The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2017-01-26 Info Packet-6a at CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org January 26, 2017 I131 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule 1132 Agenda JANUARY 30 JOINT ENTITIES MEETING JANUARY 31 SPECIAL WORK SESSION I133 Work Session Agenda (Council correspondence included) [Additional letters to Council received on 1/30 and 1/31 and distributed as Late Handouts on these dates — Formally accepted on 2/7 Consent Calendar.] I134 Memorandum from City Manager: Allen Homes project on City Hall block MISCELLANEOUS I135 Copy of letter from Mayor Throgmorton to Iowa City Community School District Board Members: Bond Referendum I136 Email from James McCoy: Fee & Dividend Endorsement Resolution Request I137 Memorandum from Senior Planner to City Manager: Historic Preservation Grants I138 Article from City Manager: Mediacom Communications Makes Iowa First Gigabit State in the Nation I139 Email from Shelia Daniels: Pedestrian Walkway— Newton Road DRAFT MINUTES IP10 Board of Adjustment: January 11 IP11 Planning and Zoning Commission: January 19 ``11 G 1 �r mw CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule JANUARY 30 JOINT MEETING IP2 Agenda JANUARY 31 SPECIA WORK SESSION IP3 Work Session A nda (Council correspon ence included) IP4 Memorandum from Ci Manager: Allen H es project on City Hall block MISCE IP5 Copy of letter from Mayor n\r IP10 Board of AdjL IP11 Planning and January 26, 2017 to Iowa City Community School District Board li'dend Endorsement Resolution Request to Ci Manager: Historic Preservation Grants om Com unications Makes Iowa First Gigabit State in Walkway —\Newton Road DRAFT MINUTES January 11 Commission: January 19 Members: Bond Referendum IP6 Email from James McCoy: Fee & IP7 Memorandum from Senior Plann IPS Article from City Manager: Me is the Nation IP9 Email from Shelia Daniels: edes IP10 Board of AdjL IP11 Planning and January 26, 2017 to Iowa City Community School District Board li'dend Endorsement Resolution Request to Ci Manager: Historic Preservation Grants om Com unications Makes Iowa First Gigabit State in Walkway —\Newton Road DRAFT MINUTES January 11 Commission: January 19 City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule IPI Subject to change CITY OF IOWA CITY January 26, 2017 Date Time Meeting Location Monday, January 30, 2017 4:00 PM Reception Penn Elementary Media Center 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting 230 N. Dubuque, NL Tuesday, January 31, 2017 5:00 PM Special Council Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, February 7, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:00 PM Iowa City Conference Board Mtg. Emma J. Harvat Hall Work Session 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, March 7, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, March 21, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 4, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 18, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 2, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 16, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting IP2 Iowa City Community School District Educational Services Center Stephen F. Murley Superintendent of Schools 1725 North Dodge Street • Iowa City, IA 52245 • (319) 688-1000 • Foe (319) 688-1009 • www iowacityschools.org Joint Entities Meeting Monday, January 30, 2017 — 4:30 pm Penn Elementary School — Media Center (Please use South Entrance) 230 N. Dubuque Street North Liberty, Iowa 52317 Joint entities meeting between the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, University of Iowa, Iowa City Community School District Board, Clear Creek Amana Community School District Board, and the following Cities: Coralville, Hills, Iowa City, Lone Tree, North Liberty, Oxford, Shueyville, Solon, Swisher, Tiffin, and the University Heights MEETING PRECEDED BY 4:00 PM RECEPTION A. Call to Order: 4:30 PM B. Welcome and introductions C. Discussion/Update 1. Legislative a. Local legislative priorities (City of Iowa City) b. 2017 legislative issues and updates affecting local governments (Board of Supervisors) c. Legislative priorities (Iowa City Community School District) 2. Facilities Master Plan (Iowa City Community School District) 3. GO Bond (Iowa City Community School District) 4. Local immigration policies (City of Iowa city) 5. Iowa City Climate Mitigation Plan (City of Iowa City) 6. Implementation of crisis intervention training, programs and facilities (Board of Supervisors) 7. Hiring of a Mobility Managerto assist residents with transit related needs (Board of Supervisors) 8. Other business 9. Schedule next meeting D. Discussion from the public E. Adjournment The mission of the Iowa City Community School District is to ensure all students will become responsible, independent learners capable of making informed decisions in a democratic society as well as in the dynamic global community; this is accomplished by challenging each student with a rigorous and creative curriculum mught by a diverse, professional, caring staff and enriched through the resources and the efforts of families and the entire community. � r � �m{lir, ,7=11 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319)356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org City Council Special Work Session Agenda Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Emma J. Harvat Hall - City Hall 5:00 p.m. • Review of the Allen Homes Project involving the City Hall Parking Lot [IP#4 of 1/26 packet) Julie Voparil From: Mary Lou Welter <welteremig@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 2:49 PM To: Council Subject: Vote YES for Plan B on January 31 I am a 30 year Iowa City resident and I am contacting you to express my support for a Yes vote for Plan B on January 31. 1 think this is the best plan for me and the other citizens of Iowa City. I travel Gilbert Street frequently and therefore have personal knowledge of the need to update the fire department and resolve the traffic problems involved with it. Also as a retired State of Iowa DHS Public Assistance Worker I am well aware of the need for low income housing and therefore always in support of any plan that increases the availability of low-income housing for our community. I also am strongly in favor of preserving historical buildings like the Unitarian Universalist Society structure which this plan will do. Thank you for all the hard work you do for the me and other Iowa City residents. I'm confident you will make the decision that is best for all of us. Mary Lou Welter 1334 Carroll Street Iowa City, IA 52240 welteremig@hotmail.com Julie Voparil From: emily <epeck1 @hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 12:15 PM To: Council Subject: Re: 10S. Gilbert St. Writing in support of a vote for plan B. Low income persons deserve housing and we all desire an historically preserved city. As much as developers deserve a return on their investment, long term goals should not be sacrificed, I believe. Sincerely, Emily Peck Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S® 6. Julie Voparil From: Kelli Brommel <kelli@deadchannel.com> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 12:39 PM To: Council Subject: Plan B Dear City Council members, Please vote yes for Plan B on January 31. 