HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-03-01 Bd Comm minutesCITY OF IOWA CITYOtt
4b-_
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 18, 2016
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Sarah Walz, Board of Adjustment
Re: Recommendations from Board of Adjustment
At their February 17, 2016 meeting the Board of Adjustment approved the January 13, 2016
minutes with the following recommendation to the City Council:
The Board approved a letter requesting the City Council to change the rental permitting process
in order to require disclosure to tenants when a rental property is located in the floodplain.
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
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
JANUARY 13, 2016 -5:15 PM
HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Gene Chrischilles, Connie Goeb, Becky Soglin
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Susan Dulek, Sarah Walz
OTHERS SPEAKING: Mike Pugh
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Board approved a letter requesting the City
Council to change the rental permitting process in order to require disclosure to tenants when a
rental property is located in the floodplain.
A. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL:
The meeting was called to order at 5:20 PM.
B. ROLL CALL
All members present.
C. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Walz explained to the Board that with their agreement she would serve as temporary chair so
the Board could nominate and elect a new chair and vice chair for 2016. The Board agreed by
consensus to allow Walz to serve as temporary chair.
Soglin made a motion nominating Baker as Chair. Chrischilles seconded the motion. By a 4-0
vote the Board elected Baker as chair.
Goeb made a motion nominating Soglin as Vice Chair. Chrischilles seconded the motion. By a
4-0 vote the Board elected Soglin as Vice Chair.
D. CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER 16, 2015 MINUTES:
Chrischilles moved to approve the minutes without changes
Goeb seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0.
E. SPECIAL EXCEPTION
EXC15-00016: Discussion of an application submitted by Mitch King, for a special exception
to allow a historic preservation waiver reducing the minimum off-street parking requirement
for a property located in the High Density Multi -family (RM -44) zone 716 N. Dubuque Street.
Walz introduced the item stating that the applicant wished to request a deferral. Mike Pugh,
representing the applicant, told the Board that the applicant wished to defer to the February
Board of Adjustment
September 14, 2015
Page 2 of 3
meeting in order to provide additional information in support of his request.
Dulek advised the Board that it should open the public meeting to hear from the applicant
and from any members of the public who may wish to speak. She stated that this would also
be a time for the Board to request any additional information it would like to receive. Baker
opened the public hearing.
Soglin noted information in the application regarding police calls. She said she would like
more information on the nature of police calls to the current assisted living use. She also
asked for clarification on the data on calls to fraternities—was the average number reported
per fraternity or was that total calls for all fraternities. Goeb asked whether the property was
currently occupied. Walz stated that it was occupied but not to capacity. Chrischilles asked
for additional information on the fraternity proposing to make use of the house. How many
total members are in the fraternity versus the number who would live in the house? He
asked if additional information would be provided about the costs related to the converting
the property to the new use.
Pugh indicated that the applicant would provide the information requested by the Board and
it was their intent to provide additional financial information.
Goeb asked whether the applicant could provide additional information as to any available
parking in the area. Pugh indicated that the applicant had investigated opportunities but that
the zoning code had a distance limitation and that he could only provide parking within the
multi -family zone. Goeb asked whether the neighborhood had ever pursued a parking permit
system—an option raised in the staff report. Walz indicated that the neighborhood has not
pursued such an option.
Pugh again agreed to provide the Board additional information.
Soglin notified the Board that she would not be able to attend the regular meeting on
February 10 meeting. After discussing options and the possibility of a new board member
being available, Chrischilles made a motion to continue the public hearing to its next
meeting to take place on Wednesday, February 17. Soglin seconded the motion. The motion
passed on a 4-0 vote.
F. Other
The Board reviewed a letter they propose to send to the City Council regarding the rental
permit process for properties located in the floodplain. By consensus the Board approved
the letter with edits. Walz will provide a copy of the letter for Baker to sign as Board Chair.
Walz reminded the Board that, because the public hearing for the special exception item
remains open and the application is not resolved, there should be no ex parte
communication. The Board should not discuss the matter with the public, staff, the applicant,
each other, or with the media. Board members should direct anyone interested to contact
staff and may provide date of the next meeting on February 17.
Chrischilles made a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed on a 4-0 vote.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:47 PM.
W
2 O
Lu
W
a Z Ln
O G T-
Q
G z
Q
O Q
m
M
x
x
i
x
x
T
<CI
N
xi
xi
x
xi
xi
T
XI
XI
X
XI
UI
TI
x
x
x
x
x
N
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
o
x
x
x
x
x
W)
x
x
o
x
x
M
x
x
x
x
x
T
r-
o
(D
0)o0
LX
N
N
N
N
N
r
r
r
r
`W`
W
z
,W
V
U
N
Y
0
LU
Z
W
Q
J
J
=
m
Vm
N
U
Z
W
W
m
Z
y
J
Z
oa0
(D
t9
U
y
Q V
WCDCC�
C ♦+ � G
C
aQQz
u n ii n
x0oj
W
Y
FINAL/APPROVED
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES — January 20, 2016
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Melissa Jensen called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Donald King, Royceann Porter (5:34 P.M.), Joseph Treloar
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mazahir Salih
STAFF PRESENT: Legal Counsel Ford, Staff Kellie Tuttle
STAFF ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: None
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
None
03-01-16
4b(2)
CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by King, seconded by Treloar, to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended.
• Minutes of the meeting on 12/16/15
• ICPD Department Memo #15-27 (November 2015 Use of Force Review)
• ICPD Use of Force Report — November 2015
Motion carried, 3/0, Porter and Salih absent.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
Community Forum — Tuttle informed the Board that they should be thinking about the
upcoming Community Forum, where they would like to hold it and whether they'd like to have a
discussion topic or not. The Board agreed to hold the forum at the public library, in April at
6pm and will discuss dates and topics at the next regular meeting.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
None.
BOARD INFORMATION
None.
STAFF INFORMATION
None.
CPRB
January 20, 2016
Page 2
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion by King, seconded by Treloar to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section
21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by
state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that
government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal
information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities,
boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports,
except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications
not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its
employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government
body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could
reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that
government body if they were available for general public examination.
Motion carried, 4/0, Salih absent. Open session adjourned at 5:37 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION
Returned to open session at 7:13 P.M.
Motion by Jensen, seconded by Treloar, to direct staff to set up a special executive session
meeting for the following week, if possible.
Motion carried, 4/0, Salih absent.
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change)
• February 9, 2016, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• March 8, 2016, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• April 12, 2016, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• May 10, 2016, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
ADJOURNMENT
Motion for adjournment by King, seconded by Treloar.
Motion carried, 4/0, Salih absent.
Meeting adjourned at 7:15 P.M.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2015-2016
(Meeting Date)
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
TERM
12/3
12/8
12/29
2/10
3/10
4/7
4/28
5/20
6/16
7/20
9/8
10/12
12/16
1/20
NAME
EXP.
Melissa
9/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Jensen
Joseph
9/1/17
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Treloar
Royceann
9/1/16
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
O
O/E
O/E
O
X
O
X
Porter
Mazahir
9/1/17
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
O
O
X
O
O/E
O
Salih
Fidencio
9/1/15
X
X
O/E
X
X
O
X
X
X
X
---
---
---
---
Martinez
Donald
9/1/19
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
X
X
X
King
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
FINAUAPPROVED l
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD L�6 /
MINUTES — January 25, 2016
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Melissa Jensen called the meeting to order at 6:03 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Donald King, Royceann Porter, Mazahir Salih, and Joseph Treloar
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Legal Counsel Patrick Ford and Staff Kellie Tuttle present
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
(1) Accept CPRB Report on Complaint #15-3
(2) Accept CPRB Report on Complaint #16-1
EXECUTIVE
SESSION Motion by King and seconded by Treloar to adjourn into Executive
Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or
discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to
be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that
government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and
22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public
bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school
districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where
disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18)
Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a
government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside
of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those
communications from such persons outside of government could
reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making
them to that government body if they were available for general public
examination.
Motion carried, 5/0. Open session adjourned at 6:04 P.M.
REGULAR
SESSION Returned to open session at 6:17 P.M.
Motion by Jensen, seconded by Treloar to summarily dismiss CPRB
Complaint #15-3 and CPRB Complaint #16-1 and forward report to the
City Council.
Motion carried, 4/1, Salih voting no.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES — January 25, 2016
ENT:
M
STAFF PRESENT:
RECOMMENDATIONS TO
FINAL/APPROVED
Chair Melissa Jensen called the meeting to order at 6:03 P.M.
Donald King, Royceann Porter, Mazahir Salih, and Joseph Treloar
None
Legal Counsel Patrick Ford and Staff Kell�iw`Tuttle present
COUNCIL
(1) Accept CPRB Report on omplaint #15-3
(2) Accept CPRB Report on C plaint #16-1
EXECUTIVE
SESSION Motion by King d seco
Session based on ectio
discuss records whirl!
be kept confidential o
government body's pi
22.7(11) personal in
4b(3)
nde y Treloar to adjourn into Executive
n .5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or
required or authorized by state or federal law to
ie kept confidential as a condition for that
ssion or continued receipt of federal funds, and
�on in confidential personnel records of public
bodies including b not lim ed to cities, boards of supervisors and school
distric/an
22-7 5) police o icer investigative reports, except where
discloau orized elsew ere in the Code; and 22.7(18)
Comio snot required b law, rule or procedure that are made to a
goverody or to any of its ployees by identified persons outside
of got, to the extent that t government body receiving those
commons from such persons utside of government could
reasoelieve that those person would be discouraged from making
them overnment body if they re available for general public
exam
n carried, 5/0. Open session adjourr%d at 6:04 P.M.
REGULAR
SESSION �eturned to open session at 6:17 P.M.
Motion by Jensen, seconded by Treloar to sum arily dismiss CPRB
Complaint #15-3 and CPRB Complaint #16-1 an forward report to the
City Council.
Motion carried, 4/1.
