HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-11-30 Bd Comm minutesAugust 20, 2015
Page i
2b(1)
MINUTES
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
AUGUST 20, 2015 — 6:00 P.M.
AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING
FINAL
Members Present: Jose Assouline, Minnetta Gardinier, A. Jacob Odgaard, Chris Ogren
Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Eric Goers
Others Present: Matt Wolford, Melissa Underwood, Dan Augspurger, Jon Ockenfels, John
Yeomans
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
None.
DETERMINE QUORUM:
Chairperson Gardinier called the meeting to order at 6:01 P.M. Tharp asked if the Commission
would object to moving item 4(d), Farm Operations, up in the agenda. No objections were
heard.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes from the July 16, 2015, meeting were reviewed. Ogren moved to accept the minutes
of the July 16, 2015, meeting as presented per the discussion. Assouline seconded the
motion. The motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
*d. Farm Operations — Tharp gave Members a brief rundown on the farm
operations agreement, noting the timeframes they have for making changes to
this. John Yeomans also spoke to these issues, noting that commodity prices
have been dropping, making things somewhat difficult at this time. He
responded to Member questions, stating that he sees no reason to terminate the
farm lease at this time. Members agreed with this assessment.
a. Unmanned Aerial Systems -
i. Discussion — Tharp stated that last month the Commission was
approached by Mr. Augspurger regarding unmanned aerial
systems and that the Commission asked that this be added to
their agenda. He then reviewed the information provided in the
meeting packet regarding the three types of users, noting how the
FAA views this as well. Tharp noted how Augspurger is affected
August 20, 2015
Page 2
by the rules and regulations that the FAA has in place, adding that
he is authorized at three miles and 200 feet. Augspurger added
that he just recently was approved for zero to 400 feet by the FAA.
He further explained what this means and then responded to
Member questions. Tharp stated that Ames is the only other city in Iowa
dealing with this issue currently. He briefly reviewed the meeting
packet handouts and how he crafted the Iowa City Airport policy
on this issue. Members then discussed the issue of drone usage
in the space around the Airport and asked questions of
Augspurger. Gardinier asked where the no-fly zone would be in
this situation. Tharp stated that the Commission can decide this
and he referred to a map to show the areas he is suggesting.
Members discussed the issue, agreeing that a half -mile radius
would work. Augspurger asked at what distance he would be able
to go to the 400 -feet, with both notification of such and a radio at
hand. Tharp noted that this issue is covered under the second
bullet point, and he then reviewed the recommended policies.
Tharp stated that they can approve a Letter of Agreement for
Augspurger so that he can move ahead, and then Tharp will have
a resolution for the Commission's approval at the next meeting.
ii. Consider a resolution adopting UAS policy — Gardinier moved
to approve the Letter of Agreement for the UAS policy as
discussed and defer acceptance of the policy. Assouline
seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION (cont.):
A member of the public asked if the Commission would return to the 'Public Discussion' section
for at least five minutes, to which they agreed. Jon Ockenfels then addressed the Commission.
He stated that he has asked several times in the past for a windsock to be installed on the south
side of the Airport and is always told that it cannot be done for one reason or another. He asked
that the Commission seriously consider doing this, even if it is not lit up, but that he believes this
to be a serious issue and one that should be addressed. Tharp stated that they did put in a
temporary one but that the issue was never fully discussed again. Members agreed to add this
to next month's agenda.
b. Airport Master Plan — Melissa Underwood briefed Members on where
the Master Plan process is at this time. The second public hearing is scheduled
for the end of September.
C. FAA/IDOT Projects: AECOM (David Hughes) —
i. FY15 Obstruction Mitigation —Working through the list of
projects, Tharp updated Members. The FAA is working with them
on these issues currently.
ii. Fuel Tank Rehabilitation — Tharp stated that the exteriors are
done on both tanks and the project is moving forward.
iii. North T -hangar Electrical Service & LED lighting — Tharp
stated that they are waiting for the contractor to complete the
punchlist. He added that he needs the Commission to then defer
accepting this project until the next meeting.
August 20, 2015
Page 3
1. Consider a resolution accepting project — Ogren
moved to defer this resolution until the September
meeting. Assouline seconded the motion. The motion
carried 4-0.
iv. FYI IDOT Grant — Tharp stated that they have received
approval for the apron expansion grant, but that the hangar door
and LED upgrade projects were not approved. He then
responded to Member questions regarding these projects and why
the one was approved when the others were not.
1. Consider a resolution accepting grant from Iowa
Department of Transportation for apron expansion —
Ogren moved to accept Resolution #A15-12, IDOT
grant for apron expansion. Assouline seconded the
motion. The motion carried 4-0.
e. T -hangar Rates and Fees -
1. 2015-2016 T -hangar Rates — Tharp stated that he is not
recommending an increase at this time. He reminded Members
that last year they did increase the south hangars, and that the
north hangars are near the market cap. Tharp stated that he is
introducing a daily hangar rate and he briefly explained how this
would be handled in conjunction with Jet Air. At this point
Gardinier stepped aside as Chair and spoke as a member of the
public. She asked how this would be accounted for, whether a
hangar is used or not. Tharp noted that there is some degree of
an 'honor system' and he noted how this might play out. Gardinier
stated that there needs to be some mechanism of accounting for
these uses, a sign -in sheet or something so that Tharp can keep
track of this. Gardinier then asked how the cost of these hangars
will be divided with Jet Air and Tharp further explained the
process. The discussion continued, with both Tharp and Wolford
responding to Member questions and concerns. Gardinier
suggested one rate - $15 — instead of having separate rates
depending on hangar location. Members agreed to this daily rate.
Tharp stated that another aspect of this issue is a need for
himself, the Airport Operations Specialist, to be able to enter into
T -hangar contracts on a yearly basis, in lieu of having the Chair
sign off on these.
ii. Consider a resolution authorizing Airport Operations
Specialist to enter into T -hangar contracts — Odgaard moved
to authorize Resolution #A15-13, allowing the Airport
Operations Specialist to enter into T -hangar contracts.
Assouline seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0,
Gardinier recused herself from the discussion and vote.
f. Airport Commission attendance — Ogren stated that she would like to
see attendance shown correctly in the future, which is something that is already
available on the attendance sheet. The other Members agreed with this
statement and discussed what constitutes "frequent, unexcused absences."
After some discussion, Members agreed that missing more than three meetings,
unexcused within a 12 -month period, should be the threshold for letting someone
August 20, 2015
Page 4
go from the Commission. Legal counsel Goers noted what the procedure will be
to make this change a part of the Commission's bylaws. It was also stated that
Members need to let Tharp know of any absences in light of this new bylaw.
Gardinier asked if anyone had any other amendments they would like to
consider. A brief discussion took place, with no other changes suggested.
g. Airport Operations -
i. Strategic Plan -Implementation — Tharp stated that he is working
on an opportunity for a private hangar. He may create a subcommittee to
discuss this further and he asked for any volunteers. Gardinier stated
that she would be interested, as did Odgaard.
ii. Budget — Tharp stated that there are a few things coming up —
replacing HVAC controls and also a need to replace the furnace in
the University hangar. The City does have a contract with a local
HVAC company, so Tharp will plan to use them for this repair.
iii. Management -
1. Application for Event — Tharp stated that the Iowa City
Area Development Group wants to hold their annual
meeting at the Airport. They will be using hangar M and
are requesting to have alcohol at the event. Members
briefly discussed what details the Airport is handling for this
and Tharp responded to Member questions. The issue of
extending internet access to the hangar was discussed at
some length, with Members agreeing that any cost to the
Airport needs to be passed along. Ogren moved to
accept the event application, with the caveat that if
internet is available, they will have to incur that cost.
Assouline seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.
h. FBO/Flight Training Reports
i. Jet Air — Wolford reviewed the monthly maintenance reports with
Members first. Grass and trimming have been the main issues
needing attention. He noted that the old airplane parked in front of
the Airport is currently being worked on and spruced up. Tharp
added that they are splitting the cost of the repairs with the
Legion. Members continued to discuss this aircraft and the
various groups over the years who have played a role in its
upkeep. They also discussed what repairs they should tackle and
what areas should be skipped for now. Continuing, Wolford noted
that he has hired a new person for the office, as business
continues to pick up. He also touched on Jet Air's flight training
business and the need to hire a couple of instructors. The jet A
fuel and the progress of this project was also talked about briefly.
I. Commission Members' Reports — Assouline stated that he was in
Copenhagen last week. Gardinier stated that she will be flying to the
Minneapolis area this weekend. Ogren stated that she will be out of town
the next two weeks and unfortunately will miss Sertoma. Odgaard talked
briefly about some of his flight training trips.
j. Staff Report — Sertoma is the 30th and Tharp stated he will be busy with
getting things ready for that. He also reminded Members of the upcoming
August 20, 2015
Page 5
Kansas City FAA four -state conference on September 20 - 22. Ogren
asked about the potential 'out of debt' party that they had discussed.
Tharp stated that he would still like to plan this, but schedules have been
so busy lately. He will look into having something and getting some
media coverage for this.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR:
The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday. September 17,
2015, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building.
ADJOURN:
Assouline moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:19 P.M. Odgaard seconded the motion.
The motion carried 40.
CHAIRPERSON DATE
Airport Commission
August 20, 2015
Page 6
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
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
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NAME
EXP.
cCn
0
c
0)
0
Ul
Cn
0
Cn
cn
s
Cn
ca
cn
Cn
cn
Minnetta
03/01/19
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/
X
X
Gardinier
E
Jose
03/01/16
O/
X
X
O/
X
X
X
X
X
Assouline
E
E
Chris
03/01/18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ogren
A.Jacob
03/01/18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/
X
Odgaard
E
David
03/01/17
X
O
X
X
O
X
O
O
N
Davis
M
Key:
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
September 17, 2015
Page 1
MINUTES
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 — 6:00 P.M.
AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING
FINAL
Members Present: Jose Assouline, Minnetta Gardinier, A. Jacob Odgaard, Chris Ogren
Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Eric Goers
Others Present: Carl Byers, Philip Wolford, David Hughes
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
None.
DETERMINE QUORUM:
Chairperson Gardinier called the meeting to order at 6:05 P.M.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes from the August 20, 2015, meeting were reviewed. Ogren stated that she noticed two
items. One on page 2 of the minutes, where it states that Ames is the only other city dealing
with the issue — she would suggest adding that they are the only other city 'in Iowa' dealing with
this issue. Then on page 5, at the end of the strategic plan area, where it says "Gardinier stated
that she would be and Odgaard." She suggested adding 'interested' or something to that effect.
Others agreed with these changes. Ogren moved to accept the minutes of the August 20,
2015, meeting as amended per the discussion. Odgaard seconded the motion. The
motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
a. Unmanned Aerial Systems -
L Discussion — Tharp stated that following last month's meeting, he
updated the policy per the Commission's discussion. He added
that in the last 30 days the FAA has put out an update to their
policy for such systems. He further explained how this will be
incorporated into the Airport's policy. Tharp also spoke about the
University's Operator Performance Lab and the desire on their
part to eventually move some of these types of operations to the
Airport field. He then responded to Member questions regarding
this. Ogren noted that she believes the policy should be more
specific, that it needs to say something other than 'carry a radio.'
This led to some discussion by Members on whether or not they
11-3
2b(2)
September 17, 2015
Page 2
need to add more information to this policy with regard to
responsibilities that are expected. Under the fourth bullet point,
Tharp suggested adding 'and comply with' or at the end add 'the
Letter of Agreement will...". Gardinier agreed with the first
suggestion, 'to comply with FAA regulations.' Members agreed
that this would further clarify this point. Discussion continued
regarding the Iowa City Aerohawks field and how to incorporate
this into the policy. Gardinier stated that they need to be more
consistent throughout the document when referring to the'
Airport's reference point,' to use ARP throughout after defining it at
the beginning of the document. She then reviewed each bullet
point, noting the need to clarify things a bit more.' The discussion
then turned to 'conditional approval' and what this means. Tharp
further explained how this applies to the OPL. Gardinier
suggested adding 'all operations must be approved by the
Operations Specialist,' which led to further discussion. Members
shared their concerns with the OPL bullet of the policy and asked
that Tharp clarify this specific issue. Having the OPL sign a Letter
of Agreement for such use was also discussed. Tharp attempted
to clarify what he would be comfortable with in regards to such
usage at the Airport. Members, however, asked that this specific
issue be clarified in the policy, and that a proposal of some type be
presented by the OPL. Tharp stated that in terms of restrictions,
the Commission does have the prerogative to add these.
Gardinier stated that the Members need to know what OPL may
want to do before they can address the Airport's policy. She used
the current situation where the individual came in and explained
how he would be using the airspace, thus giving the Commission
a clear picture of what to expect. They are unable to do this with
the OPL, as they have no idea what uses may be requested.
Ogren stated that she believes they should remove this bullet
point altogether. Others agreed and discussion continued on the
OPL's current usage and whether requests for drone usage may
be forthcoming. Gardinier asked Odgaard if he, as a pilot, would
be comfortable with drones being used on active runways.
Odgaard agreed that he would not be comfortable with this, both
using the term 'active runways.' Tharp asked what they consider
to be an active runway, as he considers it to be which one is
favoring the wind. The discussion continued, with Members
asking questions of Tharp on just how this policy would be
handled and what changes or additions they would like to have
made to it. Tharp tried to clarify what the FAA regulations are on
these types of operations and how every safety policy would be
carried out during such events. Ogren expressed her concerns
regarding the wording of the OPL bullet point and how she
believes they need to be very clear in their policy. Goers stated
that he could work with Tharp on the wording, having listened to
the Commission's discussion this evening, and try to clarify those
points that appear to be under scrutiny.
September 17, 2015
Page 3
ii. Consider a resolution adopting the UAS policy — Assouline
moved to defer approval of the UAS policy as discussed.
Ogren seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.
b. Airport Master Plan — Tharp stated that there was a Master Plan group
meeting last night and that there is an open house planned for September
30 at 5:30 P.M. This will allow for public comment and input, and then
allow the group to put a final document together that can then be
presented to the Commission in October for their approval.
C. FAA/IDOT Projects: AECOM (David Hughes)
I. FY15 Obstruction Mitigation — Hughes addressed the
Commission, sharing a summary with them regarding the survey
results. This data was presented to the FAA, and Hughes noted
their response. Trees and vegetation will have to be cleared now
and will no longer be allowed to be lit up to achieve the desired
result. He further explained the various levels of risk and
responded to Member questions regarding the obstruction
mitigation plan. Hughes noted that he and Tharp will be attending
the upcoming conference and hope to review some of these
issues with the State for their input. He added that he would like
to meet with the planner on these issues, as he believes they can
rectify this situation in a better manner than removing all of the
identified trees. Members continued their discussion, voicing their
concerns for removing trees from established neighborhoods.
ii. Fuel Tank Rehabilitation — Tharp then spoke to the fuel tank
rehab project. He stated that they are still having a problem
getting fuel into the low -lead tank. There appears to be a problem
with the valve, according to Tharp, and they have a few things
they are supposed to try in order to get this to work correctly. If
things go as planned, things should be up and running by the end
of next week.
iii. North T -hangar Electrical Service & LED lighting — Tharp noted
that this was deferred from last month. Hughes stated that the
work has been completed now and everything is done and ready
for the Commission to accept as complete.
1. Consider a resolution accepting project — Ogren
moved to approve Resolution #A15-14, accepting the
north T -hangar electrical service and LED lighting
project as complete. Assouline seconded the motion.
The motion carried 4-0.
d. Airport Commission attendance — Tharp noted that this was just an
oversight and was merely a carryover from last month.
e. Airport Operations — Tharp noted that they have installed a new wind
sock, as had been requested at last month's meeting. This wind sock is
higher than the previous one, according to Tharp, though it is still not lit
up at night. Gardinier asked if they could use a solar light to do this, and
Tharp responded that the FAA would not consider that official.
I. Strategic Plan -Implementation —
September 17, 2015
Page 4
ii. Budget — Tharp noted that budget data will be due to the City
Finance Director soon and that it would be helpful to have the
subcommittee meet to discuss projects and items to consider for
the next budget.
iii. Management — Tharp reminded members of next week's FAA
conference that he will be attending on Monday and Tuesday.
f. Airport Commission By -Laws — Tharp noted that this is a follow-up from
last month's meeting regarding attendance language in the by-laws.
1. Consider a resolution amending by-laws — Ogren moved to
approve Resolution #A15-15 amending the Airport
Commission By -Laws. Odgaard seconded the motion. The
motion carried 4-0.
g. FBO/Flight Training Reports
i. Jet Air — Phil Wolford addressed Members regarding monthly
reports. He briefly reviewed what has been going on, noting that with the
fuel situation the last few months, they have spent a great deal of time on
that. Regarding charters, Jet Air has been keeping very busy. The flight
training side is also progressing, with the search for a full-time instructor
still on. Gardinier asked about the entry for'jet canopy' being listed twice.
Tharp explained what the replacement, maintenance issues were on this.
Odgaard asked about the asphalt project shown and Tharp noted what
this entailed. Gardinier noted a rusting door on the far hangars, asking if
this could be painted. Tharp stated that they would add this to the list.
She asked that they perhaps look around for other items like this.
Members discussed briefly the window updates, asking questions of the
project, to which Tharp responded. He noted that the window dressings
still need to be installed, and he further explained what Members can
expect to see.
h. Commission Members' Reports — Ogren asked how Sertoma went.
Tharp stated that it was foggy until almost 10:30 that day. Gardinier
asked if Tharp had had a chance to check with Sertoma on the rumor that
they are not going to be hosting Sertoma at the Airport any longer. He
stated that he had not yet had a chance to do so, and Members briefly
discussed the issue. Gardinier noted that she attended the Dubuque Fly -
In breakfast recently.
I. Staff Report — Tharp noted that he would be leaving Sunday for the FAA
conference being held in Kansas City on Monday and Tuesday.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR:
Ogren asked if this date works for everyone, in light of needing to have a quorum at the
meetings. The rest of the Members stated they would be available. The next regular meeting of
the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, October 15, 2015, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport
Terminal Building.
ADJOURN: Gardinier motioned to adjourned, seconded by Assouline. Motion carried 4-
0. Meeting adjourned at 8:45pm
September 17, 2015
Page 5
Gardinier moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:14 P.M. Assouline seconded the motion.
The motion carried 4-0.