1 believe this is the best option, allowing for low income housing to be built, fire house updates and saving the old Unitarian church building. Thank you, Kelli Brommel 2 Princeton Ct. Iowa City (319)471-5990 Julie Voparil From: Caryl Lyons <clyons@southslope.net> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 1:12 PM To: Council Subject: Save 10 S. Gilbert To the Iowa City City Council: I would like to urge the City Council to vote YES on Plan B on January 31, to allow the saving of 10 S. Gilbert. Not only is the old Unitarian Universalist Society building a central part of Iowa City's architectural and social history, but voting yes on this on this proposal will also allow updates to the fire department, create better traffic patterns on Gilbert St. because of the proposed fire department pull-throughs, and develop much-needed low-income housing in Iowa City. In addition, tax revenue will be generated. I live in North Liberty rather than in Iowa City, but like most of us who live in Johnson County, Iowa City is our central city, where we work and shop and eat and attend events and drive and park, so whatever is done to benefit the city of Iowa City benefits the people who live in the surrounding towns and countryside and who help to create the wealth and productivity and creativity of Iowa City. Please vote "yes" and make this plan a reality. Thank you for all you do for Iowa City and its surrounding areas. Sincerely, Caryl Lyons 210 N. George St. North Liberty, Iowa (319) 626-6277 clyons(@southslope.net Julie Voparil From: Jeanette Carter <montehigh55@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 4:31 PM To: Council Subject: Save the UU building! I am writing to ask your consideration of the Jesse Allen proposal that is now called plan B. In addition to providing actual low income housing and helping the fire station, it will protect the historic Unitarian Universalist building at 10 5 Gilbert. Iowa City has lost so much of its history, it would be a shame to destroy this structure! Thank you for your consideration of this proposal. Jeanette Carter 424 Oakland ave. Iowa City IA 52240 Sent from my Wad Julie Voparil From: Nancy Purington <nancypurington@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 9:29 AM To: Council Subject: UU Society Building Please vote YES for Plan B on January 31. Plan B: • Allow an aesthetic transition from the higher downtown buildings to the surrounding residential neighborhoods. • Give extensive updates to the fire department. • Eliminate traffic backups on Gilbert Street with fire department pull-throughs. • Offer low-income housing, which is so desperately needed in the area. • Provide much-needed tax revenue. • Preserve the old Unitarian Universalist Society building, which is an iconic piece of Iowa City history. Dear Councilors, The UU Church would make a fine lecture hall, performance center and many more uses. It is the only piece of historic architecture of its type in the City: a note of poetry in what is becoming a vast sea of rectangles and squares, steel, concrete and glass. Thank you, Nancy L. Purington Julie Voparil From: Judith Leavitt <leavitt.147@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 5:24 PM To: Council Subject: 10 S. GILBERT City Council, Please vote YES on Plan B for the property at 10 S Gilbert at your meeting on Jan. 31 to provide low income housing and upgrades for the fire department. Judith Leavitt Coralville Julie Voparil From: Maureen Patterson <maureen.p.patterson@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 5:29 PM To: Council Subject: Jesse Allen Plan Dear City Council, I respectfully ask you to vote yes on the Jesse Allen plan to develop the city block that includes the fire station, the police parking lot, and the old Unitarian church building. In my opinion, the current layout is an inefficient use of such a prime location. The proposed development, however, would be a great use of the space, providing many wins. The city would receive tax revenue from the development while also ensuring much -need housing for low-income residents. The fire department would operate more effectively with improved facilities, and drivers would appreciate less traffic tie-ups from fire vehicles. The curb appeal of the structures would be striking, providing an easy transition from downtown high rises to residential streets. Finally, history lovers would appreciate the preservation of an iconic church structure. Thank you for your service to Iowa City. I appreciate the opportunity to weigh in on a decision to improve a community I love so much. Sincerely, Maureen Patterson 1927 Hannah Jo Ct. Iowa City, IA 52240 Julie Voparil From: Amy Fretz <amymhere@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 7:36 PM To: Council Subject: Jesse Allen Proposal Dear City Council, I have been watching with great interest the possibilities of the new Jesse Allen project. I think the City Council has the opportunity to please the most people by voting yes to the entire project. The fire station would get a much- needed upgrade, making it easier for the fire fighters to respond to the city's demand. The historical preservationists would be pleased to have the church saved and continue to be a landmark downtown with new uses. Low-income housing would be available; it is sorely lacking in our city, especially with the new college housing project on Hwy 6 where the old Rose Oaks used to be. Jesse Allen has worked very hard to bring the city a proposal very worthy that will be a beautiful renovation to that entire area. I respectfully ask you to vote yes to his project. The proposal is expensive but it is building for the future of Iowa City. I also want to thank you for allowing the church to serve as a homeless shelter this winter. It means so much that our city council cares about all our residents. Thanks so much for all the hard work you do. Your service is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Amy Fretz Iowa City Resident 720-207-4513 Julie Voparil From: amatkinson@mchsi.com Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 8:16 PM To: Council Subject: 10 South Gilbert building Attachments: Dear Iowa City Council members.docx Dear Iowa City Council members, First, thank you for the work that you do. Few of the decisions that you are called to make are simple and uncomplicated. With my family, I have lived and worked in Iowa City since 1972. During that time we have seen many of the buildings that were here in 1972 and earlier, torn down to be replaced by newer and often less interesting buildings. With the historic Unitarian church building at 10 South Gilbert, the Council has a chance to make a decision that will retain a historic building, while providing more low cost housing, and that will make life easier and more efficient for the Iowa City Fire Department. To me, this sounds like a total win-win decision for every one concerned. Please vote to accept the Plan B submitted by Jesse Allen that will retain the building at 10 South Gilbert, one of the few historic buildings left in this area of town. Yours truly, Alice M. Atkinson 219 Lee Street, Iowa City Dear Iowa City Council members, First, thank you for the work that you do. Few of the decisions that you are called to make are simple and uncomplicated. With my family, I have lived and worked in Iowa City since 1972. During that time we have seen many of the buildings that were here in 1972 and earlier, torn down to be replaced by newer and sometimes less interesting buildings. With the historic Unitarian church building at 10 South Gilbert, the Council has a chance to make a decision that will retain a historic building, while providing more low cost housing and make life easier and more efficient for the Iowa City Fire Department. This sounds like a total win-win decision to me. Please vote to accept the Plan B submitted by Jesse Allen that will retain the building at 10 South Gilbert, one of the few historic buildings left in this area of town. Yours truly, Alice M. Atkinson 219 Lee Street, Iowa City Julie Voparil From: Barbara <barbaracoralville@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 12:14 PM To: Council Subject: Plan B Please vote for plan B as regards development of the property next to the fire department. There is a need for low income housing in this area which is within walking distance of the Senior Center, the Library and grocery shopping. Tax revenue will increase as a result of this plan. Thank you for your service and your consideration of those with low incomes who need housing nearer to sources of employment and culture. Sincerely, Barbara Staib Julie Voparil From: mfkswolf@gmail.com on behalf of Kurt Michael Friese <KurtFriese@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 5:55 PM To: Council Subject: 10 South Gilbert Dear City Councilors, I am writing today to ask you to please save our historic old church at io S. Gilbert and vote YES on "Plan B." That plan will: • Allow an aesthetic transition from the higher downtown buildings to the surrounding residential neighborhoods. • Give extensive updates to the fire department. • Eliminate traffic backups on Gilbert Street with fire department pull-throughs. • Offer low-income housing, which is so desperately needed in the area. • Provide much-needed tax revenue. • Preserve the old Unitarian Universalist Society building, which is an iconic piece of Iowa City history. Thank you for voting to save the old church. Kurt Friese Iowa City Julie Voparil From: Shelby M <shelbymv@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 7:30 PM To: Council Subject: Vote YES to Plan B to preserve Unitarian Church Dear Iowa City Council. I am an Iowa City resident of over 25 years. I have seen many changes in downtown Iowa City over the years, but at this juncture, I urge you to vote YES to Plan B to preserver the Unitarian Church at 10 S. Gilbert. Plan B will: • Allow an aesthetic transition from the higher downtown buildings to the surrounding residential neighborhoods. • Give extensive updates to the fire department. • Eliminate traffic backups on Gilbert Street with fire department pull-throughs. • Offer low-income housing, which is so desperately needed in the area. • Provide much-needed tax revenue. • Preserve the old Unitarian Universalist Society building, which is an iconic piece of Iowa City history. As a welcoming and diverse community, that church is a symbol of that over the years and will continue to be as a community building. I urge you to vote YES on Plan B to preserve this historic building. Thank you. Sincerely, Shelby Myers 51 Wakefield Court Iowa City, IA 52240 Julie Voparil From: Nita Kosier <perryrahs@southslope.net> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 4:59 PM To: Council Subject: Plan B. Vote regarding Gilbert Street Area lam writing to urge you all to vote YES for PLAN B concerning the Gilbert Street and Iowa corner. The fire department needs more room for updates, some additional low cost housing would be possible, it will keep an appealing neighborhood aesthetics and the added tax revenue would be great. Thank you all for your consideration of Plan B. Juanita Kosier Julie Voparil From: Rachel Clark <rachel.clark1 @gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 4:49 PM To: Council Subject: Vote YES for Plan B for Gilbert street renovation project Hello, I recently heard about the Plan B going up for a vote soon concerning 10 Gilbert Street. I highly approve of this Plan. I live near downtown and love the area, and I see all of these changes as major improvements to the city. I struggled to find an affordable place to live. I sincerely believe low-income housing will greatly benefit this part of town. Further, I personally have experienced the fire department "back ups" and I know how much the city would benefit from having an area for pull-through access. It is absolutely not ideal to have a fire engine have to go through the tedious "backing up" process when urgent help is needed in an emergency. I understand the support from the city that this plan may require, but as a devoted Iowa City resident, I strongly believe these improvements will be worth the costs. Thank you so much for you rime- I appreciate all you do for Iowa City. It truly is a great place to live. Sincerely, Rachel Clark Graduate Student Neuroscience University of Iowa Julie Voparil From: Kristin Wildensee <kkwildensee@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 1:27 PM To: Council Subject: Please vote yes on Plan B Dear City Council members, I am writing to encourage you to vote yes on the Plan B option for redeveloping the block between Gilbert and Van Buren that includes the fire station. As I understand it, this plan will allow extensive updates to the fire department, offer much-needed low income housing in the area, provide tax revenue and preserve the old UU Society building, which is a piece of Iowa City history. This plan seems to encompass many benefits and I hope you will vote yes. Thank you for all your work in considering the options for this parcel. Kristin Wildensee Julie Voparil From: Jessica Green <jgreenphoto@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 9:32 AM To: Council Subject: Please vote yes to Plan BI Please vote yes to Plan B on Jan 31 st! This is so important. Low income housing in the area is vital and would be such an asset to the community. This plan also upgrades the fire department building to a pull through where traffic will no longer be impacted. Jessica McCusker 1�. , V, ;�_cf 7 Dear Iowa City Council members, First, thank you for the work that you do. Few of the decisions that you are called to make are simple and uncomplicated. With my family, I have lived and worked in Iowa City since 1972. During that time we have seen many of the buildings that were here in 1972 and earlier, torn down to be replaced by newer and often less interesting buildings. With the historic Unitarian church building at 10 South Gilbert, the Council has a chance to make a decision that will retain a historic building, while providing more low cost housing and that will make life easier and more efficient for the Iowa City Fire Department. To me, this sounds like a total win-win decision for everyone concerned. Please vote to accept the Plan B submitted by Jesse Allen that will retain the building at 10 South Gilbert, one of the few historic buildings left in this area of town. Yours truly, IV, � Alice M. Atkinson 219 Lee Street, Iowa City Julie Voparil From: stephen locher <lochers@mchsi.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 2:25 PM To: Council Cc: Istephen locher'; locherj@mchsi.com Subject: Letter of Support for City/Jesse Allan Construction Project Attn: Iowa City Council Members: We are writing to urge the members of the City Council to support on January 31n the proposed construction project between the City and Jesse Allen for the following reasons: • The project includes 15 low-income apartments, as well as townhouses. • The design of the project provides an appropriate transition zone between the high-rise downtown and residential neighborhoods to the east. • Upgrades to the fire department increase safety and efficiency in the dispatch and return of emergency vehicles. These upgrades are an appropriate cost for the City. Alternative development may preclude such upgrades permanently at this site. The downtown fire station provides essential protection to the many businesses (including restaurants and bars) and residences in the immediate area. • The historic old UUSIC church building will be preserved, offering repurposing options similar to the uses of Old Brick for services to the community. • The TIF grant is appropriate for the anticipated community benefit. Since the current property has generated minimal tax revenue for the city, there is an eventual gain to the City from building this taxable structure on this property. Thank you for listening to our input, Sincerely, Jan and Stephen Locher 839 Bluffwood Drive Iowa City, IA 52245 319-354-6260 lochers@mchsi.com locheri(a)mchsi.com Julie Voparil From: QUINNCRAWFORD@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:20 PM To: Council Subject: 10 S Gilbert We are writing in strong support of the Plan B development plan for 10 South Gilbert. The Fire Department needs the proposed improvements and the city can certainly use more low income housing. The tax revenue this project would provide is an additional benefit as well as the preservation of one of Iowa City's most unique historical buildings. Thank you for your support of this project. Ronald G. Crawford Judith L. Quinn 733 Galway Drive Iowa City, IA 52246 I r CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1 82 6 (319)356-5000 (319)356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org Late Handouts: Information submitted between distribution of packet on Thursday and close of business on Monday. 