HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-07-05 TranscriptionPage I
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER
ITEM lb Proclamation — National Disability Voter Registration Week
Throgmorton: Item 1 b, a proclamation .... this is a proclamation concerning National Disability
Voter Registration Week. (reads proclamation) Is there anyone here to accept
this proclamation?
Karr: Here to accept the proclamation is Harry Olmstead.
Olmstead: I want to thank the Mayor. I especially want to thank Marian Karr for (mumbled)
this morning and getting the Mayor to agree to have us ... have this proclamation. I
want to let you know there are 50 million people with disabilities in our country.
The largest minority and it's growing! Just amputees grow at the rate of 500
amputees a day ... in our country! So, it's ... it's going to get bigger, and we need to
get these people registered and be able to get them to vote. One of the privileges
in Johnson County we have and most people with disabilities are not even aware
of it cause we haven't promoted it is that they can vote at their car! The election
officials can come out to the car, if you have someone with a disability, and they
can vote right there. They don't even have to get in if they're not able to. Again,
I thank the Mayor and thank the Council for listening. (applause)
Throgmorton: Thank you, Harry! All right, Item 2, Consider Adoption of the Consent
Calen... oh, I forgot to say something! Uh, I want to welcome all of you to your
City Hall. Thanks for coming out, uh, especially on this really hot, typically hot
July day. Ub, so anyhow, thanks for coming out!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 2
ITEM 3. COMMUNITY COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA). [UNT11L 8
PM]
Throgmorton: This is for items not on the agenda and we typically go at the most 6118:00 P.M.
Uh, if, uh... if you want to speak, I .... I .... I sense that there are a substantial
number of people here who want to speak about Lusk Avenue. Uh, 101 Lusk, uh,
and we have been advised by our City Attorney not to engage in conversation
with you, not to comment on that, and .... maybe, Eleanor, before anybody speaks
you could explain why you've given us that advice.
Dilkes: Sure! Um, as I said in the, urn .... in the email that I sent to you, and in a more... a
lengthy email that I shared with the attorneys for both the property owner and, uh,
the neighbors, urn .... given that the matter has now been appealed to the Board of
Adjustment, um, I have some concern about the integrity of the Board of
Adjustment process and the less press and the less commentary by people who
aren't decision makers the better, I think. So that's the reason for my advice.
Throgmorton: And ... and the Board of Adjustment is a separate....
Dilkes: The Board of Adjustment is the ... thank you, the Board of Adjustment is a separate
body which by State law hears appeals of this sort. Um, if there is a subsequent
appeal from the Board of Adjustment's decision, that decision... or that appeal
goes to District Court. So the Council just is not involved in that.
Throgmorton: Thank you.
Dilkes: And there's been some indication that there might want to be some discussion at
some point with the Council of kind of where .... we got here, that kind of thing,
which I think is fine, but I think that conversation should occur after the Board of
Adjustment issues a decision.
Throgmorton: Yeah. Okay. Thanks. So, I .... you know, I'm just guessing that there are some
people who want to speak to that topic, and ... but anybody who's ... is free to speak
to that topic or any other topic that's not on the formal meeting agenda.
Eastham: Good evening, my name is Charlie Eastham. I'm not going to talk about the, uh
(clears throat) the, uh, Lusk Avenue issue. I want to talk about Rose Oaks. Uh,
I'm a member of the Center for Worker Justice Board of Directors. Just giving
you a brief update of some, uh, contacts that another CWJ, uh, Board member,
Robin Clark -Bennett, uh, had with Rose Oaks' residents, uh, starting last Friday.
She called three or four dozen, uh, Rose Oaks' residents to ask how their moving,
their relocation was going. She talked about a dozen. She wrote up a fairly
extensive, uh, summary of her conversations, and I think that summary's going to
be taken up, uh, maybe at next Council meeting, but I just wanted to say at this
Council meeting one thing that, uh, residents, some residents, told Robin was that
they've attempted to apply, or they, uh, or they have applied for relocation
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 3
assistance through the Shelter House program and they noticed in doing so that
they were, the Shelter ... the application form Shelter House is using apparently
asks for residents' social security numbers. Um, we know that the number of
residents at Rose Oaks are undocumented immigrants, that they don't have social
security numbers, so (clears throat) the, uh, concern we have is that people, uh,
may not be applying through the Shelter House managed program because
they've heard from other residents that they'll have to, uh... uh.... uh, have a social
security number and that will, uh, inhibit them from, uh, from .... from applying
for assistance. Uh, I'm sure the, uh, Geoff, the ... the City Manager, uh, is, uh,
aware that this may be happening and that, uh, a quick and simple solution is for
either the City to provide money that's, uh (clears throat) in lieu of the Home
program funds which the City initially allocated, for which non, urn .... uh,
authorized residents will not be eligible for, uh, to either provide City money in
lieu of those Home funds or to ask Shelter House to use Rose Oaks' supplied
funds just to make sure that all residents no matter their immigration status
receive, uh... urn .... the relocation assistance that they need. So thank you.
Throgmorton: Thank you, Charlie. Good evening!
Southard: Hi, I'm Karin Southard and I've lived at 420 Lexington for 26 years, and I'm here
to speak to the citizens of Iowa City and I want to tell them that what is happening
to us in Manville Heights can happen to you. I've been elected President of the
Manville Heights Neighborhood Association. We have organized in response to
the planned 7,400 -square foot mini-Kinnick Stadium party house that is to be
built at 101 Lusk Avenue. This is a very quiet, narrow, and only partially paved
dead-end residential street without any storm sewers. The proposed structure,
designed with an estimated capacity of 200 people, would be crammed in on two
lots and abut single-family homes, all substantially under 1,000 -square feet. This
structure would replace a modest home that was already demolished. Our group
formed three weeks ago. Fifty of us assembled on a day's notice to meet on a
near .... nearby street corner. We were stunned to discover that only.... stunned to
discover only that by hearsay that the City was about to misclassify this very large
party venue as a residence. Since that time, the City has approved a site plan and
issued a building permit. In response, we neighbors have met three times,
as ... attended City Council.... elected officers raised funds, pet ... petitioned our
neighbors, and filed an application to the Board of Adjustment to contest the
City's decision. According to State law, the decision to issue a permit is now in
the hands of the Board of Adjustment. However, we are here to express our
concern to the public that City staff erroneously handled this situation and
erroneously interpreted and applied City code. hi numerous conversations with
our neighbors, City staff did not consider many negative effects on our
neighborhood and the lack of infrastructure. We believe that the application of
City code has been interpreted loosely or misinterpreted entirely to benefit outside
forces with money and influence. We are moving forward with our appeal, but in
the meantime, we believe that other homeowners and taxpayers remain at risk if
the types of code interpretations given to this project are applied to other
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 4
situations in the city. Taxpayers will be on the hook for all of this. There are
major issues related to drainage, fire safety, res ... rescue access, vehicle and
pedestrian circulation, street frontage, property values, and environmental
preservation. The infrastructure is as vintage as the charming early -1900's homes
on this street. I urge you all to take a look at the location and try to even
comprehend the situation. At first everyone thought it was a total joke. We have
explained very specifically our concerns in our appeal, and we urge ... the citizens
of Iowa City to view this document. I can provide the link. We believe that City
code has been incorrectly applied with the result that has become a code used to
benefit a wealthy outsider at the expense of our neighbors and taxpayers. Thank
you. I can be contacted at karin.southardna,gmail.com. Thank you.
