and comment below:
(REVISED) Comment:
Bids for this project were opened on Friday, June 12, 2015,
and the following bids were received:
Base Bid
w/Alternates 1, 2 & 3
Slabach Construction
Kalona, IA
$ 157,750.00
$ 184,968.00
Advanced Electric
Iowa City, IA
$ 179,000.00
$ 212,000.00
Lan -Tel Communications
Independence, MO
$ 183,236.45
$ 213,101.96
Trace Technologies
Tulsa, OK
$ 189,000.00
$ 230,170.00
LSI Land Services
Port Byron, IL
$ 190,825.00
$ 225,425.00
Neumiller Electric
Iowa City, IA
$ 205,000.00
$ 246,600.00
Engineer's Estimate
$ 200,000.00
Information Technology
Services recommend
award of the
contract to Slabach
Construction of Kalona, IA in the amount of $184,968.00 which includes Alternates 1, 2
and 3. The project will be funded with Wastewater revenue proceeds.
ITEM 3d(14) DUBUQUE STREET PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER 1-80 AND RECREATION
TRAIL — See resolution
ITEM 3d(15) CHURCHILL MEADOWS —See resolution
� r 1
_..._.:.®moi
CITY O F IOWA CIT Y
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 5, 2015
To: Mayor and City Council
From: John Yapp, Planning & Zoning Commission
Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission
June 4, 2015 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the May 21 minutes with
the following recommendation to the City Council:
1. The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of SUB15-00008 a preliminary plat
of Windmill Heights, a 22 -lot, 6.94 acre residential subdivision located south of
Rochester Avenue, east of Green Mountain Drive and west of Teton Circle subject to
the condition that no grading permit is issued prior to signed easements.
2. The Commission voted 6-0 to (Dyer abstained) recommend approval of REZ13-00010 a
rezoning of 7.8- acres of land located on the west side of Miller Avenue south of Benton
Street from Medium Density Single -Family (RS -8) zone to Planned Development
Overlay/Medium Density Single- Family (OPD -8) zone to allow Prairie Hill, a 33 -unit co -
housing development, subject to: 1) the landscaping and tree replacement plan to be
reviewed and approved by the City Forester, 2) at the time of final plan approval the
development agreement will address the construction of the sidewalk adjacent to
Benton Hill Park and (3) review and approval of construction drawings for the private
street and the stormwater management facility by the City Engineer prior to the final site
plan approval.
3. The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of REZ15-00008, a rezoning of
approximately 0.41 acres of land located at 705 & 709 S. Clinton Street from
Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone to Riverfront Crossings — Central Crossings
(RFC -CX) zone, subject to a conditional zoning agreement requiring improvement
of the rear alley to City standards from its intersection with Lafayette Street to the
north property boundary of the subject property prior to a certificate of occupancy.
4. The Commission voted 6-0 to (Eastham was not present for the vote) recommend
approval of VAC 15-00001 an application by the City of Iowa City for a vacation of the
western 160 feet of alley right of way in the block bounded by College Street, Gilbert
Street, Washington Street and Van Buren Street (Block 43, City of Iowa City).
5. The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the City Council send a letter to the
Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission recommending approval of a
rezoning of 28.04 acres located at 3022 Newport Road NE. from A -Agricultural to R -
Residential and R3 -Residential.
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 (#1, #4, #5 — Done)
MINUTES APPROVED
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MAY 21, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch,
Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Doug Boothroy, Geoff Fruin, Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo, Sara Walz
OTHERS PRESENT: Martha Norbeck, Dave Clark, Becky Soglin, Jerry Waddilove, Tim
Lehman, Steve Gordon, Joe Clark, Joe Liu, Sue Hill, Tom Hill,
Bruce MacKay, Barbara Bailey, Annie Tucker, Steve Long, Glen
Meisner
1. The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of SUB15-00008 a preliminary plat
of Windmill Heights, a 22 -lot, 6.94 acre residential subdivision located south of
Rochester Avenue, east of Green Mountain Drive and west of Teton Circle subject to the
condition that no grading permit is issued prior to signed easements.
2. The Commission voted 6-0 to (Dyer abstained) recommend approval of REZ13-00010 a
rezoning of 7.8- acres of land located on the west side of Miller Avenue south of Benton
Street from Medium Density Single -Family (RS -8) zone to Planned Development
Overlay/Medium Density Single- Family (OPD -8) zone to allow Prairie Hill, a 33 -unit co -
housing development, subject to: 1) the landscaping and tree replacement plan to be
reviewed and approved by the City Forester, 2) at the time of final plan approval the
development agreement will address the construction of the sidewalk adjacent to
Benton Hill Park and (3) review and approval of construction drawings for the private
street and the stormwater management facility by the City Engineer prior to the final site
plan approval.
3. The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of REZ15-00008, a rezoning of
approximately 0.41 acres of land located at 705 & 709 S. Clinton Street from
Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone to Riverfront Crossings — Central Crossings
(RFC -CX) zone, subject to a conditional zoning agreement requiring improvement
of the rear alley to City standards from its intersection with Lafayette Street to the
north property boundary of the subject property prior to a certificate of occupancy.
4. The Commission voted 6-0 to (Eastham was not present for the vote) recommend
approval of VAC 15-00001 an application by the City of Iowa City for a vacation of the
western 160 feet of alley right of way in the block bounded by College Street, Gilbert
Street, Washington Street and Van Buren Street (Block 43, City of Iowa City).
5. The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the City Council send a letter to the
Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission recommending approval of a rezoning
of 28.04 acres located at 3022 Newport Road NE. from A -Agricultural to R -Residential
and R3 -Residential.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 2 of 25
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
There were none.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM:
A public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan: The 2015 South District Plan.
The plan may be viewed at: www.icgov.org/southic
Walz began the staff report by showing what the area has to offer. The South District Plan is one
of 10 planning districts within Iowa City, stating this was the area south of Highway 6 and east of
the Iowa River and includes all of the property within the City as well as properties within the
growth area. The Plan will be used to look into the future and what the area will need
infrastructure and development -wise for the area. The original South District Plan was adopted
in 1997.
When it was announced that the school district would build a new school in south Iowa City, the
City Council asked staff to revisit the plan and give attention to sustainability, stabilizing existing
neighborhoods, and to also look how new neighborhoods would develop around the new
elementary school. When drafting this plan, staff did many things to collect information and
public input including a bike tour of the area, a van tour with the Planning and Zoning
Commission, interviews with neighborhood representatives, attended a number of neighborhood
and school events, conducted an online survey, and held a neighborhood workshop on October
6, 2014. The City also reviewed a number of surveys the Neighborhood Center had done, as
well as a series of neighborhood workshops in 2008 and 2006.
Land use wise the plan being presented now is not all that different from the plan that was
adopted in 1997 and later updated as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposes generally
single family homes in the neighborhood interior with low or medium density, and the zoning
would allow for duplexes on corner lots. Multi -family units are consistent with what was shown in
previous plans, and the new plan outlines other opportunities for unique designs of additional
multi -family units. There is a little change to areas designated as commercial, it may be that with
the development of the Riverfront Crossings Plan it will help revitalized the commercial areas
along Highway 6.
Walz showed on the overhead screen a map indicating the areas for the low to medium housing
densities and areas for higher density in the new development areas. She noted there is an
opportunity on Gilbert Street due to wooded areas and ground sloping to have cluster housing
rather than single family development, so that would be an opportunity for multi -family and would
require access from Gilbert Street and not just from the neighborhood developments so that not
all the traffic is routed through single-family developments. Walz explained there is also an
opportunity in the plan for a mixed-use higher density in the future with the extension of
McCollister Boulevard at the intersection with Sycamore Street. She noted there are a few areas
where there are some question marks where extensive filling will need to be done to allow for
development, but the overall plan states in those areas higher density would be closer to the
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 3 of 25
arterial streets and low or medium density in the interior of the neighborhood. Also down by
where the wastewater treatment facility is, the DNR has a 1000 foot setback recommendation for
residential property from the facility. There may be some flexibility in that and City Staff will
review that area. Currently the property in that area is zoned ID -RM and ID -RS, it hasn't been
zoned yet for development, but at some time it might be possible to transfer some of that into
development property.
Walz reviewed the area that has been identified as neighborhood commercial stating that the
area around it would be locations suitable for more townhomes and multi -family density homes.
She mentioned many other areas around Iowa City where they have seen success having
neighborhood commercial areas within residential areas.