1/31 Special Work Session: Information packet of 1/26 (Correspondence to Council) IP 3 Allen Home project involving the City Hall Parking Lot: See additional correspondence Julie Voparil bate Handouts Distributed From: Susan Boyd <slizboyd@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 3:56 PM To: Council Subject: Plan B for 10 S. Gilbert (Date) I am grateful to the city council, which has delayed its vote until Jan 31 in order to receive public output on Plan B. The city staff also deserves thanks for its hard work to make a Plan B that retains the fire department upgrades and even boosts the number of low-income apartments to 15. I urge you to vote YES for Plan B. The plan allows updates for the fire department, including the elimination of traffic back-up on Gilbert Street. By its very existence the former Unitarian -Universalist Society building on the property offers an appealing transition from the downtown area to the residential neighborhood area of Iowa City. It also is an excellent location for much-needed low-income housing. For all the above reasons, a YES vote on Plan B would enrich Iowa City. Susan K. Boyd Late Handouts Distributed Julie Voparil From: koberry@mediacombb.net Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 3:43 PM (� 3c� u To: Council Date Subject: Support for Plan B development proposal. Dear City Council Members — I am writing in support of the proposed Plan B development plans for the block that includes the City government offices, fire station and the historic Unitarian Universalist church building. As a longtime member of the Unitarian Universalist Society of Iowa City, and the current president of the Board of Trustees, I hope for a plan that preserves that historic building even though it no longer meets the needs of our current congregation. This year as we celebrate the 175s year of our congregation in Iowa City we've been learning about the history of that particular church building and other churches in the downtown Iowa City area. If this development was proposed in a different block of downtown, I would be writing to ask that you do everything you can to preserve one of those other historic church buildings. Those buildings are an important part of Iowa City history. But it's about more than just a historic building. When I attended the work session on January 17, I was very pleased to see that the proposed Plan B includes a good number of low income housing units. That is something that is very much needed in Iowa City, and especially in the downtown area. I am concerned that those low income housing units will not be built in that block if this proposal is not approved. I share the concerns some of you expressed about the cost of completing the new fire station bays. Perhaps there is some further negotiation that could take place about that. But I ask you to look at the big picture, further into the future, for what will be gained by the current Plan B proposal to develop that block of downtown Iowa City. I ask you to please give this careful consideration and make a choice that is good for our community in the long run. Please support the Plan B proposal at your work session on Tuesday, January 31. Thank you very much for your time and consideration, Kelly O'Berry Cell: 319-541-0326 Julie Voparil Late Handouts Distributed From: Gail G <gailathome1420@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 10:44 AM To: Council (Date) Subject: project on the block in downtown Iowa City at Gilbert and Iowa Ave. Dear City Council Members: I want to thank you for your time and energy as you guide us into our future. It must be difficult for you to make all those decisions that impact our future. It has come to my attention that you are considering a plan for the area surrounding the fire station and the Historic Building that once housed the Unitarian Universalist Society of Iowa City Congregation (10 S. Gilbert). I am writing to you to ask you to consider voting for Plan B. The reason I think it is such a good idea is that the fire station will get upgrades that it badly needs to keep up with a growing city. Pull- through access seems especially important so as the city population increases traffic will not be held up waiting for fire trucks to park. If we take this opportunity away, then what for the fire department?Additionally, our community gets the low cost housing that it badly needs. And, the community's history is not lost for future generations to enjoy, by tearing down the historic church. Surely, we can come up with a viable plan that allows fire station expansion, housing for people who have less income and we get to keep our historical buildings for generations to come. Iowa City has always been a city with character. I don't want us to lose sight of that as we grow larger. Thanks again for all that you do for Iowa City so that we can have a sunny tomorrow. Sincerely, Gail Garwood Iowa City Resident 1 Julie Voparil Late Handouts Distributed From: Miriam Kashia <miriam.kashia@gmail.com> /,30 Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 10:22 AM To: Council Subject: Vote "yes" on plan B (Date) To the members of the Iowa City Council RE: Upcoming vote on project Thank you for your careful and lengthy deliberations about the property at Gilbert and Iowa Ave. It has undoubtedly been a complex and difficult process. I urge you to approve the proposed Plan B as it will: . Allow an aesthetic transition from the higher downtown buildings to the surrounding residential neighborhoods. . Give extensive updates to the fire department. . Eliminate traffic backups on Gilbert Street with fire department pull-throughs. . Offer low-income housing, which is so desperately needed in the area. . Provide much-needed tax revenue. . Preserve the old Unitarian Universalist Society building, which is an iconic piece of Iowa City history. This plan will best serve our community in so many ways. Thank you as well for your ongoing work for thoughtful community development and for a sustainable Iowa City. It is greatly appreciated! Miriam Kashia Julie Vovaril I urge you to vote in favor of Plan B at tomorrow's council meeting. Your support for Plan B will • Allow an aesthetic transition from the higher downtown buildings to the surrounding residential neighborhoods. • Give extensive updates to the fire department. • Eliminate traffic backups on Gilbert Street with fire department pull-throughs. • Offer low-income housing, which is so desperately needed in the area. • Provide much-needed tax revenue. • Preserve the old Unitarian Universalist Society building, which is an iconic piece of Iowa City history. Thank you very much for considering. Sincerely yours, Niklaus Jakob Nik Jakob (319) 631-8126 Late Handouts Distributea From: Nik Jakob <niklaus.jakob@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 12:12 PM To: Council Subject: Please vote in favor of Plan B 3 6 (Date) Dear Council Members, I urge you to vote in favor of Plan B at tomorrow's council meeting. Your support for Plan B will • Allow an aesthetic transition from the higher downtown buildings to the surrounding residential neighborhoods. • Give extensive updates to the fire department. • Eliminate traffic backups on Gilbert Street with fire department pull-throughs. • Offer low-income housing, which is so desperately needed in the area. • Provide much-needed tax revenue. • Preserve the old Unitarian Universalist Society building, which is an iconic piece of Iowa City history. Thank you very much for considering. Sincerely yours, Niklaus Jakob Nik Jakob (319) 631-8126 ,.ate Handouts Distributea Julie Voparil From: AIIanRJordison <arjordison76@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 2:25 PM )/1 I 1/1 To: Council (Date) Subject: The Historic Church at 10 S. Gilbert I am sending this E-mail in Lieu of Going to the Iowa City council meeting