Throgmorton: Thank you, Karin.
Befeler: Hello! My name's Dennis Befeler and I live at 234 Hutchinson Avenue, about a
block from what Karin was just speaking about — Lusk Avenue. Uh, I know
we're not engaging in a discussion here, but I do have a couple things I'd like to
bring both to everyone's attention here and I ... I know there's some people, uh,
listening at home. Um, one of the things that we've been bringing to people's
attention, um, I think .... falls back on me. I have a master degree in theater design
and technology, and I've worked most of my professional career on event venues.
When I look at the plans for this proposed structure, it clearly shows me a ... a
party structure for 200 people. It's designed to have people go through catering
lines, have several beer coolers, and ... and have a good time. Um, and I appreciate
what that structure is, having worked on lots of them. It ... it's got plenty of space
to eat, drink, and play, and uh... the problem is there's no parking or pedestrian
access at this location. Uh, I base my measurements on banquet seating at 13.5
square foot per person, which is an industry standard. Um, a small group of
neighbors, many of whom are here tonight, uh, took it upon ourselves to ... to put
together a petition and in ... in just a week's time — we started last Tuesday night
collecting signatures — I'm pleased to say we have over 273 signatures in
opposition to this project. All of the signatures are from Manville Heights'
residents and we haven't even knocked on every door yet. So these are the
immediate neighbors. There's only a handful that ... that didn't want to sign when
we knocked on their doors, and I have a ... a strong suspicion a lot of those people
are opposed to the project. They just don't want their name on this document, uh,
for ... for fear of what the future might hold of having their name on that. Um, I
don't know if it's appropriate — I'd like to hand this to the City Clerk. And, uh, if
I've got time I'll read a few of the lines of what people were signing. Um, stop
the construction of Kinnick Stadium house at 101 Lusk Avenue. We the
undersigned property owners and voters petition the City of Iowa City to halt the
construction of the proposed structure at 101 Lusk Avenue for many reasons,
including it will not be a residence, it will be an entertainment venue for large
tailgating functions. Based on the size at over 7,400 -square feet and designed
with a commercial kitchen, nine toilets, two urinals, or ... or one as has been
revised, indoor basketball court, and central atrium, this structure is not designed
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 5
as a residence. It will have an estimated capacity of over ... of over 200 people,
and is described by its owners as a place to have game -day events related to
University athletics. Taxpayers will be required to subsidize this private scheme
because of needed infrastructure. The city street, as we've mentioned, is narrow
and infrastructure of the location is very old and woefully inadequate with regard
to fire, safety, and rescued effort ... rescue effort ... parking congestion, and
watershed. This proposed building overburdens the streets and utilities.
Taxpayers will eventually be asked to widen streets, improve storm sewers, guard
fragile areas against water erosion, and provide safe means to get to and from this
location. The use of the city ... the use of this facility will threaten public safety.
Lusk Avenue is a dead-end, 20 -foot wide street. There are few if any paved
streets in all of Iowa City that are more narrow. Fire trucks are 10 -feet wide, and
parking is allowed on one side of the street. Fire trucks and emergency vehicles
called to the site will not be able to turn around. The public is placed at risk when
response times to real emergencies are slowed. Pedestrians, including neighbor...
neighborhood children will be at risk due to increased traffic congestion. Uh, we
go on to cite the storm water run-off and, uh.... environmental harms, threatening
bordering properties, and the proposed structure is just out of character with the
neighborhood. With, uh, 94% of those who ... who we approached agreeing with
this petition, I ask City staff reviewing the ... I asked is the City staff reviewing the
same criteria that the citizens are expecting them to review. Thank you for your
time.
Throgmorton: Thank you, Dennis.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Dickens: So moved.
Mims: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Dickens, seconded by Mims. All in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion
carries.
Syrop: Hello, my name is Craig Syrop. My wife and I, Ann Sadler, uh, live at the ... on
the property at 117 Lusk Avenue. It's a small bungalow which was built in 1918.
First I want to thank, uh, you for the opportunity to address City Council and
engage our fellow citizens and homeowners in this dialogue as they may be
listening at home and are present here. Although this concern may seem remote
to most homeowners, eventually these decisions will affect every neighborhood
in Iowa City. I want to convey personally that we value individual landowner
rights, freedom of aesthetic expression, and the right to gather with friends and
family, so long as that exercise does not adversely impact the public good of
safety, does not promote environmental degradation of public or other property,
does not create significant unapproved yet predictable public expenditure to
mitigate, uh, and does not adversely impact existing property owners' financial
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 6
interests. The proposed new, large con... construction dwarfs the municipal tax
benefits of our property. However, we ask that consistent with code, existing
public good be prioritized. My interactions with Ci ... City employees have been
pleasant, polite, and technically very informative. They have been sympathetic
yet feel unem... seem to feel unempowered to make a difference. Left instead to
encourage me to report nuisance violations if and when they occur after the
struc... structure is completed. At no point in this process resulting in the City's
approval of the site plan and building permit for the proposed structure at 101
Lusk were we ever contacted by the City or the owners of the property concerning
any aspect of the project, including potential sewer issues on our own property.
As such we are playing catch-up to discover facts and our options. For now we
remain concerned that the proposal will directly impact adversely our property
and residential public interest. We believe errors have been made in granting
approval and for that reason we have joined the appeal process. At the 6/21/16
session, Mayor Throgmorton noted that we all understand the concerns, but in the
end we have to follow the law. To follow the law means honoring the purpose of
the code in its application. That application should reflect the priorities of its
citizens, and if the priorities of the citizens are the priorities of leadership, I'm
asking that the Council exercise the leadership to provide oversight of City
government to do the right things. That is, prioritizing and preserving public
interest by balancing them with .... for existing public and new development
interests. I ask the Council work to dispel the growing neighborhood impression
that new development and tax base expansion trumps the public good with owner -
owned existing neighborhoods. Specific public goods and questions are a concern
for emergency response as previously noted; the predictable, post -approval tax
funded expenditures for new infrastructure which will be required to address and
mitigate extensive storm run-off created by the proposed construction; public
approval where least explanation of deviations to set -back requirements; the
potentially arbitrary extension of non -conforming use and infrastructure; finally,
the stated intent of the code is to promote the value and sense of neighborhoods.
These wrongful approvals of site plans and building permits, and the
misclassification of the proposed building have had the paradoxical consequence
of doing with the City's consideration thus far has failed to provide. As a result
of appealing the approval process, we have rediscovered our neighbors. Old and
new faces have walked Lusk Avenue and expressed their concern and skepticism
of the approval process. We have shared common views of our neighborhood and
in the process I've developed admiration for my neighbors' unique skills and
interests. We hope you'll exert the necessary leadership to address neighborhood
preservation and future public good. Thank you.
Throgmorton: Thank you.
Lahey: Good evening. My name is Ann Lahey and I live directly north of the property,
so I will be just a few feet from that house where the border goes. I don't think
there'll be much room between my house and that property. Obviously I have
direct concerns because of the nature of the neighborhood and how it's going to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 7
affect my property directly, which .... and obviously Syrop's, who is just north of
mine. It's a very small dead-end street. Sometimes ... on very rare occasions the
City has forgotten to actually plow it, and it's a bit of a job but I've actually
shoveled that street. It was about 20 years ago, luckily (mumbled) better shape,
but .... it is a ... just to give you an idea of the street. I also witnessed emergency
vehicles because of the lady who lived there was elderly and she needed
sometimes an ambulance, and obviously a fire truck would come as medical
assist. They basically have to .... go in there and just park in the street and then
back out. And even that is difficult because of the way the intersections with
Bayard and Rowland Court, and then actually Lexington. They have difficulties I
think turning, um, or it appears so. There's obviously immediate concerns about
run-off water, sewer, and the inner... infrastructure, uh, of that immediate area.