CPRB
January 25, 2016
Page 2
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS
• February 9, 2016, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• March 8, 2016, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• April 12, 2016, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• May 10, 2016, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
Motion by Treloar, seconded by King to move the February 9t" to
Wednesday, February 17 at 5:30 P.M.
Motion carried, 5/0.
ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Treloar and seconded by King. Motion carried,
5/0. Meeting adjourned at 6:21 P.M.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2015-2016
(Meeting Date)
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
TERM
12/8
12/29
2/10
3/10
4/7
4/28
5/20
6/16
7/20
9/8
10/1
12/16
1/20
1/25
NAME
EXP.
2
Melissa
9/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Jensen
Joseph
9/1/17
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Treloar
Royceann
9/1/16
X
X
O
X
X
X
O
O/E
O/E
O
X
O
X
X
Porter
Mazahir
9/1/17
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
O
O
X
O
O/E
O
X
Salih
Fidencio
9/1/15
X
O/E
X
X
O
X
X
X
X
---
---
---
---
---
Martinez
Donald
9/1/19
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
X
X
X
X
King
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
REPORT OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Re: lnvestigation of Complaintt C B -3
Complaint CPRB #15-3, filed October 9, 2015, was summarily dismissed as
required by the City Code, Section 8-8-3 (E), requiring that only those complaints
which do not involve the conduct of an Iowa City sworn police officer may be
subject to summary dismissal by the board;
And City Code, Section 8-8-3 (A) defines a "complaint to the board" as follows:
A. "complaint to the board" is an allegation of misconduct lodged against a
sworn police officer ("police officer" or "officer") employed by the City of Iowa
City police department, where the complained of activity occurred while the
officer was acting in the capacity of a sworn police officer.
Also City Code, Section 8-8-2 (J):
J. The board shall not interfere with or diminish the legal rights of sworn
police officers, including those rights protected under the union contract, civil
service commission, and state and federal law.
DATED: January 26, 2016
CS'S
G
e
�
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
REPORT OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Re; Inves# gation of Complaint Cf'R8 16-1
Complaint CPRB #16-1, filed January 4, 2016, was summarily dismissed as
required by the City Code, Section 8-8-3 (E), requiring that only those complaints
which do not involve the conduct of an Iowa City sworn police officer may be
subject to summary dismissal by the board;
And City Code, Section 8-8-3 (A) defines a "complaint to the board" as follows:
A. "complaint to the board" is an allegation of misconduct lodged against a
sworn police officer ("police officer" or "officer") employed by the City of Iowa
City police department, where the complained of activity occurred while the
officer was acting in the capacity of a sworn police officer.
Also City Code, Section 8-8-2 (J):
J. The board shall not interfere with or diminish the legal rights of sworn
police officers, including those rights protected under the union contract, civil
service commission, and state and federal law.
DATED: January 26, 2016
PlIzo
cn
rTlin
CO
03
4b(4)
ummm��
MINUTES APPROVED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
JANUARY 14, 2016
CITY HALL SECOND FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Esther Baker, Kate Corcoran, Andrew Litton, Pam
Michaud, Ben Sandell, Ginalie Swaim, Frank Wagner
MEMBERS ABSENT: Thomas Agran, Gosia Clore
STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow, 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.
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS:
920 Dearborn Street.
Bristow said this property is in the Dearborn Street Conservation District near the railroad
tracks. She said this is technically a non-contributing property.
Bristow said that it has a small shed roof addition on the back. She said the owner is mostly
remodeling the inside, although he wants to get rid of what is probably an original rear door on
the side and one of the three windows in the addition. Bristow said the owner also would like to
get rid of a window that is on the south side of the addition.
Bristow said the owner will take out the window on the north side of the addition and put a new
door in that location. She showed the door with which the owner would like to replace it.
Bristow said the house has vinyl windows and siding. She said that basically, a lot of these
things are not what one would want to see, but since this is non-contributing, blending in with
what is there would be much better than using something that does not blend in.
Bristow said staff recommends that the owner be allowed to match the siding where windows
are taken out. She said the owner does not intend to put in any more windows or another size
of window but only intends to remove the one window and leave the two in place. Bristow said
staff recommends approval of this, based on that information.
Bristow said the owner plans to remove the deck and put in a larger deck. Bristow said the
packet includes a plan she sketched in at about the proposed size. She said the owner is
definitely setting the deck back more than tl,e 18 inches required in the guidelines. Bristow said
the owner will be working with her to insure that the railing meets the railing guidelines.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
January 14, 2016
Page 2 of 8
Bristow said she does not feel that this will make any impact to the exterior, street view of this
property at all.
Sandell asked about the material for the new deck. Bristow confirmed that it will be wood. She
said that it will no longer have a metal railing.
Other male (Litton?) asked if the deck on the back would not have access. Bristow said the
deck will be much like it currently is but just bigger. She said there would be a door where the
one window currently is.
MOTION: Wagner moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at
920 Dearborn Street, as presented in the staff report. Baker seconded the motion. The
motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Aaran and Clore absent).
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF:
Certificate of No Material Effect — Chair and Staff Review.
721 East College Street.
Bristow said that someone hit the shed -like garage in the back of this property, breaking some
of the cement board siding. She said it is the textured type, and in order to match everything
else, staff is letting the owner put it back. Bristow said the owner has meticulously taken care of
what is here, even though it is not contributing. She said the owner is basically re -siding the
unattached garage in the back.
314 South Summit Street.
Bristow stated that this house has a porch that needs reroofing. She said the owner is reroofing
with membrane roofing. Bristow said the owner took down the original bead board, which was
very deteriorated, and bought actual bead board instead of the bead board plywood and put it
up and painted it.
Bristow said it has soffits on the entire house that do not fit the guidelines at all. She said staff
talked to the owners about the fact that if they actually took down and put new soffit up, they
should actually put up bead board soffit. Bristow said the owners claim they can put back what
was taken down, and there is an insurance claim involved. Bristow said staff approved putting
the aluminum soffit back up, as long as the owners purchase no more aluminum soffit.
Bristow said the owners have since found that it might actually be too deteriorated to put back
up. She said the owners might have to purchase, and if they do, they are working to get the
insurance company to approve actually meeting the guidelines and putting on the correct soffit.
She said that it would only be on the porch though, not on the entire house.
607 Grant Street.
Bristow said that this is basically an asphalt shingle replacement.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
January 14, 2016
Page 3 of 8
636 South Governor Street.
Bristow said this non-contributing property came before the Commission a while ago for the
replacement of windows on the front. She said the owners are rebuilding the rear deck. Bristow
said staff decided to let them have the rear deck in the same footprint that it originally had, even
though it sticks out beyond the footprint of the house, because they are just rebuilding it in the
same footprint.
Bristow said the owners will make all of the railing to match the guidelines. She said they will
paint or stain it to blend with the house. Bristow said the posts on the deck are wrought iron,
and they will use posts that match the current guidelines. She said the only way it will not be
meeting the guidelines is that it protrudes from the side of the house a little bit, but again the
house is non-contributing and they are not changing the size of the deck at all.
Minor Review — Preapproved Item — Staff Review.
728 Rundell Street.
Bristow said this project is a front door replacement. She said the owner is putting in a
fiberglass, craftsman style door with three lights.
REVIEW OF BY-LAWS AND PROCEDURES:
Swaim said that although the Commission has procedures for public hearings, it does not have
written procedures for conducting public discussion. She referred to the information about the
procedures that the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) follows. Swaim said she had
asked Miklo and Bristow to make comparisons between the Planning and Zoning Commission's
by-laws and the Historic Preservation Commission's by-laws to see where the Historic
Preservation Commission (HPC) might make some additions.
In terms of the procedures, Miklo said that it might be very useful to have time limits when there
are a lot of neighbors discussing controversial issues. He said that the time limits seem to help
speakers focus on what their arguments are and help avoid a lot of repetition.
Miklo said the Planning and Zoning Commission has been using this for at least 15 years, and it
has helped make its meetings more efficient and productive. He said that it is not part of the
Planning and Zoning Commission's by-laws but rather is part of the procedures. Miklo said the
information is placed at the entrance to the meeting room with the agenda so that any potential
speaker would have a chance to read it and become familiar with it.
Miklo said the other thing that has not been consistent is that sometimes there is discussion and
then the motion occurs and then there is a vote. He said probably the appropriate way to do it
would be to have a motion and then discuss the motion and then have a vote.
Swaim asked what things the procedures should apply to. Miklo suggested they apply to
anything for which there is a motion. He said he thinks it is more appropriate when there is an
application, a landmark nomination, or an historic district. Miklo said that when the Commission
is discussing the awards program or something like that, it would not be necessary.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
January 14, 2016
Page 4 of 8
Miklo stated that, for the Planning and Zoning Commission, after the staff report but before the
applicant speaks, the Planning and Zoning Commission asks questions of the staff. He said the
chair sometimes has to remind the Commission members when they go beyond asking
questions and start debating the matter that this is the time for clarifying the issues and asking
questions. Miklo said that it does take some discipline to have questions rather than discussion
at that point.
Ackerson said the discussion on numerous occasions has affected what was moved and voted
on. Miklo said the Planning and Zoning Commission handles that by having a motion,
discussing the motion, and then they make amendments to the motion, or a motion is
withdrawn.
Corcoran commented that it is the same procedure used for the Board of Adjustment. She said
it is the idea that a motion is made, and then it is actually on the floor for discussion by the
applicant and the public. Corcoran said then there is discussion by the Board and then the vote.
Miklo said there are pros and cons to each way. He said that by putting out a staff -
recommended motion, everyone then knows what the motion is and can comment on whether
he or she agrees with it. Swaim asked if someone then wants to amend the motion, does the
initial motion have to be voted down. Miklo replied that if it is an amendment and not a total
counter -motion, then it can be amended by adding or subtracting items.
Miklo stated that if it is a motion to approve a project and someone is against approval, after
discussion that will be the vote. He said that the discussion would give the opportunity to say
why someone should or should not vote for it.