tonight, presumably taking place @the I.C.Civic Ctr. I and many people I know are In Favor Of PLAN B - Which would preserve our historic church:(Est.1908). PLAN B would not only preserve the oldest part of the church, but would provide for the I.C.Fire Dept.to expand in the remaining space AND Provide for several Low -Income Housing spaces in the future! PLEASE Consider Voting YES on PLAN B and protect this invaluable space for Now and for the Future!!! Sincerely, Allan Jordison 301 Willowind Pl. Iowa City 52246 Julie Voparil Late Handouts Distributed From: Ginalie Swaim <ginalieswaim@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 1:39 PM To: Julie Voparil Cc: Geoff Fruin (Date) Subject: Unitarian Universalist Church and the Allen Project Dear City Councilors: Thank you for your careful consideration of the Allen project and the future of the Unitarian Universalist Church. I greatly appreciate the extra time and effort that city staff and Mr. Allen have poured into revising this project into Plans B, C, and D. And I applaud everyone for prioritizing the preservation of the church building, which the Historic Preservation Commission has urged since March 2015. The Unitarian Universalist church building is historically significant, on a local and national level, because of its association with Eleanor Gordon, one of about twenty female Unitarian ministers between 1880 and 1930 who pioneered new ideas in Unitarian ministry and church architecture in the West and Midwest. According to Professor Cynthia Grant Tucker, the Iowa City church was one of several churches associated with this "clerical sisterhood," who "viewed their sacred space from a woman's perspective," and rejected imposing and inspiring Gothic church architecture more often seen in the East. Eleanor Gordon was the Iowa City Unitarian minister from 1986 to 1900, before the new church was built. But in her later position as Iowa's Unitarian Association field director, she helped acquire the property at the corner of Iowa and Gilbert, helped place in the pulpit someone whose believe in a simpler church architecture echoed hers, and closely supervised the building of the church in 1907- 1908. According to Tucker, Gordon was "hardly prepared to let just any sort of building be put up" on the lot. For the Iowa City church, Tucker tells us, Gordon and the new minister agreed that "there should not be a steeple, and homely touches ark open beams against white walls, fireplaces upstairs and down, and leaded window panes with amber glass—should take the place of ecclesiastical ornament. They also agreed that the church, which required a seating capacity of some three hundred, should be built as economically as possible.... [And] that, even where there was a man in the pulpit, the church was a place where women worked, too. There would have to be space for a `good sized kitchen' and ample areas for socializing, guild rooms, parlors, and fireplaces, all arranged in the interest of family togetherness and comfort." This simple building, which has been part of a busy downtown streetscape for more than a century, manifests an exciting and important chapter in the history of women, architecture, and religion. Itshould continue to be part of our community and I ask that your vote tonight ensures that. Sincerely, Ginalie Swaim Chair, Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission Julie Voparil Late Handouts Distributed From: Ginalie Swaim <ginalieswaim@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 1:45 PM /gr h-7 To: Council Subject: Why the Unitarian Church is Historically Significant (Date) City Council: I apologize for this very late correspondence. I just realized that I would not be able to address the council because it is a work session. Thank you for your careful consideration of the Allen project and the future of the Unitarian Universalist Church. I greatly appreciate the extra time and effort that city staff and Mr. Allen have poured into revising this project into Plans B, C, and D. And I applaud everyone for prioritizing the preservation of the church building, which the Historic Preservation Commission has urged since March 2015. The Unitarian Universalist church building is historically significant, on a local and national level, because of its association with Eleanor Gordon, one of about twenty female Unitarian ministers between 1880 and 1930 who pioneered new ideas in Unitarian ministry and church architecture in the West and Midwest. According to Professor Cynthia Grant Tucker, the Iowa City church was one of several churches associated with this "clerical sisterhood," who "viewed their sacred space from a woman's perspective," and rejected imposing and inspiring Gothic church architecture more often seen in the East. Eleanor Gordon was the Iowa City Unitarian minister from 1986 to 1900, before the new church was built. But in her later position as Iowa's Unitarian Association field director, she helped acquire the property at the corner of Iowa and Gilbert, helped place in the pulpit someone whose believe in a simpler church architecture echoed hers, and closely supervised the building of the church in 1907- 1908. According to Tucker, Gordon was "hardly prepared to let just any sort of building be put up" on the lot. For the Iowa City church, Tucker tells us, Gordon and the new minister agreed that "there should not be a steeple, and homely touches ark open beams against white walls, fireplaces upstairs and down, and leaded window panes with amber glass—should take the place of ecclesiastical ornament. They also agreed that the church, which required a seating capacity of some three hundred, should be built as economically as possible.... [And] that, even where there was a man in the pulpit, the church was a place where women worked, too. There would have to be space for a `good sized kitchen' and ample areas for socializing, guild rooms, parlors, and fireplaces, all arranged in the interest of family togetherness and comfort." This simple building, which has been part of a busy downtown streetscape for more than a century, manifests an exciting and important chapter in the history of women, architecture, and religion. Itshould continue to be part of our community and I ask that your vote tonight ensures that. Sincerely, Ginalie Swaim Chair, Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission Julie Voparil Late Handouts Distributed From: Beck, Philip R <philip-beck@uiowa.edu> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 12:33 PM To: Subject: Council /t�, ��QQ\\ Please Vote Yes for Plan B and save the historic Unitarian-UniversaliDWrch Hello, I'm writing to ask you to vote yes on Plan B for the development of the block behind the downtown fire station and the former Unitarian Universalist church at 10 S. Gilbert St. If you vote no, the church is in danger of being torn down by Jesse Allen, the developer who purchased this property in 2015. It would be a tragedy if the city did not save such a beautiful and unique building. It was dedicated in 1908 as the first church built specifically to house the Unitarian Society of Iowa City, which had been founded in 1881. Because Unitarians and Universalists merged in 1960, the Society dates its presence in Iowa City to 1841 when the first Universalist congregation was formed. The 108 -year-old building at 10 S. Gilbert, therefore, represents 176 years of continuous religious activity, among the city's oldest religious traditions. If this doesn't distinguish it enough, consider the building's architecture, which is distinct from all other churches that were part of the downtown in 1908. The design was adapted by Boston architect Edwin J. Lewis, Jr., from a 1902 booklet, "Plans for Churches," published by the American Unitarian Association (AUA). It is deliberately simple and unadorned, eschewing traditional church features such as a steeple and a formal arched doorway. The style draws from medieval English parish architecture with elements of Tudor Revival. The false buttresses and small roof windows are rare and unique to this church, according to UU historian Rev. Stefan Jonasson. The impact it had on the community was immediate. Because of its modest look and the intimacy of its interior spaces, a local newspaper reported that the new church was known in the community as "the little church that looks like a house." Today, very few Unitarian structures like it remain, since congregations stopped using "Plans for Churches" after World War I. The Iowa City church is therefore one of the last representatives of this style of architecture in the whole country. For all these reasons, it's eligible for historic landmark status. We cannot allow so significant a building to be torn down when an opportunity to preserve it is so close at hand. The city would lose a significant piece of its history and we would all be diminished as a community. Please vote yes on Plan B and keep this from happening. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Phil Beck 109 S. Johnson St. Iowa City, IA 52240 Late Handouts Distributed Julie Voparil From: Linda S. Fisher <linda7484uu@msn.com> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 9:01 PM To: Council Date Subject: In favor of Plan B Dear members of the City Council, Having read the goals and projected effects of Plan B for the changes that can be brought to the Iowa City block that is home to the main Fire Department building, the historic former Unitarian Universalist sanctuary, and many parking spots that could be more efficiently housed along with the addition of some much-needed low-income housing, it is with great hope that I urge your positive vote for Plan B. There are so many good effects that can be achieved from it. As a player with the New Horizons Band, a couple of times I witnessed at the parking ramp across the street, either after or before a rehearsal, the challenges that exist for the fire department personnel in returning those important fire trucks to the safe haven of the current location. It will be wonderful if Plan B can provide the much safer and more efficient housing of the trucks in a drive-through design, along with improved fire department offices and on -duty personnel housing. Considering the downtown need for more housing for financially challenged people, this would seem a very commendable location for such apartments, especially for seniors, who have a fairly low profile in this college city. And saving a clearly historically significant building --I think there are VERY few built and still standing in that rare architectural style --should be an extremely important goal for a city that prides itself on retention of such historical standouts. Taking the very positive effects of these and other goods put together in Plan B, I strongly hope that you can find a way to utilize Plan B to maximize the goods possible in significant changes for this important block in downtown Iowa City. Best wishes to all, Linda S. Fisher Late Handouts Distributed Julie Voparil From: Pam Michaud <iowastay@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 10:31 PM To: Council (Date) Subject: UUSIC at 10 S. Gilbert St. a local landmark Please preserve and repurpose the 1906 iJUSIC sanctuary at 10 S. Gilbert St. The church has all original architecture and has been the discussion place and leadership for many historic movements: suffrage, civil rights, Environmental issues, women' and reproductive rights, outreach to impoverished populations here and abroad, etc. Please consider making the 10 S. Gilbert church a Local Landmark. It could be repurposed as an Iowa City Visitors' Center, selling tickets to Englert, Hancher, etc. directing visitors to local interests,welcoming and orienting prospective employees' families to local resources. hosting local art exhibits and sales by artist volunteers. Thank you for all your work to make Iowa City a Just City, Pam Michaud 319-530-7445 109 S. Johnson St. Iowa City, IA 52240 tr , CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF UTERATURE CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: January 26, 2017 To: City Council From: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Wendy Ford, Economic Development Coordinator Re: Allen Homes project on City Hall block Introduction At your work session on January 17, 2017, staff presented an overview of two plans, A & B, for the redevelopment of the north half of the City Hall block. At that meeting, we focused on Plan B and you requested two weeks to consider the information presented and seek answers to additional questions. Following is the information you requested and the introduction of a concept for Plan C and D, discussed on January 24 with the Development team. Plan A history In late 2015, Jesse Allen, of Allen Homes, presented a concept (Plan A) to the City Council for a redevelopment project on the north half of the City Hall Block. The project would preserve the Unitarian Church on the corner, if the City would sell its parking lot to the developer to enable a multi -use development to include: • A 207 space parking structure the City would purchase • 3 drive-through fire truck bays the City would purchase • 2 floors of office space (11,000 sf total) the City would purchase • Preservation of the church, to be retained by the developer as commercial property • 25 townhomes lining the exterior of the parking structure to be retained by the developer • 54 apartments, retained by the Developer; 6 of which would be rented at affordable rates • 6 affordable housing units the Housing Authority would purchase After analysis, Plan A was determined not to be financially viable. After making this determination, staff and the development team began to work on an alternative plan (Plan B) that could present a more viable option for the City. Under Plan B, the main physical change to the project is that the top floor of the parking structure would be replaced with another floor of apartments (see slides following this memo). A summary of Plan B A 145 space parking structure to be retained by the developer. The structure would allow for an estimated 54 spaces to be leased to the City for public safety parking after satisfying the parking requirement for the market rate residential units and waiving the parking requirement for the affordable housing units. Market rate rent for the City to pay (and for the developer to realize) on these space would be $51,840 annually. (Note: at the 1/17/17 work session, staff reported there would be only 40 additional spaces available in the parking January 26, 2017 Page 2 structure which did not account for a 15% affordability mix, thus freeing up the additional spaces, assuming the parking requirement waiver for affordable housing.) • 3 drive through fire truck bays for the City to purchase for $2,177,785 • 1 floor (5,500 sf) office space directly above the fire truck bays for the developer to retain • Preservation of the church, to be retained by the developer as commercial property • A total of 97 dwelling units including apartments and townhomes. The apartments have a mix of 15% designated for affordable housing: 3 1 BR and 3 2BR to be purchased by Housing Authority and 7 2BR and 2 3BR to be retained by Developer. 