But ... while I'm very concerned about how that's going to affect us right there
directly, the ... more so the neighborhood, the character of the neighborhood, I'm
extremely concerned as a resident of Iowa City, because I believe it sets a very
bad precedent. 1, as Karin said, none of us at first believed it could happen, that it
was like some kind of a joke, a bad dream, but it isn't. Apparently it is reality and
maybe the coming attraction, and that's what we don't want in our neighborhood.
We don't want our neighborhood to be an attraction that people go down a dead-
end street, there's no parking, there's really no .... lot of access or egress there, and
it's a major concern. And I think that if our neighborhood basically can be
affected by this, any neighborhood in Iowa City also risks the danger, and I think
that is very bad for the city. Thank you.
Throgmorton: Thank you, Ann.
Rossi: Good evening, uh, my name is Chris Rossi. I live at 4 Rowland Court, which is
very close to the subject matter of this conversation tonight, which you're giving,
uh, prayerful consideration about, even though I understand that matters require
you to be in a listening mode. Uh, as the... as Ann just said, uh, poor Pauline who
used to live at that address (clears throat) had problems accessing, uh, emergency
services. This was well known to everybody who could see what was going on,
including me. And, uh, to continue with that story, Rowland Court is very
similarly situated in terms of serving as a cul-de-sac. Um, it just seems a
bewilderment to so many people, and I mean hundreds of people, that conclusions
can be made about the appropriateness of this event structure, and yet.... scantily
any conversation is had about safety, security, and in ... ingress and egress, which
is particularly important to us all. Manville Heights and this area specifically is
complicated as City staff knows! On a normal day! And yet on days of sporting
events, it becomes perilous in ... in certain circumstances, notwithstanding the fact
that the police are burdened enough to take care of the considerations that on
game days require acute attention, uh, but left by the wayside are the people, uh,
and property owners of these areas that get... that... that are obstructed in terms of,
uh, parking, which is, uh, not enforced. Sometimes it is, but .... mostly it is not,
and it just complicates the ingress and egress issues. I just wonder what the
Police Chief has informed City staff about with regard to this proposal. Or the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 8
Fire Marshall, or whomever runs the City services relating to emergencies! These
issues are complicated, and ... I don't know where the City is on receiving this
information. The only information I have that approximates this comes from the
garbage collectors! The garbage collectors don't like coming down these streets!
They tell people on my side of the street to put the garbage in the street on the
other side of the street because they can't turn around and otherwise they can't
pick up the garbage! The people who pick up the yard refuse send a little scout
scampering down the street, making sure that there's nothing to be picked up, so
that that truck doesn't have to come down and then back up either. But when
some unfortunates come down these streets unknowing that it's a .... a dead-end,
they have to back up, and in doing so, they've ta.... they've hit trees, my trees, my
neighbors' trees. They've hit yards, my yard, neighbors' yards. They've taken
out shrubs, my shrubs, other shrubs. These are not just, you know, casual
remembrances. These are actionable items that actually, uh, ended up, uh, getting
remunerated from insurance companies. There's just a fundamental bewilderment
about the nature of policy planning, whereby hundreds of people are aware and
upset about what's going on. A handful of people in the City staff are seemingly
in charge and the City Council is ... not able to speak. So we're hopeful in the
future, as we address these issues more intentionally, it shouldn't come as a
surprise to anybody what our policies forward leaning are in terms of our
management, and I ... I fundamentally believe ultimately, from a taxpayer's
perspective, that what is not being allowed by City staff through the front door
with regard to the, uh, budgetary consequences, which will wash up on City
Council's shore, will ultimately and relatively rapidly come through the back
door, after this gargantuan structure is made and the fait accompli to the taxpayer
gets put. Thank you.
Throgmorton: Thank you, Chris. It's nice to see you again, Chris! Who else would like to
speak?
Ackerman: Good evening, I'm Bill Ackerman, 814 Newton Road, Iowa City. My wife and I
own a property at 631 Baird Street. Our backyard is immediately next door to
101 Lusk. Our backyards touch. We're looking at a structure proposed to be
built 78 X 94, 37 1/2 foot tall. Approximately a third the size of a football field.
In a neighborhood where you have houses of 1,000 -square foot or less, for the
most part in our area. As the others have said, the street is 20 -foot wide. There's
no real access, ingress and egress, for fire trucks, emergency vehicles, dump
trucks, whatever going down that street to turn around and get out efficiently.
Without extending the street, which none of us want, or the removal of trees that
have been there for many years at the end of the street. Another concern I have,
and touched on earlier this evening, the taxpayer expense involved... in allowing
this property to have the structure built on it. Unknown, huge amounts of money
could be spent to upgrade the street, the storm water, the sewers, let alone damage
to the street with full replacement of it could run hundreds of thousands, a million
dollars — don't know! It's something that really hasn't been discussed. But I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 9
thank you for your time, for your consideration on this, and uh.... on to the next
speaker!
Throgmorton: Thank you, Bill.
Rushton: I'm Gerard Rushton. I live at 215 Lexington Avenue, which is just around the
corner from the place we are talking about tonight. Um ... we see evidence, uh,
that you've heard tonight, uh, that ... people are seeing ... are having really core
concerns, but the concern I think is whether or not the decisions that they're
getting from City staff are really reflecting their own, the Council's own values.
We think that that's what people have seen in the last three weeks, as they've
watched this process unfold. And ... and have shared their stories as they've begun
to do that with you tonight. We look forward to our day in court, in the
proceedings with the Board of Adjustment. We look forward to them being
rescinded, and we think that ... that what will be rescinded is the very core thing
that says this is a place of residence. We think it's a party school, and we're
showing you why we think that and we think it's pretty obvious why it is that.
We look at a site plan and we see all kinds of measurements. We say we ... we
think the code is asking for (mumbled) are there drainage problems, and it's very
clear that there are. As we look over the building permit and we say, well,
where's the measurements that show how much water's going to come down
here, and where is it going to go? It can't go down Lusk Avenue towards
the .... the point of entry, cause that's just going uphill. It has to go downhill. And
there's iust... nothing is being built to take water like this. And you could see the
damage that's already been started. You can see that with your own feet if you
just walked down the street. And ... and so what we're thinking about is .... we read
the code and we see in that code all kinds of (coughing, difficult to hear speaker)
that we like. We say, yeah, those are our values. They're in the code! Where
were they used in this process? And as we ask about that, and as several people
have said tonight, your staff have been very good with us. I know that the way
that they ended the conversation at my house was if you have any more questions,
call me back. They were very good with us! But ... in what sense were they good?
They were good in telling us how according to them all the check -offs — how
many feet back, heights, 40...I think it was 45% of the lot cause only ... you're only
allowed 46%, so it's all been nicely done (laughs) to meet these conditions to
check -off. We think the code means more than checking off those things. It
includes those, and the law should be applied fairly to everyone. We're not
asking be different with us. We're not asking that. What we want is you to do to
us what we would expect for any place ... in any neighborhood in the city. That's
what we want to see ..... done eventually, and we hope the Board of Adjustment
will do it. When we speak of the (mumbled) in the City code, what are we talking
about? Let me just quote. To encourage the most appropriate use of land and
foster convenient, compatible and efficient relationships among land users.