CHAIRPERSON DATE
Airport Commission
September 17, 2015
Page 6
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
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
i
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NAME
EXP.
U+
w
m
y
0
0
os
0
-
0
cn
s
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
0
cn
cn
Minnetta
03/01/19
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/
X
X
X
Gardinier
E
Jose
03/01/16
O/
X
X
O/
X
X
X
X
X
X
Assouline
E
E
Chris
03/01/18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ogren
A.Jacob
03/01/18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/
X
X
Odgaard
E
David
03/01/17
X
O
X
X
O
X
O
O
N
N
Davis
M
M
Key:
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
11-3
2b(3)
MINUTES APPROVED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 8, 2015
EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Thomas Agran, Esther Baker, Gosia Clore, Frank
Durham, Andrew Litton, Pam Michaud, Ben Sandell, Ginalie
Swaim, Frank Wagner
MEMBERS ABSENT: Kate Corcoran
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo
OTHERS PRESENT: Alicia Trimble
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action)
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Swaim called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS.
328 Brown Street.
Miklo said this property is in the Brown Street Historic District at the northwest corner of Brown
and Gilbert Streets. He showed a photograph of the house as it appears today, as well as one
taken in 1903 after a fire had destroyed the attic level of the house. Miklo asked the
Commission members to note the railing above the porch. He showed a photograph taken in
about 1920 in which the railing is missing but there was railing elsewhere.
Miklo stated that the proposal has two aspects including adding a one-story addition to the back,
north side of the house. He said that as part of that addition, staff spoke with the applicant
about the Secretary of Interior Standards, the guidelines that discuss preserving historic
materials, and, if one adds on to a structure, doing it in such a way that changes to the original
design are minimized if someone wants to go back and undo the work. Miklo said that would be
unlikely with an addition of this size.
Miklo showed a window that he said would be retained in the interior of the house as part of this
project. He said the existing rear door would be removed and reused, and the material from
one window will be saved on the property.
Miklo showed a view from the north side of the house, looking to the south to the north wall of
the house and what the addition would look like. He said it would be on a foundation similar to
the foundation of the house and would be mostly windows on the north elevation. Miklo said the
applicant has indicated that instead of having transom windows, there will be full height
windows.
Miklo said the door would be recessed into a little porch area. He said that if one looks at it from
Gilbert Street, the area would actually be an indentation and a recess of the door there.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
October 8, 2015
Page 2 of 7
Miklo said that with the original application, there was a lot of discussion about how to treat the
sides of the addition that are not going to be covered in windows. He said that rather than doing
a board and batten design, staff has come to agreement with the owners to do a panel -type
design, similar to what is on the front porch of the house.
Miklo showed the west side of the addition. He said it would be very similar but would have a
small bay window. Regarding the front, Miklo stated that the panels under the windows would
be similar in design to the panels on the front porch.
Rather than wood for the railing, Miklo said the applicants are proposing a Fypon material. He
said that the guidelines call for wood but allow the Commission to approve an alternative
material if it finds that it has the same quality and appearance of wood. Miklo said staff feels
this product has come a long way and does a good job of mimicking wood when painted but will
probably stand up to weather better than wood. He said the fact that all of these spindles above
the front porch are missing from the original house indicate that it is not a good application for
wood in an exposed environment like this over the long term.
Miklo said staff does recommend allowing the material for the addition, some of the trim work
such as the railing, and the porch details.
Miklo said staff has discussed the option of not putting the railing on with the applicant, given
that this is the back of the house and an addition, so one might want to make it simpler and not
try to match the historic part of the house exactly. He said staff is recommending that the
applicant have the option of putting it on or leaving it off, and staff feels it actually might look
better with it off.
Miklo stated that staff was expecting a revised drawing but did not receive one. He said the
Commission could defer this to the next meeting if it wants to see the detailed drawings or
approve it subject to chair and staff signing off on the detailed drawings.
Swaim said there was some discussion of reducing the number of vertical balustrades and
asked if that would be on the back or the front. Miklo said it would probably be for both. He
replied that on the front they are spaced farther apart. Miklo said the reason the draftsperson
showed them this close together is that there has to be a maximum four -inch space between
spindles. He said that because the area above the porch will not have access, code does not
require the maximum four -inch, so they can be spaced farther apart.
Durham asked if the owner is proposing putting the railing on the front and back. Miklo
confirmed this, saying the owner is proposing to replicate the railing that was original on the
front and doing the same on the back.
Swaim asked about the balcony on the west side on the bay. Miklo said the owner is not
proposing to reinstall in the two areas and will leave those off.
Sandell stated that on the back porch it looks like there are columns on that open area. He
asked if those columns would match the ones in front. Miklo confirmed this. He said there were
wood columns on the front that rotted. Miklo said they are fiberglass that the Commission
approved several years ago.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
October 8, 2015
Page 3 of 7
Same Sandell asked if the one window of the little arched windows is remaining on the interior
of the house and the other will be saved. Miklo answered that the owner will save the
components of the window and the stone trim work.
Sandell asked about the paneling in Bristow's sketch and if that would translate on to the north
elevation below the windows. Miklo confirmed this. He said that it would be under the windows
and under the west side as well, with the idea to make it look more like an open porch versus
putting in a siding material that is not used elsewhere on the house.
Michaud asked if they would be in squares instead of rectangular panels. Miklo responded that
maybe all of them will be rectangular. He said that detail is still unknown, but staff would
recommend a panel under each window.
Michaud said this house has had a number of wood things replaced, which she has no problem
with. She asked what the difficulty is with Trex for a porch floor. Michaud said she knows a
porch floor is not being done here, but recently she was told that Trex would not be suitable for
a front porch floor, but it would look a lot more like wood than this. Miklo said that Trex has been
allowed in conservation districts and on back decks. He said it has not been allowed on front
decks, because it does have a fake wood grain and fir wood floor is still available.
Swaim said there are a lot of new synthetic materials that the Commission has seen in the last
couple of years. Miklo said the difference between this and the Trex that is used for flooring is
that this is a smooth finish, and if one doesn't see the cutaway, one couldn't tell that it is not a
piece of wood, whereas one can with the Trex.
Swaim asked if the Fypon could be used for a floor. Miklo answered that he does not believe
that it has been designed or engineered for flooring.
Regarding the Fypon product, Baker asked, should the Commission approve it for this
application, is it then saying that it is approved for all future uses. Miklo said that it is on a case
by case basis.
Agran said that one of the things about wood is that it is somewhat interchangeable over time.
He asked if the railing will be a system. Miklo replied that they come in different components so
that there would be a top rail, the balustrades, etc. so that elements could be changed out over
time. He said an example of this is the Shambaugh House on Clinton and Davenport Streets,
with a railing made of this material.
Agran said his one concern was that when one buys some kind of stock trim molding and has to
go back later to buy it again, something has been changed or it's no longer available. He said
his concern more generally about these kinds of products is what the future of it is.
Swaim said the options are then to either vote for approval with final approval by chair and staff
or wait and see the final plan at the next meeting. She said it is a big, very important building,
and these are substantial changes.
Akerson said the family has taken very good care of the house, and it's clear the applicant
wants to do things the right way. He said he has no problem leaving final review up to staff and
the chair.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
October 8, 2015
Page 4 of 7
Sandell said that when the revised drawings come back with the elongated windows, does that
mean that the bottom course where panels were discussed would match the front. Miklo
showed where there would be panels. He said staff would like to see a panel under each
window, and the window would be elongated at the top, not from the bottom. Sandell asked if
proportionally that fits in with the guidelines, as it appears that from the finished floor to the first
level of the column may be a little bit taller on the front porch. He said that it appears to him that
the proportion of the windows is a lot greater than the panel.
Miklo said he believes it is a taller space. He said he did not know how important it is that it
match. Miklo said it is a screened -in porch type look. Sandell said he agreed that this is a good
project but just wondered about the proportions.
MOTION: Ackerson moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at
328 Brown Street as presented, subject to chair and staff approval of the final drawings.
Wagner seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-1 (Swaim voting no and
Corcoran absent).
1025 Burlinaton Street.
Miklo said this property is on the south side of Burlington Street in the College Hill Conservation
District. He said the property had significant alterations about 15 years ago, including enclosing
the front porch and the shortening and boxing in of the windows on the first floor. Miklo said the
applicant is the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership Program, and the proposal is to try to
undo as much of the remodeling as possible within budget and then selling it to a homeowner
who will hopefully take over from there.
Miklo said the proposal includes reopening the front porch and trying to restore it to the original
appearance. He showed where columns are still evident.
Regarding windows, Miklo said the proposal is, where the interior function allows, to put the
windows back in place in a size similar to what was there originally. He showed the area that
was once a door, with the proposal being to put a window back in. Miklo presented a
Photoshop prepared by Bristow that shows what the windows would look like on the fronts and
sides of the house where they would be put more to their original state.
For a few of the windows such as the kitchen and bathrooms, Miklo said the proposal is not to
elongate them but to put them back to a level that is appropriate for a kitchen counter and then
re -side the areas with wood siding.
Miklo showed where there were three windows at one time. He said that a stairway was moved
to this part of the house at one point, so it is not practical to put all three back, but one of them
will be placed here.
Miklo said there are two chimneys on the house, but one is pretty deteriorated and is likely to
come off. He stated that the other one will be investigated to see if it can be retained. Miklo
said the applicant is asking for permission to remove them both. He said that although the one
chimney is somewhat prominent, it is not an architectural feature like a fireplace chimney.
Miklo said staff recommends approval with conditions.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
October 8, 2015
Page 5 of 7
Swaim asked about the roof. Miklo answered that the proposal includes removing the metal
roof, which is a second generation roof, to put on asphalt, architectural grade shingles that
would mimic the original roof, which was wood shingles.
Swaim asked about the garage in the back. Miklo said the proposal is to remove the chimney
from the garage. He said it is unusual for a garage to have a chimney, so staff does not have a
problem with that.
Miklo showed some photographs of the building. Sandell asked about the porch flooring. Miklo
answered that he believes it is carpet but thinks the original floor might be under that. He said it
may be fine after the carpet is pulled out.
MOTION: Baker moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 1025
Burlington Street as presented in the application and staff report with the following
conditions: 1) if the porch flooring needs replacement, it is replaced with either vertical -
grained fir flooring or a material approved by staff; 2) if either or both chimneys on the
house need to be removed, their condition warrants it and their removal is approved by
staff and chair; and 3) new window product approved by staff. Clore seconded the
motion. The motion carried on a vote of 10-0 (Corcoran absent).
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF:
Certificate of No Material Effect — Chair and Staff Review.
403 E. Jefferson Street.
Miklo said this is one of the first projects under the new requirements for review of roofs. He
said that an asphalt roof was replaced with an asphalt roof - an architectural grade shingle that
does a reasonable job of mimicking a wood shingle roof.
1223 E. Burlington Street.
Miklo said the porch is being rebuilt to match what was there.
1024 Woodlawn Avenue.
Miklo said this is the repair of rotten wood.
530 Ronalds Street.
Miklo said this involves the repair of a soffit on the back of the house to match what was there.
739 Clark Street.
Miklo stated that the crumbled driveway is being replaced with a new, concrete driveway.
613 E. College Street.
Miklo stated that the front steps are being replaced with material to match what is there.
Minor Review — Preapproved Item — Staff Review.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
October 8, 2015
Page 6 of 7
715 N. Johnson Street.
Miklo said that some modern, slider windows on the back of the house are being replaced with
double -hung windows appropriate for matching what is already on the house.
506 Clark Street.
Miklo said that a number of casement windows are being repaired on a non -historic property.
636 South Governor Street.
Miklo said this is a similar situation to the Clark Street house.
Swaim stated that the house at 1025 Burlington Street is a good example to keep in the
Commission's portfolio of before and after photographs.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 10 2015:
MOTION: Baker moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's
September 10, 2015 meeting, as written. Clore seconded the minutes. The motion carried on a
vote of 10-0 (Corcoran absent).
Baker said that a couple of months ago a neighbor of hers in the east College Street Historic
District with a deteriorated brick chimney had received an exorbitant bid to remove the chimney
and had come before the Commission to ask for permission to remove it and put up a metal,
round pipe coming through with a cap on it. She said the Commission gave suggestions for
other ways to fix the problem.
Baker said she talked to one of the owners who said they were able to get the chimney repaired
and are really pleased with how it turned out. She said the owner thanked Baker for the
Commission's work.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 5:54 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
Z
O
U)
CO)
g
� 0
O
U O
Z U
O
H W o
U
9
a, Z
r
N Z N
W W
CL �.
U Q
0
c
x
x
x
x
o
x
x
x
x
x
x
xx
x
X
X
X
X
C>
M
x
x
x
xo
x
X
Xco
o
X
o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
r
x
X
x
X
x
X
0
X
X
to
x
x
X
o
X
o
X
X
X
x
o
x
x
x
x
X
o
x
x
x
x
X
T-
xo
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
X
M
N
T-
X
X
0 X
X
0
X
X
X
X
w
N
co
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
x
N
X
X
X
�
X
X
X
X
X
X
W
T
O
_M
e=
r
X
O
O
X
x
X
x
x
X
X
X
�
co
r�
oo
ti
m
co
r
ao
�
co
00
X
X
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
WLU
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
W
M
M
M
Cl)
M
M
Cl)
Cl)
Cl)
M
Cl)
a
Lu
w
a
w
as
z
a%
p
a
z
a
o
g
w
W
O
U
=
O
V
Za
Z
J
V
Q'
N
N
XO
Q
CO
O
J
a
U
N L
U �
Ox E
W CD
C���
cn .0-0 o
a¢¢z
n n n n
CITY O F IOWA CITY zb(a)
MEMORANDUM -
Date: November 24, 2015
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Kristopher Ackerson, Community Development Planner
Re: Recommendations from Housing and Community Development Commission
At their October 22 meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission made the
following recommendations to the City Council:
By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends allocating $100,002 to Prelude, $50,000
to Systems Unlimited and $49,998 to The Housing Fellowship and to encourage all other
applicants to resubmit their applications with more detail in the regular funding round.
By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends a CDBG loan of $600,000 to Bilam
Properties LLC (a SouthGate Companies entity) to rehabilitate 53 units at Walden Ridge
with the following financial terms: 15 -year amortization, 15 -year term, 3 percent full
amortizing with a 15 -year compliance period. Payments would begin once the
rehabilitation is completed. Executing the agreement would be contingent on SouthGate
paying off the $600,000 loan for the Orchard Place (aka Broadway Condos) project.
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
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OCTOBER 22, 2015 — 6:30 PM
SENIOR CENTER, ROOM 202
MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Byler, Bob Lamkins, Dorothy Persson, Emily Seiple, Mark
Signs
MEMBERS ABSENT: Syndy Conger, Jim Jacobson, Angel Taylor (resigned October
21, 2015), Michelle Bacon Curry
STAFF PRESENT: Kris Ackerson, Tracy Hightshoe
OTHERS PRESENT: Maryann Dennis, Justin Matiyabo, Casey Westhoff, Alissa Voss,
Angie Meiers, Thomas McInerney, Ron Berg, Jerry Waddilove
By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends allocating $100,002 to Prelude, $50,000 to
Systems Unlimited and $49,998 to The Housing Fellowship and to encourage all other
applicants to resubmit their applications with more detail in the regular funding round.
By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends a CDBG loan of $600,000 to Bilam Properties
LLC (a SouthGate Companies entity) to rehabilitate 53 units at Walden Ridge with the following
financial terms: 15 -year amortization, 15 -year term, 3 percent full amortizing with a 15 -year
compliance period. Payments would begin once the rehabilitation is completed. Executing the
agreement would be contingent on SouthGate paying off the $600,000 loan for the Orchard
Place (aka Broadway Condos) project.
Byler called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM.
Persson moved to approve the minutes of September 17, 2015 with minor edits.
Signs seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and motion passed 5-0.
None.
STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT:
Persson noted the Commission should be kept informed when the City Council makes decisions
that might come under the Commission's purview. Questions are being asked or things are
appearing in the media before the Commission is made aware. Byler agreed there is a City
Council meeting every two weeks so if there will be something on the agenda the Commission
needs to be aware of, perhaps an email can be sent.
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 2 of 14
Byler mentioned that at a previous meeting a recommendation was made to Council to split an
allocation which the Council did not follow through with and gave the entire allocation to The
Housing Fellowship. His question is what happened between the Commission vote and
recommendation and the Council's decision. Hightshoe said due to the loss of possible funds to
HUD and the upcoming HOME commitment shortfall, the recommendation process was
different than what normally happens. Staff prepared the action plan amendment as it was
proposed to HCDC. HCDC's objection was noted in the staff memo and the action plan
amendment under comments received. At the time HCDC reviewed, The Housing Fellowship
had only identified one property. Before the Council meeting, The Housing Fellowship obtained
purchase agreements on two properties and secured financing. Due to this, Council agreed to
award the entire allocation to The Housing Fellowship. Byler questioned what recommendation
goes forward when staff and HCDC disagree. Hightshoe stated the normal process is to
present HCDC's recommendation. If staff objects, it would be in a staff memo, but HCDC's
recommendation would be presented to Council for consideration. The process for this one
amendment did not follow standard practice due to the upcoming HOME deadlines. Hightshoe
stated that Council gets minutes of the HCDC meeting where the topic was discussed before
they make a decision as well.
Ackerson noted that Angel Taylor notified him that she needs to step down from the Commission
so they will post an announcement for the opening in November and the Council will make an
appointment in January. Byler noted that with Taylor's absence there will not be anyone with a
voucher on the Commission so that may be a consideration for the replacement.
Ackerson also mentioned the memo on inclusionary zoning and plans to keep the Commission
up to date on that progress and believes Staff will be drafting the language for that zoning in the
next few months.
Hightshoe updated the Commission on the Towncrest Senior Housing project. The City Council
approved a local contribution of $600,000 for a Low Income Housing Tax Credit application for
41 units of senior housing. It is the same developer (3 Diamond Development) that applied
unsuccessfully in 2013 for a 41 unit senior housing project. In 2014 a local developer applied for
CDBG Disaster Recovery Multi -Family funds for a similar senior housing project and was denied.
This will be the third application for senior housing at this location. If the project gets funded, 36
of the 41 units must be targeted for households under 60% of median income. The project will
be competitive due to location, income targeting and a strong local contribution. Commission
requested email updates when projects such as this are presented to Council if there is not a
HCDC meeting scheduled before the Council meeting.