25 Townhomes designed to line the exterior of the parking facility. The 2 story nature of the townhomes makes the apartments a more accessible option for the affordable housing units. APARTMENTS # units Affordable housing units Market rate units Studio apt. 4 Apartments 4 1 BR apt. 12 3 purchased by Housing Authority 9 2 BR apt. 44 3 purchased by Housing Authority 7 retained by Developer 34 3 BR apt. 12 2 retained by Developer 10 Total 72 15 total (15.5%) 57 TOWNHOMES # units Affordable housing units Market rate units 2 BR flat 3 3 2 BR 2 story 22 22 Total 251 1 25 Along with construction costs, total development costs (TDC) include land acquisition and soft costs. Soft costs include but are not limited to architectural and legal fees, developer fees (<1 %) construction loan interest costs and contingencies (5%). The TDC of the components of Plan B break down as follows: Component TDC Per unit Townhomes $6,233,386 $249,335 Apartments 14,485,442 $219,476 Commercial office 1,274,150 Church 2,456,365 (includes $429,000 renovation) Parking 6,394,519 $44,100 per space Affordable Housing sold to Housing Authority 1,323,506 Fire Truck Bays 2,177,765 Total $34,135,343 The determination of a financial gap requires the analysis of all project costs less long term financing, required Developer equity, and proceeds from sales of any portions of the project. January 26, 2017 Page 3 The table below illustrates the financial gaps and costs associated with each portion of the project and how proposed financing covers them. Plan B Dev. retained Gaps and costs Developer portions (apts, 6 Affordable Developer Retained townhomes, City's portion Housing Units City purchase City Purchase Retained office, church, (fire truck for sale to City Sources of Fire Bas Sourcesparking) Church bas) (1 and 2 bdrm Uses Total Development Costs (TDC) City Land Sale Proceeds $ 30,843,861 $ 2,177,765 $ 1,323,506 $ 34,345,133 - Debt Capacity per Developer $ 21,993,011 $ 21,993,011 AH funds $ 21,993,011 - Equity per Developer $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 1,080,000 $ 3,000,000 = Gap on Retained Portion $ 5,850,850 $ 4,273,836 $ gap portion due to church Developer Long Term Debt $ 1,577,017 $ 783,179 $ gap portion due to Dev. retained residential $ $ 4,273,833 Developer Equity + gap due to 6 AH units sold at $180K each to City $ 243,506 2,903,831 $ 1,080,000 3,000,000 Total Development Gap $ 2,177,765 $ 6,094,357 $ 2,456,365 $ 28,387,499 Total required financing for Cit 34,345,135 $ 2,177,765 $ 1,080,000 Total Deve]oE2r Resources $ 24,993,011 $ 24,993,011 Public Funding Resources Filling the gaps HA Capital Funds $ 1,080,000 $ 1,080,000 $ 1,080,000 Land Sales Proceeds $ 3,330,000 Fire Bay Acquisition $ 2,177,765 $ 2,177,765 AH gap $ 243,506 $ 243,506 church gap $ 908,729 $ 908,729 $ 3,330,000 TIF (can be covered in approx 16 years assuming 4% int and $420,213 rebate/yr) 4,942,124 $ 4,942,124 $ 4,942,124 Total Public Resources $ 8,352,124 E 9,352,124 TOTAL $ 34,345,135 1 $ 34,345,135 The table below is the source for the graphic on the following page illustrating the relative size of each portion of the project and how the proposed financing covers each part. Notice, the total public resources include the proceeds from the Land Sale of $3.33 M, $1.08 M in Housing Authority funds and $4.94 M in TIF for a total of $9.35 Million. In exchange for the $9.35 Million, the City would gain the drive through fire truck bays and 6 units of affordable Housing. The remaining public funds would cover the gap on the Housing purchased by the Housing Authority of $243,506 (from land sale proceeds), the $1.57 M gap on the church ($908,729 from land sale proceeds and $668,289 from TIF) and the gap on the Developer retained residential and office space of $4.27 Million (from TIF). Developer Developer Retained City purchase City Purchase Retained Residential & Sources of Fire Bas of Aff Housing Church Office Uses City Land Sale Proceeds $ 2,177,765 $ 243,506 $ 908,729 $ 3,330,000 AH funds $ 1,080,000 $ 1,080,000 TIF $ 668,289 $ 4,273,836 $ 4,942,124 Developer Long Term Debt $ 783,179 $ 21,209,832 $ 21,993,011 Developer Equity $ 96,169 $ 2,903,831 $ 3,000,000 Total $ 2,177,765 $ 1,323,506 $ 2,456,365 $ 28,387,499 $ 34,345,135 Notice, the total public resources include the proceeds from the Land Sale of $3.33 M, $1.08 M in Housing Authority funds and $4.94 M in TIF for a total of $9.35 Million. In exchange for the $9.35 Million, the City would gain the drive through fire truck bays and 6 units of affordable Housing. The remaining public funds would cover the gap on the Housing purchased by the Housing Authority of $243,506 (from land sale proceeds), the $1.57 M gap on the church ($908,729 from land sale proceeds and $668,289 from TIF) and the gap on the Developer retained residential and office space of $4.27 Million (from TIF). January 26, 2017 Page 4 Below is a graphic description of the sources and uses derived from the previous table. $25,000,000 $15,000,000 Plan B Sources $34.34 million ■ AH funds ■ City Land Sale Proceeds r TIF ■ Developer Equity Developer Long Term Debt $908,729 +668,289 $4,273,836 $5,000,000 $1,080,000 96,169 +2,903,831 +243,506 783.179 21.209.832 $2,177,765 $1,323,506 $2,456,365 $28,387,499 City purchase of City Purchase of Developer Developer Fire Bays Aff Housing Retained Church Retained Residential & Uses Office $34.34 million January 26, 2017 Page 5 Plan C — Removing Fire Truck Bays In a meeting with staff and the development team after the work session, the developer indicated that it may be possible to do the project without the City purchase of fire truck bays. Providing an answer to the question of whether the project would be feasible without the City purchase of fire truck bays, the Development team presented two additional ideas with variations on each, described below. Development costs and revenues will change with these plans, and with the background from Plans A and B, we feel confident in describing the concepts for your consideration in choosing a direction for this project. Plan C(1) removes the fire truck bays and replaces them with 9 (possibly more) residential units, increasing the Affordability requirement by another unit. In it, the parking deck is redesigned with a lower height first floor because it wouldn't have to accommodate fire truck heights. In this scenario, the Developer has stated the portion of the gap attributed to his retained portion (rental units and parking structure) and the gap on the affordable units purchased by the Housing Authority could be covered by TIF rebates. The $1.57 Million gap on the church could be covered by a portion of the land sales proceeds of $3.33 Million. Plan C(2) is the same building configuration as C(1), but allows for the Developer's affordable Housing requirement (10, now) to be located in another developer -owned apartment rental property off site. 6 affordable units would still be purchased by the Housing Authority in both C(1) and C(2). This further reduces the gap and would enable the use TIF to cover the gap attributed to the Developer's retained portion (rental units and parking structure), the gap on the affordable units and the church gap of $1.57 Million. The Developer has indicated a rental housing property outside downtown that he would use to satisfy his affordable housing requirements. The Economic Development Policies include an affordable housing element that allows for the Developer to pay a fee in lieu or negotiate alternative options for providing affordable housing in the community. While exact locations have not been determined, they would presumably be compliant with the affordable housing location model. Highlights Plan C(1) Plan C(2) Reinvestment of $3,330,000 $1,577,017 to cover gap in City retains all proceeds: in land sales proceeds in church. City retains balance: $3,330,000 project $1,752,983 TIF Rebates to cover gaps on Rebates to cover gaps on • affordable housing • affordable housing developer retained • developer retained residential residential • church Affordable housing 6 units owned by Housing 6 units owned by Housing Authority Authority 10 units owned by Developer Remaining 10 units in other on site Developer owned apartment complex (not downtown) January 26, 2017 Page 6 Plan D — Surface parking only to be retained by City The City and the Developer also discussed two variations of another concept, Plan D. D(1) would require the elimination of all of the parking requirements for the dwelling units. In this plan, the City would retain the surface parking and the Developer would build apartments on a concrete deck built over the existing City parking lot. The City would own the land surface and all parking which would be reduced by the space required for the concrete piers supporting the deck above and the square footage required for the townhomes