Walz stated that in terms of the South District Plan streets are very critical and the layout of
streets really affects the way people live. This is important when looking at new subdivisions and
making sure the connectivity is developed at the time the subdivision is developed. Highway 6 is
one of the streets that shapes the boundary of the South District and has been noted by many
people as a huge barrier separating the South District from the rest of Iowa City. There are
many children south of Highway 6 and the junior high and high school as well as Mercer Park
and other recreational areas are all north of Highway 6. Additionally for employment
opportunities, especially in the industrial areas, require residents to cross Highway 6. Another
barrier is the river, right now McCollister Boulevard crosses the river and residents and
developers stress the need for additional east/west access is necessary for the district. Many
also noted that so much of how people view the South East District is what they can see from
Highway 6, which is not always the best representation of the area as a whole and doesn't
showcase the great neighborhoods that are in the district. Walz discussed Lakeside Drive that is
also an east/west arterial street, but ends at Sycamore Street and would be hard to extend to
Gilbert Street. And for those resident in the southeast area of the South District to access the
great parks and other features off Gilbert Street, they have to go in a very round -about way to get
there. Sycamore Street is currently being extended which will allow for additional north/south
access in the district. H
Highway 6 also raises the issue of pedestrian traffic which is noted in the plan. Residents asked
about a possibility of a pedestrian bridge, but it is not feasible space or cost -wise. Additionally
then the City would need to create pedestrian walkways north of the highway so once
pedestrians are across they have pedestrian facilities which currently do not exist in the industrial
zones.
Walz explained that the arterial streets are seen as the welcome mat into the City and District
and a lot of thought is put in to how the new developments will occur adjacent to the arterial
streets and be seen from them. The new plan looks at possibilities of creating landscaping
berms or facing townhomes towards the street, with garages and parking behind, to keep the
streetscapes pleasant and welcoming.
Walkability is emphasized throughout the Plan. With all the trails in the area residents can walk
for recreation but because of the street structure connectivity and safety issues it is not always
feasible to walk for commuting. Walz said they looked at a quarter mile area around the Grant
Wood School, which is the distance most parents feel is walkable, and almost all the homes in
that quarter mile area are single family homes. Most are owner occupied, and overall there is
good walkability within a quarter mile of Grant Wood School. Within that area there are 428 units
of housing and makes that area sustainable because of the proximately to the school. In the
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 4 of 25
Plan they show a future neighborhood scenario for around the new elementary school that could
be built that would fulfill the goals of the Plan. There needs to be reasonable sized blocks for lots
of opportunities for connectively and routes for walkability to school.
Walz stated that the other area of the Plan she wished to focus on is neighborhood quality which
was the topic along with streets/connectivity that really received the attention of most people.
The fostering of stronger sense of community that embraces all residents of the South District
whether they are homeowners or renters, expanding organized activities for youth and children,
and projecting a positive image of South Iowa City. The sense of inclusivity is when people
come to South Iowa City they feel welcome, they have opportunities to meet neighbors, there is
good communication between neighborhoods and the City, and to promote a sense of
stewardship and investment and that the neighborhoods are a place to belong to whether a
homeowner or a renter. Opportunities for youth and kids is important, the recent census
indicated there is somewhere around 1800 residents under the age of 17 in this District, so there
is a real need for quality affordable daycare, support for before and after school programs, and
addressing obstacles such as costs, transportation, etc. for activities. There are things the City
and other organizations can do to encourage and promote that. A concept that came out of the
Plan was the feasibility of a youth corps, an opportunity for youth to get training in doing a variety
of different things throughout Iowa City, but particularly that would build their own community.
Walz explained that sustainability in South Iowa City is balanced on a better projection of the
District. Too often the media clings to things that have happened in the past and do not focus on
how South Iowa City is a vital and healthy place to live. There are so many parks and trails in
the area, more parks and open space than any other planning district and over 23 miles of trails,
which will continued to be extended. So this district has many opportunities in terms of
recreation and that needs to be promoted. Walz discussed the need to promote local art and
culture as part of the strengths of the area.
Walz noted that Eastham mentioned in the work session that there are references in the District
Plan that specifically talk about the reduction in crime and linking that reduction to the efforts of
the neighborhoods. Crime is not really discussed in District Plans, but rather they focus on
safety issues. She confirmed that many people during the interview process talked about the
public perceptions of south Iowa City and that it's not accurate and isolated incidents get
promoted as a problem for a vast area. So in the updated Plan they do focus on the positives
and the improvements made in the District regarding those perceptions. The issue of community
policing has been brought up, but the hope is that the policing of the South District will show the
City's commitment to safety and allow those police officer to become part of the community and
neighborhoods.
In closing Walz explained that when people see the South District Plan they might think this is
something the City needs to implement, but it really takes participation from the neighborhood
groups, non-profit organizations, realtors, developers, and there is a role for everybody to play to
make this all happen.
Eastham asked for an explanation of the future use of the neighborhood scenario and land -use
scenarios that are part of the illustrations will be used for. Walz explained that those are just
tools meant to guide. For example where multi -family is shown in a location that doesn't mean
absolutely multi -family will be developed there, but it is shown as a guide and possibilities. The
scenarios just show how the goals in the Plan can be achieved and visualized. When the time
comes to develop the areas, zoning might be changed and developers might have a different
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 5 of 25
concept, but they need to be within the goals of the Plan. Additionally Walz clarified that no one
is forced to develop their land, so there may be large tracts of land that go undeveloped. The
scenario shows possibilities for when someone might want to develop.
Eastham also commented that he was happy that in the plan it is mentioned that churches or
religious institutions are welcome in the district and wants to clarify that means places of worship
of any denomination. Walz confirmed that was the intent by the term church or the term
institutional, which could mean daycare as well, all places that bring something to the community
in terms of meeting space and serving the neighborhood where they are located.
Theobald mentioned that when she looks at the area in the district, and read about the soils and
the reasons not to have basements, she worries about tornados and the need for storm shelters
and asked if this topic has come up in conversations or within the planning stages of
developments. Walz said they have not however they know there are areas in south Iowa City
that do not have homes with basements, but the vast majority do have basements.
Freerks opened the public hearing:
Martha Norbeck (906 S. 7th Avenue) stated she is a lifelong biker and walker. She looks at areas
and wonders if people will be willing to walk an extra block around a cul-de-sac to get to
Sycamore Street to catch a bus or would it just be easier to jump in a car. She acknowledges
that the scenario in the Plan is a proposed layout but feels it is important to identify conflicts now
because developers will look at the scenario and see cul-de-sacs and assume those are okay for
the area, but they present challenges for the City in terms of increased cost in servicing those
roads, and create challenges for people who live on those cul-de-sacs in terms of access on
bicycles or feet or even driving. Norbeck encourages the City to further tweak the proposed
scenario so that when future developers see it they will really understand how the City wants
connectivity and are serious about incorporating it into the proposals. Norbeck also noted she
feels the walking trails are wonderful, but she was just riding on them last weekend and they are
very isolated and tranquil, which is lovely for adults but she would not want her child using that
path to ride to school, probably not. These trails are for recreational riding, not really for
transportation riding. She feels there are some great opportunities with some modifications to
cement the message that the City is serious about connectivity, and not just for cars. If a cul-de-
sac was developed, keep a 10 foot right -a -way to allow for a cut -through for bicycles and
pedestrians. Norbeck reiterated to have the City improve their message about the importance of
connectivity in the Plan.
Walz noted that the some areas on the map she showed are already platted and the in the area
where they have drafted the proposed scenario there are no cul-de-sacs. Additionally there are
subdivisions to the south that are actually in the County so the proposal for the trail expansion is
to allow those subdivisions to connect up to the neighborhoods. Walz noted that Norbeck's point
is well taken as there are obstacles, and that cul-de-sacs are allowed in the subdivision code
where there is a topographical feature or something that doesn't allow for connectivity.
Eastham asked if it were possible for the Plan to be worded to point out the proposed scenario
areas to say that cul-de-sacs will not be allowed. Walz said they could change the colors on the
map to show the areas that are already platted, but not built on. And as an example there is an
area in one of the platted plans that has a cul-de-sac due to a drainage system that could not be
built through, but feels there is a way to address these things to clarify them on the map and in
the Plan. Miklo also said that in terms of cul-de-sacs the subdivision code addresses when those
are allowable, so that additional language doesn't need to be added to the Plan.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 6 of 25
Dave Clark (1542 Somerset Lane) noted that in the Plan they are encouraging development of
commercial improvement along Gilbert Street from Highway 6 to the railroad tracks. He asked if
Public Works had any plans in stormwater piping or flood mitigation in that area on the east side
of the river. A berm has been built on the west side so it seems as if the water will be pushed to
the east side if another flood event happens.
Miklo answered that the City had looked at an east side levee however the funding is not
available and stormwater would be addressed on a case-by-case basis for each development.