DISCUSSION REGARDING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
REQUESTS AND DEVELOP CDBG BUDGET RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL:
Byler said they will have a representative from each group discuss their application and allow
the Commission to ask questions. After each application is discussed they will then make
recommendations.
Persson recommended beginning the discussions with applications that fit into CITY STEPS.
She would also like to ask questions on how some of these programs are fitting into the services
and programs coming out of the Hearth Act and Opening Doors.
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 3 of 14
Byler noted that there are $625,000 funding requests and $200,000 to allocate. He said the
Commission has been given direction to look at requests above $50,000 but noted the
Commission could award under $50,000 if they were an established partner and the project
would go smoothly. Persson said that since they requested applications of $50,000 or more she
would prefer those under $50,000 to submit their applications in the regular cycle.
Byler first asked The Housing Fellowship to come forward to discuss their CDBG request of
$49,998 for two residential rehabs at $24,999 each (keeping the amount under $25,000 due to
lead abatement).
Persson asked about how this application aligns with the goals and objectives of the Hearth Act
and Opening Doors and what The Housing Fellowship does to prevent homelessness. She
noted that one of the major issues for the City right now is affordable housing. Persson
explained that the Hearth Act defines what the Government considers homelessness and the
effort is to move people to rapid rehousing for stability in neighborhoods and families.
Maryann Dennis (The Housing Fellowship) said the two properties are currently occupied by low
income families. The Fellowship's letterhead states "opening doors for Johnson County" so they
focus on opening doors and they are the only non-profit in Johnson County providing permanent
affordable rental homes for families which creates stability for families and neighborhoods.
Dennis noted that one family has been in one of their homes since 1997.
Byler asked if they needed to relocate people who are currently in these homes because it
appears to be an extensive rehab. Dennis replied that no, they can stay in the homes during the
rehab, both homes have two bathrooms. She noted they recently finished five other homes and
the residents are extremely appreciative of the Fellowship.
Persson asked if the Fellowship was denied this special allocation would they resubmit in the
official round coming up in a few months. Dennis said they would or else look for other sources
of funding to make these projects happen.
Byler asked if only one project was funded which one would be picked, Dennis replied that the
Dover Street project would be rehabbed first.
Signs made the observation that the request is a high priority in the CITY STEPS Plan, there
are disabled members in both of these homes, so this is an important and valuable request.
Persson noted it also prevents homelessness.
Next application is Systems Unlimited, application for $50,000. Byler asked about the
application, noting there are three disabled persons living in a three bedroom rental and paying
$1450 in rent. Byler asked if the residents were paying that cost.
Casey Westhoff (Director, Systems Unlimited, Inc.) said that yes, the residents of the rental are
paying the rent. The application is to buy a home that Systems Unlimited would own and then
have the residents pay rent to live in. Byler was concerned about the residents having to move,
and then still be paying rent and how that fit into the low-income housing model. Westhoff noted
that with Systems Unlimited owning the rental unit they would be able to charge more affordable
rents and keep the unit affordable for low-income housing. Byler asked if Systems Unlimited
would provide all the same services the current landlords do for the residents. Westhoff said
they probably do more because of the volume of houses they own. He noted the current
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 4 of 14
residents they want to move into one of their homes are young men with autism and can be
destructive. Their goal is to be able to customize homes to fill the need.
Signs noted his observation that this application would be using CDBG money and leveraging it
significantly which is positive.
Seiple asked if there was a location currently identified for this project. Westhoff stated they had
not committed to any location yet so are just estimating at $200,000 for a purchase price, or for
the cost of renovating a less expensive home to meet the needs for the residents. The $50,000
would be down payment assistance.
Persson asked if they were awarded the money could they spend it in the time frame dictated
with the award. Westhoff replied that yes, they would be able to do so.
Byler moved onto the next application, the Arc of Southeast Iowa which is to build three rooms
in the basement of the building on Muscatine Avenue.
Alissa Voss (Associate Program Director, Arc of Southeast Iowa) stated that without this award,
they would help fewer kids.
Signs asked if they received this award and built the three rooms, would they need more staff
and where would those funds come from. Voss said those funds would come from other
sources of fundraising and grants.
Byler asked if the kids (families) that use the services pay. Voss said they do on a sliding scale,
so that is a source of income, or also through Medicaid waivers.
Persson asked Voss if they did not receive funding now would they resubmit in the next funding
cycle. Voss was sure they would.
Byler asked what is in the space currently. Voss explained that right now it is an open space
and is used for their after school program for adolescents and on the weekends it is used for
group respite alternating weeks with older and younger groups. If the rooms were built they
would not need to alternate and could offer respite care for both groups every weekend.
Byler noted they need to partition the space. Voss agreed noting the space is already carpeted,
has a kitchen area and a bathroom. Byler stated it seems like a large request for money just to
put up partitions. Voss explained it would be drywall and moveable walls so the spaces can be
utilized in multiple ways.
Byler stated his concern there were no official bids on the project. Signs noted his concern that
if this is an estimate and there has not been an official bid estimate then it is hard to know what
can really be done in the space. Persson questioned that if they waited until another cycle of
funding would they have more information so the Commission could make a more informed
decision.
Signs noted he feels this application is a bit hurried or forced and perhaps more time to flesh out
the details of the project and to reapply for funding assistance in the next cycle round would be
more appropriate. The application meets the goals of the funding, it's a disabled population and
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 5 of 14
also youth which is a different population than other applications, but the proposal is missing
details.
Persson said it is similar to funding they have approved for neighborhood centers and in the
past have found in those situations it is best to have all the details and know exactly what the
costs will be, etc.
Seiple noted she felt it was a compelling application and they provide specific services for the
community.
Persson suggested skipping the next two applications because the funding requests were
specified to be at least $50,000. This extra funding needs to be used to make the biggest
impact. The other requests are worthy projects and could be considered in the next funding
cycle. Byler said he still would like to hear from them and ask questions.
Next application comes from the Crisis Center. Byler noted the application appears to be a
laundry list of deferred maintenance items with a couple upgrades and while those are worthy
funding items, there is a concern that this particular funding source is to make a deeper impact.
Persson agreed and said this unanticipated funding (known as windfall program income) and
should be used for the greatest needs. Persson commented on item 8 of the Crisis Center's
application which discusses the impact on homelessness. What population of homeless are
they serving and how are they defining homeless.
Angie Meiers (Office Manager, Crisis Center) answered that through their food bank program
they provide emergency assistance that goes towards rent and utilities to avoid losing housing.
They work closely with the homeless coordinating board and community on helping folks stay in
their homes.
Byler noted the application is very clear and states that not every application must provide for
homeless, that is just one of the areas of need. Persson agreed but wants to see how applicants
are working together to common goals and not against each other's needs.
Signs stated he has no objections to the applications that are less than $50,000 but feels the
numbers on the Crisis Center application seem very high. When looking at condensers, the cost
seemed high and security camera systems can be much lower, around $1,500. Signs also
agreed that this application is a laundry list of deferred maintenance and questions if that is the
correct use of funds the Commission has available.
Byler acknowledged that a lot of the applications have deferred maintenance in them, so that is
hard to pick and choose from, but this particular application does seem to be items that are very
small in cost (although agrees that a security system does not need to cost $8900). Meiers
noted that security system will encompass their entire campus, both the 1121 and the 1105
properties, on one system.
Meiers stated they have done a lot of funding of maintenance and repair and last spring funded
a remodel of their 1121 property to make more room for programming. Byler asked if the Crisis
Center had a two- or five-year maintenance or capital improvement plan. Meier said that every
year when they do their budget the finance committee and the Board set aside for unexpected
maintenance. She also noted the condenser will be moved outside the building to free up space
and make the client choice area of the food bank less noisy.
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 6 of 14
Lamkins asked if they currently have a security system. Meiers said they do have security
systems on their doors but no video surveillance. There is a video camera outside the main door
to see people to be buzzed into the building since it is staffed 24/7.
Persson said she believes it is a worthy project but feels there needs to be better cost estimates
and more information on exactly what they will be doing with the money and then consider the
application for resubmission.
Signs asked about the condenser, if it works and they just want to move it, or if they need a
whole new one. Meiers said it does work, but would like a new one to place outside because the
current condenser is an older unit that requires preventative maintenance every quarter to make
it last. Signs asked about the broken window, if it was a safety concern, is it broken or just
cracked. Meiers answered that they are the type of windows that appear to be a clear brick that
are more just to let light through and when it rains a certain direction water does come through,
but it is not a safety issue. Signs asked about the ADA doors, if they work currently. Meiers said
they have had issues with the doors not working at all times, and because the doors are so old
replacement parts are no longer made for them.
Signs noted Meiers's answers to the cost questions are very helpful in understanding the
application and encourages her to include those type of details in any future applications.
Byler called the next application up, the CSCC Child Care expansion. The application for
upgrades to a basement and questioned if the basement is currently utilized.
Thomas McInerney (architect) prepared the application for his client. He said the City will not
give occupancy to any building for a daycare that is in a basement that does not have an
accessible route (like an elevator). Since this building is an older church facility adjacent to the
daycare and since the church is on a hillside it will allow them to grade it so that there could be
an entrance to the basement. Currently the basement is not utilized in any way, so this project
would allow an unused area to be used to serve lower income children. The funding would help
install a ramp to a new basement entrance.
Signs asked how many members were in the King of Glory congregation. McInerney answered
105. Hightshoe noted Staff has no problem with the portion that is the church, they have funded
the free lunch program and Home Ties programs at other churches, but Community Service
Community Center is not the owner of the building so there is concern about the City investing
in the property and if CSCC has a long term lease for the space because if they move to
another relocation or close operations within five years they will have to pay the money back to
the City. Hightshoe noted the church would have to agree for the City to put a mortgage on
their building to protect the investment.
Signs asked what was currently in the basement. McInerney said it is currently not utilized. The
daycare is currently in another building next to the church, they share the same parking lot, so
this basement would be an expansion for the daycare.
Byler asked where the rest of the funding would come from to outfit this basement to be turned
into a useable daycare space. McInerney said that at one time there was a child care facility in
the basement but doesn't meet today's standards with accessibility in the restroom and
entrances.
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 7 of 14
Persson asked about code requirements and if the space will pass code. McInerney said if they
provide an accessible entrance and restroom it will meet current code requirements.
Signs noted he liked the concept but had a concern about the leverage as it appears the City's
funding would be paying 100% of the costs.
Byler announced the next application Fairmeadows Park Playground is the City of Iowa City.
Ackerson said it is a playground that was installed about 20 years ago so the equipment is
aging and needs to be replaced. Often the City has pots of money (open space funds) that are
set aside by developers when subdivisions are installed but there are none of those funds
available to the parks department for this neighborhood.
Signs asked about general funds for park maintenance throughout the City. Hightshoe said this
park is not in the City's five-year plan for upgrades. Persson asked why this park was not
included in the five-year plan. Hightshoe said Parks has a five year plan that is reviewed by City
staff and a citizen advisory board, but did not know all the specifics of funding priority for these
projects. Mercer Park upgrades are in the five-year plan and Byler noted that the equipment at
Mercer Park is very similar to the equipment at Fairmeadows. Hightshoe could not comment on
the Parks and Recreation overall improvements plan, but noted that Fairmeadows did just get a
splash pad, new bathroom and parking lot so that is likely why they were not on the five-year
plan for additional upgrades. The idea for upgrading and moving the playground equipment is to
move it closer to the parking lot and splash pad so parents can see both areas from one spot.
Signs noted the school also has playground equipment and it is newer and therefore children
also tend to play over there.
Signs stated that the City needs to pay more attention to maintenance of park space. He noted
he lives in the area and does know this park is well used and the playground equipment should
be moved closer to the parking lot for safety reasons as well.
Hightshoe noted Fairmeadows Park was chosen to apply for CDBG funds also because it is in a
low-income area and not all parks are.
Persson noted that the Commission has funded park needs before. Byler asked if the
Commission chose to partially fund this project, will that compel the City to fund the rest.
Persson didn't think they would, because the park is not in their five-year priorities. Hightshoe
was unable to know for sure, but believed if Parks and Recreation were able to get some federal
funding for this project that might change their priorities and shift funding to this project to make
sure it was completed.
Lamkins also shared concern about the note in the application that states the project won't be
completed until November of 2016, which is entering a time of year when the park will not be
utilized, so the timing of the project is unusual.
Byler moved onto the next application, Prelude's Future.
Persson noted that in that area of town it is very difficult to obtain land to expand services
because there are people who will oppose it because the area is very congested. She said the
nonprofits in that area work very hard to have parking spaces and not have complaints from
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 8 of 14
people in the neighborhood. She was impressed that Prelude could buy land in the area and
saw that as a positive.
Ron Berg (CEO, Prelude Behavior Services, formally known as MECCA) stated they targeted
this application on the purchasing of the property and building, there would be other phases that
would need to be put in place to complete the whole plan for expansion, but this would be the
first step to secure the ownership of the property.
Byler asked which property they would be purchasing. Berg said it was to the north, the TMOne
parking lot and building. Signs asked what the total purchase price for the property is. Berg said
the total purchase price was $1.55 million.
Hightshoe asked how soon they would be building something on that acquired parking lot. Berg
said they would not build on the parking lot. They would purchase and remodel the building.
Hightshoe asked what they would do to the building. Berg said they would immediately build out
5,000 square feet now and 25,000 square feet later. Hightshoe asked if there would be an
immediate use of the building, Berg replied yes, within three months they could be using the
building. Signs noted they would be vacating one of their current buildings, the administration
building, as part of the transaction so there is motivation for them to quickly get the new building
ready for occupancy.
Berg noted their master plan is to connect the current building with this new building to expand
the outpatient operations which is needed for changing Medicare and Medicaid laws. Then they
will also be able to retool the current residential services building to make it more appropriate for
residential clients. Right now there are 32 beds in 8 rooms and on weekends with visitors there
can be up to 100 people crammed into a space meant for 32. He also added that having the
parking lot space allows them for future expansion uses over the next several decades.
Persson asked about Prelude's relationship with other service providers who work with
homelessness and other nonprofits in the neighborhood. Berg noted there are several in that
neighborhood, Shelter House is across the street, Four Oaks is next door, and HACAP
Waterfront's facility is in the area. They contract with Shelter House for all their evening meals.
Staff goes to Four Oaks to provide prevention services and various programming services.
Persson stated her understanding is that when Shelter House gets clients with co-occurring
problems Prelude assists those clients. Berg said they work closely with Shelter House on
getting clients temporary housing once they leave Prelude.
Signs noted a sense of collaboration amongst agencies in that area in the application and being
able to keep Prelude and their services in this area is very positive. It is unfortunate that the
Commission only has $200,000 of funding to allocate and this application alone is for $200,000.
Persson stated the whole area has collaborated their services together which is wonderful and
also noted the Commission has not funded Prelude as much in the past and would like to see
services in that area well provided for.
Byler asked about the current properties that will be sold to assist with the purchase of this new
property and if those figures are set and agreed upon. Berg said they are being negotiated at
this time. Byler noted then if the Commission were only able to fund say $100,000 of the
request, Prelude could get funding for the rest of the amount and Berg agreed but had to be
conscious of their bond rating and cash reserves they would need to use for this project.
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 9 of 14
Seiple noted confusion of the use of the old space and what will be used in the old spaces and
the new spaces. Berg said they currently have five properties. Two will be sold to make this new
purchase and the other three will be retained and repurposed as part of this new project.
Byler moved onto the final application, Towncrest Investment which is demolition funding for a
lot that then will be sold in hopes of getting tax credits. There was no one present on behalf of
the applicant. Staff was present for the discussion and supported the applicant's application as
part of a larger senior housing project.
Persson questioned why the Commission would finance demolition. Byler agreed as well and
noted they would be funding someone that will then turn around and make a profit on that
property. Signs agreed and said the owner is going to tear down the property regardless and will
make money regardless.
Hightshoe said the developer requested that the landowner apply for CDBG funding to make up
the difference in the amount they were able to pay to reach the seller's asking price. Signs does
not feel the Commission should supplement a request such as that. Lamkins also noted there
would be other City monies going into this project. Ackerson said the risk is that the landowner
won't sell and the affordable senior housing units won't get built.
Byler stated the City wants the property redeveloped; it is an eyesore in an area where the City
has already invested a lot of TIF money. Signs noted that if the Commission funds this request,
and the deal still doesn't go through, the owner could demolish the building and sell the property
to someone who won't put affordable housing there. Hightshoe said the Commission can put
conditions on the funding.
After review of all the applications, the Commission began proposing allocations.
Persson proposed two options:
1. Fund Prelude the full $200,000 or;
2. Fund The Housing Fellowship and Systems Unlimited and give the remaining funds to
Prelude.
Persson also noted that all other applicants should be encouraged to resubmit in January for the
next funding cycle.
Signs agreed with the second option with the one change of adding the ADA doors at the Crisis
Center.
Byler asked if there was a consensus that the last application, Towncrest Investment, would be
funded zero dollars. All agreed that was the Commission's consensus.
Byler stated that the Arc project is a good project but is unsure if there is enough detail at this
time to be funded in this round but would encourage them to resubmit at the next funding round
with more detail. Persson agreed that with the exception of Towncrest Unlimited, any application
not funded in this round should resubmit in the next round.
Byler moved onto the Crisis Center application. Signs noted he would like to allocate $8,800 to
have the ADA doors repaired. Hightshoe noted that the Commission made a policy to make
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 10 of 14
allocations based on significant impacts and also due to staffing cuts there is not the ability for
staff to take on multiple low dollar projects. So due to lack of funding and staff resources, the
policy was made to fund projects $50,000 or above and to make the largest impact with the
dollars available. A $6,000 project takes the same amount of staff time as a $60,000 project, but
has a much smaller impact and often leads to the applicant applying several times. Hightshoe
stated that agencies should be reviewing their long term needs and basing an application on a
well thought out capital improvement plan, not a compilation of deferred maintenance items that
provide short term benefits. Byler then asked if the Commission is in consensus to pass on the
Crisis Center application at this time and all were in agreement.
Next discussed was the CSCC basement project. Byler noted that from the application there are
no other money sources identified so if there were issues with the project, and the allocation
was not enough to cover all the expenses, then what would become of the project. He would
like to see a resubmitted more comprehensive plan in the next allocation cycle. Lamkins agreed,
thinking there would need to be many more internal improvements on the property to enable a
preschool to operate in that location. And additionally there is no leverage, they are asking for
full funding.