Miklo said it is also the Planning and Zoning Commission's practice, once there is a motion on
the floor and the Commission is discussing the item, to not take more discussion from the public
or, generally, the staff. He said the Planning and Zoning Commission may ask questions of the
applicant or staff, but it is the Planning and Zoning Commission's time to discuss the agenda
item.
Corcoran asked if the order would then be the staff report with questions for staff, the public
hearing for the applicant and any other speakers is opened and then closed, and then there is a
motion. She said then the Commission would discuss the motion and make any amendments
or whatever and then vote.
Miklo said that after everyone has spoken, the Commission could have another round of
questions. He said the trick is to not get into debate but to have questions to get any
clarification. Miklo said that once those questions are answered, the public discussion is closed
and it is up to the Commission to discuss and vote.
Swaim said the P&Z by-laws refer to meeting in a place with accessibility, and she did not
believe that is in the HPC by-laws. Miklo said that is standard procedure and is part of the open
meetings act. He said there is no reason not to have it in, although it would be redundant.
Regarding who can make a motion, Miklo said it is the Commission's practice and is in Roberts
Rules of Order that anyone but the Chair can make a motion. He stated that it would be good to
clarify that.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
January 14, 2016
Page 5 of 8
Swaim referred to the Conflict of Interest Section of the P&Z By-laws. Miklo said that if the HPC
wanted to adopt something like this, because each historic district has to have a member who
lives in it and owns property, there will be cases where a member of the Commission has a
conflict. He said that ideally there will be another party to represent him or her. Miklo stated
that if there is not the possibility of another representative, the City Attorney's Office has said
that the HPC member could represent his or her own case. He said that should be spelled out.
Michaud said that if one is representing his or her own neighborhood, he or she will be really
vested in it. Corcoran asked in what kind of situations this would occur.
Miklo said that for P&Z, the person/applicant does not participate in the discussion. He said that
P&Z is somewhat different in that the conflicts of interest have included situations where the
P&Z Commission member was a University employee and his department of The University was
involved or the member was a realtor and his or her firm was involved. Miklo said this is a little
bit more difficult in terms of the HPC.
Swaim said if someone in her neighborhood has an application, it is in her interest to have the
application be the best it can be, but she is also representing her district. Miklo stated that the
State law was specifically written to include members who live in the district. He said that if
someone in a member's district has an application, the Commission member does not
automatically have a conflict of interest. However, Miklo said that if the member has a close,
personal relationship with the neighbor and feels there is a bias, the member could recuse
themselves. He said that from the other perspective to avoid offending a neighbor, a
Commissioner may want to recuse themselves. He said it is up to each Commissioner
determine when they have a conflict and choose to not participate.
Ackerson said it would not make sense for the historic district representative to always have to
recuse himself. Miklo said that fortunately, most of the districts are large enough that this does
not often come into playa
Miklo asked Ackerson and Litton how they felt the process went from the perspective of an
applicant. Litton said he would include something that says that a property owner has to recuse
himself at some point. Miklo said that it is clear that a property owner cannot vote. He said the
question is whether the owner should participate in the discussion in any capacity.
Litton said he really liked having the opportunity to speak. Swaim said that he Litton was
speaking as the applicant and recused himself at that point. Litton agreed. Miklo said that the
way P&Z does it is that the owner gets someone else to represent them. He said that would be
a possibility. Miklo said the other end of the spectrum would be for the owner/applicant to
recuse himself and go out into the public and participate from there. Baker said that recusing
oneself might result in not having a quorum. Miklo said in that case the application would need
to be deferred.
Corcoran said that it does not say that an applicant has an obvious conflict of interest. She said
the language leaves it to the member to make that determination. Corcoran said the HPC might
want to say that if the member is an applicant for a decision by the Commission, that person has
a conflict of interest, per se, and will be required to recuse himself. She said that would be the
rule, and then there would be no question. Corcoran said the Commission could also include
the P&Z language for other situations where there is more of a gray area.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
January 14, 2016
Page 6 of 8
Corcoran said the law is to avoidance even the appearance of impropriety. Miklo said that it is
up to individual commissioners when there is a conflict or when they are the applicants to move
into the audience. He said it is really not the applicant that is the issue but the rest of the
Commission, in terms of whether the members are treating the applicant the way they would
one across the street or down the block.
Ackerson said that since he has been on the Commission, people have been good about
recusing themselves without exception. He said he wondered if really spelling this out might
cause a problem where one doesn't exist.
Miklo said that currently there is nothing in the HPC by-laws about this. He asked about using
the P&Z language and including having a member who is an applicant recuse himself, allowing
him to participate as an applicant but not as a member. Michaud suggested including the
applicant or someone who would receive direct financial gain from the project.
Miklo said that staff could work on the language before the next meeting and present some
alternatives.
Swaim asked about section 11. Miklo said that because the size of the Commission may
change over time, he would be hesitant to get into numbers. He suggested using the language
"the majority of the quorum present." Corcoran said the phrase "but not less than three" could
be removed for HPC purposes Swaim said the next sentence would not apply to the Historic
Preservation Commission.
Swaim asked if the HPC would want to add the sentence about following Roberts Rules of
Order. Miklo responded that he would be hesitant to include that, because Roberts Rules are
so specific, and the Commission would want to have some flexibility. He said that if the
Commission includes the wording and doesn't follow Roberts Rules of Order, that could open up
a decision to challenge.
Bristow said the procedural process from the National Trust for preservation commissions was
included in the packet for reference. She said that the Commission could review it before any
revisions are made. Swaim commented that she read through it and can see why procedures
are so critical. Miklo said staff could draft some options for the next meeting.
Miklo said, regarding the whole issue of the City Council resolution to not reappoint commission
members, that it could be problematic for the Historic Preservation Commission, especially for
small districts, unlike other boards and commissions, which have a city-wide pool of applicants.
He said that Commission members might want to let City Council members about that.
Miklo said that City-wide, there is a low minority representation on boards and commissions,
although there is a pretty good gender balance, per State law. He stated that the City Council is
trying to make more opportunities for more people to apply to boards and commissions in order
to get more diversity. Miklo said he did not know that the Historic Preservation Commission
needs to offer specific changes but might want to ask that the City Council be open to looking at
this.
Miklo said one possibility might be that if a position is advertised for a certain period of time and
no one applies, that a previous member might be appcinted. Corcoran said that since there are
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
January 14, 2016
Page 7 of 8
four at -large members on the Commission, that might be one place the City Council could
enforce the rule,. because of the larger pool.
The Commission discussed the length of terms for various City board and commissions. Miklo
stated that staff advocated longer terms for some boards and commissions because of the
learning curve and the amount of time it takes for new members to get up to speed.
Regarding ex parte communication, Swaim said that seems like this could happen with small
districts and neighborhoods. She said it is important to remember that people should refer the
public to staff for information when requested.
REPORT ON 2015 HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS:
Swaim said this is a chance for all to take pride in historic preservation and for the City to see
what the Historic Preservation Commission does. She said she also thinks that the historic
preservation awards program wins new support for preservation.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 10, 2015:
MOTION: Sandell moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's
December 10, 2015 meeting, as written. Corcoran seconded the motion. The motion carried on
a vote of 8-0 (Agran and Clore absent).
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 6:19 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
Z
O
N
U
Z
a
W
N
W
w
IL
U_
R
O
w
U
W
W
U W)
Z
o N
Z
W
H
Q
xow
O'
w
Y
x
o
x
o
x
i
x
X
x
x
X
0
V-
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
o
X
x
04
x
x
o
x
x
x
X
0
X
0
0
Go
x
x
x
o
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
o
x
o
x
o
x
x
x
x
o
w
�
x
X
X
X
xGo
x
X
X
p
0
0)
x
x
x
o
x
x
x
x
x
x
o
x
x
x
o
x
x
o
o
x
x
x
co
X
x
x
o
x
o
x
x
x
x
0
X
x
X
X
X
0
X
x
x
x
x
X
4j
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
x
M
N
V-
X
x
0
X
X
x
p
X
X
X
0
X
x
X
x
x
x
6
x
X
x
ca
r
ao
co
co
ao
n
aD
o2
0)rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
W W
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
m
M
co
Cl)
M
Cl)
M
Cl)
Cl)
ui
3
W
Y
z
Y
x0
w
G
m
a
a
Z
Z
tL
0
LL
W
Q
J
Z
z
LU
w
0
a
z
a
p
�_
W
Y
O
o
�
O-
U_
Z
a
U
Y
Q
Q
m
U
U
O
J
N
N
xow
O'
w
Y
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 19, 2016
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Kris Ackerson, Community Development Planner
Re: Recommendations from Housing and Community Development Commission
At their February 18 meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission approved
the January 21, 2016 meeting with the following recommendations to the City Council:
1. By a vote of 9-0 the Commission recommends the City Council approve the following
allocations for FY17 Aid to Agencies funding.
4b(5)
FY17
tFa
Agency
Requests
Shelter House
$65,00
Neighborhood Centers of 1C
$50,000
.....
Domestic Violence Intervention Program
$48 00R
$
United Action for Youth
$52,391
$_
Crisis Center of Johnson County
$55,825
Big Brothers / Big Sisters
$33,000,.
b;
Elder Services Inc.
$50,00
Housing Trust Fund of JC
$24,000
IC Free Medical/Dental Clinic
$15,000
r,
Free Lunch Program*
$18,0oo
`
Pentacrest, Inc./Pathways Adult Day
$15,000
Health Center
Prelude Behavioral Services
$25,00
$ 15"
Rape Victim Advocacy Program
$17,500
$#
4 C's Community Coord. Child Care
-$411 0
Arc of Southeast Iowa
" $15,00'
Four Oaks - Pal Program
$15,Q00-
Compeer of Johnson County
$1510010
IS
National Alliance on Mental Illness of
$15,000,
m
Johnson Co.