Clark asked if there would be any improvement on existing stormwater issues, there are pockets
in that area when a heavy rain occurs in a short amount of time where people turning from
Gilbert Street onto Stevens Drive will be backed up because of water and traffic cannot get
through. Clark said he had a couple of buildings on the north side of Stevens Drive that get
water clear up in the parking lots with a heavy rain. He said he's talked with Rich Fosse about
the issue several times but hasn't seen any improvements.
Walz said that she can make a note of those areas and issues in the Plan.
Becky Soglin (65 Rita Lyn Court) spoke in support of the issues Norbeck raised as Soglin does
live on a cul-de-sac and can take an extra 7 minutes walking or .7 miles to get to the nearest
east/west arterial street. She noted the images in the report are very powerful and if they could
be revised that would be helpful. Also if there has to be cul-de-sac to show there will be
walkways to connect areas. Soglin also wanted to add the Plan mentions the Archibald
Alexander School and it would be nice to include a paragraph explaining who he was and the
significance to Iowa City.
Jerry Waddilove (755 Mormon Trek Blvd) the Chief Operating Officer at Southgate Companies
noted his company owns quite a bit of land in the South District. They own the Pepperwood
Plaza where Kmart is located along Highway 6, as well as apartment units and Sandhill Estates
Subdivision. He said that specifically for his company one of the questions is the concept of
multi -family. In the plan it is discussed as 24-36 units but what is shown on the map is less than
an acre so it would not hold 24-36 units. He is glad there is an open mind on what can be
developed in the area, especially on those corners of arterial streets. His only other comment is
perhaps for the Commission to consider removing the private open space listed between Sand
Prairie Park and Weatherby Park in the Sandhill Estates Subdivision. There was a long
discussion about his company donating the Sandhill Prairie Park so there is a lot of land that has
already been dedicated to the City for open space. They are open-minded about making a
connection there but what is shown on the Plan map is a lot of street and infrastructure that has
no houses or lots to sell to help pay for it.
From another perspective, Waddilove belongs to a group of property owners and developers in
the South District that represent over 500 acres of development land in the South District (out of
roughly 1500 acres of total development land) and they have met recently to discuss concerns.
One of the concerns that group had is while they really appreciated the City's willingness to
engage the community and the group, but as noted there was a lot of meetings in October and
November and then now the plan comes out and there is only two weeks' time for the public to
review and comment on it. Therefore, he is asking the Commission to allow for more time for
public review and additionally while they all agree the City wants growth in this area, and there is
investment in this area with the stormwater management facility, there is a need to a diversity of
product for the area. In the Plan there are not a whole lot of property uses other than single
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 25
family and low density and his group would ask for a consideration of a mix. The City discusses
the need for affordable housing and when you have low density that is not an efficient use of the
land and it makes it more expensive for those types of endeavors. Lastly Waddilove said his
group would like the City to consider putting McCollister Boulevard in, at least all the way to
Sycamore Street, which could help spur development in this area.
Tim Lehman (4715 Canterbury Court) represents three parcels in the South District owned by the
Lehman Family. They own the 160 acres where the new school will be built, so there is'about
145 acres left there to develop, then to the right of that is another 100 acres known as the
Gatens Farm, and then the Hull Farm which is 28 acres. On the platted map that shows the
streets, it is shown that none of these properties (the Hull Farm, Lehman Family farm and the
Gatens farm) have been annexed into the City yet. Like Waddilove, Lehman has been to the
neighborhood meetings regarding this Plan but is disappointed that the citizens are just now
seeing the Plan. He did acknowledge Walz has done a good job answering concerns. He feels
as a property owner he has not had enough time to review this. Freerks noted that the
Commission does not have to vote on this Plan tonight. Lehman appreciated that however when
the Commission does vote on it does that make it final? Freerks noted that the Plan is just a
visualization of the goals of the district, it is not set in stone, and it is to show the potential for the
area, it does not mean this is what must happen in these areas. It is more important for the
goals and words of the Plan to be correct to what the area should be, not so much the maps.
The maps are just suggestions and creative ways to try to visualize the words that are in the
Plan. Lehman appreciated that explanation and reiterated that some of his concerns were
already answered during Walz's presentation earlier in this meeting. Eastham noted that the
comment "is this set in stone" he explained these land -use scenarios are somewhere between
sand and stone and involved a lot of interpretation but can also be very limiting in future
development. Lehman noted that was his concern when he first viewed the map, he has 275
acres of land in this district and he wants to be allowed some input and was surprised they had
not been contacted until an email came out two weeks ago. Freerks reiterated that it's unlikely
the Commission will move forward with voting on this plan immediately, there is no great rush.
Walz noted that in terms of the land, the few things that are set in stone are the arterial streets,
the easements, the new school, the greenway and there is limited opportunity to cross the
greenway, and then whatever already exists with the areas already platted. What they are trying
to show is it is possible to create a well-connected neighborhood with reasonable block sizes.
That is what the City will be looking for when a new subdivision comes into play. Freerks noted
that if one was to review past Plan maps for other areas of Iowa City, and then what was actually
created, there is a type of blossoming that happens as development occur.
Lehman lastly asked if there were any plans for the extension of McCollister Boulevard, or a
timeframe when that might happen. Freerks replied not at this time, and that would need to be
addressed by the City Council.
Steve Gordon with AM Management, they own or have owned about 450 acres in the South
District Plan area. Some of their land has already been developed and sold or rented, some has
yet to be developed, some is in a conservation easement and some is part of what is known as
the Sycamore Greenway area. Gordon said as Waddilove and Lehman have both mentioned
there are only about four landowners (and they are three of the four) that represent that future
development area indicated on the map in the Plan. He concurs that he hopes as a landowner
he will be allowed more input and focused discussion on this Plan. Gordon noted that Walz has
been very easy, accessible and pleasant to work with on this project and it's been greatly
appreciated. Specifically with the land AM Management owns, all that remains to be developed
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 8 of 25
is either east of Sycamore Greenway or south of Lehman Avenue as evidenced by the future
neighborhood scenario. He feels the AM Management land has been left out of the focus on the
proposed scenario plan, over the past 20 years while most development was happening in other
areas of the city, they have invested millions of dollars in the South District. Their developments
have made a significant impact and have improved the quality and diversity of housing in
southeast Iowa City and most importantly improved the perception of living in southeast Iowa
City. They have provided a safe, well-built and appealing neighborhood for over 500 families
and continue to do so today. The first concern is that their 48 acres to the east of the Greenway
is labeled as future urban development and the definition -in the Plan of a future urban
development is "due to environmental constraints and/or the need for major infrastructure,
potential street layouts and residential use are not shown for those areas labeled as future urban
development in the neighborhood scenario". Gordon acknowledged that Walz did address that
in her report but his group has been developing long enough to know that these Plans are part of
the discussion when planning a development and they do matter. He feels that this land is
currently inside the City limits, it is zoned RS -8, it has all the infrastructure and utilities ready for
development, and therefore are requesting this area be labeled as a medium -low density single
family housing area instead of the future urban area.
Walz agreed and noted she should change the wording, it is shown on the map correctly, but she
can change the definition of future urban development to correspond with the map.
Gordon stated his second and third concerns relate to the 35 acres they own south of Lehman
Avenue and north of the wastewater treatment plant. This land was part of a very large
annexation that allowed the City to make the area where the current wastewater treatment plant
was built to be contiguous to the City allowing it to be built. This part of the land holdings in the
annexation were not serviced by any public infrastructure at the time and the owners were not in
favor of including it as part of the annexation. It was the City at the time that needed this part of
the land included in the annexation (previously known as the Russell farm) in order to build the
treatment plant. According to Gordon, after lengthy negotiations with the landowners it was
agreed to include this land as part of the annexation. As part of that agreement a small area that
was already zoned multi -family and part of the County was zoned RM -12, and the remaining land
to the south was zoned ID -RM. RM is the key part of that. The ID was because there was no
infrastructure in place, once infrastructure was put in place the assurance from the City was the
land would be zoned RM. Without this assurance the landowners would have no reason to
annex this land into the City, it is the expectation that once the infrastructure is in place the ID
designation could be dropped and the land would be zoned RM -12 which is currently the lowest
RM zoning. However it is currently labeled in this Plan as a low -medium density single family
housing area. The second issue with this land is the 1000 foot buffer, it the Plan it is noted as a
requirement, but in tonight's discussion noted as a DNR suggestion. Gordon said that in all the
years his group has been working with the City and at the time of annexation - really until this
Plan came out — they were never aware of any buffer on this particular piece of land. He
believes this piece of land is about 2000 feet from its southern border by the wastewater
treatment plant to the northern border of Lehman Subdivision and the buffer would cut this
property area in half which is a significant amount of land. Gordon noted that both of these
issues are in economic taking of their land and to include this land in the annexation assurances
were made that it would be zoned multi -family once infrastructure was available. To say that half
the land is now unbuildable due to the buffer cannot be made up by higher density on the
remaining land.