With regards to the Arc application, Lamkins has the same concerns as he has with the CSCC
project that it is not thoroughly thought out. Signs noted then the Commission would be passing
on two applications benefiting children, but understands the reasoning. Byler agreed and
encouraged the Arc came back in a few months with more specific plans. Therefore the
Commission's consensus is for no funding at this time to Arc.
Byler noted on the Systems Unlimited request they are not rehabbing or gaining additional units
it is just a re -shifting and is there a significant benefit to those living in the units. They are
currently getting services from the organization, the rent will be reduced which is good, but is it
worth a $50,000 investment to have the rents reduced $100. Lamkins sees it as more of a long
term benefit. Persson agreed and says it becomes'a lodge concept which is working in other
communities, having like people come together and live together in communities and having
ownership of the property gives this a long-term benefit. Signs agreed and said it is a highly
leveraged application, they are not asking for full purchase cost, just down payment assistance.
Byler then suggested following Persson's second recommendation the allocations should be as
follows:
Applicant
Request
Recommendation
The Housing Fellowship
$49,998
$49,998
Systems Unlimited
$150,000
$50,000
The Arc of Southeast Iowa
$70,000
$0
Crisis Center
$24,255
$0
CSCC Child Care
$35,000
$0
Fairmeadows Playground
$85,000
$0
Prelude
$200,000
$100,002
Towncrest Unlimited
$112,000
1 $0
Total
1 $200,000
Lamkins moved to allocate $100,002 to Prelude, $50,000 to Systems Unlimited and
$49,998 to The Housing Fellowship and to encourage all other applicants to resubmit
their applications with more detail, in the regular funding round.
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 11 of 14
Seiple seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
DISCUSSION OF SOUTHGATE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' CDBG APPLICATION FOR
THE REHABILITATION OF THE WALDEN RIDGE TOWNHOMES AND SUPPORT FOR AN
IOWA WORKFORCE HOUSING TAX CREDIT APPLICATION:
Hightshoe explained that Southgate applied for and received CDBG funds in 2012 for the
rehabilitation of the Orchard Place condos at 1956-1960 Broadway Street in Iowa City. Today
the vacancy rate for the project is below one percent. At that time they received $900,000 in
funding, $300,000 was a grant and $600,000 was a loan with repayment deferred for five years.
Now they would like to rehab Walden Ridge (which is 53 units) off Mormon Trek Boulevard. So
the proposal is to pay back the loan from the Orchard Place project, and have that money
reallocated back to Southgate for the rehab of Walden Ridge. Southgate had asked for a grant,
and the City had the National Development Council review the proposal and complete a
financial analysis that found there is an ability to repay the loan, so the recommendation would
be that $600,000 applied to Walden Ridge and then after project completion Southgate would
pay back the loan at 3% interest.
Lamkins asked if they would get another five year deferment on repayment of the loan and
Hightshoe said no, they would be on the original repayment schedule.
Byler asked if the reason for this repayment of the first loan only to have the monies reallocated
back to Southgate in a second loan is just to keep the monies and properties separate.
Jerry Waddilove (Southgate Development) said the reason was because the lender they are
looking to refinance the Orchard Place properties with does not want a subordinate mortgage
also on the property. Southgate needs funds to rehab Walden Ridge, as it is a location they are
trying to prevent becoming a location similar to what Broadway Condominiums used to be.
Persson asked if those condominiums once rehabbed will remain affordable housing units as
they currently are. Waddilove said they would, more than 51% of the units are affordable
housing units. Hightshoe said staff usually recommends the same compliance period as HOME
regulations. For the amount of assistance per unit, HOME would require a 10 year compliance
period. Persson asked if Southgate was willing to keep the units affordable after the 10 -year
period and Waddilove said they were committed to doing so.
Byler asked if the property that was being paid off (the Orchard Place properties) were going to
remain affordable housing units. Waddilove said that in terms of what the market will bear yes,
those units will remain as affordable housing units, and they could not increase rents and keep
their occupancy rates. Byler asked if they were able to raise their rates above HUD
requirements and get occupancy they would do so. Waddilove said yes, but that would take
years to reach that level of rents and maintain occupancies and right now they are still charging
below the HUD maximums for two-bedroom units by a wide margin.
Byler congratulated Southgate on their rehab on Broadway Street which was an extreme
upgrade for that area. However, his concern is this should be two separate issues. Southgate
should repay the funding they owe from the one project. Then Southgate should come in and
ask for funding for the new project, obviously the funds are very limited for such projects as
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 12 of 14
demonstrated in applications reviewed earlier in the meeting. This situation feels like Southgate
is saying they will only repay the loan if the funds are given right back to them for another
project. It is not to discount that the project is not a valuable project.
Lamkins and Persson feel that it is a good way to accomplish this project. Byler disagrees and
feels Southgate will do the project whether the City funds the $600,000 or not.
Waddilove noted this is just a loan, not a grant, they will pay the money back. Byler said
however that Southgate needs to pay this loan back in order to refinance the Orchard Place
condominiums so the money was coming back to the City and perhaps there are other projects
that should also be prioritized for those funds. Waddilove understands that concern but the
ultimate goal is to reestablish a healthy low to moderate income neighborhood and they have
successfully accomplished that in Orchard Place and would like to do that again in Walden
Place.
Persson agreed and noted how on the west side there were low and middle class communities
that upper class built around and embraced the areas but deserve to see the properties kept up.
Byler agreed it's not a bad project, he just questions when a for-profit successful company asks
for such a large grant and then shifts it to a loan when a grant is denied. Lamkins noted that
although a company is for-profit, they are willing to take risk of their own and do positive things
for the community such as affordable housing, neighborhood stabilization, and access for other
populations that is a good thing. Hightshoe noted from Staff's perspective they are always trying
to create new partnerships in the community, not only non -profits but for-profit companies as
well. Southgate is providing for-profit housing at below HOME fair market rents and they are
paying taxes.
Seiple asked a question from the application, in which it states the goal is to attract a higher
quality tenant and asked if Waddilove could comment on that. Waddilove explained that what
they did with the Orchard Place Condominiums was they implemented a crime -free lease so
they do credit and criminal background checks on all tenant applications. If a tenant commits a
crime while living in one of the units that is grounds for eviction. Those new lease stipulations
have created a safe environment for all the tenants and community. With regards to Walden
Place, they do have the same lease in effect for their 53 units, and their ultimate goal is to
acquire the rest of the units in Walden Place. Some of the other landlords in the complex are
problem landlords and will just rent to anyone. Lamkins asked how many units Southgate would
have to buy to get control of the condo association. Waddilove said there are 100 units total and
even just one or two poor tenants can create a bad living environment for everyone. Byler noted
that if Southgate controls the majority of the condo association they could encourage all units to
use their leasing agreement making it a required association guidelines lease.
Signs moved to recommend a CDBG loan of $600,000 to Bilam Properties LLC (a
SouthGate Companies entity) to rehabilitate 53 units at Walden Ridge with the following
financial terms: 15 -year amortization, 15 -year term, 3 percent full amortizing with a 15 -
year compliance period. Payments would begin once the rehabilitation is completed.
Executing the agreement would be contingent on SouthGate paying off the $600,000 loan
for the Orchard Place (aka Broadway Condos) project.
(CDBG rules require that 51 % of the units be rented to those under 80% of median income at
no more than the CDBG fair market rent).
Housing and Community Development Commission
October 22, 2015
Page 13 of 14
Lamkins seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
DISCUSSION OF SCORING CRITERIA AND APPLICATION FORM FOR CDBG AND HOME
GRANT APPLICATIONS:
Byler noted the Commission was able to have a productive discussion on this evening's
applications without any scoring criteria. He doesn't feel the scoring forms need to be filled out.
Seiple noted she did use the scoring worksheets when reviewing tonight's applications just so
she could get used to using them. She does agree she would not want the allocations to be
based on scoring only without discussion.
Persson said she would like to see the Commission get a list of the CITY STEPS and then to
have a discussion about homelessness, rapid rehousing, and what the Commission should be
looking at in terms of affordability so they can better react to applications that state they serve
homeless needs. She feels it is important to have definitions of homelessness and rapid
rehousing set so that they can see if the applications fit into those definitions.
Berg noted that from an applicant's perspective it would be nice to have evaluation criteria so
they know if their application meets the stated criteria.
Dennis noted that the Commission's charge is to be the best stewards of the federal funds that
come into the City by making recommendations to the Council and there are three things they
need to look at: Is there a need? Is the project reasonable and have a reasonable budget? Does
the applicant have the capacity to fulfill the project? In her opinion the scoring sheet makes it
difficult to answer those three questions and make a reasonable judgment.
Signs noted that the application seems to have a lot of redundant questions on it as well.
Perhaps that can be trimmed down.
Byler asked if anyone was interested in forming a smaller committee to meet to come up with a
recommendation. Persson volunteered to work on it and would like input from others and also
applicants. Hightshoe said if changes are made to the applications, then it must be done soon
because Council needs to approve the applications in early December.
Byler asked that the Commission give the scoring and application some thought and then at the
November 19 meeting the Commission can discuss and also hear public input.
ADJOURNMENT:
Persson moved to adjourn.
Lamkins seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and motion carried 5-0.
Z
O
as
N
O
�.i
H
Z
W
a
O
J
W
W
O
Z
O
v
D
z
Q
z
W
M
2
T
CM
LU
LU
w
N
X
X
X
X
X
0
T
0
i•
X
X
-
X
X
X
X
X
O
T
T
W
W
X
X
X
X
T
'
O
O
co
0
cc
-
X
X
X
X
X
T
1!"1
T
N
X
X
X
X
X
O
T
M
If!
T
os
X
X
X
X
X
X
T
N
0
LU
0
X
X
X
X
T
T
N
p
X
X
;
X
X
T
T
a
(fl
-
co
-
co
co
0o
co
r -
w
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Nr
r
r
r
r
T
r
r
r
W
CF)
0)
0)
0)
CF)
0)
rn
rn
0)
H
W
J
J
W
2
V
W_
Z�_
Ww
}
O
G
J
Y
Z
`�
o
�;
W
a
a
a
z
N
O
d
Z
W
Q
W
0
Y
U
J
0
o
V
m
J
m
z
U
Z
Z
c�
Z
Q
a
0
N
H
� r 1
��..®44T
1-4 Rk
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 19, 2015
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Stefanie Bowers, Staff to the Human Rights Commission
Re: October 20, 2015 Recommendation from the Human Rights Commission
2b(5)
mmm��
At their October 20, 2015 meeting the Human Rights Commission voted unanimously (6-0) to
make the following recommendation to the City Council:
To adopt the amendments to the Human Rights Ordinance as presented in a memo by
Investigator Kristin Watson dated October 1, 2015. (Memo on amendments included in
the attached final minutes of the October 20, 2015 Human Right Commission).
Additional action (check one)
x No further action needed. City Council will consider second reading of the amendments
to the Human Rights Ordinance at its December 15, 2015 meeting date.
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
_ Staff has prepared a Memorandum included in the Information Packet of April 30, 2015 for
recommendation 2.
S:RECform.doc
Minutes Approved
Human Rights Commission
October 20, 2015 — 5:30 PM
Neighborhood and Development Services Conference Room (Second Floor)
Members Present: Kim Hanrahan, Orville Townsend Sr, Harry Olmstead, Paul Retish, Edie
Pierce -Thomas, Joe Coulter, Ali Ahmed.
Members Not Present: Stella Hart, Shams Ghoneim.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Recommendations to Council: Yes. The Commission recommends that Council adopt the
amendments to the Human Rights Ordinance as presented in a memo by Investigator Kristin
Watson dated October 1, 2015. (Attached to these minutes).
Call to Order:
Coulter called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
Consideration of the Minutes from the September 15, 2015 Meeting Date:
Motion Pierce -Thomas, seconded by Hanrahan. Motion passed 5-0. (Ahmed, Olmstead not
present).
(Ahmed present 5:38 p.m.)
Meeting Business
Human Rights Ordinance Amendments
Bowers reviewed the amendments to the Human Rights Ordinance. Most of the changes are not
substantive and only involve rearranging the Human Rights Ordinance for clarity. Substantive changes (6
total) make the Human Rights Ordinance substantially equivalent to the Fair Housing Act and allow for a
more efficient processing of complaints that are found to have probable cause.
Motion Pierce -Thomas, seconded by Townsend. Motion passed 6-0. (Olmstead not present).
Commission Action Plan 2015
Education Programming
Hanrahan reported that the Affordable and Accessible Housing Panel was well attended and informative.
Education Outreach
Bowers reported on a meeting she had with Ghoneim where they discussed future programming that
focuses on specific areas that are protected under the ordinance such as credit and housing. Two possible
programs are one that addresses barriers for persons new to this country in acquiring a place to reside and
also barriers that exist for single persons who are applying for credit without a spouse. Townsend also
suggested in a discussion with Bowers to have Commission Buddies. This would allow for newly
appointed members to the Commission to be paired with Commission members who have served longer
in hopes of introducing them to the work of the Commission and also allow for Commissioners to get to
know one another better.
(Olmstead present 5:50 p.m.)
Community Outreach
Hanrahan and other Commissioners will consider how to use the questionnaire and what is the best way
to acquire the information. Should the questionnaire have boxes to check as opposed to filling in the
lines? Should the survey ask open ended questions or provide possible responses to select from for each
question asked? For example, highly satisfied or sort of satisfied.
Council Outreach
Hart accepted the National Hispanic Month proclamation at the September Council meeting and
Olmstead will accept the National Disabilities Awareness Month Proclamation at the October 20 Council
meeting date and Coulter the National American Indian Heritage Month Proclamation at the November
10 Council meeting.
Motion Pierce -Thomas, seconded by Olmstead. Motion passed 8-0.
Reports
One Community, One Book -Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson
Hanrahan and Coulter both attended the book discussion on September 30 held at the Iowa City Public
Library. Hanrahan and Olmstead attended the formal discussion with author Bryan Stevenson on October
4 at the Iowa Memorial Union.
Human Rights Awards Breakfast (October 28)
Hanrahan will do the introduction at the Breakfast, Olmstead will introduce the keynote speaker, Pierce -
Thomas will present the awards, and Coulter will do the closing. Bowers presented an overview of how
the Awards Breakfast works from start to finish.
Job Fair
The job and resource fair will be held on October 22 from 4:00-6:00 p.m. at the Eastdale Plaza.
Commissioners who are able are encouraged to come out and assist with the event. There are over 30
local employers and social service agencies listed.
Building Communities
No report.
Making Iowa City a Human Rights Community
Coulter suggested adding the meeting minutes of the subcommittee to the Commission packet so all can
read the minutes. Another subcommittee meeting is planned for November.
University of Iowa Center for Human Rights
The Center has a meeting coming up in November—more information should be available at that time.
Education Subcommittee
The Iowa City Community School District Equity Committee at its last meeting discussed ways to
measure outcomes of the recently completed School District Equity Plan.
Commission
Pierce -Thomas spoke on her recent trip to South Africa where she visited Robben Island and the
Apartheid Museum.
OA
Ahmed discussed the newly formed Human Rights Committee formed in his home country.
Olmstead mentioned that the Cedar Rapids Civil Rights Commission has a new phone app to file
complaints of discrimination. He also spoke on a conference he recently attended in Coralville sponsored
by Disability Rights IOWA.
Adjournment: 6:55 p.m.
Next Regular Meeting — December 15, 2015 at 5:30 p.m.
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2014/2015
(Meetine Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP.
11/18/
14
12/15/
14
1/20/
15
2/17/
15
3/17/
15
4/1/
15
4/21
15
5/19
15
6/16
15
7/21
15
8/18
15
9/16
15
10/20
15
Edie Pierce-
Thomas
1/1/2016
-
-
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
Joe D. Coulter
1/1/2016
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
Harry
Olmstead
1/1/2016
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Paul Retish
1/1/2017
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ali Ahmed
1/1/2017
X
X
O
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
Orville
Townsend, Sr.
1/1/2017
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Kim
Hanrahan
1/1/2018
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Shams
Ghoneim
1/1/2018
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Stella Hart
1/1/2018
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = No longer a member
R = Resignation
11-10-15
CITY OF IOWA CITY 14
..III a
-.-� MEMORANDUM
Date: October 27, 2015
To: Geoff Fruin, Assistant City Manager
From: Kristin Watson, Human Rights Investigator
Re: Human Rights Ordinance Revision
Introduction/Backoround:
Revisions have been made to Title 2 of the City Code (the Human Rights Ordinance) in
order to (1) make it consistent with the Fair Housing Act and (2) update its provisions to
reflect a more practical enforcement mechanism for both staff and the public. These
revisions were considered and approved by the Human Rights Commission at its
October 20, 2015 meeting.
Discussion:
Most changes are not substantive, and involve only rearranging for clarity. Changes worthy of
noting are:
• 'Chapter 5, Fair Housing,' has been incorporated into the general provisions prohibiting
discrimination. Having a separate Chapter for fair housing was confusing, as some
enforcement provisions were contained in Chapter 5 alone and applied only to housing,
while others were contained in the general provisions of 'Chapter 4, Enforcement.'
• Two instances of the word 'citizen' have been changed to 'individual.' (See §2-1-2 and
§2-2-1.) A person need not be a citizen, either of the U.S. or Iowa City, in order to file a
complaint.
• Both the general ordinance and the housing chapter contained definitions of 'person.'
These definitions have been combined. (See §2-1-1.)
• The definition of 'housing accommodation' has been removed. There is no counterpart to
this phrase in the FHA, and it presently serves no purpose. 'Housing accommodation'
has a slightly wider scope than 'dwelling,' in that it would apply to temporary sleeping
places such as a homeless shelter. However, people utilizing temporary sleeping
spaces are protected under the public accommodations sections of the human rights
ordinance.
' The fair housing chapter existed separately because it is older than the general human rights ordinance.
When the ordinances forbidding discrimination on the additional bases of employment, public
accommodation, education and credit were created, the fair housing chapter was retained.
October 27, 2015
Page 2
• Conciliation procedures have been updated. Formerly, the Coordinator was required to
attempt conciliation for a period of 30 days. The section has been revised to allow the
Human Rights Coordinator to determine whether conciliation efforts should be utilized,
and if utilized, removes the requirement of waiting 30 days before declaring the process
unsuccessful. (See §2-4-5.)