, :;+
Table to Table
$10,00
Systems Unlimited
$55,000;'
$„w
Iowa Jobs for American's Graduates (JAG)
$15,000
Nx
IV Habitat for Humanity
$15,000
Girl Scouts of Eastern Iowa & Western
$15,000
Illinoisa
Total Request: 13M,466�
4b(5)
February 19, 2016
Page 2
2. By a vote of 9-0 the Commission recommends City Council approve the amendments to
the Iowa City Housing Authority's Admissions and Continued Occupancy (ACOP) Plan
to require that all public housing units are smoke free.
3. By a vote of 5-4 (Bacon Curry, Byler, Lamkins, and Persson dissenting) the Commission
recommends City Council approve inclusion of the Housing Choice Vouchers and other
rental subsidies in the definition of Public Assistance Source of Income under the
Human Rights Ordinance.
4. By a vote of 9-0 the Commission recommends City Council approve the proposed
FY2016 Annual Action Plan Amendment #3.
Additional action (check one)
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
X_ Agenda items will be prepared by staff for Council action - Done
MINUTES APPROVED
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
JANUARY 21, 2016 — 6:30 PM
SENIOR CENTER, ASSEMBLY ROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Byler, Michelle Bacon Curry, Sydny Conger, Bob Lamkins,
Jim Jacobson, Harry Olmstead, Matthew Peirce, Dorothy Persson,
Emily Seiple
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Kris Ackerson, Marcia Bollinger, Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Rackis
OTHERS PRESENT: Dee Dixon, Tracy Achenbach, Stu Mullins, Ron Berg, Becci
Reedus, Karen DeGroot, Scott Hansen, Mark Sertterh, Albert
Persson, Susan Gray (sp?), Marty Venograde
By a vote of 9-0 the Commission recommends the City Council approve the following allocations
for FY17 Aid to Agencies funding.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 2 of 12
(Minimum allocation was $15,000)
By a vote of 9-0 the Commission recommends City Council approve the amendments to the Iowa
City Housing Authority's Admissions and Continued Occupancy (ACOP) Plan to require that all
public housing units are smoke free.
By a vote of 5-4 (Bacon Curry, Byler, Lamkins, and Persson dissenting) the Commission
recommends City Council approve inclusion of the Housing Choice Vouchers and other rental
subsidies in the definition of Public Assistance Source of Income under the Human Rights
Ordinance.
By a vote of 9-0 the Commission recommends City Council approve the proposed FY2016
Annual Action Plan Amendment #3.
CALL TO ORDER:
Byler called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 3 of 12
APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 19, 2015 MINUTES:
Persson moved to approve the minutes of November 19, 2015.
Seiple seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and motion passed 7-0 (Lamkins & Peirce not present for vote).
PUBLIC COMMENT:
None.
STAFF/COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Ackerson introduced Olmstead, a new commissioner. Olmstead had previously served on the
Human Rights Commission.
Ackerson mentioned they received 11 applications for CBDG/HOME funding. Ackerson stated
the applications will be forwarded to Commission members the next day.
Lamkins and Peirce arrived at meeting.
Hightshoe stated that back in the 1990's there was a demonstration project for affordable
housing. The City provided $30,000 in down payment assistance to an eligible family to purchase
a home at 1109 5`h Avenue. The $30,000 was to be repaid upon sale of the property. The house
was in danger of foreclosure. The City purchased the home from the owner to prevent it from
going into foreclosure. The City will now rehab the home and sell it for a homebuyer under 80%
of median income.
Hightshoe stated the CDBG Economic Development Fund, in existence since 2003, is now out of
funds. The fund provided low or no interest loans to eligible businesses providing employment to
low -moderate income persons. The Council has a $50,000 set-aside for economic development.
The Council Economic Development Committee will determine if additional funds will be used for
this purpose in FY17. If yes, funds will be available in July.
Ackerson noted Congress approved the bill authorizing CDBG and HOME funding at
approximately the same level as last year. Unfortunately, more communities are eligible for the
funds. Iowa City may be allocated less money as HUD must split the funds amongst more cities.
DISCUSS FY2017 AID TO AGENCIES FUNDING REQUESTS AND CONSIDER BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL — APPLICATIONS ARE AVAILABLE AT
WWW.ICGOV.ORG/ACTIONPLAN:
Byler noted that Ackerson compiled the Commissioner's recommendations showing the median
and the average. He mentioned that generally for Aid to Agencies they do not call each agency
up unless someone on the Commission has specific questions. Byler noted that if anyone from
the agencies wishes to address the Commission they are welcome to. He mentioned the
Commission appreciates the time that went into the applications and wishes they could fully
award them all.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 4 of 12
Byler suggested the Commission go through the recommendations based on majority
agreement first. Persson suggested that the median shows only a $1,000 difference in overall
allocations, so perhaps approve the median and then figure out how to allocate the additional
$1,000.
Byler suggested discussing the projects first and then arriving at a consensus based on the
median numbers. Byler noted that a minimum $15,000 allocation is driving some of the
decisions. The Commission used to fund less than $5,000, but decided to raise the minimum to
make a greater impact with the funds. Bacon Curry noted that in one application it was noted
how the raising of the minimum wage was affecting agencies but felt it important to support the
other initiatives that are important.
Agencies that were only chosen for funding by one Commissioner were discussed. Byler noted
that Big Brothers Big Sisters to him is a youth organization which is listed as a medium priority,
but it shows on the list as a mental health/high priority.
Scott Hansen, Big Brothers Big Sisters, stated they are a mentoring organization and provide
services in many different ways. They work very closely with child psych at UIHC for mental
health services. He did note that mental health services is not their primary focus, but have
programs that provide mental health services.
Persson noted she and her husband were a couples match for Big Brother Big Sisters for ten
years for a young person with disabilities.
Hightshoe asked if they spent more than $24,000 for mental health services. Hansen stated yes.
Hightshoe noted that whenever there is an agency with a medium priority and they are applying
for a specific program that is a high priority, it can be funded with conditions. In the City's
agreement only the activities associated with the high priority will be funded. So in this case if the
City awarded money to Big Brother Big Sisters, the $24,000 would need to be targeted to mental
health services.
Byler also commented on Elder Services. They are a medium priority and were allocated a
significant amount less than in prior years. From his understanding the Council was then
petitioned directly and the Council came up with additional funds to increase their allocation for
the year. Byler noted that was unusual and Council would probably not be able to keep doing this
as there is just not enough extra money out there. He did note all applicants are very important to
the community.
Bacon Curry noted that other agencies were clearer about what the funds would be used for.
She wasn't sure if it was going to be spread out amongst the whole agency or if specific
programs were being targeted.
Byler asked if any other Commissioners wanted to discuss specific applications. Byler then
asked if any of the applicants in the audience wanted to address the Commission to comment on
their applications. No one came forward.
Persson noted that if they go with the median allocation model, there is an additional $1,000 to
allocate. She suggested those additional funds go to Prelude Behavioral Services. Olmstead
suggested the additional funds go to the Free Lunch Program because it is hard for that program
to get resources financially, and the median is under the requested amount. Conger agreed,
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 5 of 12
noting that it would be nice to see the funds to go an agency that does not collect fees for
services. Prelude has clients that pay or they can bill insurers for services whereas Free Lunch is
strictly donation funded. Lamkins agreed on giving the Free Lunch Program the additional funds.
Bacon Curry also agreed, noting Free Lunch asked for $18,000. Persson noted no objection as
well.
Byler asked if there was someone from Domestic Violence Intervention Program. He had a
question on the budget. In the last fiscal year there was a $140,000 increase in salaries and
there was a $300,000 federal grant and wanted more information on those line items.
Dee Dixon, DVIP, replied stating that they began to serve more areas/counties as the State of
Iowa closed programs in southeast Iowa. In their service area they lost more than half the
available beds when shelters closed.
Olmstead moved that the Commission recommend to the City Council the following
allocations for FY17 Aid to Agencies funding.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 6 of 12
Conger seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 9-0.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 7 of 12
CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING PROPOSED
SMOKE FREE POLICY IN PUBLIC HOUSING UNITS:
Rackis gave an overview of the proposed policy, stating it would be mandatory for public housing
agencies to go smoke free in public housing units. Even though this proposal is still in the public
comment period, Rackis feels it will happen and wants to be prepared. He noted it was part of an
evolution of participation in the STAR certification for the City, which is a way for communities to
evaluate themselves. It is very a detailed certification and the smoke free policy was part of that.
The only issue the City has with the HUD ruling is the 25 foot barrier required from the building.
This makes sense with multi -family properties with common areas. The City currently only has
two multi -family units and they are already smoke free. The City proposes instead of a 25 foot
barrier to just designate the right-of-way as the smoking area. The City will not actively enforce
this as no practical way to do so, but it will respond to complaints. Rackis noted that on the HUD
website the public comments are overwhelmingly in favor of the smoking ban, it is mostly those
living in the units that are smokers who are objecting.
Conger asked what the enforcement would be if a complaint was received. Rackis said it would
be treated as a violation of the lease. He noted that legal questioned if a magistrate in Johnson
County would allow the eviction of a low-income family from public housing due to smoking in the
units. He said across the country there have been communities that have adopted such policies
and have been able to enforce them through the court system. If a complaint was received,
Rackis said the first step is to issue a " 7 day notice to cure" which means the occupant has 7
days to correct the issue (to quit smoking in the unit). The notice will also state if it happens
again within 6 months the City could pursue an eviction. He also noted that HUD does make
accommodations for tenants with disabilities so the City would honor those as well.
Olmstead asked how many units city-wide would be affected by this policy. Rackis said there are
81 units. Olmstead asked if this policy also pertains if the tenant has a guest over. Rackis said
yes, the guest must also go outside to the public right-of-way to smoke.
Persson asked if the City goes in on a regular basis to paint or repair the units, especially those
who have been tenants for multiple years. Rackis said those type of maintenance issues are
usually handled when there is unit turnover, however it can be done at the tenant's request if
they are long-term tenants. There is an annual inspection of every unit.
Conger moved to recommend approval of the amendments to the Iowa City Housing
Authority's Admissions and Continued Occupancy (ACOP) Plan to require that all public
housing units are smoke free.