Freerks asked what specific part of the South District Plan Gordon was referencing. Gordon
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 9 of 25
pointed to the part of the plan where it is referenced "because a 1000 foot buffer is required
between the wastewater treatment property and any residential development density may be
transferred to locations along Lehman Road where townhomes or a smaller number of multi-
family buildings may be considered near the intersection with Sycamore Street". Gordon noted
that is not part of his land, nor is the intersection with the soccer park road also noted in the Plan.
This is all on page 20 of the Plan.
Gordon stated his request would be that the language and the maps be amended to reflect the
changes he noted above. Lastly, he wanted to mention McCollister Boulevard again, it's been
mentioned by many this evening, it is important. They have been waiting 20 years for
McCollister Boulevard to be built, it was part of the discussions of the Saddle Brook Subdivision
when it was contemplated over 20 years ago and it was built with a right -a -way established to
connect to McCollister Boulevard. Gordon said if everyone is serious about sustainable growth
in this South District, McCollister Boulevard needs to be completed.
Freerks announced she would like the public hearing to be continued at the next Planning &
Zoning meeting.
Theobald moved to continue the public hearing at the next meeting.
Hensch seconded the motion.
Freerks noted there has been discussion from the stakeholders and suggests that if there are
other items in the Plan that need clarification or changes, to submit suggestions to Walz to be
shared with the Commission prior to the next meeting.
Hektoen mentioned that the language regarding the buffer is not creating that buffer or
establishing a 1000 foot buffer. The source of that buffer would be an outside source, so simply
by adopting this Plan no one's property is being taken for the establishment of this buffer. The
Plan is just a guide for future development; it does not have the force of a law. Eastham noted
that he is personally interested in the density ideas that have been shared this evening and
hopes that the Staff can address the various issues the landowners raised this evening.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Discussion of an application submitted by Joseph Clark for a preliminary plat of Windmill
Heights, a 22 -lot, 6.94 acre residential subdivision located south of Rochester Avenue, east of
Green Mountain Drive and west of Teton Circle.
Miklo noted that since the last Planning and Zoning meeting there has been some discussions
with the neighbors and City Engineers as well as the applicant for this property. As noted at the
last meeting there are concerns, mostly about drainage related to this subdivision, there are
apparently some existing drainage issues to the south, the City Engineer is aware of those
issues and will look at what can be done to improve that situation. With this new subdivision,
according to the City's stormwater management ordinance this subdivision will not be allowed to
exasperate the issues and that is why the stormwater management plan was reviewed by the
City Engineer. Miklo said the City Engineer is satisfied with the stormwater management plan
proposed with this subdivision. That plan does rely on some offsite easements that will need to
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 10 of 25
be acquired from adjacent property owners prior to final plat approval. At this point, Staff is
recommending approval of the subdivision. Walz added that there is a condition that the
applicant must have the signed easements prior to grading for the subdivision.
Freerks opened the public discussion.
Joe Clark (350 Green Mountain Drive) is the developer of Windmill Heights and said he is
working on obtaining the easements and is confident he will get them all in place over the next
couple of weeks.
Joe Liu (127 Bowling Green Place) stated he's lived in Iowa City for 43 years and lived on
Bowling Green Place for 30 years. Since they moved there, they have had water problems, and
the Hodges were here 11 years ago when they did their development. The Hodges plan was to
retain the water: use gutters and pipes to get it to go out the other direction, but still when it rains
hard the pressure of the water coming to the drain in his backyard lifts the drain off. Additionally
he has to make sure he keeps that drain clear at all times otherwise the home south of his get
flooded. The water needs to be contained, and building more homes and adding concrete will
just add to the issues.
Sue Hill (167 Bowling Green Place) said she did have a meeting with the City regarding the
water concerns after the last Planning & Zoning meeting and were promised a call from the City
Attorney regarding easements and have not received it. Freerks asked if she was given a time
frame to expect the call. Hill thought it would be soon. Miklo said the City Engineers are looking
at the existing drainage issues but he is not aware that they have any solutions yet. Hektoen
said she was not given a message about the easements or phone calls she needed to make.
She noted that the City's position on easements is that they need to be signed before grading
can begin and with final plat approval.
Tom Hill (167 Bowling Green Place) said his property is to the south of the development and is
concerned about the value of his property, they have been at their home for 28 years and their
sump pump has never run because they are on the hill. He understands the engineers have
calculations but adding 22 houses is lots of rooftops and concrete and very little green space to
soak up the water. The lot behind his house has a natural waterway built into it, and the water
rushes through that waterway. He is afraid to develop the new subdivision they will make it level
with his property and he will get water on his property where he's never had an issue before.
Bruce MacKay (143 Bowling Green Place) stated he has had faith in City Staff with the neutrality
of the issues with this application, but is concerned that Engineering has said this application is a
good plan and it is a plan that will work, whereas code enforcement shows detention basins are
ongoing issues throughout the City. There is an existing basin in the Washington Park Addition
to the west of the planned development which has had at least two citations since it's been
constructed. It is now currently being cared for but properties change hands as well as the
desire to take care of such things. This plan is asking for an immediate retention basin to be
built right on the property line which will also rely on the existing basin. MacKay believes this will
be a problem. He feels there needs to be more consideration regarding these retention basins,
code enforcement says there is a lot of potential for issues there.
Freerks closed the public discussion.
Eastham asked if the process for the easements was sufficient and Hektoen replied that is all
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 11 of 25
fine at this point, no easements are required at this point. Freerks reiterated that before any
construction or grading occurs the easements must be signed. Hektoen confirmed that if the
applicant wants any of their stormwater to flow to the west, they will have to have signed
easements prior to the grading.
Theobald moved to approve SUB15-00008 a preliminary plat of Windmill Heights, a 22 -
lot, 6.94 acre residential subdivision located south of Rochester Avenue, east of Green
Mountain Drive and west of Teton Circle subject to the condition that no grading permit
is issued prior to the signing of easements.
Martin seconded the motion.
Martin questioned if the City Engineer has ever worked with developers to encourage using
permeable concrete, especially at the top of hills. Miklo replied that the City has not had good
experiences with permeable concrete, in the few places it has been used around Iowa City the
engineers are saying because of the soil conditions, it clogs and doesn't hold up well over time.
The City does require that stormwater be retained on this site and to be released at no greater
rate than it is currently being released. Miklo stated at the time of final plat, the construction
documents will show the stormwater management plan and have to be approved by the City
Engineer. Martin asked what would happen if the water did exceed the current flow rate once
the subdivision is built. Hektoen said that is all based on predictions and the stormwater
management plan has to be designed to the 100 year flood event. If there is a greater flood
event, it won't be designed for that and does not need to be certified for that type of event. The
City Engineers are reviewing the plans to make sure the calculations are accurate.
Hensch asked if the City Engineer has now agreed that the developers engineering plan won't
exasperate the water problems in this area. Miklo replied that is correct.
Theobald asked about the developers plan to replace the top soil, the State of Iowa is dropping
the requirement that there needs to be four inches of top soil in place in new developments.
Miklo stated that is not in the City's zoning codes, there are standards for erosion control but it
doesn't address top soil, but would look into that and get back to the Commission. Theobald
noted this could have implications on how much water could be absorbed.
Eastham noted he has heard from the public is the uncertainty of the maintenance of the
proposed stormwater detentions basins over time. Eastham asked if we know what
percentage of the stormwater will be retained by detention basins to the west of the subdivision
and what percentage will be maintained on the subdivision. He also asked if it would be
possible to retain all stormwater on this subdivision's property and not use the retention areas
to the west. Miklo said he is unable to answer that question, but could ask the City Engineer.
He doesn't believe under the current design it can all be retained on the subdivision property, it
has to rely on the adjacent subdivision's basins. Hektoen said that at the time of final plat it will
be noted who is in charge of maintaining the detention basins and that there is an escrow
account set up to pay for the maintenance. If the basins are not maintained the City can come
in and issue citations. Eastham asked if the City can require escrowing from the owners of the
adjacent properties for the detention basins that are not part of this subdivision. Hektoen said
that would have been required at the time that subdivision was platted and approved.
Hensch asked if the easements are not obtained, the developer will be unable to get the
grading permit and then what would happen. Hektoen said the developer would then have to
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 12 of 25
redesign their stormwater management plan, and go through the platting process again to get
approval on the new plan.