That's one of your values .... that the code says you have. Where do we see
that ... here? To promote the economic stability of existing and future land uses
that are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and protect them from intrusions
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 10
by incompatible land uses. We read that. We think (mumbled) obviously it
applies in this case! But no ... none of your staff talked about any of these values.
To lessen congestion in the streets, and promote safe and effective access to
property. These are quotes from your code! And you've heard the evidence
tonight, even though some of it is quite informal but it's .... it's quite reasonable.
And that's I think what we're getting at ... is ... is common sense being used by your
staff. My father used to say, "Common sense, Gerard, it's so common it's rare."
He would say that often to me, which may say something about me (laughs) But
anyway, that's where we are and we hope that somewhere in this process... we will
see a return to those fundamental values. Thank you.
Throgmorton: Thank you, Gerry.
Larew: Good evening, Council and Mr. Mayor. I'm Jim Larew. I am an attorney. I live
on Woolf Avenue, but I'm also representing, uh, groups who have submitted an
application for review by the Board of Adjustment, and we certainly understand
that this is not the venue to ask this body to reverse a decision that has been made,
but we were also pleased to have been invited to attend this public meeting at the
last City Council session and we didn't want to miss the opportunity to
communicate with our fellow citizens. The appeal as Council may know to the
Board of Adjustment asked that body to reverse three decisions that your staff has
made, that the classification of this structure was classified as a single-family
dwelling, that the site plan was approved, and that a building permit was issued.
We hope to convince that body that those decisions were wrong and should be
reversed. Looking forward, which is a purpose of tonight's meeting because after
all the appeal to the Board of Adjustment, perhaps an appeal by either party
thereafter to the Iowa District Court, maybe to the Iowa Supreme Court, could
take years. But in the meantime, you have to govern day-to-day, and your staff
has to make decisions, moment by moment. That concerns us. If this sliver of
time and this neighborhood issue is either an outlier, or it's a part of a pattern that
could affect other neighborhoods adversely. A theme of the presentations tonight
is that many residents, at least of Manville Heights, are concerned that there may
be a breach, or a disconnect, between what they as voters understood to be the
prioritization of values and actions of those who on the one hand are elected to
serve, and do sit on the City Council, and on the other hand, the prioritization of
those same values of those who are charged at the City staff level to implement
the code of ordinances, in the name of the Council on a day-to-day basis. We
don't think that the strong reaction of the neighbors that we have against this
project is a surprise, and therefore we're hopeful that it's an aberration. But it's,
uh, an echo of the reaction of a neighborhood in University Heights had to the
very same proposal. If you look at the site plan and the drawings that are in this
City's own records, the dates of those drawings begin two years ago. They were
the same plans that were submitted to University Heights, a city which rejected
the scheme at the city council level and from whom neighbors, similar to our own,
wrote to the owners, a letter — just about a year ago — and in that letter said in part,
signed by many neighbors, the site plan you have submitted is not a dwelling, but
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 11
rather a very large mini-Kinnick Stadium party venue that simply does not fit
within the charm and integrity of our small town neighborhood. That letter was
copied to the City of Iowa City staff. They knew of this event or this plan more
than a year ago. The material facts here are not much disputed. You've heard
descriptions of physical facts. A street is either 20 -feet wide or it's not. It's either
the size of a third of a football field or not. It either has X number of urinals and
toilets or it does not. Those are not in dispute. What appears to be in a situation
with virtually no disputed facts, that in the opinion of virtually everyone in our
neighborhood, the City staff has moved history in the wrong direction. It's like
the clock that tolls for the 13d' time. It causes one to not only wonder about the
first and last of the chimes, but all those that proceeded it, and it makes you worry
about the future ability of the clock to keep time. Is the clock broken? City
Council Members, once elected to office, cannot be expected to control all events,
and we understand that. Yet they must be the ones to sustain a vision of civic
purposes. They must identify the strategic policy goals and prioritize the values
to advance those purposes. Maintaining the day-to-day management of those
purposes, exercised through goals and the prioritization of values, is not easy. But
it's the essence of self-government. In Iowa City, self-government may
necessarily involve the uses of more velvet gloves than iron fists. But it must be
the Council's fists and not those of the City staff, that ultimately must be
exercised if we move forward in the public interest. Ultimately it's the City
Council that's the vortex around all else that must swirl. Our concern then as
citizens, using the recent events from 101 Lusk Avenue as our most recent and
most vivid example, is that the balance that exists currently must be undone. That
the reasonable expectations of property owners in this instance have been ignored.
That the common sense prioritization of values articulated in the zoning ordinance
itself, a common sense consensus that voters are hopeful that a majority of the
City Council shares with them, has been at least temporarily disassembled and
disoriented. We ask, therefore, that in going forward, the Council consider how
their own prioritization of these values can be operationalized, directed and
infused by the Council to the City staff, and not the other way around. Thank
you.
Throgmorton: Thank you, Jim. Would anyone else care to address this or any other topic that's
not on the agenda? Good evening, Pam.
Michaud: Hi! I'm Pam Michaud and live at 109 S. Johnson. Urn ... to .... I appreciate in some
remote sense that, uh, the proposed project is one-third the size of a football field.
However, it's not empty space. And so for those of you who think vertically as
well as, uh, horizontally, I would say it's the equivalent of half of the apartment
building, um, across the street. So the Washington Plaza apartment building that
houses 120... students is just twice the size of this proposed project. So we're
talking about, uh, the project at 101 Lusk that is going to be the size of an
apartment building. It's not the design that, uh, I'm going to have problems with,
it's the scale, and across the street happens to be CB -2. That's an appropriate
building for CB -2. I didn't like it behind my College Green Historic District but
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 12
it's ... it's what was in the zone. And what is in the zone for RS -5, where Manville
Heights residents have lived for decades, is, uh, single-family residents, not
something the size of an apartment building, a three or four-story apartment
building. Thank you very much.
Throgmorton: Thank you, Pam. Anyone else care to speak? If not, we'll move on to Item 4,
Planning and Zoning Matters. Item 4a ... thank you all for coming!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 13
ITEM 4. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS
ITEM 4a COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, ORCHARD COURT
— RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF
BENTON STREET AND WEST OF ORCHARD STREET TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE DOWNTOWN AND RIVERFRONT FRONT
CROSSINGS MASTER PLAN. (CPA16-00002)
1. PUBLIC HEARING
Throgmorton: I'll open a public hearing. (bangs gavel) John Yapp!