Peirce seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 9-0.
CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING INCLUSION OF
HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS AND OTHER RENTAL SUBSIDIES IN THE DEFINITION OF
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE SOURCE OF INCOME UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ORDINANCE:
Rackis noted this is not a Housing Authority recommendation but rather from the Human Rights
Commission. Once the Human Right Commission made their recommendation the Housing
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 8 of 12
Authority met with the City's Equity Director and other staff members to discuss the issue. City
staff also reached out to the greater Iowa City apartment owners association and got their input.
Rackis said the Human Rights Commission made their recommendation in February and met
with the apartment owners in July.
Rackis explained this proposal. In the Human Rights Ordinance source of income is included as
a protection; one cannot discriminate on the basis of someone's source of income. The definition
included sources like Family Investment Program, food stamps, etc., but the Housing Choice
Voucher (Section 8) was not part of the definition of source of income. It is illegal for a landlord
to discriminate on the basis of source of income. This proposal adds Housing Choice Voucher to
the definition so it would also be illegal to discriminate against someone just due to their voucher
status.
Bacon Curry noted that is a big change, noting that a Housing Choice Voucher is not a source of
income for a tenant; it is a source of income for a landlord. A landlord does not just have to take
a specific source of payment when they accept a Housing Choice Voucher they have to accept
an addendum to their lease that supersedes anything that is in their own lease and has an
additional inspection and reporting requirements.
Rackis noted the tendency addendum does not change their lease, the HAP contract only states
that if the HAP contract is cancelled it cancels the lease. Additionally there are no reporting
requirements for the landlord.
Bacon Curry noted that when a private landlord that is not accepting vouchers has some sort of
violations to their lease they handle it. If they do accept vouchers they are required to report
violations to the Housing Authority and are not allowed to charge late fees if the tenant is not
current.
Rackis noted that in terms of lease violations, landlords are not required to report lease violations
to the Housing Authority, it is just preferred that they do. If someone is late on their rent, if the
landlord provides the City with that notice, the City can assist the landlord and communicate with
the tenant.
Bacon Curry noted the Housing Choice Voucher program is a great program, but it should not be
a protected class because the money goes to the landlord, not the tenant. The City is subsidizing
the landlord, not the tenants. Concern was also expressed that many landlords will not want
increased City interference or regulations about how they select their tenants.
Hightshoe noted the intent of this proposal is to provide the same opportunity for all tenants and
use the same method to screen all tenants, regardless of a tenant's income/rent source. Voucher
holders do not need to be prioritized and can be denied based on landlord criteria, as long as the
same criteria applies to everyone, such as bad landlord references, history of eviction, damage
to unit, etc. If there are multiple tenant applications, the landlord can make an appropriate
selection based on their screening method such as date of application, can immediately rent the
unit, etc. if all other criteria (the landlord's screening criteria) are met.
Jacobson noted that this could be listed as its own separate protected class, a housing subsidy,
rather than income protected class. This just simplifies the process, but it is just semantics.
Jacobson agrees with Rackis that this is an issue of discrimination and whatever the community
can do to limit the amount of discrimination it is encumbered upon them to do so. Having this
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 9 of 12
policy in place does not force landlords to rent to voucher holders, but it will give them pause to
have to consider their decisions.
Byler asked how a landlord should approach a prospective tenant who has a housing voucher,
but the landlord's rents are significantly higher than the housing voucher limits or tenant's
income. It seems unfair to have the prospective tenant fill out and pay and application fee just to
learn they cannot move into the unit. Rackis said the prospective tenant should communicate
with their case worker prior to filling out an application and paying a fee to make sure they meet
the all the guidelines for the unit they are applying for.
Lamkins was concerned that landlords would have to meet with their attorney to review
screening criteria to make sure they are not sued. They will be concerned if they will be called
racist or open themselves to lawsuits. Landlords will inform all applicants they can apply as they
will be concerned about a suit, even when they know they will not lower rent based on voucher
eligibility. He was also concerned if some landlords would raise their rents and or increase
screening criteria that may impact all low income tenants.
Concern was noted that with such a high voucher utilization rate, why it is needed. Are we trying
to fix a problem that doesn't exist? Hightshoe noted this proposal will not impact our voucher
utilization rate. It is intended to increase opportunity of tenants with a voucher to access units in
different neighborhoods that they can afford.
Olmstead suggested tabling this item until the next meeting and inviting Stefanie Bowers from
the Human Rights office and one of the City Attorneys to answer some of the questions and
concerns. Byler said the issue is this item is going to City Council at the February 2 meeting.
Olmstead moved that the Commission recommends City Council approve inclusion of the
Housing Choice Vouchers and other rental subsidies in the definition of Public Assistance
Source of Income under the Human Rights Ordinance.
Jacobson seconded the motion.
Seiple said that when she has called on behalf of friends who were nervous about contacting
landlords because they have a voucher, the reason landlords gave for not accepting them had
nothing to do with inspections, it was more derogatory. There is a perception problem of who
needs a voucher.
Conger noted this is a change to an ordinance; it can be changed again in the future if Council
hears complaints or that it is not working property. She sees this as a value added and in line
with CITY STEPS.
Peirce asked what the percentage of people currently being turned away from rental units
because they have Housing Vouchers is. If it is only 1 % there shouldn't be a protective class to
protect such a small class. Rackis did not recall the numbers but they did report to HUD recently
on voucher utilization and the fact was the City had to increase the voucher eligibility days from
120 to find a unit to 365. Either people found a home with their voucher in the first 60 days or
otherwise it was 150 to 180 days.
Byler noted he will be voting no on this motion for the reason of not having addressed the
question of landlords who are close to or above fair market rents and what they tell applicants.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 10 of 12
Rackis said fair market rents are not what determine if the voucher can be used; it is the income
of the applicant. This ordinance will not compel landlords to change their rents.
Hightshoe stated a great deal of education will need to be done as there are many incorrect
assumptions about the voucher program. Staff will work to improve understanding of the voucher
program and the people who utilize them.
Persson asked about abstaining from the vote as she was not ready to make a decision.
Hightshoe stated the preference is that if a member does not have a conflict, they vote yes or no.
If a member feels they don't have enough information to make a decision, they should vote no.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-4 (Bacon Curry, Byler, Lamkins, and Persson
dissenting).
CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING PROPOSED FY2016
ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AMENDMENT #3:
Ackerson explained that in the current Action Plan there is a $75,000 streetscape project in
census tract 18 which is south of Highway 6 and east of Sycamore Street. $50,000 is for curb
ramps for accessibility and $25,000 for additional signage in the neighborhood. The signage
project will now be funded with other sources as determined not appropriate with CDBG funds.
Due to the nature of CDBG and the low income requirements; signage on major arterials is not
eligible as the traffic is not necessarily local traffic.
Since CDBG funds will not be used for the signage, there is a request to use the funds for
improvements at the Highland Park in the Lucas Farms neighborhood. The neighborhood has
been very involved in advocating and assisting with park improvements. These funds will help
finish the improvements requested by the neighborhood.
Jacobson moved to recommend to City Council the proposed FY2016 Annual Action Plan
Amendment #3.
Olmstead seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 9-0.
CONSIDER FORMING SUB -COMMITTEE TO CELEBRATE NATIONAL COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT WEEK, MARCH 28 -APRIL 2:
Byler asked if anyone was interested. Hightshoe explained that cities typically promote the
impact of the CDBG/HOME programs annually. The City used to have a Community
Development Celebration in years past, but hasn't had one in two -three years. Hightshoe asked
if a subcommittee wanted to be formed to consider what type of activities, if any, the City would
like to pursue for this week.
Due to time constraints and other personal obligations there was not an interest on the
Commission to form a sub -committee. Hightshoe stated their intern may be able to organize a
couple smaller activities. Staff would keep them informed.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 11 of 12
OVERVIEW OF HOUSING PRO FORMA TEMPLATE:
Ackerson just wanted to invite any of the Commissioners who are interested in an overview of
the Pro Formas to contact him and he will schedule a time.
ADJOURNMENT:
Olmstead moved to adjourn.
Persson seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and motion carried 9-0.
0
O
U
W
w
W
U
Z
Q
0
Z
W
H
Q
co
T
N
x
X
X
X
X
x
X
x
x
i
T
T
W
O
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
T
T
LO
T
N
o
x
o
o
x
x
x
x
0
T
X
X
-
X
X
X
x
X
O
T
cow
r,
x
X
O
w
O
x
X
cc
LO
T
T
Ix
X
x
X
X
LO
T
X
X
X
X
X
O
T
M
LO
T
X
x
x
x
X
X
N
CL
W
CD
0
N
r-
o
N
00
0
N
ti
0
N
w
0
N
00
0
N
00
0
N
CD
0
N
o
0
N
00
0
N
r -
0
N
Li
W
0)
o±
ai
ai
0)
0)
a±
ai
ai
ai
Qi
LL
1"
W
J
J
W
LU LU
Z
v
U
m
Hmcn
a
J
m
Z
oC
Z
U
N
O
z
Y
a
w
N
O
WW
Q
w
U
a
0
O
tjj
a
J
W
UJ
a
0
rn
z
0
W
Z
a,^
OJ
X
W
C c c
ILQQ>
n n n n
Y W
XOO
4b(6)
mm��
Minutes Approved
Human Rights Commission
January 19, 2016
Neighborhood and Development Services Conference Room (Second Floor)
Members Present: Kim Hanrahan, Orville Townsend Sr, Joe Coulter, Eliza Jane Willis (via
phone), Ali Ahmed, Andrea Cohen.
Members Absent: Paul Retish, Shams Ghoneim, Adil D. Adams.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Recommendations to Council: No.
Call to Order:
Coulter called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m.
Consideration of the Minutes from the December 15. 2015 Meeting Date:
Motion Townsend, seconded by Hanrahan. Motion passed 6-0.
Meeting Business
Election of Vice Chair
Hanrahan was elected Vice Chair, seconded by Ahmed. Motion passed 6-0.