Freerks noted that whenever there is an application that has water issues the good thing that
comes about is the City becomes aware of the water issues in the neighborhoods. These types
of discussions are encouraging that solutions will come forth. The Commission of course never
wants any new development to do further harm, but they can only trust the City Engineers and
their approval of the calculations.
Eastham noted he is still struggling with the plan of stormwater management and what happens
if the management system is not maintained, because of the flooding issues for the homes
downstream from this development. Freerks said it would be the homeowner association's
responsibility to maintain the systems. Hektoen said the homeowner's association will have
easement agreements that give them the rights to go onto the properties to the west of the
subdivision to maintain the stormwater basins there if needed. So the new development's
homeowner's association is obligated to maintain the stormwater systems on their subdivision as
well as the ones within the easements. Miklo confirmed that would all be part of the legal
documentation with the final plat approval.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
REZONING ITEM (REZ13-00010):
Discussion of an application submitted by Iowa City Co -Housing for a rezoning of 7.8 -acres
of land located on the west side of Miller Avenue south of Benton Street from Medium
Density Single -Family (RS -8) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Medium Density Single -
Family (OPD -8) zone to allow Prairie Hill, a 33 -unit co -housing development.
Dyer recused herself from the discussion and left the meeting room.
Miklo updated the Commission on this application, noting the changes from the proposal
presented last fall. The original plan relied on a driveway access point that went through
Benton Hill Park and intersected with Benton Street. That proposal also included trading a
portion of Benton Hill Park with land along Miller Avenue. The Commission did not recommend
approval of that plan due to the concerns about the access onto Benton Street and the swap of
land from the park. The applicant then went back to the drawing board and has now come up
with a new plan which no longer includes development on top of the hill; the development is
now along Miller Avenue and the eastern slope of the hill. This development will rely on a
private street called Prairie Hill Lane which will be maintained by the homeowner's association.
They are requesting some waivers to the subdivision standards with regards to the width of the
street and sidewalk locations to allow for clustering of development. The City has examined the
proposed street in relation to the subdivision standards and is recommending approval of this
alternative design. The proposal also clusters housing units in different formats, a number of
duplexes, three four-plexes, one townhouse style building, and three units in the common
house. The planned development allows for clustering of houses in this manner and also sets a
high standard for design of landscaping and buildings. The applicant can speak about co -
housing and how it is different than a traditional subdivision and the rationale for clustering.
Staff has examined this proposal with regards to the standards in the zoning code for planned
development and the written Staff report goes into detail on how the proposal meets the
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 13 of 25
standards. Staff is recommending approval of the plan; they have received confirmation from
the City Engineer on the stormwater management plan that the concept is satisfactory.
Staff recommends approval of REZ13-00010 a rezoning of 7.8- acres of land located on the west
side of Miller Avenue south of Benton Street from Medium Density Single -Family (RS -8) zone to
Planned Development Overlay/Medium Density Single- Family (OPD -8) zone to allow Prairie Hill,
a 33 -unit co -housing development, subject to: 1) the landscaping and tree replacement plan to
be reviewed and approved by the City Forester, 2) at the time of final plan approval the
development agreement will address the construction of the sidewalk adjacent to Benton Hill
Park and 3) review and approval of construction drawings for the private street and the
stormwater management facility by the City Engineer prior to the final site plan approval.
Miklo showed some images of the property. There is discussion in the Staff report about the
removal of trees on the property; the City Forrester did find these trees would likely be affected
by the ash borer, a walnut tree that is subject to disease, as well as other undesirable volunteer
trees.
Freerks opened the public discussion.
Barbara Bailey (2357 Willenbock Circle) has been involved with the co -housing project since its
inception and is a member of the board of managers.
Annie Tucker (1425 Oaklawn Avenue) has also been involved the co -housing project since its
inception and is also a member of the board of managers. Tucker explained that this would be
the first co -housing development in Iowa. The photos they have to share in their PowerPoint are
of the land except there are photographs of other co -housing communities to showcase the
concept. Tucker stated the thing that is different about co -housing is the people that are going to
live there are the ones who will develop and design it. It will be designed based on what is
important to those that will be living there and their values. The original co -housing was
developed in Denmark in the 1960s. The concept is now all over the world and there are over
130 co -housing communities in the United States with a 100 more in the planning process. Co -
housing communities have a number of characteristics in common. There are individual homes,
as in our community every person or family will own their own home, as well as own a share of
the common house and a share of the common land. The homes will be small and energy
efficient, and be multi -family. There will be duplexes, the townhouse building, three four-plexes,
and three apartments in the common house. Having common walls makes the homes more
energy efficient. All of these homes will be downsizing for the occupants from previous homes,
so smaller places to heat which is also more energy efficient. Tucker explained that the homes
in co -housing are clustered along common walkways, with front porches facing each other to
create a living community, and the parking is on the peripheral of the community. Tucker then
showed some photos of other co -housing communities to illustrate how they work. The houses
are close together because the concept is for residents to share the common space. There are
no individual back yards fenced off; it is common space hey will all share. Tucker showed the
site plans and shared that the common house is the hub of the community. Martha Norbeck
obtained a Fulbright Fellowship and went over to Sweden and studied co -housing communities
to see what was stronger and more successful. She found that the placement and usage of the
common house is what made the community. The common house will have a large kitchen, a
dining room where they plan to share a few meals a week, it will have a large meeting room, a
multi-purpose room, and guest rooms for visitors.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 14 of 25
Bailey said they did not have a slide of their site design, but pointed out that in their community
the parking would be more dispersed and not all in one place. She said the board of managers
has been busy since last fall putting together this new plan and feel the plan that they are
presenting is pleasing to the neighborhood. While plan has changed since last fall, the values
have not. They will still be multi -generational, and strive for social and economic diversity.
They've designed their site to promote community and to respect privacy; they will build small
energy efficient homes, and will incorporate sustainable practices in as many ways as they can
include resource sharing, use of alternative transportation and produce some of their own food.
This site was selected in large part to support these values, it is walkable to downtown and The
University of Iowa, and it is on a bus line, with adequate space for about 30 units and a common
house, ample space for gardening and orchards, play areas and green space for recreation.
They believe this community will be a good fit for the neighborhood and the city.
This parcel of land on Miller Avenue is an infill that has never been developed; it has been empty
and unused for a number of years. The co -housing group has acquired the land and determined
it is a feasible site for the development they have planned. They have completed the pre -
development work necessary to finalize the funding and begin the construction of the plan. Iowa
City Co -housing is also voluntarily including affordable housing which is a need in Iowa City.
They have applied for and received a commitment of funding from the Johnson County Trust
Fund for down payment assistance for three or four of the homes. They are also actively
pursuing other options of funding that will allow them to offer additional funding for more
affordable housing.
The Southwest District Plan goals include revitalization and stabilization of neighborhoods,
Prairie Hill will add 33 high quality owner occupied homes in the UniverCity Impact Zone based
on the August 2014 UniverCity map that was prepared by the Neighborhood Services division of
the City. The Miller -Orchard neighborhood has 79 owner -occupied homes and Prairie Hill will
increase that number to 112, a 40% increase in owner -occupied homes changing the
neighborhood from majority rental to majority owner -occupied. The co -housing model reinforces
the stability of the owner -occupied homes, and co -housing communities experience very little
turnover and many have waiting lists for occupants. There are currently 12 member households
and many more that are waiting to see what happens tonight and beyond. Having the City
approvals would help solidify the people that are on the edge waiting to see what will happen
before making a financial commitment.
Prairie Hill will also provide a model of sustainability, there has been a lot of talk tonight about
stormwater, as building codes change, and stormwater management plans change, and as
construction companies respond to those changes, Prairie Hill will lead by example on how to
create neighborhoods that use their resources wisely. The homes in Prairie Hill will be small
attractive Lead certified homes many of which will be solar powered. Rainwater that falls on the
property will be utilized through a system of rain gardens, rain barrels and bio -soils to minimize
runoff in stormwater systems. This co -housing project joins around 300 existing and developing
communities in the United States, it provides a structure for aging in place, supporting families,
mentoring youth, and engaging with a large community. They hope to be a thriving place or hub
for the community and see this project as an asset to the city and neighborhood and are anxious
to get their approvals in place and move onto the next stage.
Tucker mentioned they did not discuss the specific unit types, but if the Commission has
questions regarding that they are happy to respond.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 15 of 25
Parsons asked about the location of the common house would be on the map. Freerks showed
him on the plat plan. Tucker explained that the common house will have the mailboxes, laundry
facilities, and a meeting place for the community.
Freerks closed the public discussion.