Yapp: Uh, good evening, John Yapp, Development Services. Uh, this is an application
by M&W Properties (clears throat) requesting an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan, uh, to add an area on the west side of Orchard Street to the
Riverfront Crossings District. Uh, what's shown on this overhead outlined in
yellow is the existing Riverfront Crossings District. Uh, and showing the area
just west of Orchard Street that is proposed to be added to the District. Uh, this is
zooming in. The property is north of Benton Street, uh, west of Orchard Street,
and includes, uh, a segment of Orchard Court. Uh, this would be the map that if
approved, uh, would be added to the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan,
identifying this as the Orchard Court District. Uh... the existing area is currently
covered by the Southwest District Plan. Uh, and what ... this is the land use map
from a portion of the Southwest District Plan. Uh, the west side of Orchard
Street, uh, just .... where my mouse is right now, uh, has been identified as a
redevelopment area already. Uh, the Southwest District Plan identifies it as
mixed-use development. Uh... the, uh, rationale at the time was that, uh, the east
side of Orchard Street had been zoned commercial, uh, for commercial
development. Uh, the west side of Orchard Street is currently, uh, medium
density, single-family. Uh, it contains duplexes, uh, single-family house, and
four-plexes, and the thought was that mixed-use development should be on both
sides of Orchard Street, before transitioning to the single-family, uh, area to the
west. Uh, few images to show you. This is, uh, the west side of Orchard Street
currently, uh, with the duplex, uh, development. This is, uh, the Riverside West
apartment building, uh, that is currently being developed, uh, on the east side of
Orchard Street. Uh, the west side of Riverside Drive, uh, within the Riverfront
Crossings District. Uh, and this is looking at the, um .... and you can see the
apartment building in the background, uh, this is the intersection of Benton Street
and Riverside Drive where a new Kum n' Go gas station will be located. Gas
station and convenience store. Uh, to give you some context. And this is an
image looking east on Benton Street with the existing single-family houses on the
north side of Benton Street. And the next few slides, this is an image, uh... of the
proposed project as presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Uh,
through the Planning and Zoning Commission process, there were a few changes
made, uh, to the project concept. Uh, a few things I'll note on this initial concept
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 14
were an access drive off of Benton Street to the rear of the property, uh, surface
parking on the west side of the, uh, proposal, uh... lack of any, uh, connectivity on
the north side of the project. Uh, through the Planning and Zoning process, uh,
some of these things were .... were changed to bring you a proposal tonight. Uh,
there's a relocated entry drive along the north side of the site, uh, from Orchard
Court. The surface parking on the west side of the property was eliminated for,
uh, screened parking and under -building parking. Uh, this shows space for, uh,
potential community gardens. I think the important thing is that it's, uh, green
space on the west side instead of surface parking lot. Uh, removing the existing
gravel, uh, drive, uh, through the back side of these properties, and instead of an
access point to Benton Street, this would become a pedestrian street, uh, through
the property from Benton Street to Orchard Court. Uh, this is an image of the...
concept from Orchard Street. Uh, the concept proposal shows this as two-story
townhouses with a third floor, uh, of apartment units, a stepped -back third floor. I
think the important thing to remember at this stage is that this is a Comprehensive
Plan proposal, not a specific development proposal or a specific zoning action.
Uh, but the Comprehensive Plan does set the stage, uh, for future rezoning
applications. Uh, there are two factors to consider in whether a Comprehensive
Plan amendment is warranted. Uh, number one, circumstances have changed, or
additional information or factors have come to light, that the proposed amendment
is in the public interest. Uh, the Southwest District Plan was adopted in 2002.
Uh, since that time, adoption of the Riverfront Crossings District in 2013 and
redevelopment of the properties east of Orchard Street, the, uh, four-story
Riverside West apartment building and the, uh, Kum n' Go gas station and
convenience store, uh, is a change in circumstance. I would also note that in
2002, the, uh, form -based code as a tool, uh, did not exist. Uh, if this property is
added to the Riverfront Crossings District, the form -based code would apply, uh,
to any development on it. Uh, number two, the proposed amendment will be
compatible with other policies or provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Uh, as
noted, the Southwest District Plan does encourage redevelopment of properties on
the west side of Orchard Street. Uh, identifying it as mixed-use, uh, development.
Uh, and I'll conclude with a few images of the existing conditions, uh, of the area.
Uh, here's Orchard Street, uh, the residential on the west side of Orchard Street,
and the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment, uh, image of a three-story
building, uh, townhouses with a third floor of apartments, and an apartment
building to the west. Uh, with the gas station and Riverside West complex on the
east side of the screen. With that I'd be glad to take any questions and then the,
uh, a representative from the, uh, applicant is also here.
Tbrogmorton: Thank you, John! Any questions for John?
Dickens: So is a portion of this already in the Riverfront?
Yapp: None of it, nothing on the west side of Orchard Street (both talking)
Dickens: ...it stops at the....
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 15
Yapp: It stops at Orchard Street. So the, uh, Kum n' Go and the Riverside West project
are both in Riverfront Crossings.
Taylor: Would these qualify for then the Riverfront inclusionary housing ordinance then?
Yapp: If added to the District, they would. Yes. And under that, uh, proposed
ordinance, which is also on your agenda tonight, there would be a 10% affordable
housing requirement.
Taylor: This also means that the current duplexes and housing that's in that area would...
would be demolished to allow for the construction of this?
Yapp: Um, not with the Comprehensive Plan amendment proposal, but with a
subsequent rezoning and development application, uh, they would.
Throgmorton: Any other questions? Thank you, John. Good evening, Mark.
Scabold: Hello! Let me, uh, fix this up. I'm Mark Seabold with Shive Hattery. I've been
working with M&W Properties on ... on this, um, Comprehensive Plan amendment,
and I have, urn .... John showed a number of the slides that I'll be showing you,
but um .... I'd like to run through it just really quick, because I think, um .... you
know, and a lot of the conversation tonight actually has talked about process. We
had a, I thought, a really good process working with, um, both City staff and uh,
through the Planning and Zoning Commission, as well as with the neighborhoods,
kind of going through this whole process, and um .... you know, it really was, I
think, impactful to the design from the first (mumbled) that we presented to
Planning and Zoning we heard a number of resident comments, um, as well as
comments from Planning and Zoning that we made some really, I think, impactful
changes to the design, some of which John has shown, um .... I'll just kind of run
through.... those. So, John had indicated this is the, uh, the proposed boundary of
the, uh, Orchard or Orchard Court District that we would like to, uh, add into the
Riverfront Crossings, um, Comprehensive Plan. These are the properties that
would be affected. Uh, the ones of course that we're looking at are the ones,
um... kind of these lower properties, the 330, 226, 224, and then the ones fronting
on Orchard Court, which are all either owned or I think there's one that is
currently in contract to be owned by, um, M&W Properties. Um, this was the site
plan that we presented at the May 5a' Planning and Zoning meeting, and... and
really that was where, um, we gained some valuable insight. We did have a, uh,
neighborhood meeting, um, earlier in the year. We had, uh, four attendees show
up. We had, uh... one of those, um, attend at the ... at the, um, Planning and Zoning
meeting as well as two others that gave us comments at that time. Um, and again,
those comments, um, made us kind of reflect on that road, the parking lot. I think
they were concerned about even just green space for the residents that would be
moving here and just how it will impact the backyards of a lot of the adjacent
neighbors. So, um, in looking at that and looking at what we could do, as John
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 16
mentioned, um, we relocated that entry drive, which is an existing drive that's
utilized to access a lot of those properties currently, to the north off Orchard
Court. Urn .... so we could get rid of that gravel road and start to have this ... this
west and south sides of this development kind of blend into those backyard areas,
establishing again, as John mentioned (mumbled) Um .... the .... the under -building
parking with some ... some screening so it's not a large parking lot, which also
allowed us for some additional green space for community gardens along the
edge. Uh, since this time, I think one of the things that M&W, um, did
immediately after leaving that first Planning and Zoning meeting is contacted
that ... that last home at 330, um, and asked to purchase that, and so now that's
under contract as well, so now there's not that one house kind of, um, sitting out
at the edge of the property. Uh, again, um .... now that 330 is .... is ..... is underway