Election of Chair
Commissioner's will elect a Chair at its February 16 meeting. The vote was 3 for Townsend (Coulter,
Hanrahan and Townsend) and 3 for Ghoneim (Cohen, Ahmed, Willis).
Funding Request for MLK Celebration/Black History Month
Motion Coulter, seconded by Townsend to provide $300 towards the MLK Celebration/Black
History Month. Motion passed 6-0. Commissioners cited the direct service and benefit to the
community as the reason for the support.
Funding Request Form
The funding form was slightly modified and is available on the City's website on the Human Rights link
under Form, Brochures and Upcoming Events.
Education Programming & Outreach
Bowers will plan to meet with Townsend, Ahmed and Ghoneim in the near future to plan a fair housing
event for April.
Community Outreach
Bowers has not heard back from the Iowa City Mosque as to a future date to present the Resolution in
Support of Muslim Communities.
Council Outreach
Townsend accepted a proclamation in honor of the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Holiday at the
January 5, 2016 Council meeting. Coulter made remarks after Council adopted the Resolution in Support
of Muslim Communities at the January 5, 2016 Council meeting. A proclamation will be submitted for
Black History Month, if approved Cohen will accept at the February 16, 2016 Council meeting.
Subcommittee Reports
Job Fair
Bowers reported that a job fair will be held in the fall of 2016. Planning will begin in June.
Building Communities
Townsend reported that education of students within the Iowa City Community School District was the
topic at the Black Voices Project meeting in January.
Making Iowa City a Human Rights Community
No update at this time.
University of Iowa Center for Human Rights
Ghoneim provided a report via correspondence.
Education Subcommittee
Hanrahan reported on the Iowa City Community School District's most recent progress data for students
by race, ethnicity and age.
Commission Reports
Ahmed announced that he will be moving to Virginia in the near future and will have to resign his tenure
on the Commission at that time.
Willis spoke on Arkansas celebrating the birthdays of Robert E. Lee and Martin Luther King, Jr. on the
same day. Arkansas is one of three states (Alabama and Mississippi) that celebrate both on the same
holiday. The Arkansas Governor is asking for the two holidays to be separated in the future.
Coulter remarked on his past year as Chair of the Commission. Noting he enjoyed his time serving in that
capacity.
Staff Reports
Bowers updated the Commission on the St. Ambrose Police Traffic Stop Study. She also reported on the
proposed inclusion of the Housing Choice Voucher and other rental subsidies to the definition of Public
Assistance Source of Income under the Iowa City fair housing laws.
Adjournment: 7:01 p.m.
Next Regular Meeting — February 16, 2016 at 5:30 p.m.
2
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2015/2016
(Meeting Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP.
2/17/3/17/
15
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
11/17
15
12/15
15
1/19
/16
Joe D. Coulter
1/1/2019
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ad it D.
Adams
1/1/2019
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
O
Eliza Jane
Willis
1/1/2019
----
----
----
----
----
----
---
---
----
----
----
----
X
Paul Retish
1/1/2017
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Ali Ahmed
1/1/2017
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
O
X
X
Orville
Townsend, Sr.
1/1/2017
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Andrea Cohen
1/1/2018
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
X
Kim
Hanrahan
1/1/2018
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Shams
Ghoneim
1/1/2018
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
Stella Hart
1/1/2018
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
R
R
Edie Pierce-
Thomas
1/1/2016
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
----
Harry
Olmstead
1/1/2016
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
----
KEY: X
= Present
O
= Absent
O/E
= Absent/Excused
NM
= No meeting
---
= No longer a member
R
= Resignation
r -a3-a�-
t6a®4 CITY OF IOWA CITY 4b(7)
�'
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 19, 2016
To: Mayor and City Council
From: John Yapp, Planning & Zoning Commission
Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission
At their February 18, 2016 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the January
21 st minutes with the following recommendation to the City Council:
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ1 5-00023/SUB1 5 -00031, a
rezoning of 9.33 acres from Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5) and Medium Density
Single -Family Residential (RS -8) to Planned Development and Overlay Zone (OPD -8), and a
Preliminary OPD Plan and Plat of Pine Grove, a 12 -lot residential subdivision with 10 single
family lots and 44 multi -family dwellings located south of Lower West Branch Road between
Scott Boulevard and Hummingbird Lane.
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of VAC15-00007, an application
submitted by Equity Ventures, requesting vacation of approximately 13,454 square feet
of Waterfront Drive running east -west between 1402 and 1411 Waterfront Drive, subject
to retention of utility easements and approval of a final plat prior to final approval of the
vacation request. The final plat shall include plans for utility relocation and a plan for temporary
access to the Car -X property during construction and a permanent access easement.
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
JANUARY 21, 2016 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
OFFICE OF MPOJC — CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin,
Max Parsons, Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ann Freerks,
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo, Ben Clark
OTHERS PRESENT: Duane Musser
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ1 5-00023/SUB1 5 -00031, a
rezoning of 9.33 acres from Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5) and Medium Density
Single -Family Residential (RS -8) to Planned Development and Overlay Zone (OPD -8), and a
Preliminary OPD Plan and Plat of Pine Grove, a 12 -lot residential subdivision with 10 single
family lots and 44 multi -family dwellings located south of Lower West Branch Road between
Scott Boulevard and Hummingbird Lane.
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of VAC15-00007, an application
submitted by Equity Ventures, requesting vacation of approximately 13,454 square feet
of Waterfront Drive running east -west between 1402 and 1411 Waterfront Drive, subject
to retention of utility easements and approval of a final plat prior to final approval of the
vacation request. The final plat shall include plans for utility relocation and a plan for temporary
access to the Car -X property during construction and a permanent access easement.
CALL TO ORDER:
Eastham called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There were none
REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ15-00023/SUB15-00031):
Discussion of an application submitted by Steve Kohli for a rezoning of approximately 9.33 -
acres from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone and Medium Density Single Family (RS -8)
zone to Planned Development Overlay (OPD -8) zone and a preliminary plat and sensitive areas
development plan for Pine Grove, a 12 -lot residential subdivision with 10 single family lots and
44 multi -family dwellings located south of Lower West Branch Road between Scott Boulevard
and Hummingbird Lane.
Miklo noted that since the last meeting Staff has received a set of new plans for the subdivision
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2016 — Formal Meeting
Page 2 of 9
that attempt to address some of the concerns raised at the last meeting from both the
Commission and the public. Miklo noted that a significant issue was the preservation of trees.
The new plan shows the trees that will be removed due to the grading of the land for
infrastructure and the building of the multi -family structures, and the likely area that will be
cleared for the house lots. He did note for lots 10, 11 & 12 it will be up to the individual lot
owner to possibly save additional trees that are not within the protected area, but may not be
necessary to remove when houses our built. Miklo stated there are some significant White Pines
along Lower West Branch Road that would be fenced off subject to a tree protection plan
provided by the City Forester as well as spruces that were planted along what will be the new
property lines on the east side of the houses. These were all items on the previous plan as well,
what is new on this plan is the note on the plat that states the City Forester would approve a
tree protection plan including fencing.
Miklo noted that they did discuss the possibility of identifying the maximum building area on lots
6, 7, 8 & 9 but after discussion with the City Forester and the applicant, it was decided a better
approach would be to require that at the time of construction and a protective fence would be
placed outside the drip line of the red maples. A fence would not be required around the silver
maples, but that doesn't mean they would be removed, it would be up to the individual property
owners. The City Forester approved this approach so that many of the red maples could be
saved and some of the silver maples might be saved. The new plat also identifies the location
of driveways for lots 8 & 9 and those have been positioned to best avoid the red maples. In the
previous plan there was an option for lot 7 to have a driveway on either Hummingbird Lane or
Pine Grove Drive but now it is identified as being on Pine Grove Drive to help preserve the
trees. The maples on lot 6 are not included on the note on the plat because they are deeper on
the lot and although it may be possible, it would be harder to work around those trees.
Consideration was given to using shared driveways, but given the location of the trees this
would have likely required more trees to be removed.
Miklo stated that they also discussed the possibility of a trail to go to Outlot A. The City Forester
has recommend against adding a paved sidewalk or trail to provide access to the pine grove on
Outlet A. The construction activity necessary to build the trial would likely damage the trees.
Miklo also noted that the topsoil will be stockpiled and distributed over disturbed areas after
construction is complete.
Regarding the question of siding material on the multi -family building, Miklo stated the applicant
has indicated that the majority of the large apartment building will consist of a faux stone veneer.
Vinyl siding is proposed primarily on the upper floor. The townhouse style multifamily buildings
will include similar durable material around its base and a combination of vinyl lap siding and
shake style siding.
The discussion from neighbors about traffic on Hummingbird Lane was also addressed. Miklo
said the Transportation Planner looked at the area again and feels it is adequate for the traffic
anticipated in this development. The street is 25 feet wide, only 1 foot narrower than the current
standards and there are no recorded accidents on this street, or at the two intersections
Staff is recommending approval of REZ1 5-00023/SUB1 5 -00031, a rezoning of 9.33 acres from
Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5) and Medium Density Single -Family Residential
(RS -8) to Planned Development and Overlay Zone (OPD -8), and a Preliminary OPD Plan and
Plat of Pine Grove, a 12 -lot residential subdivision with 10 single family lots and 44 multi -family
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2016 — Formal Meeting
Page 3 of 9
dwellings located south of Lower West Branch Road between Scott Boulevard and
Hummingbird Lane.
Theobald asked if the City Forester commented on the condition of red maple trees. Miklo
replied that yes he did look at those and thought they were for the most part healthy and as for
the silver maples, some were healthy and some had been improperly pruned but had a lot of
years left in them.
Eastham questioned the diagram and not seeing any designated play area for children and
wondered if the homeowner's association could use part of Outlot A for a children's play area.
Miklo said that is actually something the City would want to discourage given that it is a densely
wooded area. He said the woodland might make a good natural play area. There might be an
opportunity for playground equipment around the multi -family structure, although it is very
sloped in that area. The nearest established park is Frauenholtz-Miller Park, about a half mile
to the east.