Theobald moved to approve REZ13-00010 a rezoning of 7.8- acres of land located on the
west side of Miller Avenue south of Benton Street from Medium Density Single -Family
(RS -8) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Medium Density Single- Family (OPD -8) zone
to allow Prairie Hill a with 33 -unit co -housing development subject to: 1) the landscaping
and tree replacement plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Forester, 2) at the
time of final plan approval the development agreement will address the construction
of the sidewalk adjacent to Benton Hill Park and 3) review and approval of construction
drawings for the private street and the stormwater management facility by the City
Engineer prior to the final site plan approval.
Eastham seconded the motion.
Hensch noted that he walked through the area on Sunday and thought this would be a marked
improvement for the Miller -Orchard neighborhood and can vision this plan and think it will be a
nice fit for the site.
Theobald mentioned she was impressed with what good neighbors the planners of this project
are with the changes they've made to their plans and it will be exciting for the whole
neighborhood.
Parsons noted he (nor Hensch) were on the Commission when the first proposal was put forth
but from reading the first proposal and now the revised one, it shows the amount of work they
have put into this and feels the co -housing project is very intriguing and supports the project
and hopes it gets built.
Eastham said he is relieved to see that the group continued to work with the planning and came
up with a new proposal that addressed all the issues he raised with the first proposal. Eastham
asked Miklo if the City's stormwater management retention calculations do take in consideration
the items discussed in this proposal such as rain gardens. Miklo replied he believe they do.
Freerks agreed she was happy to see this project moving forward and acknowledge the
applicant for their perseverance. She feels this is a better plan and keeping the park intact is
nothing but a positive impact on the neighborhood. She noted that the fact this development
will increase owner -occupied properties in that neighborhood is very positive.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Dyer abstained).
Dyer rejoined the meeting.
REZONING ITEM (REZ15-00008):
Discussion of an application submitted by 709 Clinton, LLC for a rezoning of .41- acres of
land located at 705 & 709 S. Clinton Street from Intensive Commercial (C-1) zone to Riverfront
Crossings - Central Crossings (RFC -CX) zone.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 16 of 25
Miklo showed a location map and images of the area, the lot has frontage on Clinton Street
and vehicle access would be from the alley behind. Here is a MidAmerican substation located
directly to the west of this property. Miklo stated there was a concept plan in the Commission
packet that shows how the property might be developed. The current zoning (C -I zone) does
not allow residential so this rezoning would allow either commercial or residential on this
property. Staff believe it would be significant increase in the intensity of development.
Therefore one of the recommendations Staff is making is a condition on the approval is that
the alley in the back of the property be paved from the property line to Lafayette Street to City
standards (the ally is currently gravel). Miklo stated that the Riverfront Crossings form -based
code will dictate what can be developed and how it will be designed for this property (height,
setbacks, building materials, etc.). There is the possibility there will be some bonus points
applied towards this building which can increase the level of design required. It is clear this
rezoning request complies with the Comprehensive Plan as it is in the area that is adopted for
Riverfront Crossings and in the area for the form -based code.
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00008, a rezoning of approximately 0.41 acres of
land located at 705 & 709 S. Clinton Street from Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone to
Riverfront Crossings — Central Crossings (RFC -CX) zone, subject to a conditional
zoning agreement requiring improvement of the alley to City standards from its
intersection with Lafayette Street to the north property boundary of the subject property prior
to a certificate of occupancy.
Martin asked if this particular parcel would then have to also go through design review if this
zoning change was made. Miklo said it would.
Eastham asked about the improvement on the alley and if that would be necessary if any
building were to be built there. Miklo said the Staff does not recommend approval of the up -
zoning without this condition, the only vehicle access to this property will be from the alley.
Freerks opened the public discussion.
Steve Long (HBK Engineering) is representing the applicant. They are excited about
Riverfront Crossings and with the City demolishing the wastewater plant and deciding to
invest in Riverfront Crossings it is a good time to look at possibilities. This is a perfect infill
site, close to jobs, new parks, and the University and downtown. The applicant is excited
about the staff recommendation to move forward, but they are concerned about the
requirement of paving the entire alley. It is a burden for one developer when all properties will
benefit. Additionally the landowner to the west of the alley is MidAmerican Energy and they
have heavy trucks that go in and out of the area, so it seems like there should be some cost
sharing.
Freerks closed the public discussion.
Eastham moved that the Commission recommend approval of REZ15-00008, a rezoning
of approximately 0.41 acres of land located at 705 & 709 S. Clinton Street from
Intensive Commercial (CIA) zone to Riverfront Crossings — Central Crossings
(RFC -CX) zone, subject to a conditional zoning agreement requiring improvement
of the rear alley to City standards from its intersection with Lafayette Street to the
north property boundary of the subject property prior to a certificate of occupancy.
Hensch seconded the motion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 17 of 25
Eastham noted he would prefer there be a better mechanism for cost sharing for the alley
improvements. He also feels the applicant would not want the Commission not to approve the
application based on not being able to do the cost sharing.
Hektoen stated that the Code allows the Commission to impose conditions to address public
needs that are being generated by the rezoning and as Miklo stated there will be additional
traffic on that alleyway so that is why Staff is recommending the condition.
Freerks agreed that with the up -zoning the alley needs to be improved. She did have a
couple other concerns. She sees this area with small businesses in affordable buildings and
hopes what is developed here does not out -price the businesses and just becomes more
housing, likely student housing. She also is concerned about open space and to make sure it
is nice open space that can be utilized and appreciated.
Martin agreed and is concerned that they haven't seen any design plans nor have a concrete
idea of what will happen at this site. She is not opposed to this rezoning and to have the land
developed, but is cautious and would like to know it will be developed with good intentions.
Hensch noted he was excited about this because it is a difficult site to develop given its
sloping nature and its position next to the substation. So the willingness for someone to want
to go in and develop this is exciting. He does understand the concerns about being solely
responsible for the cost of the alley upgrade, but doesn't know there are alternatives for that.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Kel -il_�Bu w1filivuli
Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning to add a definition for "rooftop service areas"
and establish standards for such uses.
Fruin shared with the Commission that outdoor dining has become more popular and every
season there are more and more applications for cafes and that is a trend also seen in other
communities. One option they have not addressed in Iowa City is rooftop service areas, but it is
seen more frequently in urban areas and recently in Iowa City when they created a code
amendment allowed FilmScene to have a rooftop area which they are using. People are also
probably familiar with the 30 Hop restaurant in Coralville that has a rooftop patio area, and what
a success it has been. Iowa City currently has a situation where some businesses can expand
to rooftops service areas but we don't have a set of standards other than the building codes to
evaluate those requests. Other businesses simply cannot expand to rooftops. The City is getting
more inquiries from people interested, primarily with new developments but also existing
properties. It would be much more expensive for an existing property to retro -fit for this type of
expansion. As the City gets more of these requests, Staff needs to have a process in place to
evaluate, particularly with safety, accessibility, nuisance mitigation. That is not in place right now
even for those businesses that could offer rooftop services. The City has chosen to make this a
special exception process, to allow for ability to look at each individual situation. It is very hard to
write regulations for situations where every case can be different, so the special exception is the
best route. Each rooftop will be different; the setbacks from other buildings different, the
nuisance controls for neighbors will be different so it is very hard to write one rule to encompass
all those scenarios.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 18 of 25
Freerks asked for examples of how other communities make this type of rooftop services areas
work, especially with concerns about amplified sound. The idea of these rooftop service areas is
to enhance the community, not be offensive to the community.
Fruin agreed and said that amplified noise is the number one issue that cities deal with regarding
rooftop service areas. There are sometimes also issues with lighting, but amplified noise is the
toughest issue. Some cities outright restrict amplified sound, some have placed time of day
restrictions, and he is sure there are other methods other cities have employed. Again this is
why Staff felt the special exception was the way to go with each unique situation and the Board
of Adjustment would create a set of standards that made sense for that unique property. For
instance, FilmScene has a small rooftop patio and they like to show movies up there but don't
have any neighboring properties that object. That is a case where amplified noise may not be an
issue or have any impact. If there were to be a restaurant or bar build a large rooftop patio and
there is residential area 10 feet away, then a condition of no amplified sound at all should be
made, or at least cut it off at a reasonable time. Fruin said Staff is also recommending that any
type of amplified sound use be controlled through a temporary permit to allow for flexibility to
address problems.
Hensch asked what the time frame of temporary permits was, so how long could the amplified
sound be an issue. Freerks replied they are issued for one year. Fruin confirmed they are
seasonal, weather permitting with an annual application process through Neighborhood
Development Services.