we can remove that gravel drive and increase the green space between the
properties, provide that pedestrian street, which could include benches. It could
include ... it could become more of a resource for the neighborhood because it's
kind of in that in-between zone. Because we still have access to a, uh, green
space between the buildings for resident use, as well as a number of roof gardens
as the building steps back from .... at that third -story level. And then we are
pushing the building back so we have that increased front yard setback for any
future widening on Benton Street. Uh, one of the comments also, as John
mentioned, was the, um .... the character of the street along Orchard, um ... Street,
and the .... changes that we made on there were defining more landscaping, you
know, defining those front yard areas for each of the individual units with a small
wall, some vegetation up front, um, you know, the possibility for some plantings,
ornamental trees, a garden or something in there that becomes more that personal,
um, living space and outdoor space for each of the residents, because the idea here
is that this building here is all owned units. You know, we're trying to
incorporate more owned housing into this neighborhood that's largely turned into
a lot of rental housing, and trying to get that Riverfront Crossing aspect,
um .... the .... the townhome style living, which is also fairly lacking in town. You
know, it's not a lot of that type of residency either. Uh, again, this is, um, what's
existing there. Largely, um, student rentals. It's fairly transient, you know,
there's not those permanent residents that really M&W's identified as
their .... as .... as what they would like to provide some housing for. Uh, we did
look at this, um, view looking east on Benton. It's largely story and a half, two-
story homes, um, hovering in that, you know, 15 to 25 -foot high range. Um,
when we took our model and kind of blended it in with that existing housing
stock, it did ... it's not overly, um, taller than the existing surrounding. In fact, this
property, there is no change in the zoning requirements that currently exist at that
35 -foot height, and as the building slopes up, um, and ... and as we step our
building back, it really is fairly contextual and a little bit lower, and provides a
little bit, I think, of that transition between those larger structures that John was
showing that are happening in the Riverfront Crossings District right across the
street and the Kum n' Go, and then starts to blend that down into the rest of the
neighborhood. Um, again, this is the, um, existing drawing showing the, uh,
rental properties. These are all rental properties currently, and then what, um,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 17
what the idea is here for the ... for the more permanent housing areas as part of this,
uh, as part of this idea. You know, again, we're talking about a Comprehensive
Plan amendment to start to work on what specifically will be, uh, located here, but
this is the diagram, I guess, that we've been working with. Again, through City
staff, uh, with the .... with the, uh, neighborhood and uh, and with Planning and
Zoning. Does anyone have any questions?
Dickens: What's the total number of units?
Seabold: Uh, there are .... 34 owned units here, so it'll be 18 townhomes with 16, uh, one -
bedroom condominiums on top, and then this is a 22 -unit, um, smaller, like grad
student, single -bedroom (both talking)
Throgmorton: How many units are currently in the area, Mark?
Seabold: There are .... oh! We have that number. So these are (mumbled) (unable to hear
person away from mic) Yeah, it's ... it's a little misleading. (mumbled) ....14, 16
to 20, but they're all two to three-bedroom duplexes. So when we're talking
about that conversion to like the 54 from this, we're talking about a resident count
that's maybe twice as many, just because of the amount of people that this type of
housing and ... and that students like to shove into their apartments.
Cole: How many will be owner occupied?
Seabold: Uh, 34, more than half. And the parking for those ... you know, is all.... this... this
building, all the parking for those residents is all accomplished under... underneath
the building, or between the buildings. So, you know, we don't have that impact
anymore, and then having the screened and tuck -under parking at the, uh,
apartment building too helps satisfy that concern.
Throgmorton: Other questions for Mark?
Seabold: Okay! Thank you very much.
Throgmorton: Thanks, Mark. Would anybody else care to address this topic? I need to take the
temperature of the Council, right? Or is that different for Comp Plan stuff?
Yeah, okay. So I'm going to close the public hearing. (bangs gavel)
2. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Dickens: Move the resolution.
Mims: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Dickens, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 18
Mims: I'll support this. I think I like the process that has been used, um, with the
neighborhood meetings, uh, P&Z has supported this. I think it's a good step-
down from the large apartment building right on Riverside, uh, Drive to the
neighborhood. Um, I like the changes in design that they've done. I realize this
is just a Comp Plan. It's not ... they're not committed, but .... um .... I'll be
supporting it. I think it's a good use.
Dickens: I think the fact that they're moving into the Riverfront Crossing.... kick-starts that
10% affordable housing, then ... it just, everything that we can add I think just ... just
makes that property much more enjoyable I think.
Taylor: I live in that neighborhood, so I go up and down Benton all the time and .... the
photos are beautiful, and I really look forward to seeing that now instead of some
of the, uh...some of what we have been seeing — the old gas station, etc., and the,
uh, car dealership on that corner. It's going to be a welcome change.
Cole: I'm fully supportive of this and I know we're not considering this particular
development proposal, but I do want to comment on it because that's what's
before us tonight (clears throat) You know density and livability is something
we're really trying to do, and that's really hard to do well, and I think this
particular proposal I think is very thoughtful. I think as evidenced by .... we don't
have a room full of people in opposition, and I think that that's a testament, I
think, to the planning of the developers, as well as our staff, that you did your
homework at the early stage and incorporate .... and I sort of share the original
concerns on the P&Z design, um, so I'm glad they had that thoughtful
commentary, but I really love the proposal and I think that particular district... it
hasn't seemed to work as well as it should, given its proximity to the University,
but I think what we've seen in the last five years it really seems like is taking off,
and I think with proposals like this, we're really going to make that happen. So I
really commend the developers and staff that made this happen, so I'm going to
be supportive of this and will look forward to whatever comes our way in terms of
future proposals.
Thomas: It's a very good project. In fact, you know, transitions in Iowa City have been
(several talking) hotly debated (both talking)
Cole: ...time to time!
Thomas: (both talking) I've been here anyway, and um....positioning on that west side
is ... is problematic as the houses are a little bit smaller than, um, you would expect
in a residential neighborhood. Uh, but I think the building profile works well and
I appreciate the graphics. I think there was a high level of graphics here depicting
the ... how that transition works in terms of building heights. Urn .... very
supportive of the .... the use of the townhouse, the idea that you access the units
from the street. I think that's one of the key aspects of when you're designing a
larger building, and this is not necessarily a tall building, but it has ... a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 19
considerable size, the articulation you can get with the townhouses with the
entries along that length really help break up the mass and very effectively. It
reminds me a little bit of the, um ... the building at Linn -Bloomington, with that
two-story and then the setback, um, for the third floor. So I ... I .... I think ... this is
an excellent example of how to do the transition and um, not impact the existing
neighborhood.
Cole: And I also love the community garden. That's a really good one!
Throgmorton: I guess we know how this vote's going to go (laughter) I ... I walked this site on
Independence Day. You might be wondering what was I doing out there walking
(laughs) the site on July the 4`h, but uh... uh, I love to do that kind of thing. It was
really interesting to get a sense of the project in relation to the ... to the, uh... uh, the
new apartment building on Riverside Drive and the existing structures along, uh,
Benton Street and so on. And .... sol ...I, like the others, support the proposed
amendment, but I do have some observations I'd like to present to Mark, and in
the spirit of dialogue, you know, just .... thinkin' through the project more, cause I
know you ... you have an opportunity to think about it a little bit more. Uh, I think
it's .... the building's going to work really well in relation to, uh, the ... four-story,
urn, building on Riverside Drive, uh, but I think it ... I think it would be better to
divide the .... the Orchard Street building into two parts, or at least have a walkway
in the inter ... in the interior, going from Orchard Street to that pedestrian walkway
and the other building to the west. I don't know if that's financially feasible, but
when I imagine living in the space, I think that would be appealing. Uh,
and ... um, there's lots of trees in the area. I don't know if any ... well, I guess I got
myself a little bit confused. I guess the major trees are just to the north, where the
other ... um .... buildings that are going to be maintained, uh, are. So disregard that.