Eastham opened the public hearing.
Duane Musser (MMS Consultants) stated that the on lots 6 & 7 the area shown on the plat is
where the driveways could be, but they will not be as large as shown on the plat. Those
driveways show the closest they could be to Hummingbird Lane and stay within the City's
approved design standards.
Eastham asked if the residences in the multi -family unit will have access to the building
entrances along Scott Boulevard. Musser replied that yes, there will be a main corridor and
elevator that will go from that door straight to a door on the back of the building as well.
Eastham asked where the grade level entrances are on this building. Musser said there are
three doorways on the west side of the building will be ADA accessible. The entrance from the
garage level will also be accessible.
Eastham closed the public hearing.
Hensch moved to approve REZ15-00023/SUB15 -00031, a rezoning of 9.33 acres from
Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5) and Medium Density Single -Family
Residential (RS -8) to Planned Development and Overlay Zone (OPD -8), and a Preliminary
OPD Plan and Plat of Pine Grove, a 12 -lot residential subdivision with 10 single family
lots and 44 multi -family dwellings located south of Lower West Branch Road between
Scott Boulevard and Hummingbird Lane.
Martin seconded the motion.
Hensch noted that the issues that were discussed at the last meeting were addressed.
Parsons agreed and said with the correct protections for the trees.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
VACATION ITEM VAC15-00007:
Discussion of an application submitted by Equity Ventures for the vacation of an approximately
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2016 — Formal Meeting
Page 4 of 9
13,454 square feet of Waterfront Drive running east -west between 1402 and 1411 Waterfront
Drive / located in the southeast comer of Highway 6 and S. Gilbert Street.
Miklo began the staff report showing an aerial photograph and gave some history of the area.
Waterfront Drive used to continue through, but now is a 'dead-end' right of way that the City
encouraged because there had been quite a few accidents at that intersection with Gilbert
Street as it drew heavy traffic. The Waterfront Drive intersection was too close to the Highway 6
intersection. The applicant is now requesting that the remaining piece of the east/west portion
of Waterfront Drive be vacated with the goal of consolidating the two properties it currently
divides to allow a redevelopment of the area.
There currently is an access easement to provide access to the Car -X property to the east. Part
of the proposal would include a new easement to replace the old one to continue to allow
access to the Car -X property. Miklo showed a concept plan of the proposed area and the
easement access to Car -X would come from the south. He noted there are some easements
for public and private utilities that will need to be relocated as part of the project. As a condition
for approval of this project Staff is recommending easements for these utilities be retained until
the new utilities are constructed and accepted by the City. Releasing the utility easements will
require subsequent action by the City Council. Staff is also recommending that the property be
platted with a permanent easement established for Car -X and also a temporary access be
established for Car -X during construction. Miklo noted that the owner of Car -X did write a letter
stating their agreement for this project provided that their concerns about access are resolved.
Staff recommends approval of VAC15-00007, an application submitted by Equity Ventures,
requesting vacation of approximately 13,454 square feet of Waterfront Drive running
east -west between 1402 and 1411 Waterfront Drive, subject to retention of utility
easements and approval of a final plat prior to final approval of the vacation request. The final
plat shall include:
• Plans for utility relocation.
• A plan for temporary access to the Car -X property during construction and a
permanent access easement.
Eastham asked about the entrance to the parking lot from Gilbert Street and where it would be
relocated. Miklo stated it would be further south than it is currently. Eastham asked if the traffic
engineers approved of the driveway relocation. Miklo said they did in concept, the actual
location may change as the project progresses. Miklo said the engineers feel this concept will
be an improvement because rather than three entrances along Gilbert Street there will be just
one.
Eastham questioned the lighting along that street area, stating it was a dimly lit area. Miklo said
that street lights are required at intersections, but since this will a parking lot entrance/exit he
was not sure of the requirements. Miklo said it could be discussed with the applicant about the
possibility of installing street lights at the location.
Hensch asked if this would be an opportunity to widen the sidewalk along Gilbert Street in this
area. Miklo replied that yes the new sidewalk would be a minimum of 5 feet wide.
Hektoen reminded the Commission they are just considering the vacation of the area now, if
there is a plat the Commission can examine that and view the development details.
Eastham opened the public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2016 — Formal Meeting
Page 5 of 9
Duane Musser (MMS Consultants) began by noting the applicant will light the parking lot as
according to City Code, but one of the requirements is that they cannot bleed light across the
property line or into the public right-of-way so if there was a requirement for a light at that new
driveway entrance it is something that would have to be put in by the City. He also pointed out
on the concept plan some additional area of right-of-way that was suggested by Staff which is
part of a study that the City and DOT conducted regarding any future improvements to that
intersection. He did question if the right-of-way would be vacated now or at the time of plat.
Hektoen said the intention is to have the vacation and the plat coincide at the same Council
meeting.
Musser said they were moving ahead with redesigning the utilities. As for the public utilities, the
sanitary and sewer goes through the existing Waterfront Drive to service Hills Bank so that will
have to be rerouted as well as the public water main and several private utilities (gas, electric,
etc.). Those redesigns will be submitted to the City Engineer for approvals and then get the
final plat on the agenda.
Eastham closed the public hearing.
Theobald moved to approve VAC15-00007, an application submitted by Equity
Ventures, requesting vacation of approximately 13,454 square feet of Waterfront
Drive running east -west between 1402 and 1411 Waterfront Drive, subject to
retention of utility easements and approval of a final plat prior to final approval of the
vacation request. The final plat shall include:
• Plans for utility relocation.
• A plan for temporary access to the Car -X property during construction and a
permanent access easement.
Parsons seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
DISCUSSION OF STORM WATER MANAGEMENT:
Miklo introduced Ben Clark, Senior Civil Engineer with the Public Works Department who works
with storm water management, noting the Commission had requested information on how storm
water management is done in Iowa City.
Clark stated he has spent most of the past five years working on capital improvement projects
and is now moving into the storm water management area. Clark showed the storm water
ordnance, which is now 40 years old. The general requirements are a control release rate of
1.5 cubic feet per second per developed acre, which is some cases can end up being lower
than the predevelopment run-off rate.
Eastham asked if it's ever been higher for some developments. Clark said it's possible but has
no example ready and it would depend on slope and surface soil conditions, etc.
Next it requires excess storm water passage to make sure there is no damage to buildings
downstream, must retain 100 year storm frequency in the basin. It does allow for compensating
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2016 — Formal Meeting
Page 6 of 9
storage so if a developer has somewhere off site there is excess capacity they can use that, it is
at the Director's discretion. The ordinance also encourages easements so that the City can get
in to fix storm pipes or structures.
Eastham asked if it encourages or requires easements. Clark said it is not required, it is
encouraged but the City does not have to take the easement.
Eastham asked about the release rate and how accurately engineers can calculate those
release rates. Clark was unable to answer that question exactly, stating it can be a little bit of a
guess, there are a lot of variables that go into trying to predict release rates, run off rates, it
depends on actual soil conditions, how the storm moves through the area, storm intensity, and
antecedent moisture conditions.
Eastham asked if the City tries to measure the exact release rates. Clark said they do not.
Eastham asked what steps the City takes to try to keep the release channels open, or as far as
ongoing maintenance. Clark will address that in a bit, stating these are just the general
ordinance requirements that have been around for 40 years. In 1977 there was an attempt to
repeal the ordinance to allow a certain subdivision, there were complaints about the
computation methods and in 1987 there was a discussion regarding increasing the release rate.
Hensch asked if now the private sector civil engineers and City engineers generally agree on
the ordinance. Clark stated there can be different methods for calculating the run-off so that can
cause some question.
Musser noted that MMS started in 1975 and all the current engineers at MMS were trained by
the senior engineers who knew the Iowa City ordinance and way of doing things. It is different
than other communities in the area, Iowa City being the most restrictive release rate. He noted
that every engineering firm likely uses different software so there could be some variation in the
calculations.
Hensch stated it would seem the City, consultants and developers would have the same
objective to manage the storm water so that the people who now live on the property aren't
upset at the developer or the City. Musser agreed, stating the engineers in his office are very
concerned with water and is the number one concern with development. By taking this concern
seriously they are protecting the developers as well.
Clark continued, stating that once a subdivision begins development and homes start to be built
they can run into issues with the maintenance of the basins. It is not always clear who is
supposed to maintain what. Sometimes the basins are turned over to the City, sometimes the
responsibility lies with the private homeowner, and sometimes it is the homeowner's
association's responsibility.
Eastham asked about the bigger basins. Clark said the City does have some regional basins
which are usually the City's responsibility.
Hensch asked if there was anything the Commission could do to make sure the issue of
responsibility of the basin is clarified. Hektoen said it is clarified in the subdivision agreement
and in the plats, but the average homeowner may not understand. Eastham asked if there was
anything the City could do to help homebuyers understand what the homeowner's responsibility
might be. Hektoen said the City is not involved in those transactions. She said the recording of
the easement agreements and recording of the plats makes it a matter of public record. She
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2016 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 9
noted that a homeowner's title opinion should reflect use restrictions, covenants from the
subdivision, etc., and that is how a homeowner is informed.
Eastham asked if there were any estimates on costs for individual homeowners for maintaining
storm water basins. Clark said it would depend on the quality of the basin when a homeowner
begins to maintain it. Sometimes it is as simple as mowing the basin area regularly.
Clark said one of the things the City requires is a storm water permit and one of the components
of that permit is to reach out to the public. The City sends out flyers about fertilizer and various
other storm water issues. The City intends to also identify certain areas and certain basins and
tries to let the people know what the requirements are.
Eastham asked if the average homeowner has the skill and knowledge necessary to maintain
the inlet and outlets. Clark said the problems they see are mostly debris plugging the outlets
and one step is to keep the areas mowed and remove the sticks and trash.
Clark showed some examples of basins around the City, noting the various owner/responsibility
structures.
Martin asked about the rules regarding lawn chemicals and storm water. Clark was not aware of
any restrictions on fertilizers or lawn chemicals. Clark said with the City's storm water ordinance
there is no water quality control.