Boothroy came forwarded and added that the permits are issued and can be used at any time
within the one year time frame and then needs to be reissued. It works because there is criteria
they must meet and that is reviewed on an annual basis so businesses make an effort to comply
to the performance standards so they can get a permit issued for the next year. They use the
temporary permits throughout the community, all the garden centers and venders on Melrose
Avenue during football games. There have not been problems with temporary permits, vendors
know it's temporary and that they will not be reissued a permit in upcoming years if they do not
comply.
Freerks commented that for the rooftop services areas alcohol is involved and feels that is so
much different than garden centers. Boothroy said the permit would just be for the amplified
sound, not for alcohol.
Theobald also noted that the Melrose Avenue permits are for football Saturdays only, these
rooftop areas would be every single night. Boothroy said he was just trying to give examples
from an enforcement perspective the permits are effective. Freerks feels the easiest way to
enforce the issue is to just not allow amplified sound. Boothroy agreed that could be an option
but if any amplified sounds are going to be allowed the temporary permit is the best solution for
compliance.
Eastham asked how a resident would be able to object to amplified noise issue. Boothroy said
residents can contact his office if there are complaints.
Freerks reiterated that she does not feel the amplified sound is necessary on the rooftop service
areas, she lives close to downtown and can hear noise now and feels it will just contribute to that
issue if allowed. She noted that it would always be changed in the future and allow for
incremental allowance of amplified sound.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 19 of 25
Martin asked for clarification, that with this special exception every case would be reviewed
individually and it if were appropriate for no amplified sound, like close to a residence, the City
could say no. Boothroy replied that was correct and it was not just a Staff review, but each case
would go before the Board of Adjustment. Martin then asked if there were complaints on a
location that did have amplified sound; this would allow easier access to revoke the permit.
Boothroy said that was accurate and if they were unable to revoke they could at least not renew
in the following year.
Eastham said if there were five use permits for amplified sound in a three block area of
downtown and neighbors object to the amount of amplified sound but cannot identify which of the
five businesses they are hearing, how would the City address that. Fruin explained that they do
deal with that issue already in the summer months when restaurants and bars open their doors
and windows and loud amplified sound spilling out and admitted it can be a struggle to deal with
and pinpoint the most offensive offender, but the City tries to work with the business owners to
rectify the situations.
Dyer noted that Plaza Center One has offices that overlook FilmScene and she has heard that
their rooftop patio can be distracting. Fruin noted that they have seen in other cities that there
are different types of amplified noise; it is one thing to have a couple of TV's up on a bar versus
an extensive speaker system or live entertainment. Particularly with live entertainment, there are
cities that have said no live entertainment allowed. With this exemption if the Board of
Adjustment agrees that amplified sound is to be allowed and allow a temporary use permit to be
obtained they can put conditions on the approval to state what type of amplified sound is to be
allowed.
Dyer said the Staff report says the criteria for the rooftop services areas states an elevator and
accessible restrooms are required. Since it is the Board of Adjustment that deals with these
requests is there any possibility of them allowing an exemption form the elevator. Fruin stated
that the elevator and accessibility criteria cannot be given an exemption; it is one of the core
principles for allowing this type of area. Because of these criteria it will likely make existing
buildings very difficult to add the rooftop services area due to the cost to bring the existing
building up to the criteria standards. Existing buildings would have to be structurally sound to
support a rooftop area, they would have to be contiguous spaces, so mostly one story buildings
and a few that were grandfathered in to allow for serving alcohol on upper floors.
Freerks asked if Fruin could talk about what areas these rooftop service areas would be allowed,
the zones they would be allowed. Fruin said this would be for any place in Iowa City, not just the
downtown area. She also asked how this might change the alcohol ordinance. Fruin stated that
the piece of this proposal that is not before the Planning and Zoning Commission but would go
before the City Council is an at least 20 year old rule that says the City does not allow the sale of
alcohol on upper level or basement level floors of businesses. There are some current
businesses that have been grandfathered in as exceptions to this rule. That ordinance was born
out of public safety concerns and Fruin said they have discussed this rooftop services areas
proposal with both Police and Fire and both chiefs have indicated they are comfortable removing
that particular ordinance and allowing alcohol sales on upper levels.
Freerks said that means this would allow for expansion, where it previously did not. Fruin agreed
that this would affect the 500 foot rule and expansions of non -conforming drinking
establishments. The allowing of the expansion would be for the sole purpose of a rooftop service
area.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 20 of 25
Martin asked if currently a business had a roof that was structurally sound could they expand up
there now, with no standards. Fruin said currently they would not be allowed to serve alcohol
and there would be building code standards they would have to meet. Boothroy said that if the
business is a restaurant they can expand to the roof or top floor by obtaining a permit if they
meet all building code requirements. There would need to be a guardrail along the edge of the
roof, it would need to be structurally sound, and lighting requirements, etc. All those are already
in the code, but the new criteria this amendment would add would be the requirement of the
elevator and other items that will show more careful consideration.
Hektoen stated that non -conforming drinking establishments means they do not currently
conform to the 500 foot buffer and they would not be allowed to have a rooftop area under
current ordinances because that would be expansion of a non -conforming use. This amendment
would modify and allow the rooftop service areas, even for non -conforming drinking
establishment.
Fruin also noted that food service would have to be included, City Staff felt it was important that
these areas not just be drinking only. Freerks asked if food service would have to be until 2 a.m.
Fruin said it's stated "as it's in operation" but doesn't know that the Board of Adjustment will allow
rooftop access use until 2 a.m.
Hensch asked about businesses that do not serve food. Fruin said if a drinking establishment
wanted to add a rooftop access area, they would be required to serve food, however they would
not be required to meet the restaurant standards that are in the code. Freerks asked who
decides what enough food service to fulfill this requirement is. Fruin said this would all go
through the Board of Adjustment who would receive Staff input.
Eastham asked who would enforce the food service requirement. Fruin said City Staff would, if
there were concerns or complaints they would follow up. Hektoen said it would be enforced just
as any special exemption is.
Eastham asked for clarification as to why Staff included an amplified sound provision in this
proposal. Fruin stated Staff felt there could be circumstances where amplified sound could be
appropriate. It is very hard to contemplate what the circumstances may be for each individual
situation.
Freerks opened the public discussion.
Hearing none, Freerks closed the public discussion.
Theobald stated that she spent the majority of Tuesday researching this issue, and found that
every code change throughout all her research was no amplified music, no live music, no
television, no PA system and therefore has concerns supporting this proposal as is. She is not
necessarily against rooftops, but against allowing amplified sound. The other issue she found in
her research was smoke, when people are outside they feel they can smoke. Hektoen said that
smoking would not be allowed on the rooftop service areas at all. Theobald understand that but
says in other communities, it was an issue, even if smoking was banned.
Theobald said in New York City the ordinance says rooftop areas need to close at 10 p.m.
Sunday — Thursday and close at 11 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. Additionally no doors can be
open from the downstairs due to music. Her research showed multiple cases of neighborhoods
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 21 of 25
having issues with these areas. In Chicago, their ordinance states no live or recorded music and
to be closed by 11 p.m. Each city was pulling back and adding more rules as time went by. The
New York Times claimed "the mixed-use neighborhood complaints were up 44% in one year'.
Also in New York State, the State controls all rooftop areas; they are not governed by local
governments.
Hensch asked if there was any research to see if special use permit were used to try to control
the issues. Theobald said no special permits were used, this was all written in City and State
codes.
Freerks said she would be interested in knowing how other college towns are dealing with this
issue. She would like to give this issue more time, or if it must go forward without the amplified
sound provisions and also the 2 a.m. issue. She of course wants to see the downtown enhanced
but does not want to see it broken.
Fruin said clearly the City's intention is to enhance it and also he does not take the amplified
noise issue lightly but feels there should be flexibility in the issue, however if the Commission
does not agree it is certainly their right to take that out. Fruin doesn't feel additional research will
lead to any new information; they know this is a difficult issue that many communities have
struggled with. The Commission can restrict amplified sound, or set limits.
Eastham stated that perhaps this proposal for amplified sound is not specific enough, five
amplified noise areas in one small location is different than one isolated location.
Dyer noted that televisions were mentioned as an example, if they are televisions in a sports bar
on a roof the patrons are not going to be quiet so while their voices are not amplified, they would
be loud due to the amplified televisions.
Freerks agreed stating that just voices will carry and there is no need for amplified sound, she
would be in favor of removing the amplified sound provision of the proposal.
Hensch feels that if a business put the financial investment into these rooftop areas they will be
extra careful to comply so they can have their temporary permit reissued. Freerks thinks it
would be better to not allow the amplified sound at first, and if this all works out, add in the
amplified sound provision in the future. Parsons agreed it is much easier to give something later
than take it away.
Eastham said he would like to defer this application and have it redrafted without the amplified
sound provision.