Uh.... uh.... and then, you know, I was thinking a lot about Benton Street,
especially the building that currently stands at 203 and 206 Benton. So it's the
one, uh.... so .... the buildings right across the street from your proposed Orchard
Street building... right across Benton Street from it, and just to the west of that
building. Seems to me that the... the... the.... Benton Street part of your proposed
building is out of character.... not so much out of mass or scale, but out of
character with the other buildings, and I wonder ... in the spirit of, you know, just
interaction and dialogue, I wonder if it's possible to consider some finessing of
the design to make it really feel like it's in dialogue with the buildings across the
street and just to the west. Uh, let's see .... and I say that partly because... the
Comp Plan amendment itself states the building should be "complementary to the
rhythm and scale of the single-family neighborhood located to the south and
west." So .... so I think.... finessing that design might .... be more in spirit with the,
uh, the Comp Plan amendment. That said, I ... like I said, uh, I intend to vote for it.
So ... any other discussion? If not, um .... roll call. Motion carries 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 20
ITEM 4. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS
ITEM 4b ZONING CODE AMENDMENT, COMMUNITY SERVICE
LONG TERM HOUSING — ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE
TITLE 14 TO ADOPT AMENDMENTS RELATED TO ESTABLISHING A
COMMUNITY SERVICE — LONG TERM HOUSING USE, AND
ESTABLISHING PARKING, DENSITY AND PROVISIONAL AND
SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA FOR SAID USE. (SECOND
CONSIDERATION)
Throgmorton: Staff has requested expedited action.
Mims: I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for
passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally
passed be suspended, that the second consideration and vote be waived, and that
the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time.
Dickens: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? Is there any reason to
hesitate on this? Yeah. Roll call. Motion carries 6-0.
Mims: Move the ordinance be finally adopted at this time.
Dickens: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion?
Mims: Just glad to see this happening!
Throgmorton: Yeah. Yeah, glad to move ahead on it. Uh, no further discussion? Roll call.
Motion carries 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 21
ITEM 4. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS
ITEM 4c. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT, INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
ORDINANCE — ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 14-
2G, RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS FORM BASED DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS, TO ADD A RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS AFFORDABLE
HOUSING REQUIREMENT. (SECOND CONSIDERATION)
Throgmorton: And again, staff request expedited action.
Mims: I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for
passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally
passed be suspended, that the second consideration and vote be waived, and that
the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time.
Dickens: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? Hearing none, roll call.
Motion carnes 6-0.
Mims: I move that the ordinance be finally adopted at this time.
Dickens: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? Hearing none, roll call.
Motion carries 6-0. Glad to see that too!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 22
ITEM 4. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS
ITEM 4d AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEE - RESOLUTION
ESTABLISHING THE FEE AN OWNER MAY OPT TO PAY IN LIEU OF
PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE RIVERFRONT
CROSSINGS DISTRICT
Mims: Move the resolution.
Dickens: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? Uh, do ... would it be
helpful, I think it would be, to have someone from staff make a brief statement
about what's involved with this.
Yapp: Uh, the.... ordinance provides.... that fee in lieu of is an option and I have ... here
we go! Uh, is an option for a developer, uh, to choose. Uh, the other options are
on-site affordable rental housing or on-site affordable owner-occu.... owner -
occupied housing. Uh, the ordinance provides that the fee should be based on the
difference in project value, uh, comparing a market -rate project with the 10%
affordable project. Uh, we engage the National Development Council to develop,
uh, the formula. Um ... the goal is to establish a consistent, predictable fee .... for
projects in the Riverfront Crossings District. Uh, the fee is based on local market
data, uh, which would be updated every two years. Uh, and the proposed fee is
580,572 per unit. Uh... those funds would go into an affordable housing fund, uh,
for use, uh, for affordable housing purposes, uh, within the Riverfront Crossings
District. Uh, that's one distinction from some other potential funding sources for
affordable housing, uh, is that these funds would have to be used in the Riverfront
Crossings District.
Throgmorton: I want to make sure I understand how this works, and I'm going to say this mainly
for the public's purpose, I guess. Uh, I want to relate this to the project we just
considered. Assuming they apply for rezoning, assuming they get it, assuming
they build a project that has the same number of units owned... owned units as
they proposed or talked about, uh, just a minute ago. Uh, that would be 30 -some
odd units if I remember it correctly, uh, which would mean (both talking)
Yapp: I think a little more than that, but....
Throgmorton: Well the total's 50 -some odd (both talking)
Yapp: Right.
Throgmorton:... thought only like 30 -some odd would be owned.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 23
Yapp: Oh, the .... the, uh, inclusionary housing ordinance is ... is (both talking) based on
total number (both talking)
Throgmorton: Okay, so .... that would mean that five or six, I don't know how that works. Five
or six of the units would have to be .... meet the affordable housing requirement...
Yapp: That's correct.
Throgmorton: .... and if they could choose this, uh, payment in lieu of, which would mean
$80,000 times....five or six units.
Yapp: That's correct.
Throgmorton: And ... then that money would either go .... that would go into the affordable
housing fund, if they chose that route.
Yapp: (both talking) Yes.
Throgmorton: Okay. Great, and....
Cole: And it has to remain in the district, correct, so they (both talking)
Yapp: (both talking) That is correct.
Cole: Okay.
Yapp: Yeah.
Throgmorton: Uh....
Yapp: The legal term is a nexus between how the funds ... where the funds are collected
from, uh... and a relationship between that and where the funds are used.
Throgmorton: Yeah, rational nexus.
Yapp: Yes.
Throgmorton: Zoning law. (laughs) Court cases. Nolan, Dolan, whichever one it was. I don't
know. Uh, okay, so, uh, any other questions for John? Thank you, John!
Yapp: Thank you!
Throgmorton: Uh... okay! Uh, any further discussion? We have a ... we have the motion, right?
So, any discussion?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 24
Mims: I would just say I'm not sure that I'm fully comfortable with the .... the way this is
being calculated and the number that we're coming up with. But, as a starting
point, I'll support it. Um .... but ..... I think it's something that we need to keep a
close eye on and .... and, you know, from developers and see how they .... you
know, really rationally feel like it is working. Um, certainly we've had some who
have criticized it considerably in terms of some of the background of this and how
it's being done. Um, so I'll support it as a starting point. I'm not .... I'm not sure
if it's the right way, if there is a `right' way.
Throgmorton: So you .... you've heard from some developers (both talking)
Mims: Yeah!
Throgmorton: .... this methodology and are critical of it (both talking)
Mims: Yes! Yeah. Yep.
Throgmorton: Yeah, so we should pay attention to how it works over time. Any other
discussion? Hearing none, roll call. Motion carries 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 25
ITEM 4. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS
ITEM 4e. PINE GROVE — RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY
AND FINAL PLAT (SUB16-00006)
Dickens: Move the resolution.
Tbrogmorton: Moved by Dickens.
Mims: Second.
Throgmorton: Seconded by Mims. Discussion? Uh, John, you want to .... tell us just a little bit
about this.