Clark noted some upcoming updates. The City is considering adopting the State-wide design
standards. What that will entail is a unified sizing criteria and takes into consideration the water
quality volume. It will cover the "first flush" which is 90% of the rain events in Iowa (up to an
inch and a quarter of rain). It will also account for water protection storage so it would have a 24
hour release rate, which is not quite as restrictive as the City's current release rate.
Eastham asked if that would be an ordinance change the Commission would have to
recommend. Miklo said that it would go directly to Council, it is not a part of zoning or
subdivision regulations.
Theobald noted her concern with several large apartment and condo complexes in her area of
town and there are the big basins where trash collects, it is mowed over and the trash just blows
around, and wonders if there was something more attractive that could be done with some
possible vegetation. Clark said the particular ones Theobald is questioning are privately owned
basins and not maintained by the City.
Parson asked if the only thing that could be planted on detention basins is grass. Clark said
there are no restrictions and people can plant native things, some have tress but that is not
recommended but has not been forced to remove.
Musser discussed the process the City of Coralville is undertaking for their storm water
management and new ideas in developments. Using pavers or porous concrete and doing soil
quality restoration. There are no cost estimates on maintenance of these systems yet since
they are so new. The bio cells and brick pavers can be very expensive just to install.
Clark said some regional basins were installed along Ralston Creek in the 70's to help control
flooding. He showed some examples of other regional basins around Iowa City. He also
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2016 — Formal Meeting
Page 8 of 9
showed some past water quality efforts such as the Sycamore Greenway. He discussed the
program the City has to assist people if they have a storm water management best practice
project, like a rain garden or pervious pavers, they can apply to the program and the City will
match 50% with a $3000 maximum. They also have the deep tine aeration, the soil quality
restoration, movement with three companies in Iowa City marketing projects.
Eastham asked about runoff rates and if having a new development will actually benefit a
neighboring existing development. Clark said that it would, the new development would slow
down the runoff rates and control flooding.
Hensch asked what the possible resistance from developers is to storm water management
plans. Clark said the basins take up area, possible building lots. Musser also noted that some
developers don't like having to create a homeowner's association just to maintain a basin area,
they would prefer the municipality to maintain the basin.
Eastham thanked Clark for his presentation and for answering the Commission's questions.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 7, 2016
Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes of January 7, 2016.
Theobald seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Miklo noted they are registering the newer members of the Commission for a workshop
in Cedar Rapids in early April conducted by the Iowa State Extension Office.
ADJOURNMENT:
Martin moved to adjourn.
Parsons seconded.
A vote was taken and motion carried 6-0.
Z
O
U)
N C
20
uww
0wo
ZWN
OZW)
06NDw N
o W
Z_
ZQ
J
CL
Z
H
W
w
a
0
N
X
X
�LL,r
0
X
X
X
X
P-
X
X
x
X
X
x
x
M
M
jX
XXX
X
X
X
X
x
X
V-
co
c000rnr.rna�
0)
X
X
X
x
x
�
X
r
r
x
X
X
O
X
X
r
w
w
g
w
0
OV
Z
a-=
Y
p
o
X
x
X
x
X
x
X
r
2
Z
Q
O
X
x
x
x
�
X
X
X
X
x
X-
X
X
clf)x
X
X
X
X
x
X
0
N
X
x
X
X
X
x
x
Go
CD
X
x
x
X
x
x
tp
XX
�
x
X
X
X
!�!xwxxxxx
lxxxxxxx
N
x
x
X
x
X
x
X
N
L
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
co
4
X
x
x
i
X
i
X
X
x
X
f
x
I
X
V-
X
X
x
i
x
i
X
M
C!
W
p
X
X
I
X
x
N
w
J
w
W
O'
O
X
Z
Q
Y_
O
=
V
Q
Y
Z
Q
=CrV-000
2
Z
oPLuU)
i
4Ixwa4x
NO
cwLL.X2CL
O
Z
H
w
W
C1C
0
Z
V-
XXXXXXX
,XXX
i
X
ix
M
N
XXX
iX
ix
�W
co
c000rnr.rna�
watO
LOU")
0
LO
00
WX0000000
W
w
w
g
w
0
OV
Z
a-=
Y
p
V
Q
Y
Z
woCF=-wy�'NO
:E
2
Z
Q
ZW�ia
w
p
y
w
Z
X
0:
w
H
a)
w E
c a)
C"-
(n a m
��Q o
Z
n n w u
XOO
}
W
Y
4b(8)
mm .•
APROVED
IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
MONDAY, JANUARY 25,2016--5:30 P.M.
CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST. -TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Bergus, Alexa Homewood, Derek Johnk, Nick Kilburg
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bram Elias
STAFF PRESENT: Ty Coleman, Mike Brau
OTHERS PRESENT: Josh Goding
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
Goding reported PATV would be reducing operating hours and eliminating 1 '/2 positions to save
money in advance of the city no longer providing funding when the franchise ends in 2018.
Hours are now Monday -Thursday 5 p.m. -9 p.m. and Saturday 11 a.m.-5 p.m. Equipment can be
checked out on Friday between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. 90% of editing hours currently occur after 5
p.m. Studio and editing bays are now in 2 -hour periods rather than 3. PATV staff will use the
hours between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. to work on revenue generating projects. PATV will be offering
a series of workshops at the Senior Center over the next three months. PATV has entered into a
contract with the Center for Worker Justice to provide video training sessions to their staff and
volunteers. PATV recently entered into a contract with the Gannett company for $2500 to
produce a short video on ways to discuss affordable housing. Coleman said Grassley informed
him the plans to increase in Internet speeds to 305 is on hold. Mediacom is looking to
implement the DOCSIS 3.1 standard in future upgrades after testing has been completed.
Homewood said it was a concern of the Commission at the time Mediacom announced their
intention to upgrade the system and wanted to move some of the access channels that there
needed to be a reasonable timeframe for the upgrade.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Homewood moved and Kilburg seconded a motion to approve the amended November 11, 2015
minutes. The motion passed unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS
None.
SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
LOCAL ACCESS CHANNEL REPORTS
Homewood noted that PATV, the Library and the City Channel 4 had written reports in the
meeting packet. Goding reported PATV would be reducing operating hours and eliminating 1 '/2
positions to save money in advance of the city no longer providing funding when the franchise
ends in 2018. Hours are now Monday -Thursday 5 p.m. -9 p.m. and Saturday 11 a.m.-5 p.m.
Equipment can be checked out on Friday between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. 90% of editing hours
currently occur after 5 p.m. Studio and editing bays are now in 2 -hour periods rather than 3.
PATV staff will use the hours between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. to work on revenue generating projects.
PATV will be offering a series of workshops at the Senior Center over the next three months.
PATV has entered into a contract with the Center for Worker Justice to provide video training
sessions to their staff and volunteers. Membership dues have been increased slightly this year.
Volunteer hours can be used in lieu of dues. Homewood asked about PATV's high school sports
project. Goding said they are working on getting sponsors for the basketball and wrestling
season. PATV recently entered into a contract with the Gannett company for $2500 to produce a
short video on ways to discuss affordable housing. Coleman reported two University of Iowa
interns are now working with Katie Linder. City Channel 4 has started covering the City
Council work sessions. The City Channel has had more requests from within the city. For
example, a short video on the City's hiring process will be produced.
CONSUMER ISSUES
Coleman referred to the report in the meeting packet and noted that there have been more
complaints about getting service to new homes. Homewood asked if the reinstitution of the
municipal franchise would help in such situations. Coleman said it could in some cases as the
franchise includes provisions addressing provision of service.
MEDIACOM REPORT
Coleman said Grassley was unable to attend. Coleman said Grassley informed him the plans to
increase in Internet speeds to 305 is on hold. Mediacom is looking to implement the DOCSIS
3.1 standard in future upgrades after testing has been completed. Homewood said it was a
concern of the Commission at the time Mediacom announced their intention to upgrade the
system and wanted to move some of the access channels that there needed to be a reasonable
timeframe for the upgrade. Homewood asked about Mediacom's lawsuit against the City
regarding preferential treatment of ImOn. Coleman said it is being handled in the legal
department and he is not been informed of how the case is proceeding. Coleman said he could
invite Geoff Fruin to the next Commission meeting if the Commission wished. Johnk said it is
likely Fruin could not discuss the law suit in any detail. Homewood said Fruin's attendance
might not be productive. Bergus said it is important the City administration and the City Council
should understand that the Commission is available to assist in them in matters relating to
telecommunications and it would benefit the City if the Commission is kept informed. Johnk
said a face-to-face meeting might have more impact than conveying that idea in a letter of other
means. Bergus suggested attaching a cover letter to the Commission's annual report.
Homewood said the cover letter might inquire if there any initiatives the City might like the
Commission to pursue over the next year. It was agreed Commissioners will email each other
with ideas for areas the Commission could pursue.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT
Kilburg moved and Johnk seconded a motion to approve the Telecommunications Commission
annual report.
ADJOURNMENT
Bergus moved and Johnk seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously.
Adjournment was at 6:03 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael Brau
Cable TV Administrative Aide
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
12 MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD
(X) = Present
(0) = Absent
(O/C) = Absent/Called (Excused)
Elias
Ber us
Kilburg
Butler
Homewood
11/24/14
O/C
O/C
X
X
X
1/26/15
X
X
X
X
x
2/10/15
X
X
X
o/c
X
2/23/15
x
x
x
x
X
3/23/15
X
X
X
X
X
Johnk
4/27/15
x
x
p/c
X
X
6/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
6/22/15
o/c
X
X
X
x
8/24/15
0
x
X
x
o/c
9/28/15
X
X
X
X
X
10/16/15
X
X
X
X
x
11/23/15
X
X
o/c
o/c
x
1/25/2016
o/c
X
X
X
x
2/22/2016
x
x
x
x
o/c
(X) = Present
(0) = Absent
(O/C) = Absent/Called (Excused)