Hensch stated he does not have a problem with the amplified sound believing the temporary
permit system will regulate the issue.
Theobald believes the broader picture is to consider all the residents and their best interests
rather than just the interest of a few businesses.
Eastham moved that the Commission recommending approval of amending the code to
Title 14, Zoning to add a definition for "rooftop service areas" and establish standards
for such uses as indicated on the Staff Report except eliminating references to amplified
sound as a use permitted in those rooftop service areas.
Theobald seconded the motion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 22 of 25
Hensch asked if this motion would then prevent any generated sound like a TV, speaking on a
PA system, etc. Fruin confirmed it would mean no TV's, speakers, live bands. TV's could be on
mute, and bands that are not "plugged in' like a guitar or steel drum band would be allowed.
Movies would not be permitted if sound was included with the movie. Freerks feels that if there
were situations like movies, which is different than all of the bars having amplified sound one
after the other, is a completely different situation.
Parsons asked if outdoor area time restrictions, the Ped Mall used to have such regulations.
Fruin stated that there is an ordinance that states no amplified sound is allowed in the outdoor
cafe areas if it is a street facing front.
Freerks noted that with this amendment they will be allowing the rooftop areas to stay open until
2 a.m. perhaps that should be another restriction.
Hensch asked if this amendment passes, with the amplified noise restriction; will that mean
FilmScene will no longer be able to show movies on their rooftop patio area. Fruin confirmed
that was the case.
Theobald said that perhaps one-time events should be allowed, there being a permit process for
a one-time event but not nightly.
Fruin said the reason Staff liked the special exemption process was because it allows the Board
of Adjustment to have this very conversation and say for each situation whether the amplified
sound was appropriate or not.
Eastham withdrew his motion, Theobald withdrew the second.
Eastham moved that the Commission defer the consideration of the code amendment to
Title 14, Zoning to add a definition for "rooftop service areas" and establish standards
for such uses until the next meeting.
Hensch seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Eastham left the meeting room.
VACATION ITEM (VAC15-00001):
Discussion of an application by the City of Iowa City for a vacation of the western 160 feet of
alley right of way in the block bounded by College Street, Gilbert Street, Washington Street and
Van Buren Street (Block 43, City of Iowa City).
Miklo stated that Staff is recommending approval of this vacation and would be happy to answer
any questions.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Hearing none, Freerks closed the public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 23 of 25
Hensch moved to approve VAC15-00001 an application by the City of Iowa City for a
vacation of the western 160 feet of alley right of way in the block bounded by College
Street, Gilbert Street, Washington Street and Van Buren Street (Block 43, City of Iowa
City).
Martin seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Eastham was not present for the vote).
Eastham rejoined the meeting.
COUNTY ITEM (CZ15-00001):
Discussion of an application submitted by Nicholas & Kay Colangelo for rezoning of
28.04 acres located at 3022 Newport Road NE. from A -Agricultural to R -Residential and
R3 -Residential.
Miklo stated this is on the agenda because it is within two miles of the Iowa City city limits.
There is a fringe area agreement with the County that allows the City to make
recommendations to the County on zonings within the two mile limit. The agreement with the
County has standards on how to treat these rezoning's. This particular property is in Fringe
Area A, which is the North Corridor area and that is the area identified in the County Land Use
Plan for residential growth where appropriate. It is an area where the City's Fringe Area
Agreement defers to the County's land use plan in terms of what is appropriate zoning. If this is
approved, this land that is currently zoned agricultural would be allowed to be subdivided into
smaller residential parcels. One of the parcels would contain the existing home, the reminder
24.6 acres could be subdivided into smaller parcels. Much of the property is woodland and
there are some sensitive areas and it is not highly suitable for agricultural purposes.
Staff is recommending approval of CZ15-00001 based on the Fringe Area Agreement with the
County.
Freerks asked if by "approval" it meant sending a letter to the County. Miklo answered yes, the
Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council who will then send a letter to the
County Planning and Zoning Commission with our recommendation. The County is under no
obligation to follow that recommendation but if there is a future subdivision the City would have
to approve or deny that subdivision.
Eastham asked about the location of the site, if it was well outside the City limits. Miklo
confirmed it was and also it was not in an area the City anticipates annexing.
Freerks opened the public discussion.
Glen Meisner (MMS Consultants) is representing the applicants. He can answer any questions,
but the main intent for the Colangelo's is to split their farm house off which they have intentions
of selling someday, and want to maintain ownership of the rest of the parcel, but have no
intentions of developing at this time. Therefore the County said to rezone the land at the time of
the split.
Freerks closed the public discussion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 21, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 24 of 25
Eastham moved to approve sending a letter to the Johnson County Planning and Zoning
Commission to recommend approval of the rezoning of 28.04 acres located at 3022
Newport Road NE. from A -Agricultural to R -Residential and R3 -Residential.
Theobald seconded the motion.
Freerks agreed that this request conforms to the Johnson County Land Use Plan.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES, MAY 7 2015•
Eastham moved to approve the meeting minutes of May 7, 2015.
Theobald seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
Hensch moved to have Freerks continue as Commission Chair, Eastham Vice Chair and
Theobald as Secretary.
Martin seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
PLANNING & ZONING INFORMATION:
Miklo stated that the Council has indicated they are inclined to approve the rezoning of
the property at Gilbert and College Streets and is offering the possibility of a consultation
if there is a majority of the Commission that would like to meet with them. Hektoen said
that consult would happen on June 2.
Hensch asked what the objective of such a consult would be. Hektoen said it is an
opportunity for Planning and Zoning to explain their position on the rezoning. Freerks
noted there are now two new members on the Commission that were not part of that
discussion or vote. Eastham asks that the Commission meet with the Council due to the
complexity and history of the issue as well as the future implications. Dyer and Eastham
were two of the three Commissioners that voted against the rezoning, and the other that
voted in dissent is no longer on the Commission. Theobald and Freerks stated they
were not interested in consulting with the Council on this issue. Eastham feels that some
of the public may have an interest in the Commission following up on the process.
Dyer stated she would be willing to meet with the Council. Eastham also wants to meet
with the Council. Theobald does not, nor does Martin. Freerks stated she felt in this case
a meeting with the Council is not likely to be productive, so she does not want to meet,
so the majority vote is to not meet with the City Council.
ADJOURNMENT:
Theobald moved to adjourn.
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
z
0
U)
U) NO
C If.
Ov
L7 o
Z W N
0
Oz�
N a r
�w
OW
z
za
z
J
CL
T
N
X
X
X
x
X
x
1
X
i
W)
n
ipxxxxxx
;
x
;xxx
1
X
1
w
T_
XXXIXIOXX
1
x
I
xxx
4
X
x
X
1
x
I
X
x
x
w
w
(0
oo
rn
rl-
rn
Ln
00
Ln
Wa
x
X
X
I
X
1
X
x
x
M
(Y)
N
w
p
X
X
i
X
1
x
X
X
N
XXX
w
J
I
W
O
I
X
X
X
W)
Q
Z
W
W
a
Q
2
,xxx
0
0Z
s
1
x
I
xxx
�
0
T
a
00
UJ
mIxlu.Uz0aIm
H
U)
W
N
y
O
O
mx
N
x
x
X
1
x
1
x
X
X
T
aNF
-I-
CD
Noxx
1
x
I
xxx
T
Txxo
1
x
1
xxx
T
w
Q
X
x
X
I
X
I
X
X
X
T
oXXX
1
x
I
xxo
oo
LXXX
1
X
I
XXX
LXXX
1
x
1
XX
LLJ
o
Nxxx
1
X
1
xxx
00
LXXX
1
x
1
XOX
ti
V_
X
x
X
1
X
1
X
X
X
M
T -
X
X
w 1
O
X
I
X
X
X
w
J
W
J
W
W
WQ
O
Y
O
V
Q
O
a�
0
CL
NmpJ-,
o
10
CO
P
Lu
U)
)
-y00�
oWUi=�av��=
V
Z
H
w
w
2
ao
;xxxxxx
x
W)
W)
;xxx
;
x
;xxx
M
Nxxx
1
x
I
xxx
� w
w
(0
oo
rn
rl-
rn
Ln
00
Ln
Wa
5�i
nin�LnLn�n�
F_X000000000
w
}
w
J
W
J
W
Q
Z
W
W
a
Q
2
0
0Z
s
s Ne
_
a
�
0
a
wV
a
UJ
mIxlu.Uz0aIm
H
U)
W
N
y
O
O
mx
ac
ZOwrL=
aNF
-I-
a
c c
:3 o
X N N
T-0-000
a¢¢z�
II II II II II
xOw
O
w
Y