In civil proceedings regarding housing, the ordinance stated that upon request of the
complainant pursuant to §2-4-11, the human rights coordinator shall authorize, and the
city attorney shall commence, a civil suit. These instances of the imperative 'shall' have
been changed to 'may,' to prevent the City from being forced to commence and
maintain a legal action in connection with a complaint it might not consider litigation
worthy. (See §2-4-12.)
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the revised Title 2 be submitted to Council for consideration.
11-3
2b(6)
QW4 IOWA CITY
i PUBLIC LIBRARY
123 S. Linn St. • Iowa City, IA 52240
anrr Suun Craig-- 319-356-5200-- 319-3565494. www.kpi.org
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
October 22, 2015
FINAL APPROVED
Members Present: John Beasley, Janet Freeman, Adam Ingersoll (by phone), Thomas Martin, Robin
Paetzold, Meredith Rich -Chappell, Jay Semel, Monique Washington.
Members Absent: Diane Baker.
Staff Present: Terri Byers (in at 5:04 pm), Susan Craig, Kara Logsden, Patty McCarthy, Elyse Miller, Brent
Palmer (in at 5:05 pm), Angela Pilkington.
Guests Present: Doyle Landry, in at 5:10 pm.
Call Meeting to Order. President Paetzold called the meeting to order at 5:02 pm.
Public Discussion. See below.
Approval of Minutes.
The Minutes of the September 24, 2015 Library Board of Trustees meeting were reviewed. A motion to
approve the Minutes was made by Martin and seconded by Rich -Chappell. Motion carried 8/0.
Unfinished Business.
FY17 Operating Budget. A draft operating budget was discussed. Services, supplies and capital outlay
have all been updated with the City projections and the items approved at the last meeting. We
calculated an increase to the hourly wages based on the county minimum wage staying in effect. The
Library would need to change its pay structure in January, 2017. In response to a question by Beasley,
Craig noted that the approximately $6,000,000 it takes to run the library comes from a number of
different sources including the special levy that has been in place since the late 1980's from which we
get about $800,000 plus our contracts with other communities. She noted personnel costs are fixed
except for hourly wages and we cannot add permanent staff without the approval of the City Council. A
motion to approve the proposed budget was made by Semel and seconded by Rich -Chappell. Motion
carried 8/0.
A motion to go off the agenda to address a member of the public who entered late was made by Semel
and seconded by Martin. Motion carried 8/0.
Doyle Landry would like a joint conversation in January, after the holidays about more collaboration
with the school district on literacy programming. Craig stated that there will be a meeting tomorrow of
the Summer Reading Program Coalition, members include persons from Coralville Public Library, North
Liberty Community Library, and the Iowa City Community School District. One of the goals of this group
is to work with the schools to provide data about summer reading program participation in each school.
Washington mentioned talking to City High staff about incentivizing high schoolers to get library cards.
Landry said he didn't want the focus to be just on the summer program. He wishes to have year-round
literacy and to address the people who are not currently coming to the library.
New Business.
Policy Review: #817: Alcohol in the Library. This is a regularly scheduled policy review. Craig reviewed
the policy review process for the new members. Ingersoll asked about mixed drinks; Craig said the City
permits mixed drinks. Ingersoll asked if it we require liability insurance and if an amount needs to be
stated in the policy. Beasley wanted to know if the City has criteria for the amount of insurance needed.
Craig said she would find out. Ingersoll proposed a language change and Beasley had other suggested
changes. Craig will ask the City Attorney about the insurance question and bring this policy back next
month for further discussion. Freeman asked if there were any unfortunate events related to alcohol in
the library. Craig and McCarthy both said there have only been three events and all things went well.
A motion to adjust the agenda item Visit to the Children's Room to the end of the meeting was made
by Martin and seconded by Freeman. Motion carried 8/0.
Staff Reports.
Director's Report. Craig and Clark presented a resolution in support of the State Historical Society at the
Iowa Library Association Annual Conference last week. It passed, which means the ILA is on the record
as advocating for the State Historical Society. Craig went to a session at the conference, led by the State
Archivist, and he had no new information. Craig believes the imminent threat of closing the Iowa City
building is off the table as there is nowhere to put the materials. Craig believes the building should be
open at least five days a week including Saturday. Craig will keep people updated. Craig relayed the
passing of Steven Marsden, a long-time library staff member. Steve passed away in his sleep on
Tuesday. He was kindhearted and devoted to many causes, one of which was the library. Steve will be
missed. The City provided diversity training to all permanent staff this week, it was mandatory. Craig
thought it was good beginning training and encouraged the City to provide next step training. Paetzold
asked if this was ongoing training. Craig said training is offered at different levels throughout the year.
Miller will send a copy of the training handout to Board members.
Departmental Reports.
Children's Services. Ingersoll asked if Children's Room used a specific application for the iPad he liked
and offered to bring it in for her to try. He hopes that Appy Hour continues to be offered and he hopes
it continues to grow. Martin asked about Appy Hour. Pilkington said it is for applications one uses on
devices; the program shows parents how to interact with their child and their devices to improve
literacy and other educational applications.
Logsden mentioned that on Wednesday morning and Sunday at 2:00 pm the Oscar Meyer
Weinermobile will be at ICPL. There will be tours and whistles.
Collection Services. No comments.
IT. No comments.
Development Office. Two weeks from tonight, Craig and McCarthy will attend the Rotary 1001h birthday
dinner where the winner of the Rev it up for Rotary raffle will be announced. Thanks to Semel and
Freeman who are volunteering at the Book Gala. Paetzold asked about the Craft Bazaar.
Spotlight on the Collection. No comments.
Miscellaneous. No comments.
President's Report. Just a reminder that the Book Gala will take place before the next Board meeting.
Washington asked about the Witching Hour. Craig said it's a new festival which we are supporting and
everything at the library connected with the Witching Festival is free. Some of the events at the library
are part of our Music is the Word project.
Announcements from Members. None.
Committee Reports.
Foundation Members. No meeting.
Communications. None.
Disbursements.
The MasterCard expenditures for September, 2015 were reviewed. A motion to approve the
disbursements for September, 2015 was made by Martin and seconded by Rich -Chappell. Motion
carried 8/0.
Quarterly Financial Reports. Beasley asked about revenues and the negative numbers. The City uses
parentheses for the revenues. All of those figures are positive numbers.
Quarterly Use Reports. Circulation is up by .09%. Craig does not see any problems with our statistics.
Craig reminded everyone that the weather affects circulation. Paetzold asked about books in other
languages. The collection is not large, and statistics can be affected easily. Logsden said the
demographic for international students has changed in the past few years and is younger with no
children.
Set Agenda Order for October Meeting.
Alcohol policy.
Volunteer policy.
Wrap up of FY17 operating budget request.
Adjournment. A motion to adjourn the meeting subject to completion of the tour of the Children's
Room was made by Beasley and seconded by Ingersoll. Motion carried 8/0. President Paetzold closed
the meeting at 6:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elyse Miller
Board or Commission: ICPL Board of Trustees
ATTENDANCE RECORD
12 Month
KEY:
X = Present
0 = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
bate
Name
Term
11/ SAS
7./22115
2A6/1S
3/26/15
4/2UU'
Sj26115
/iS
7/23/15
AMI/1S
8/2411
U/2VU
11/19/2S
Diane Baker
6/30/19
X
O/E
x
X
O/E
x
x
x
X
X
O/E
O/E
John Beasley
6/30/21
Not on Board
x
x
x
x
x
Thomas Dean
6/30/15
x
x
X
X
X
x
O/E
Off Board
Janet Freeman
6/30/19
X
O/E
X
x
O/E
X
X
O
x
x
x
X
David Hamilton
6/30/15
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
Off Board
Adam Ingersoll
6/30/21
Not on Board
X
x
x
X
X
Tom Martin
6/30/17
X
X
X
x
x
X
X
x
O/E
X
X
X
Linzee Kull
McCra
6/30/15
X
O
O/E
X
x
X
X
Off Board
Robin Paetzold
6/30/17
x
x
x
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
Meredith
Rich -Chappell
6/30/17
X
X
O/E
x
X
X
X
O/E
x
x
X
X
Jay Semel
6/30/19
x
O/E
x
x
X
O/E
x
x
X
X
X
x
Monique
Washington
6/30/21
Not on Board
X
X
X
X
X
KEY:
X = Present
0 = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
�I.®air CITY OF IOWA CITY
-fibimilIt
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 6, 2015
To: Mayor and City Council
From: John Yapp, Planning & Zoning Commission
Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission
At the November 5, 2015 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the October 15
minutes with the following recommendation to the City Council:
1. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of an application submitted
The Crossings Development, LC for a rezoning from Interim Development Research
Park (ID -RP) zone to Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone and a preliminary plat
of Cardinal Pointe West - Part 1, a 31 -lot, 16.3 acre residential subdivision for
property located south of Kennedy Parkway, west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
2. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of the requested rezoning of
3.72 acres from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R) conditioned on the requirement for a
shared driveway.
Additional action (check one)
No further action needed
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
X Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action - Done
MINUTES APPROVED
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 15, 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:
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Karen Howard, Bob Miklo
OTHERS PRESENT: Kevin Digmann, Josh Entler, Jerry Eyman
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of an application submitted The
Crossings Development, LC for a rezoning from Interim Development Research Park (ID -
RP) zone to Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone and a preliminary plat of Cardinal
Pointe West - Part 1, a 31 -lot, 16.3 acre residential subdivision for property located south
of Kennedy Parkway, west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of the requested rezoning of 3.72 acres
from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R) conditioned on the requirement for a shared driveway.
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There were none
REZONING ITEM (REZ15-00020):
Discussion of an application submitted by HD Capital Partners, LLC for a rezoning from
Community Commercial (CC -2) zone to Riverfront Crossings - Central Crossing Subdistrict
(RFC -CX) zone for approximately 1.03 acres of property located at 602, 604, 608, 610, 614,
620, 628 South Dubuque Street.
Howard began the staff report showing a location map of the area. The properties are currently
zoned CC -2 and the request is to rezone the properties to Riverfront Crossings - Central
Crossing Subdistrict RFC -CX. The current zoning is Iowa City's general commercial zoning
which calls for low scale commercial buildings with a maximum building height of 35 feet. There
are no specific standards for buildings and parking other than a 10 foot front setback. Typically
in most Community Commercial zones parking is located between the building and the street
because they tend to be in more auto oriented locations. The current zone requires commercial
buildings but is also a mixed-use zone in that residential apartments can be above the
commercial by special exception.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 2 of 12
Howard said that the requested zoning in Riverfront Crossings allows a broad mix of residential
and commercial uses and buildings. The maximum building height is four stories with a 10 foot
facade step back above the third story. There can be additional stories if the developer qualifies
for bonus heights up to four additional stories. Howard explained that the southern half of the
South Dubuque Street block in question is a required retail frontage so it has to be built as a
mixed-use building or a commercial building with store front frontage. There cannot be any
residential units on the ground floor within a required retail frontage area, which is specified on
the regulating plan in Riverfront Crossings. The reason that requirement is in this location is
because there was an existing commercial building in that location which is close to what was
the transit hub there and the Rock Island train depot. At the time of the Riverfront Crossings
plan development there was still hope that there would be Amtrak service on that railway.
Howard explained that there are quite a few building standards in the Riverfront Crossings
Form-based Code that must be met, including facade articulation and composition, minimum
window coverage and design for both residential and commercial buildings, entrance way and
frontage standards, building material standards, awning and canopy standards, and location
standards for mechanical equipment to ensure they are screened from the street.
The Central Crossings Subdistrict is the center of the Riverfront Crossings Zone so the
Comprehensive Plan that applies to the area highlights some of the defining features of this
subdistrict, including the two rail lines, the historic Rock Island Rail Depot, and Ralston Creek.
The master plan objectives encourage contextual buildings, meaning that itshould maintain
a rhythm of facade articulation and appropriate frontage and building types in context to its
location. Additionally it should restore and enhance conditions along Ralston Creek and
provide a mix of residential and retail uses and to promote new housing options for the
area. The development character that is expressed in the Plan is to improve the quality of
residential design and to maintain the moderate scale and intensity of use in this area.
Howard showed the existing block plan and pattern and new development should respond
to that design and character. In general the conceptual plans show the blocks with
buildings that have mid-block open spaces. In the Code the terms mid-block breaks, such
asforecourts oropen airpedestrian passages and Howard showed photos of examples from
other cities of such areas. She also noted that the mid-block pedestrian passageways are
necessary for the retail spaces, if the parking is in the back of the building, the passageway
can be a way to get to the front of the building where the entrances to the retail spaces are.
Howard said that Staff discussed with the applicant rather than doing a block long
development there is an opportunity to do some of those urban spaces within this block
face. The applicant was agreeable and Howard showed a preliminary site plan the
applicant's architect created. It would be a U shaped building with a private courtyard in the
center for the residents. Due to the topography of the area, the space would allow for
underground parking for the building.
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00020, a proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres of
property located within the 600 block of South Dubuque Street from Community Commercial {CC-
2} to Riverfront Crossing-Central Crossings (RFC-CX), subject to a conditional zoning agreement
requiring a minimum 30-foot wide pedestrian passage or a mid-block forecourt frontage with
minimum dimensions of 30'x 30' is established upon redevelopment.
Freerks asked if there was any information on proposed building height for the conceptual
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 3 of 12
development at this area. Was there an idea of the number of units and mix bedrooms.
Martin asked how the developer could get bonus heights on buildings. Howard replied the Code
allows for bonus height for Leed buildings, affordable housing, elderly housing, protecting
historical properties, and art donation to Riverfront Crossings. She noted this area would not
qualify for historic building bonus nor student housing bonuses due to the location.
Theobald asked about the 30 foot wide passage or a courtyard and if that was one or the other
or could it be both. She said the staff recommendation includes one or the other but not both.
Howard said Staff discussed the requirement in their recommendation prior to discussing with
the applicant and their architect creating a conceptual plan. Howard stated if there is a
courtyard, the Code does require minimum dimensions for the size of courtyards. Freerks said
that is why she would like to see a little bit more information about what is planned.
Eastham noted that in the Comprehensive Plan for this area, the block in question shows more
green space than what is being shown in the conceptual plan for this development. Eastham
asked about the amount of green space compared to the overall Riverfront Crossings Plan.
Freerks agreed and is concerned the area will just be filled with large structures and that
development will not be in character with what is shown in the Riverfront Crossings Plan.
Eastham asked if this rezoning is approved is Staff developing a design concept the next step.
Howard answered that no, Staff does not develop the design concept, they would respond to an
application of a possible building concept for the property. Eastham asked if at the time Staff
could negotiate more green space. Howard stated Staff can only enforce what is in the Code, if
the Commission wanted more green space than what is shown or required by the code, it would
have to be a condition of the rezoning. Currently in Riverfront Crossings there is an open space
requirement, it is 10 square feet per bedroom so the application must meet that requirement.
She said the concept plan probably far exceeds what is required by code for open space.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Kevin Digmann (HD Capital Partners) said that Karen did a good job of describing their plan.
He explained their concept plan for the site. First he said the site will be developed in phases
with building A first then building B will be later so there will naturally be a courtyard between
them. He also noted the maximum the width of the buildings will be is 60 feet, and may very
well be narrower which would provide more than the 30 foot required passage way. Additionally
building B would have commercial frontage along Dubuque Street.
Freeks noted that the Comprehensive Plan discusses current business placement. She said
that we said we would address that as the area redevelops and feels that was lost in this plan
on both the applicant's and City's part. Freerks is concerned about the existing businesses on
this property and the Comprehensive Plan specifically states "as areas transition to more mixed-
use pedestrian focus strategies should be developed to help businesses remain in the area or
assist them to find new locations that better meet their business goals". Freerks would like
some thought in the community regarding these existing businesses. She said that it may not be
the applicant's job to address it, but is the City's. She would like some thought given to this by
staff. If we don't we are ignoring what we said in the Plan.
Digmann asked if what the existing businesses there that Freerks is speaking of. Freerks said
yes that is something that was talked about when we draft the Riverfront Crossings Plan. She
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 4 of 12
said we have the small business there like the Broken Spoke bike shop and the shoe repair
business. She said that it was not necessarily the developers problem, but one that the City
said would be addressed in the plan.
Digmann said they have had discussions with all the current businesses on the property. He
said they have Kennedy Plaza nearby and offered to relocate them. Some they had already had
found another place and some said they had not. Additionally he noted the businesses that
are currently on the property take up less than a fourth of the total property being developed.
Digmann also noted those businesses are in their locations for next to nothing rents and any
development would change that factor. Dyer noted the businesses in that area have all been
there for quite some time. Digmann said they are willing to extend the current leases for the
businesses to May of 2017.
Freerks replied that she is being upfront with her concerns. She would like to see a concept plan
before voting on this rezoning application. She does not want to vote it down because of lack of
information, but is not ready to vote on it at this time.
Digmann noted he was encouraged by City Staff not to bring the concept plan at this time.
Freerks noted that the staff is not voting on the application. Digmann understands but noted he
watched the rezoning go through on the Nagle property. Freerks answered that the Nagle
property did not deviate from what we had outlined in the Riverfront Crossings Plan for that
area. She emphasized it matched the Plan closely and in this application it is deviating from the
Plan with the removals of the cottages, removal of most of the green space as shown in the
Plan and finally removal of the businesses. Additionally the concept does not show the scale of
the building, the heights, density, etc. All those are questions for which she is requesting more
information.
Martin asked why the zoning being requested is Riverfront Crossings status rather than CC -2
zoning. Digmann said the request is because the area is Riverfront Crossings and that is the
best fit for the area. They could do something similar to what they did at the Depot lot which is
PRM but knows that request would be denied by the City. He also feels that CC -2 would be
denied and Freerks agreed and said that the applicant going for Riverfront Crossings zoning is
the best for them as they will get more benefits in density. Martin said she asked the question
because the work that went into creating the Riverfront Crossings made so many opportunities
for the community and she wants to hear how this project fits into the community. What does
that mean for this project.
Digmann said their goal is to create a quality project and market it successfully. He said we are
experienced developers who did Sycamore Mall and Old Capitol Mall. We have done lots of
residential projects. We aren't here to just put up cheap student housing. We want to do a
quality project like the pictures that Karen has shown. We will be providing additional housing
downtown, new business spaces, and provide what the community needs and wants. We have
a lot invested in this community and want to do quality.