Yapp: Sure, I'm sorry. I was .... talking with Maryann Dennis (laughs)
Throgmorton: It's Maryann's fault, I could tell the way she's walkin' out (laughter)
Yapp: Uh, this is the project, uh, for which you approved the, uh.... planned
development, uh, couple months ago at the intersection of Lower West Branch
Road and Scott Boulevard. Uh, the action tonight is to approve the preliminary
and final plat. Uh, this is an image, uh, of the, uh, final plat subdivision, uh.... it
includes, and this ... this was a topic of some discussion, it includes a street
connecting from Lower West Branch Road to Hummingbird Lane. Uh, single-
family lots on the east side of the subdivision. Uh, townhouses in the generally
the middle of the subdivision, and a multi -family building on the west side of the
subdivision, fronting on Scott Boulevard. Uh, it also includes preservation of
about an acre of the, uh, pine trees at the corner, uh, and I'll go back to the aerial.
Uh, the pine trees at the comer of Lower West Branch Road and Scott Boulevard.
Any questions?
Throgmorton: Uh, I .... I do have a question, but, uh....
Yapp: Sure!
Throgmorton: .... it's probably happened before but I just do not remember the moments, uh,
when it has. Is it normal to condense, combine the preliminary and final plat?
Yapp: It is not.
Tbrogmorton: Yeah, so .... why are we doing that?
Yapp: Normally, uh, normally the preliminary plat would have been approved with the
planned development. Uh, it was an oversight on staffs part that it was not
forwarded at that time.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 26
Throgmorton: Well usually there's a little bit of time so that... staff and others have an
opportunity to ... reflect upon how..... whether there are any changes that are
needed in the, uh, when it gets to the final stage. So....
Mims: Not really, Jim. Once we approve the preliminary we're pretty much bound to do
the final, aren't we?
Yapp: The planned development plan was very detailed. (several responding) Uh,
and ... and this, uh, plat is consistent with the approved planned development.
Throgmorton: So just for the sake of some, uh, naive, uh, Council Members, like me (laughs)
what ... what is the fundamental distinction between a preliminary plat and a final
plat?
Dilkes: Well, once you approve a preliminary plat, you're essentially .... the .... the final
plat's pretty ministerial. That's why the ... the final plat doesn't go through P&Z, it
just comes right to you. But ... but both have to be based on our subdivision
regulations. So your .... your level of discretion at this stage is far less than it was
at the planned (both talking)
Throgmorton: Yeah, yeah, I wasn't (laughs) I didn't want to exercise (laughs) substantial
discretion. I was just wanting to be clear about why we're doing both a
preliminary plat and a final plat at the same time, and John's answered that
question. And then being clear about what the distinction is between the two, and
why the distinction matters, you know.
Yapp: I would say in this case ... uh.... staff and the developer are obligated, uh, to ensure
the plat conforms with the approved planned development.
Throgmorton: Okay.
Dilkes: Final plat is the stage at which we do all the legal papers. We ... we have the
recorder's statement has to be filed, the ... the title opinion has to be done, the
subdivision, urn .... subdivider's agreement has to be done, etc., all those things are
done at the final plat stage.
Throgmorton: Okay! Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call. Motion carries 5-1 ... uh,
with, um, Taylor in the negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 27
ITEM 5. CITY SALE, 1109 5th AVENUE - AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A
SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 1109 5TH AVENUE
b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Dickens: Move the resolution.
Mims: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Dickens, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
Cole: Do we still have the City STEPS program? It seems like something out of the
90s.
Frain: It's a ... it's a, uh, plan that's required by HUD every five years, um, so yes, we still
have it.
Cole: Just wanted to know.
Throgmorton: Further discussion? Hearing none, roll call. Motion carries 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 28
ITEM 6. EXCLUDING CRIME VICTIMS FROM RENTAL PERMIT SANCTIONS
- ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 17, ENTITLED "BUILDING AND
HOUSING," CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED "HOUSING CODE," TO
EXCLUDE CRIME VICTIMS FROM RENTAL PERMIT SANCTIONS.
(SECOND CONSIDERATION)
Dickens: Move the second consideration.
Thomas: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Dickens, seconded by Thomas. Discussion? Uh, is ... I thought Steve
Rackis might be here. Is there anyone who can sort of briefly describe what
this.... proposal's all about?
Dilkes: This ... this is because of a State code section, um, which arose because of the
actions of other cities, not Iowa City, were taking, uh, with respect... respect to
penalties when the police were being called. Um, and in looking at our ordinance,
uh, although we ... I think we have one instance where there was a penalty to a...
potential victim, um .... we just wanted to clarify this. So that there was nothing...
it was clear that we would not apply our rental permit sanctions to a victim of a
crime.
Throgmorton: Okay! Thank you. Uh, any discussion? Hearing none, roll call. Motion carries
6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 29
ITEM 7. HOUSING CODE - ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 17, ENTITLED
"BUILDING AND HOUSING," CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED "HOUSING
CODE," TO REQUIRE THAT THE INFORMATIONAL DISCLOSURE
AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT FORM NOTIFY TENANTS OF THE
AVAILABILITY OF A MAP SHOWING WHETHER A RENTAL UNIT IS
LOCATED IN A FLOOD PLAIN. (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Dickens: Move the consideration.
Thomas: Second.
Throgmorton: Moved by Dickens, seconded by Thomas. Discussion? Uh, can somebody, uh,
address this as well? John, thank you!
Yapp: Uh, sure. This, uh.... proposal was initially suggested by the Board of
Adjustment, uh, when they were considering a special exception to approve, uh,
second floor apartments, uh, in a commercial building. Uh, the building was in
the flood plain, uh, and while the second floor apartments would not of directly
been threatened by, uh, any flood, uh, if the property did flood, uh.... it would
make those apartments inaccessible. So they .... they asked a question — how do
renters know if they're in a flood plain? Uh... and we .... considered that and .... and
the, uh, answer to that question was that there is no good answer. Uh, and so this
is simply a .... a method, uh, to inform renters if their, uh, structure that they are
renting is in the flood plain or not, uh, renters currently, uh, excuse me. Landlords
currently have to provide renters with what's called an information, uh, and
disclosure form. Uh, and we thought that the ... that would be the best way to
inform, uh, renters .... if their .... if the property's in the flood plain or not.
Throgmorton: Thank you, John. Any questions for John? Hearing none, any further discussion?
Roll call. Motion carries 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 30
ITEM 10. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION
Throgmorton: Terry, why don't you start.
Dickens: Nothing.
Throgmorton: Well done! (laughter) Rockne?
Cole: Nothing to add.
Throgmorton: Pauline?
Taylor: Nothing.
Throgmorton: John?
Thomas: Nothing.
Throgmorton: Susan?
Mims: Nope!
Throgmorton: There you go!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.
Page 31
ITEM 12. ADJOURN to executive session for evaluations (and to work session if
needed)
Throgmorton: Motion to adjourn to executive session for evaluations.
Mims: So moved
Dickens: Second
Karr: Do need to read statement distributed this evening.
Throgmorton: Move we adjourn to executive session to evaluate the professional competency of
individuals whose appointment, hiring, performance or discharge is being
considered when necessary to prevent needless and irreparable injury to that
individuals' reputations and those individuals requested a closed session.
Mims: So moved
Dickens: Second
Throgmorton: All those in favor.
Dilkes: Roll call.
Throgmorton: Roll call. Motion carries 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
regular formal meeting of July 5, 2016.