Martin noted that the conceptual plan shown is not in the same quality as other project
Digmann's group has done around the City and that is her concern. She was surprised when
she saw it. Digmann noted that it costs tens of thousands of dollars to create such plans so they
are trying to stay within the Code and Comprehensive Plan (noting yes things have changed
with the cottages gone). Freerks noted that for the applicant to say it's going to be quality
buildings and an upgrade for the site needs to be confirmed with the plans noting that the trust
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 5 of 12
level with regards to this property is low. Digmann said he can't help with what the prior owner
did.
Digman asked what further information the Commission wanted to see. Freeks explained that
the Commission is asking for more information about the concept for the property, a more
detailed site plan with schematics of what the buildings would look like and how they will lay out
on the property, how tall the buildings will be and the approximate density. Martin asked how
the concept connects to downtown.
Freerks noted the current concept plan shows no guarantee to even meet the Staff
recommendation. Digmann said they would be willing to do a CZA (Conditional Zoning
Agreement) stating their concept must comply with the particular code. Freerks noted it is not
uncommon for the Commission to ask for more detailed information as they only want what will
be positive for the community. Digmann understands but asked what assurances they would
have if they invest in more detailed plans. Freerks said we refer to the examples in the photos,
but there is no guarantee that anything like that will be built. With more substantial plans the
Commission would be better equipped to understand the plans and be able to vote accordingly.
Freerks said perhaps she was the only Commissioner who was concerned with this. Eastham
agreed he shared these concerns.
Dyer noted her concern is that block shown on the Comprehensive Plan shows more green
space and the conceptual plan is big blocks of buildings and very little green space. Digmann
pointed out with regards to the green space it is really a misnomer because the space elevation
changes 20 feet, so it is not usable green space. Freerks acknowledged that but noted it is still
green space and part of the property landscape.
Hensch noted that the property topography is steep, it has a significant drop off and a part of it
is hard packed gravel. He feels the proposal is already an improvement to what is there
currently. He did agree though it would be useful to see building heights, open space is also
important to him and more details would be helpful, but noted it is a tough space to develop with
the gravel and elevation changes and feels the form-based design gives good directions but
understands if people want to see more of a concept.
Digmann explained his frustration is they meet with the City and follow the direction of Staff not
to submit a concept plan. Freerks asked if Staff instructed the applicant to not present more of
a concept plan. Digmann said John Yapp and Doug Boothroy did.
Parsons stated he doesn't necessarily want the applicant to have to spend a lot of money on
this but agrees that the schematic may show the back portion and the cross through. He also
noted that the staff recommendation and the current concept plan are not consistant. Dyer
noted that other developers do present more detailed plans with elevations and more details.
Howard noted that there is sensitivity to this block because of the cottages and Freerks said it is
more than just the cottages that and there are a number of changes to this area from what was
visualized in the Riverfront Crossings Plan so it's not just about the cottages and she wanted to
make that clear.
Hektoen noted that the Commission's job is to vote on if this application is compatible with the
Comprehensive Plan and asking for more information is just to clarify questions in that regard.
Eastham noted the illustration in the Comprehensive Plan for this block is not in line with what is
being shown in the applicant's concept plan.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 6 of 12
Howard said what she is hearing is that the Commission would like to see how more opens
space might be incorporated into this block. Freerks and other commissioners said yes and
Freerks noted she would like to see a drawing or schematic of what a structure might look like.
Martin asked if the proposed concept would be LEED certified or what type of quality would the
building be as just stating "quality" can be subjective. She also stated that with Riverfront
Crossings it is the perfect opportunity to do something creative and innovative. Digmann said it
would not be LEED certified as that is typical for an office type building but all their buildings are
of high quality and the Commission is welcome to tour their buildings. Martin said that she
wanted more of an understanding of what quality means, it can be subjective. Martin noted she
is interested in articulation of the structure and hopes to see examples and specifics they can
see so they know it will be a positive project for the area.
Freerks is interested in the height and scale. Digmann said he could say now that the height
would be four stories with the fourth story setback. Freeks appreciated that but that was not
specified in the Staff report and recommendation so that is not what they would be voting on
tonight. She is also interested in more green space and how this building will sit on the property
and the streetscape in terms of mass and scale. Freerks also asked what the mix of bedrooms
would be, if they would be three-bedroom units, one -bedroom units. Digmann answered it
would likely be a blend but noted that until they do definitive construction documents at scale
they will not know the specific mix of units. Freerks understands that but asked for what is the
applicant's goal. Dyer agreed and noted that usually the applicants do come forward with more
information. She also wanted to know if there would be some affordable housing, is it LEED
certified, are sustainable building practices used, these are all questions the Commission
reviews and in this application there is none of that information. Dyer noted this is a valuable
piece of property to the community. Freerks said it is a major up -zoning.
Digmann agreed and said he is not trying to be argumentative but looking at everything else in
the Riverfront Crossings District that gets zoned, it is some type of up -zoning. Freerks agreed
but reiterated that is why they need to see more details.
Eastham reiterated that the illustration of this block in the Riverfront Crossings Plan and the
illustration shows some type of commercial building along Dubuque Street, a couple of buildings
on the north, the three cottages (which we know are now gone) and the concept in the
application tonight is basically two large building with little open space. He said he did not
expect development to match the Riverfront Plan exactly, but would like to see some notation as
to why there is a deviation from that Plan. Additionally what that deviation means to the rest of
the development to the Riverfront Crossings area in terms of streetscape and green space, not
just the building appearance. Howard said the reason the illustration in the Comprehensive Plan
was shown that way was to highlight the possibility of the preservation of the Cottages. That is
why there was not a redevelopment plan for this block. Clearly that has not occurred so now it is
important to figure out what would be appropriate for this site. Freerks agreed that the plan
does not need to match the Riverfront Plan exactly, but feels it is from one extreme to the other.
Knowing the Cottages are not there, perhaps now more green space can be achieved, or ways
to address the existing businesses. Those are the deviations she is concerned about from the
Comprehensive Plan to the applicant's concept.
Digmann asked if the buildings in the illustration were higher heights than what his concept
shows. Digmann pointed out things change and that his concept is not the only deviation to the
Comprehensive Plan. Freerks said they are saying this concept is deviating in a number of
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 12
ways and in the discussion of the Nagle property there were no deviations.
Digmann stated he is willing to come back to the next meeting with answers and more details as
requested this evening, but wanted to note that at this stage of the project that won't have exact
plans. Freerks said she understood that but the applicant now knows what the Commission is
looking for.
Freerks closed the public hearing.
Eastham moved to defer this item until the November 5, 2015 meeting.
Dyer seconded the motion.
Freeks noted the discussion has been constructive and informative. She asked if there was
anything else the Commission would like to add. Parsons said that this is too important of a
block to take lightly. Martin added that opportunity for this property is very important for the
Riverfront Crossings Plan.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ15-00018/SUB15-00023):
Discussion of an application submitted The Crossings Development, LC for a rezoning
from Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) zone to Low Density Single Family (RS -
5) zone and a preliminary plat of Cardinal Pointe West - Part 1, a 31 -lot, 16.3 acre
residential subdivision for property located south of Kennedy Parkway, west of Camp
Cardinal Boulevard.
Miklo began the staff report showing illustrations of the property. The area has been zoned
Interim Development - Research Park (ID -RP) to reflect possible development of an office park
along Highway 218. When the Comprehensive Plan for the area was updated this area became
a concept that envisioned a "conservation -type" development including residential and
commercial uses in the area surrounding Camp Cardinal Boulevard. The application is for the
northern portion of the area, however if approved this evening, Preston Lane will continue to the
south to connect to Camp Cardinal Boulevard, and the potential for of single-family, townhouse
and multi -family development to the south of the current proposal. Miklo pointed out the
concept plan for future phases, showing Preston Lane extending to the south and the possibility
of multifamily or townhouses being clustered to transfer development away from the wooded
ravines. The application is to rezone the property to RS -5 which Staff has determined does
comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The plan is to do a residential subdivision with a loop
street, Ava Circle and a north/south street, Preston Lane.
Parsons asked why the street was named Preston Lane to the left of Kennedy Parkway and
Vintage Boulevard to the right. Miklo replied that area to the north of Kennedy Parkway is in
Coralville where the street is named Vintage Drive. The street south of Kennedy Parkway will
intersect with Preston Drive farther to the south in Iowa City. So to keep it consistent, the Iowa
City portion of the street between Kennedy Parkway and Camp Cardinal Boulevard will be
named Preston Lane.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 8 of 12
Miklo noted there are some sensitive areas on the property but most of those are being set
aside in future development stages. In this stage there will be some grading and tree clearing in
the back of the RS -5 lots and some grading and tree clearing to allow for the stormwater
management basin. But even with the grading and tree clearings, it is below the threshold for
the sensitive area rezonings with less than 50% of the woodlands and less than 35% of the
critical slopes on the site. The City Engineer has reviewed and is satisfied with the stormwater
management plan and it will drain into a detention basin.
Staff recommends approval of REZ15- 00018/SUB 15-00023 a rezoning of 16.18 acres from
Interim Development- Research Park (ID- RP) zone to Low Density Single -Family Residential
(RS -5) and a preliminary of Cardinal Point West - Part 1, 31 -lot residential subdivision
located south of Kennedy Parkway and west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
Hensch asked if there would be any connections to the existing Deer Creek Road. Miklo stated
that Deer Creek Road runs parallel to Highway 218 and there will not be any connections to that
road. There is a possibility Deer Creek Road may be vacated in the future. Miklo pointed out
that the future alignment of Highway 965 is just to the west, but there are no plans to build it in
the near-term. Parsons assumed that the quarry to the north will not be going away anytime
soon. Miklo agreed and indicated that the quarry is not within Iowa City's jurisdiction.
Hensch asked if the water structure to the south was connected to this development. Miklo said
that was designed when Camp Cardinal Boulevard was built and it may have some capacity for
this subdivision but the City Engineer determinedd the current proposal must provide its own
stormwater management.
Eastham asked if consideration was made to go ahead with the rezoning for the entire area so
that it would clearly state future development in the area would be townhomes and multi -family.
He said that it is close the elementary school. Miklo said the applicant only requested this
parcel, they are responding to the market at this time. He said the concept plan shows the
intention for the remainder of the property include multifamily and townhouses. He noted that
there will need to be some changes to the concept plan to meet code requirements.
Miklo noted that with this development the sidewalk will be constructed (outside of this
subdivision) along the south side of Kennedy Parkway to connect with Camp Cardinal
Boulevard.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Josh Entler (Southgate Companies) addressed the walkability to the elementary school and
noted they will install an 8 foot wide trail along the north side of Kennedy Parkway and will install
the 5 foot sidewalk along the south side of Kennedy Parkway from Preston Lane to provide
access to the elementary school. To address the question of rezoning the whole area: they did
not want to commit to a master plan of the whole area and need to see how the market will drive
future development. With regards to the stormwater management, the current pond to the south
will be impacted but in a quality and quantity controlled manner. The developments stormwater
basin will overflow and drain to the pond and other stream ways in the area, but will be
controlled. He explained that the ownership of the pond is broken up into a pond association
which means anyone whose water (either through piping or hard surface) drains into the pond is
part of the ownership, so it is just not Southgate's responsibility. Entler noted that they will be
clearing as few trees as possible, they share a desire to preserve as much of the woodlands as
possible. Freerks said that the woodlands does provide a good buffer that can't be easily
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 9 of 12
replaced.
Hensch asked what the density of the development will be when fully developed. Entler was not
able to say exactly what the final number would be a this time, the plans for the whole area have
undergone several revisions. Hensch noted his concern is the number of vehicles and
pedestrians all relying on just one entrance onto Camp Cardinal Boulevard, and when might
Highway 965 be extended. Entler did not have information on that highway extension. Miklo did
point out that when Preston Lane is extended to intersect with Camp Cardinal Boulevard, it will
provide two ways in and out of the area.
Hensch asked what the price point for the single family dwellings in this development will be.
Enstler could only give a guess on what the price point would be and thought maybe in the
range of $250,000 to $325,000.
Freerks close the public hearing.
Hensch moved to approve application submitted The Crossings Development, LC for
a rezoning from Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) zone to Low Density
Single Family (RS -5) zone and a preliminary plat of Cardinal Pointe West - Part 1, a
31 -lot, 16.3 acre residential subdivision for property located south of Kennedy
Parkway, west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard. (REZ15-00018/SUB15-00023)
Parsons seconded the motion.
Freerks said it was good to see more development in this area.
Hensch just noted his concern about water drainage as that is an ongoing concern with
every application the Commission reviews.
Theobald noted her concern about diversity of housing and that area is neighborhood after
neighborhood of the same. She is concerned that there is not guarantee that there will be a
mix of housing in the future phases. She would like to see some mix and sooner rather
than later.
Eastham agreed and feels future developments in that area will need to include more
diverse housing types to meet the Comprehensive Plan and School District diversity goals
throughout the community.
Martin said there area east of Camp Cardinal Boulevard does have a good mix of houses
and thinks they did a good job of providing a range. Miklo showed on the aerial photograph
the area along Ryan Court which has a mix of office, single family, townhouses and
duplexes.
Parsons pointed out that when they first built Camp Cardinal Boulevard development was
slow to start but with the construction of the new school there has been some good
development in the area.
Hensch said a more general concern is that this is on the far edge of the city and is only
accessible by car. His hope is that not all developments are dependent on access by cars.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 10 of 12
COUNTY REZONING ITEM (CZ15-00003):
Discussion of an application submitted by Jerry and Jan Eyman for a rezoning from County
Agriculture (A) to County Single Family Residential (R) for approximately 3.72 acres of
property and a subdivision of 5.73 acres of property located at 5092 American Legion Road
in the Iowa City/Johnson County Fringe Area.
Miklo noted this property is within the two mile fringe area but beyond the growth area so do not
anticipate it will be annexed into the city. The property is surrounded by residential
development however a portion of this property is zoned agricultural and the application is to
zone it all residential and then split it into two separate lots. The existing house would be on
one lot and a new home would be constructed on the other lot. The fringe area agreement
provides guidance with regards to this area and the County Planning Office is recommending
approval of this application with a plan for a shared driveway. Miklo noted that if this was a
larger area or not already surrounded by residential development, staff might not likely
recommend approval of changing the zoning from Agricultural. In this case the property is fairly
small and only suitable for limited agricultural uses. Staff recommends that approval of the
requested rezoning of 3.72 acres from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R) conditioned on the
requirement for a shared driveway.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Jerry Eyman (5092 American Legion Road SE) stated that the property is currently just in hay or
prairie and not being used as agricultural. The area is not conducive to getting farm equipment
into and additionally they are being made to give up the two current entrances and replace with
one shared entrance for both lots to minimize the number of entrances onto American Legion
Road.
Freerks closed the public hearing.
Eastham moved to recommend the approval of the requested rezoning of 3.72 acres from
Agricultural (A) to Residential (R) conditioned on the requirement for a shared driveway.
Hensch seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 1 2015
Dyer moved to approve the meeting minutes of October 1, 2015.
Theobald seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Martin asked if she were to go look at some of the Hodge Construction buildings to see the
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 11 of 12
quality of building, what are the rules regarding such an endeavor. Freerks said that is not
recommended because whatever building she was to tour is not the building that will be going
into the location in question. It also creates an appearance for the public that there is
conversation between the applicant and the individual commissioners behind the scenes.
Hektoen noted that if such a visit or discussion occurs it should be disclosed as part of the
public record. Eastham said that one could go and visit the property on their own without being
accompanied by the applicant.
ADJOURNMENT:
Theobald moved to adjourn.
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0.
z
0
N
Na
�w
20
0 v
W Ln
C9�o
Z W N
C)
0
N N
ca W
o LU
z�
zQ
z
J
IL
Z
F-
W
W
0
LL
Ln
i
X
o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
r
XXX
:
X
X
X
X
o
X
x
x
X-
X
!
X
r
XXX
i
X
i
X
X
X
ti
T"
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
gWcocoaorn�rn�ao�n
CW)X
000000000
X
X
X
X
X
I
X
0
N
X
x
x
X
x
x
i
X
co
W_
JLL
z
W
X
J
Q
G
0
co
x
X
X
X
X
X
a
0
2
0
E_
IL
Ui
d
Rj
m
X
X-
X
X
X
I
X
W
N
W
z-
U
W
�
W
O
ti
X
LU
x
X
X
x
i
X
i
X
x
x
x
x
x
X
N
x
x
x
X
X
X
i
x
W)
p-
i
X
X
x
x
x
x
X;
tC
T"
XXX
I
X
O
X
X
X
X
X
i
X
i
X
X
x
os
�xxx
x
xXx
M
qr,
p
X
X
X
x
X
x
N
N
XXX
i
w
0
i
X
X
x
T-
X
x
X
i
x
i
x
X
X
N
XXXIXIXXX
qrl0
V
LU
X
X
X
x
X
X
r
co
r -
x
X
W
i
X
x
x
x
O
w
z
W
JQ
W4
a
n
J
0C)Q�=�a�0
x
z
Y
2
CL
C6
0-1
U
Q
Y
3
Z -Z
4-Xwu
n
WO
00-
Lu
=
_
0WLLX
ILI/)HH
0
z
H
W
W
a
0
z
"-XXXXXX
i
X
LO
XXX
:
X
X
X
X
M
N
XXX
i
X
i
X
X
X
co
gWcocoaorn�rn�ao�n
WML000LnLO0LnLnLn
X
000000000
W
W_
JLL
z
W
X
J
Q
G
0
J
O0
2
O
Q
Y
a
0
2
0
E_
IL
Ui
d
Rj
Wo=wu�o3f
H
zaIn
C7
W
N
W
z-
U
W
�
W
O
zGwUU.x
ILU)PH
N
U `
N
U -0
WE
�
°'
C C N
C
N Q O
a.< Z
u u w n
XOO
W
Y
CITY O F IOWA C1TY
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 23, 2015
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Bob Miklo, Senior Planner
Re: Recommendation from Planning and Zoning Commission
At their November 19 meeting the Planning and Zoning Commission made the following
recommendation to the City Council:
1. By a vote of 4-1 (Eastham voting no) the Commission recommends approval of REZ15-00020, a
proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres of property located within the 600 block of South
Dubuque Street from Community Commercial (CC -2) to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings
(RFC -CX), subject to the condition as stated in the staff report.
2. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of VAC15-00005 , a vacation of
approximately 4,200 cubic feet of airspace (from 25 feet above pavement grade to 46 feet
above said grade) above the alley running north -south between East Harrison and East
Prentiss Streets to allow for the installation of a pedestrian walkway connecting MidWestOne
Bank and a municipal parking facility.
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
2�
MINUTES APPROVED
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 5, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Mike Hensch, Max Parsons,
Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ann Freerks, Phoebe Martin
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Karen Howard, Martina Wolf, John Yapp
OTHERS PRESENT: Kevin Digmann, Jane Driscoll, Ben Logsdon, Dan Tiedt, Carolyn
Wallace, Nick Lindsley
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 4-1 (Eastham voting no) the Commission recommends approval of REZ15-00020,
a proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres of property located within the 600 block of South
Dubuque Street from Community Commercial (CC -2) to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings
(RFC -CX), subject to the condition as stated in the staff report.
By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of VAC15-00005 , a vacation of
approximately 4,200 cubic feet of airspace (from 25 feet above pavement grade to 46 feet
above said grade) above the alley running north -south between East Harrison and East
Prentiss Streets to allow for the installation of a pedestrian walkway connecting MidWestOne
Bank and a municipal parking facility.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There were none
REZONING ITEM (REZ15-00020):
Discussion of an application submitted by HD Capital Partners, LLC for a rezoning from
Community Commercial (CC -2) zone to Riverfront Crossings - Central Crossing Subdistrict
(RFC -CX) zone for approximately 1.03 acres of property located at 602, 604, 608, 610, 614,
620, 628 South Dubuque Street.
Howard stated this item was deferred at the last meeting and began by showing a map of the
area of the proposed rezoning and what the existing zonings in the area currently are. She
noted the Community Commercial zone is the general commercial zone for Iowa City and does
not have a lot of design standards. It is the same zoning that is along Highway 6 and Highway 1
in Iowa City and allows only 15 units per acre by special exception. In contrast, in Riverfront
Crossings, the Central Crossings Subdistrict zone has form -based zoning standards for building
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 2of15
and parking placement and fairly extensive building design standards. The zone allows a
maximum of 4 stories with a 10 -foot stepback above the 3d floor. It allows a mix of uses, in this
particular area there is a requirement for a retail frontage on the south end of the Dubuque
Street frontage.
Howard refreshed the Commission on the elements that are in the form -based code, and how
those standards would relate to buildings on this site if it were rezoned. The applicant submitted
a schematic site plan, building elevations, and some general information regarding their intent
for redevelopment of the property. Howard said there is a regulating plan with the form -based
code that specifies the primary street; which in this case is Dubuque Street. According to the
regulating plan, a retail frontage is required on the ground level floor of the southernmost
building. The form -based code has specific standards for placement of buildings and parking.
Parking must be located behind off an alley with active building space located at the front of the
lot. Buildings must be built toward the front of the lot and meet standards for front entrances
designed to meet the building type. The density in Riverfront Crossings is controlled by building
height and the parking requirements. Builders must be able to meet the parking requirements
for the number of residential units and also the height limitations in each subdistrict. In this
particular case there is a four-story height limit with a step -back on the fagade on the fourth level
which gives it a general three-story height character of the district. The step -back creates a
visual change from a pedestrian view. Howard said the form -based code is mostly focused on
the form of the buildings, the parking placement and building design, less on the land uses
allowed. There is a broad range of uses that can locate in buildings over time and the uses can
be mixed both vertically (ground level commercial and residential above) or horizontally with a
commercial building right next to a residential building. It is mostly up to the developer as to
what they think will be most successful. There are a lot of building types that are allowed in
Riverfront Crossings and each one of the subdistricts of Riverfront Crossings lists the building
types allowed in each subdistrict. In this case the developer has an interest on building a multi-
dwelling building to the north and a mixed-use building on the southern portion of the block.
Associated with those building types there are certain frontage types that they can choose from
but each has specific standards. The building frontage requirement is one of the most important
requirements of a form -based code, it is the transition of the public space along the street to the
private space of the property, the transition from outdoor to indoor, and the design treatment of
the first floor building fagade, the configuration of the fagade projections and the disposition of
entranceways and other front yard improvements between the building and the public sidewalk.
Howard explained that in this application the storefront frontage would apply to any building on
the south end of Dubuque Street and showed images of good store front designs. Eastham
asked if the storefront elements Howard was showing were required by the form -based code
and Howard replied that they were. For example, the form -based code specifies how much
window coverage there must be; in this case 70% window coverage on the ground floor, with an
entrance every 50 feet, entrances must be at grade, and there is a minimum floor to ceiling
height of 14 feet on the ground level floor.
Howard explained that for multi dwelling buildings there are several different frontage types. If it
is a building where you enter into a lobby and then go up an elevator or stairways to get to the
units it would need a portico frontage. Stoop frontages are allowed for individual entrances, and
some buildings can incorporate both portico and stoop frontages. Terrace frontages may also
be used for individual entrances into units. Each of these types of entrances require specific
landscaping as well.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 3 of 15
Howard stated there are detailed design standards in the form -based code, building articulation
standards, building entryway standards, and building materials. There is also an open space
code requirement which in Riverfront Crossings is 10 square feet per bedroom, so it will depend
on the number of bedrooms/units on the site. That open space requirement can be met in a
number of different ways, it can be ground level, or it can be up on a terrace or rooftop.
Howard explained that with regards to this particular application, the question is whether the
requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In this particular situation the
Comprehensive Plan that applies is the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. So this application
must meet the goals and objectives stated in the Plan, encouraging contextual infill, leveraging
future investments in transit through higher density development, to restore and enhance
conditions along Ralston Creek, to promote additional housing options and to improve the
quality of residential design.
Howard noted that the plan map shown in the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan was intended to
demonstrate one way the Plan's goals could be met.
Howard stated the applicant has provided a more detailed plan for the development than was
shown at the last meeting. It shows two buildings with a 35 foot space between the two
buildings that would be configured as a pedestrian street. A U-shaped mixed use building on
the south has retail in the front with residential behind and above and that building would have
useable open space for the residents that would be configured as a rear courtyard between the
wings of the building. The building to the north is shown as a multi -dwelling building with the
main entrance off the open space that would be configured as a pedestrian street between the
two buildings. These open spaces would be located on top of a below grade parking structure
that is accessed from the rear alley. The minimum front and side setbacks are 10 feet and a 5
foot setback is required from the rear alley. Howard showed the conceptual elevation drawings
of the proposed buildings, showing the character and scale of the buildings.
In the Staff review they looked at if the application achieves the goals of the Plan and felt it does
generally but thinks there is a need for additional open space on the property over and above
what is required in the code, to respond to the context, character and scale of the neighborhood
and existing lot and block pattern. In addition, a mid -block break between the buildings will
provide a higher quality living environment for residents.
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00020, a proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres of
property located within the 600 block of South Dubuque Street from Community Commercial
(CC -2) to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings (RFC -CX), subject to the following condition:
Mid -block shared, useable open space is required between the buildings and between
building wings as conceptually shown on the submitted site plan. The mid -block space
between the buildings must be at least 35' wide and must be designed as a "private
pedestrian street" as set forth in the form -based code and also meet the design
standards for "open space" as set forth in the form -based code. Courtyard space
between building wings must be a minimum 35' in width and must be configured as
shared usable open space meeting the design standards in the form -based code.
Dyer asked if there were any provisions for handicap accessibility on the street side and
residential since the stoops and porticos are all up steps. Howard said every multi -family
building is required by City Code to have accessible entrances so that will need to be shown in
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 4 of 15
the final plans
Eastham asked if the accessible requirement could be fulfilled by having an elevator from the
garage entrance into the building. Howard answered that the building would have to be
accessible from both the garage and pedestrian entrances.
Hensch asked about the below grade parking with entrance to the rear of the building and how
the determination was made for the required number of spaces. Howard said it is based on the
number of units and the number of bedrooms and in the Central Crossings District the
requirement is 0.75 parking spaces for one bedroom units, 1.5 spaces for 2 bedroom units and
2.5 spaces for a 3 bedroom unit.
Eastham asked about the recommendations to require garage doors of some type on the
garage entrances and if that was required by the Code. Howard said they are not required by
the Code but developers tend to put them in and the applicant can better answer that question.
Eastham then asked about the side of the building on the south, which will be next to the
railroad tracks, and if that side of the building is only required to be setback 10 feet even if it is
next to a railroad right-of-way. Howard said the railroad right-of-way is pretty wide so it's not like
the building will be right next to the railroad tracks. She suggested the applicant could comment
on types of materials they have used in other situations when buildings are built next to railroad
tracks. Eastham noted concern if children live in the building.
Eastham noted that Freerks raised the questions at the last meeting the provisions of the
Riverfront Crossings Master Plan regarding existing business placement and providing some
tools or strategies to help existing businesses remain in this area. He asked how that is met in
this particular application. Howard explained that the zoning will not control the displacement of
businesses, it would have to be solved by some other policy means. Eastham asked if it could
be a conditional zoning. Howard said that would be difficult to enforce because they do not
know what the desires of the existing tenants are in this situation. Hektoen agreed that was
beyond the realm of zoning and into other policies. Dyer asked what other policies would
address this issue. Howard said there could be incentive programs or relocation assistance
programs.
Eastham opened the public hearing.
Kevin Digmann (HD Capital Partners, LLC) first wanted to address a couple of the questions
that were raised. With regards to the handicap accessibility, they do show a couple of stoops
on the residential building but the main entrance to both buildings would be off the courtyard
and pedestrian street between the buildings which would be handicap accessible. The units
with stoops out front will also have an access to from a corridor to the rear of the unit that would
be handicap accessible. Because of the elevation change of the lot (from Dubuque Street to the
alley behind is more than a 20 foot drop), they are proposing one or two levels of parking behind
there that would have elevators. Digmann noted that with regards to the property line along the
south building next to the railroad tracks, the proposed building will actually be 10 feet more
north than the current building that is there now (because it is built on the property line) and for
noise reduction they will use laminate windows that are three panes thick to abate the noise.
Digmann stated that they have worked with the current commercial tenants on the property and
the current tenants have leases until May 2017 so Digmann's group will complete the
development in phases to not disturb the tenants. They have also offered up vacant space in
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 5 of 15
other buildings for the commercial tenants to move to, but none of them have shown any
interest. Digmann noted that his group took the notes from the Commissioners at the last
meeting and have come back with more details and efforts to accomplish all the requirements of
the Riverfront Crossings Plan. He also noted that the residential units will be marketed towards
young professionals, not that no students will live there, but the units will be more upscale and
attractive to young professionals.
Hensch asked about the sloping of the lot and would the buildings be at only one level.
Digmann said yes and the courtyards will have a retaining wall and fencing for safety due to the
sloping of the lot
Dyer asked if Digmann anticipated the residential units being rentals or condos. Digmann said
they would be set up as condominiums originally but the market will dictate if they will be sold or
rented. Dyer asked if there would be any affordable housing units. Digmann said that has not
been decided, they have talked to the City about details for those types of units and what bonus
opportunities they would receive for having affordable housing units.
Yapp noted that City Council has provided staff to prepare an inclusionary housing ordinance for
the Riverfront Crossings District that would require affordable units for new projects. If that is in
place prior to this project commencing then they would have to meet that requirement.
Hensch asked what percent of the units would be three bedrooms. Digmann said about 50-60%
would be two-bedroom units, 20-25% will be one -bedroom units, and 20-25% will be three-
bedroom units.
Hensch noted that most of the commercial tenants on that block have already moved out of their
spaces. Digmann said that was correct. Racketmaster was still there, the bike shops lease runs
out in December and he bought a property on Gilbert Street and will move there. Theobald
asked about the other commercial shops along that property. Digmann answered yes at the
other end of the property there is a shoe repair shop, a hair place, and an alterations place and
those are the businesses that have leases until May 2017 so that area of the development will
be part of a phase two of the project. Theobald asked if Digmann anticipated the rents being
substantially higher in the retail spaces of the new developments. Digmann replied yes, the
current rents those tenants are paying are substantially below current market rates. Dyer noted
that is the concern with this project, the displacement of businesses that cannot afford brand
new storefronts and the community needs to accommodate them. Digmann agreed and said if
someone wants to subsidize a commercial business they would accept them as a tenant but as
a private developer they have to meet their costs needs.
Eastham asked if the entrances to all the residential spaces will from the building courtyard or
front, none from the U -shape open space area. Digmann confirmed that was correct. He also
noted that the common greenspace was about 7000 square feet and with regards to City Code
that would accommodate almost 700 bedrooms and they will not be close to that with this
project.
Theobald asked about the garage doors. Digmann said they will put in garage doors so that
they have secure buildings, there will be secure access to the buildings on all entrances.
Dyer asked if they had any renderings of what the back of the buildings would be like, because
of the height of the lot and buildings it will be visible when the creek is developed. Digmann
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 6 of 15
said it will be a decorative retaining wall with garage doors, it will not be an eyesore. Parsons
noted that there was something in the Code that specifies what materials the building has to be
so it would not be an eyesore. Howard confirmed noting there were more standards for fronts
of buildings but this plan will have to go through design review and Staff always reviews all
sides and elevations of the buildings. She acknowledged that the parking level is often less
ornamental than the residential levels but they will review the whole plan to make sure it meets
the intent of the Code. Eastham asked about the north side of the building, Howard said that is
a street facing side of the building so it would need to meet all the design standards. Eastham
asked about the south side of the first building, facing the pedestrian walkway. Howard said
that was not a street facing side so it does not require as much windows, but since this will be a
residential building every bedroom is required to have a window. Digmann noted that they
would use similar window coverage on all four sides of the buildings with the exception of the
commercial space that will meet those particular design standards. Dyer noted her concern that
the back of the buildings will be visible and not typical building backsides, so it should be treated
the same as a street facing side. Howard said a garage structure parking is required in the
Code to be designed to have character of a residential building and appear to be part of the
design of the building. Howard reiterated that Staff will review the proposed design elements of
the buildings, including elevations of all four sides and sample materials.
Eastham closed the public hearing.
Hensch moved to approve REZ15-00020, a proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres
of property located within the 600 block of South Dubuque Street from Community
Commercial (CC -2) to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings (RFC -CX), subject to the
condition as stated in the staff report.
Theobald seconded the motion.
Hensch noted that from Digmann and Staff's presentations it's been shown compliance with the
Master Plan objectives and assesses the character and development programs for the Central
Crossings District. Parsons agreed with that statement.
Theobald agreed but noted her concern that the area will lose its character of the existing small
businesses that are located there as it is a diverse mix of businesses.
Dyer stated her appreciation for the elevations and feels it will be a good addition to the
downtown area.
Eastham also appreciates the elevations and the potential building design and the expansion of
the gaps between the buildings from 30 to 35 feet but has a concern about the distance from the
building to the railroad right-of-way being only 10 feet. In other residential areas of the city the
distance from the railroad right-of-way and the houses is closer to 20 or 25 feet. He said one of
the issues with this application is the major use of these two buildings will be residential and if
they are to be attractive to families with children the proximity to the railroad tracks will be an
issue. He feels the building could be shifted 5 feet, even if that meant reducing the gap
between the buildings or shortening the length of the building. Eastham noted additional
concern about lack of assisting existing commercial users to either relocate to another space in
this area or somewhere else in town or to eventually be placed into the new building. He
reiterated that the Master Plan for this area is very specific stating "tools and strategies should
be developed to help existing businesses remain in the area in assisting them in finding new
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 15
locations that better meet their business goals". Eastham noted he feels that is an obligation on
part of the City and Staff has not addressed that. It is a lack of infrastructure support in this and
other rezoning applications. He would be much more comfortable if the Staff could address
those tools and strategies before construction begins or current leases expire. Since this
language is in the Master Plan, the City does have some obligation to develop assistance for
such situations. He hopes Council notices that when this application comes before them.
Dyer noted this is the first project in Riverfront Crossings to deal with this situation but it will
come up again in future developments in the area.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-1 (Eastham dissenting).
REZONING ITEM (REZ15-00021):
Discussion of an application submitted by Built to Suit for a rezoning from Community Office (CO -
1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for approximately 7.98 acres of property located
east of Mormon Trek Blvd between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive.
Yapp introduced Martina Wolf an intern and graduate student at The University of Iowa.
Wolf presented the staff report. Build to Suit would like to build a medical office, pharmacy
and a warehouse they would be distributing medical equipment out of on the property.
When this property was first annexed in 2003 it was originally zoned intensive commercial
and then was zoned to commercial office in 2007. Intensive commercial zoning allows
commercial uses including outdoor storage and warehousing. Wolf showed maps and
aerial photos of the area. The South Central District Plan reflect that either intensive
commercial and/or office commercial would be appropriate for this area. Staff believes
Mormon Trek Boulevard is more than capable of handling any increase in vehicle traffic.
Staff recommends that REZ15-00021, an application to rezone 7.98 acres of land generally
located east of Mormon Trek Boulevard between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive be
approved.
Yapp added that when the applicant first came to the City with their project for a medical
clinic the majority of the uses in the medical clinic would be permitted in the existing
commercial office zoning. It is the warehouse storage and distribution of medical
equipment portion of the clinic that led to the application for rezoning to CI -1, Intensive
Commercial zoning. Warehousing and distribution of supplies to other clinic is not
permitted in the existing Commercial Office Zone.
Hensch asked if it is just the distribution of medical equipment but not any retail aspects.
Yapp said the pharmacy in the clinic would be considered an accessory retail use.
Dyer asked about what type of medical equipment would be housed there. Yapp said the
applicant could answer those specifics.
Hensch noted that Dane Road (to the east) appears to be just a chip -seal road and not in
very good repair, and asked where the retail customers would be driving to. Yapp said
access to the property would be off Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive which are both
streets improved to public standards. Hensch asked if Dane Road was on any of the City's
five or ten year plans for improvement. Yapp said it is not.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 8 of 15
Parsons noted there was a section of Dane Road that is separate from the main Dane
Road and wondered if the two were ever to be connected. Yapp said there are no plans to
extend it to the north or south but it does provide access to the properties to the east that
are currently outside of City limits.
Eastham asked if there would be sidewalk requirements when this parcel is subdivided.
Yapp said that yes, sidewalks will be required.
Eastham asked if the staff cared to comment on the letter received Lisa Hine from the Iowa
National Heritage Foundation. Yapp said the letter indicated that land held by the George
Dane Trust is bequeathed to the Iowa National Heritage Foundation and that property is to
the southeast of this property and have asked land use zoning and transportation plans
when they are amended take this bequeathment into account. That property is currently in
Johnson County and not Iowa City but the next time they amend their land use map they
will reflect this bequest. Eastham asked how the Commission was supposed to consider
the letter amongst their deliberations. Hetkeon said it is just a letter for information
purposes it does not prevent the Commission from considering or approving the rezoning
application. Hensch asked Yapp to show on the map exactly where the parcel of land was
located.
Eastham opened the public hearing.
Ben Logsdon (Build to Suit) said the original project was a medical office for the University
to bring several different practices to the building. Part of what evolved was need for retail
of some medical equipment, wheelchairs and such, and to also store more medical
supplies in bulk. The lot slopes so the building will have a walkout basement and storage
will be on the lower level east side of the building. There will be a family practice use in the
building, a dialysis area, a pharmacy and Mothers Milk Bank. The reason for the rezoning
is to allow all the different users to fit within the building. Although outdoor storage is
allowed in commercial intensive zones, they do not plan for any outdoor storage. Logsdon
also noted that they are not planning to access the property off Dane Road, most the traffic
will come off Grace Drive with a staff parking lot off Eagle View Drive.
Dyer asked if they had building elevation drawings to show. Logsdon said they have
started elevation renderings but with the various different users in the building it's taken
time to put all the pieces together.
Eastham asked what the height limits are for CI -1 buildings. Yapp replied they are 35 feet.
Logsdon said they are planning on 2 story buildings with a walkout basement so they will
be well below the 35 foot limit.
Hensch asked if it was going to be a distribution center for durable medical equipment for
UIHC. Logsdon said that is part of it, mostly it will be clinics but with the ability to have that
lower level walkout they will utilize that space for durable medical storage for items there is
not enough room to store at the hospital.
Hensch asked about the clinic uses and if there was any concern about mixing the
chronically ill with a wholesale warehouse site. Logsdon said they are working on the site
plan with all parties involved and entrances will be separated as will driveways to each
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 9 of 15
entrance. Due to the grade difference in the lot the far east parking lot will be at a lower
grade than the other parking lot and separated by a retaining wall. Hensch asked if the
main clinics would be more to the east, easier to see from Mormon Trek Boulevard.
Logsdon said they were still working out all those details.
Theobald asked about all the cars that are currently parked on one of those streets during
the day. Logsdon said that Billion Auto is currently parking employee cars over there since
those roads aren't currently used. Yapp said 'no parking' has been designated on one side
of those streets and with a development on this site they will revisit the no parking
designation and decide if it needs to be posted on both sides of the street.
Hensch agreed that was one of his concerns, traffic implications, with family practice and
chronically ill dialysis patients there needs to be safety concerns.
Jane Driscoll presented the Commission with a handout of her talking points. She is
speaking on behalf of her grandfather, George Dane, who owns the property immediately to
the east of the application property. Her parents currently reside in the home her
grandparents built in 1948. Her grandfather wants to keep in close contact with this topic
but is not physically able to attend meetings. In addition to the family residence there is an
apple orchard, grape vineyard, flowers, trees, and bushes, walnut and oak trees, farming
crops, livestock and other amenities. The hilltop is approximately 100 feet above the airport
so it allows for magnificent views in all directions. Where the house sits, at the peak, one
can see to the northeast downtown Iowa City, City High School, the airport, east over the
Iowa River valley to Lone Tree, West Liberty, south to Hills, to the west is the rolling hills of
the Iowa prairie, and you can see fireworks from four different communities. There are
beautiful sunrises and sunsets. This is the last sizeable open area close to Iowa City that is
unencumbered by trees or buildings. Her grandfather believes they are tenders of this land
for a very short time, the land is a gift to us and we need to be mindful of its care. These
views are unique and they belong to everyone not just a few people. With foresights of
generations to come about 15 years ago the property was designated to become a park so
there can continue to be sledding in the wintertime and views for all the world to enjoy. The
gift of the 16 acre park to the citizens of Iowa City and Johnson County is in an effort to
preserve the beautiful views on this open hilltop area with the vision that the park will be
used for picnics, flying kites, band concerts, playing Frisbee, and those type of activities
that all ages can enjoy. The City has been aware of this designation, it has been
documented to reflect these plans, and discussed with both the City Staff and the City
Council. This topic needs conscious planning for the adjacent property uses that need to
be compatible with a park. However as you know the future park designation is not yet
reflected in the Comprehensive Plan and that needs to be updated. As the letter from the
Iowa Heritage Trust Foundation stated that is what is going to happen to her grandfather's
property. With a future park in mind across the road from the property that is being
discussed tonight they realize something will need to go there but hope the Commission
can consider what the best use for the property is. They understand the proposal is to build
an outreach medical facility for the community and while they are not opposed to that use,
the zoning designation of CI -1 could be for a lot of uses that are not compatible with a park
like outside storage displays, warehouse and industrial services. Those types of uses can
include larger truck traffic and deliveries at all hours which is not conducive to residential
areas. Those type of uses need to be in typical commercial areas that provide easy truck
access and ideally shielded visually from less intensive zones. The current zone of CO -1
offers a transition between the higher intensive commercial uses to the residential or less
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 10 of 15
intensive uses. Driscoll noted she understands the Commission can recommend limitations
or define specific features beyond use as a condition to a zoning assignment, so wouldn't it
be possible to maintain the commercial office zone and for a specific targeted use allow a
small warehouse or distribution center perhaps based on limited square footage or a
maximum number of truck docks. Or the reverse could happen, rezone the property to CI -1
with conditions that include features you see in the commercial office zone and to allow that
transition from a high intensity to a low intensity to happen within that property. That would
create a potential buffer between the park and more intensive issues. Driscoll's concerns
can be more specifically stated CI -1 and residential uses just don't mix and she is not
aware of any other parks that boarder such intensive uses in our community, it is simply not
compatible. Fast forwarding to the future when her hilltop becomes a park folks will likely
ask what the City was thinking back in 2015 when they allowed intensive commercial use
buildings next to a park. We can assume the University will have this clinic for some time,
but there are no guarantees and no one knows what the next use of this property will be.
Other parks in Iowa City are not burdened with this potential neighbor. City Park has the
Levitt Center and Hancher across the street, it does not have a warehouse or auto
dealership right across from it. The CI -1 brings more intensive traffic, delivery vehicles,
they tend to be customer driven and they attract more customers and more traffic in order
to be sustainable. Attracting customers requires visibility, large signs, lighting, high profile
store fronts, and other activities that call attention to the business which is also not
compatible to residential or park areas. Outside storage requires intensive lighting for safety
and security and even with shielding it does create light noise. It will be difficult to star gaze
or use your telescope in the park when there is the glare of security lighting in the sky.
They have already had direct experience with some of these issues with the existing car
dealership on the corner of Highway 1 and Mormon Trek Boulevard extending east and
south to Dane road. They utilize outside speakers for paging services, light radiates from
the lighting towers that are necessary for security, deliveries are made with large car
carriers that are sometimes unloaded on Eagle View Drive, and employee vehicles line
Eagle View Drive down to Dane Road and also on Grace Drive which makes snow plows
and mail delivery access restricted. While these are both public streets and allow parking
on one side they are not intended to be used for street storage or for servicing vehicles.
Deliveries or shipments moving in an out of warehouses often use a truck docks with
forklifts that require audible backup warnings definitely interrupting a quiet afternoon
reading at a park. Driscoll asks that zoning conditions be placed on lighting issues, hours
of operation, square footage of a warehouse, limit the number of truck docks, the location
and number of accesses off the side streets, and screening. Preserving this future park as
a community asset and hopefully a place future recruits for The University of Iowa or other
businesses will visit that will make them want to come to Iowa City. The park may also be a
great location for picnics between appointments at the medical clinic but only if we protect it
from adjacent uses that could spill over and diminish its significance. Commissions,
Council, Staff, and property owners change over time therefore including conditional zoning
requirements are reasonable limitations and the preplanning during the rezoning process
will document the agreements and the intentions for the future. Driscoll invited the
Commissioners to come visit the future park area and see the spectacular views.
Parsons asked if there was a time table of when the property would actually become a
park. Driscoll said the plan is once the immediate family is done using the property as their
residence it would become a park.
Eastham asked about the size of the property. Driscoll said it is just shy of 20 acres.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 11 of 15
Eastham asked since it's been bequeathed will it become parkland legally at what point.
Hetkeon said she would have to review the bequest documents to know the details and
make a legal determination.
Dan Tiedt (PIP Printing) questioned that if this parcel does get rezoned does that mean the
University will build the clinic or could it possibly be something else. Hektoen said there is
nothing that the Commission can do that would limit the University from reselling the
property, the zoning is not tied to the University's purchase of the property.
Logsdon reiterated that the project does not plan for any outdoor storage, it will be a small
warehouse use for medical products, so there would not be anything outside or no forklifts
outside, it would all be contained within the building. Logsdon said they envision two docks
at most and likely vehicles will be brought inside the building to load. The warehouse
portion is really more of an accessory to the rest of the clinic use.
Dyer asked if they don't plan outside storage then why is there a need for the rezoning.
Yapp replied that due to the warehouse portion a rezoning is required. If it was
warehousing just for this medical clinic it would not require a rezoning but because it is
warehousing for other medical clinics and a distribution function that requires a rezoning
request.
Hensch noted this sounds like it will be more of a central stores configuration in a hospital
rather than a wholesale distribution center. Logsdon confirmed that was the case. Hensch
asked what type of vehicles would be used for the medical equipment transfers. Logsdon
said there would be semi -trucks to get the product to the facility but most deliveries out of
the building will be in vans or small cargo trucks (similar to what a UPS truck size is). The
vehicles will be loaded inside the facility because they do not want medical products to be
outside. It will be durable medical equipment (gauze, gloves, etc).
Eastham stated that is the case for this particular use, but if rezoned the zoning would allow
for future uses that may include outside warehouse storage. Logsdon said while that is
true, this project is a pretty significant investment, over a $20 million project, and the
warehouse component is a very small portion of the whole project.
Hensch asked if this building would be the only structure on the parcel. Logsdon replied
that yes it will all be one building. The warehouse portion is basically the basement of the
clinic building.
Dyer asked if the access to the structure would be off Grace Drive. Logsdon confirmed that
they would like to have three access points off Grace Drive and two off Eagle View Drive.
Dyer asked which access point the trucks would use. Logsdon said trucks would only
access the property from the east side of Grace Drive.
Hensch stated that since Dane Road is unimproved he wanted confirmation that none of
the distribution traffic would access Dane Road. Logsdon confirmed that none of the traffic
would be on Dane Road.
Eastham asked if Logsdon knew what type of nighttime lighting will be used. Logsdon said
not at this time but certainly they would follow the City ordinance. Yapp confirmed the City
has lighting standards within 300 feet of a residential zone, parking lot lights can be no
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 12 of 15
more than 25 feet high, and further than 300 feet parking lot lights can be 35 feet high but
must be downcast and shielded. Yapp noted the question for the Commission is whether to
discuss higher standards than what is the current City ordinance. Eastham asked if that
was the same for sound. Yapp stated that sound is very difficult to regulate, but can be
controlled by hours of operation. If the Commission would like to open that conversation
Yapp would need to discuss such standard options with the applicant. Eastham agreed
and asked then if they would be setting a conditional zoning that would persist over time.
Yapp confirmed that would be the case.
Hensch asked if they would then have to have the same discussion for any rezoning
application on any of the contiguous properties to be fair. Eastham noted that was a
question and the Commission would need to discuss if that was a reasonable provision for
the areas surrounding due to the potential future park land use. Dyer noted there is a
current residential use of that property.
Eastham closed the public hearing.
Theobald moved to defer this item REZ15-00021 until the next meeting.
Hensch seconded the motion.
Dyer asked if possible the Commission would like to see building elevations as well at the
next meeting. She noted this project seems similar to the clinic they rezoned property for
on North Dodge Street and items like berming and lighting need to be discussed.
Eastham noted that any restrictions on the rezoning of this parcel should be taken in light of
the proposed future park use in the area.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer carried 5-0.
VACATION ITEM (VAC15-00005):
Discussion of an application submitted by MidWestOne Bank for a vacation of air rights 25'
above pavement grade over public right-of-way in the north -south alleyway between East
Harrison Street and East Prentiss Street to allow a pedestrian walkway.
Wolf stated that MidWestOne Bank is requesting vacation of air rights 25' above to 46'
above pavement grade to install an enclosed pedestrian walkway between their new
MidWestOne Bank building on the corner of Harrison Street and a parking facility that is
planned for the corner of Dubuque Street and Harrison Street. There are four adjacent
properties that utilize the alley, mostly for parking, so vacating these air rights Staff does
not believe will affect those uses. This walkway will allow for pedestrians to avoid having to
cross traffic in the alley. When reviewing vacation requests pedestrian and vehicular traffic
is the most important factor Staff looks at. Because this vacation is 25' above grade all the
circulation will remain the same, emergency and utility vehicles don't normally require more
than 14' of clearance. Wolf showed an image of the proposed walkway, it will be 20' long,
10' wide and 10' high.
Staff recommends approval of VAC1 5-00005, a vacation of approximately 4,200 cubic feet
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 13 of 15
of airspace (from 25 feet above pavement grade to 46 feet above said grade) above the alley
running north -south between East Harrison and East Prentiss Streets to allow for the
installation of a pedestrian walkway connecting MidWestOne Bank and a municipal parking
facility.
Hensch asked what are some typical issues associated with these particular types of
requests. Wolf replied that when looking at vacating the pedestrian and vehicular traffic
circulation is important, emergency vehicle access, impact to adjacent private properties,
and location of utilities. Hensch asked if there was any opposition to this vacation item from
neighbors. Yapp replied that they have heard no opposition. He added that Wolf
summarized what they review with vacation applications, he added that for air rights such
as this there do not appear to be any conflicts that are created for a skywalk. He noted
there are some concerns with skywalks in general in retail situations because it can take
away from pedestrian traffic at the street level. In this case however it is a connection
between an office building and a parking ramp to facilitate people who are parked in the
parking ramp to get into the office building.
Dyer noted this is similar to the walkway between the Senior Center and the parking ramp
on Iowa Avenue. Eastham asked if that one had to have a vacation of airway and Yapp
replied no because it is owned by the City.
Eastham asked if there was any other permitting process to allow this walkway to be built
besides in addition to vacating the rights to the airspace. Yapp said they will need a
building permit. Hetkeon said doing the vacation is necessary because this is an integral
part of the building this is the course of action the City feels is necessary.
Eastham opened the public hearing.
Carolyn Wallace (MidWestOne Bank) and Nick Lindsley (Neumann Monson Architects)
came forward to answer any questions the Commission may have.
Hearing no questions or other public comments Eastham closed the public hearing.
Parsons moved to approve VAC15-00005 , a vacation of approximately 4,200 cubic feet
of airspace (from 25 feet above pavement grade to 46 feet above said grade) above the
alley running north -south between East Harrison and East Prentiss Streets to allow for
the installation of a pedestrian walkway connecting MidWestOne Bank and a municipal
parking facility.
Theobald seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 15, 2015
Dyer moved to approve the meeting minutes of October 15, 2015.
Hensch seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 14 of 15
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Yapp noted that staff handed out a meeting notice for public meeting on a proposed
Riverside Drive streetscape plan next Thursday from 5 pm to 7 pm at Roosevelt School.
Staff has been working with a consultant on a proposed streetscape design plan for
Riverside Drive which is part of the Riverfront Crossings District and this will be a public
unveiling of that plan for public feedback. This would be the area of Riverside Drive
from the Highway 1/Highway6 intersection to about Myrtle Street. Eastham asked if
this will show the underpass under the railroad. Yapp was not sure that would be
specifically addressed, this is more about the streetscape plan. He noted the pedestrian
tunnel under the railroad is an important part of the pedestrian circulation and that is
currently a funded project. Dyer asked how long it will take to build that pedestrian
tunnel. Yapp was unsure specifically but believes it is funded for 2016-17.
ADJOURNMENT:
Parsons moved to adjourn.
Hensch seconded.
A vote was taken and motion carried 5-0.
Z
N
20
uww
C90
Z W N
U
OZ�
NijCN
W
Z_
ZQ
Z
J
CL
e1-XXOXOX
X
X
X
X
X
X
I
x
1
r
Ln
X
X
X
i
X
i
X
X
X
Q
X
X
X
X
X
X
1
X
1
r
X
X
X
i
X
i
X
X
X
o
X
X
X
X
o
XIXI
r
r -
X
X
X
X
o
X
1
X
1
0
w
X
X
X
X
X
X
I
X
1
0
NXXxXXX
z
w
W
W
I
x
1
0
JxZY0QQnx
X
X
X
X
X
x
1
0
1
co
a�vi�av600-
C
Z
a
N
co
XX
Q
o
XXX
1
X
1
n
to
w
ZW
xx
O
Z
X
o
x
X
X
x
I
X
I
to
X
X
x
X
I
X
X
I
X
I
NXXxXXX
i
X
i
Lo
xxx
xxx
1
x
1
w
Irl
X
X
X
1
X
1
0
x
x
XXX
1
X
1
X
X
x
os
XXX
ll
1
X
I
1
X
X
X
M
LU���
1
x
I
xxx
N--oxx
N
XXX
1
w
p
1
X
X
X
w
X
x
X
1
x
1
x
X
X
N
x
X
X
1
X
1
X
x
X
r
0
o
X
X
1
X
1
x
x
X
r
Z
w
W
wJ
J
Z
w
w
x
Q
0
O
x
U
Q—_
a
x
O
CL
.ZW
3o4
Woo
wv)wz��
wo
w0
awLLLLX
CLU)
Fx-
co
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
W)
W)
I
X
X
X
i
X
i
X
X
X
M
X
X
X
i
X
i
X
X
X
�WcocDaornrrnLnao�n
W o.
LoU-)
LO
Ln
Ln
LO
LO
LO
f.Xo0o000000
w
z
w
W
W
J
Lu
F3
JxZY0QQnx
004
—_
a
O
a�vi�av600-
C
Z
a
N
U
Q
x
2w
Q}QWwQQ
to
w
ZW
xx
O
Z
p
W
LL
x
2
a
fn
F-
I F-
U
X
r`J N
n
�-
N
cn o
dQ Z
n u W
xoo
w
Y