which would line the surface parking under the concrete deck. This Plan would require an ordinance that would eliminate the parking requirements on this block. The ordinance would be narrowly tailored to address the specific public benefit of preserving an historic structure. Plan D(2) would be similar, whereas the City would retain the surface parking, but the Developer would build a one -level parking deck above the City's retained surface parking lot. The City's surface parking area would be further reduced in this scenario by the need for a ramp to the Developer's parking, one level above the City's surface. This too, would require a specifically tailored parking code amendment eliminating parking when necessary to preserve an historic structure. Each of the above plans have the potential for additional levels of apartments reducing the Developer's financial gap, significantly reducing or eliminating the need for TIF, and the ability for the City to realize the tax increment from the Development sooner, if not immediately. There was not sufficient time to analyze the financials in this scenario, however, both staff and the Developer believe Plan D has the potential to reduce project costs, the amount of TIF and thus the time period over which TIF rebates would be necessary. Staff would also need time to consider parking impacts on adjacent decks and how services like bike and car sharing may address transportation needs. For more information on the parking requirements under current city ordinances, see an email copied from John Yapp, Neighborhood Services Coordinator, following this memo. Additional questions from City Council not covered above 1) What is the project cost associated with the church? Total development costs for the church in Plan B are $2,456,365 including $429,000 in renovations that include an elevator to make the entire building accessible, new HVAC system, and accessible bathrooms. The acquisition cost of the church in the Plan B total is less than the actual acquisition costs paid because it is reduced by the portion of the property the City would buy on which the fire station would be built. The Developer purchased the church for $2,450,000. Under Plan C or D, the project cost for the Church is estimated to be $2,992,500 2) Could the City purchase the church? The Developer has indicated he is not willing to sell the church. 3) To the extent possible, some explanation of the gap, especially as it relates to the new construction, would be helpful. Since this is a mid -rise building, I had anticipated the construction costs to result in a smaller gap, assuming the residential above the parking January 26, 2017 Page 7 ramp could be built with wood framing. Perhaps the parking ramp is mostly driving the residential gap, which then brings up our parking requirements. Three numbers to look at from Plan B: TDC of Developer retained residential, parking and office ........... ....... $28,387,499 Cost of Parking included in TDC above ($44,100 x 145 spots)................................................................. ......... $6,394,519 Financial Gap on Developer retained residential, parking and office, due to both cash flow reduced by affordable housing rental units vs market rate and the expense of building the parking structure......................................................................... ......... $4,273,833 4) Is it possible to reduce the parking requirement? Does the historic preservation element give us some flexibility, at least for the use of the UU church? Under the City's current parking ordinances, the church is in the CB -5 zone and therefore has no parking requirements, assuming a commercial use. The parking requirements for the affordable housing may be waived. Other options for parking are detailed in an email from John Yapp, Neighborhood Development Services Coordinator, at the end of this memo. Earlier in this memo, Plan D presented the option of a narrowly tailored parking ordinance that would eliminate all parking requirements when necessary to preserve an historic structure. 5) What is a rough estimate for the fit out of the fire bays and for the connection to the existing building? It is difficult to estimate build out and costs associated with connecting new fire truck bays to the existing building especially considering the need to relocate utility infrastructure now located between the two sites. A conservative guess would be a minimum of $2 million. 6) Would the removal of the Van Buren liner housing help make this project more feasible? No, because it would reduce revenues necessary to cash flow the rest of the project. 7) Compare the cost and benefits with other downtown TIFs. Packing and Provisions Building, 2011 Total Development Cost: $2 million TIF $250,000 up front Taxable value before improvements: $813,350; after: $1,817,390 Estimated annual property taxes: $62,750 Public benefits: Renovate building that had housed one of the large "problem" bars downtown. Stem the proliferation of restaurants; add alternative night-time entertainment option providing space for Film Scene to start up; add high end office space on formerly unused 2"' floor space; enliven Ped Mall street frontage with retail use. Park at 201, 2012 January 26, 2017 Page 8 Total Development Cost: $10.7 million TIF: $2.5 million up front Taxable value before improvements: $569,520; after: $10,160,280 Estimated annual property taxes: $234,488 Public Benefits: Redevelop under-utilized property; realize property tax increase from $23,000 per year to more than $220,000 per year. Gain three floors of Class A office space, street facing retail enliven Ped Mall. New downtown residents generate new spending in downtown area. Riverside West Apartments, 2014 Total Development Cost: $16.1 million TIF: $1.8 million in rebates Taxable value before improvements: $1 million; after: (est.) $14.2 million Annual Estimated Property Tax Revenues: $300,000 Public Benefits: Redevelop former car sales lot; early project in new Riverside Drive urban renewal area adopting Riverfront Crossings form based code; 96 residential units for rent; 12 units managed by Greater Iowa City Housing Authority for rent to persons at 120% AMI or below for life of TIF; photovoltaic solar array to supply power to building. The Chauncey, 2015 Total Development Cost: $49 million TIF: $14.18 million up front Assessed value before improvements: $0; after: $30.1 million Annual Estimated Property Tax Revenues: $1.17 million (of which $250K goes to taxing entities, $920K to TIF bond repayment over 19-20 years) Public Benefits: Redevelop former publicly owned land; creation of millions in new taxable value; 2 floor of Class A office space; two movie theaters and a bowling alley to add to the non -bar night-time entertainment options downtown; 5 residential condo units purchased by the Housing Authority for perpetual lease to persons at 60% of Area Median Income (AMI) or below; renovation of Chauncey Swan Park. Hilton Garden Inn, 2015 Total Development Cost: $33.2 million TIF and 50% hotel/motel tax rebates: $8.8 million Annual Estimated Property Tax Revenues: $524,000 Assessed value before improvements: $314,880; after (est.) $15.12 million Public Benefits: Redevelopment on portion of lot that has been empty for decades; new hotel property allowing larger market share of visitor population to stay, eat and shop in downtown Iowa City; Hotel motel tax generation supporting Police, Parks and Rec and tourism promotion. Note: The Chauncey is the only one that included City -owned land. Staff Recommendation The scenario presented in Plan B achieves the City Council goal of preserving the church property as a historic landmark. The preservation of the building would come at a steep cost, including all land sale proceeds and the maximum TIF rebate permitted by law. The City would January 26, 2017 Page 9 benefit from an improved fire station, but only after considerable additional investment is added to make the space usable and connect it with the existing fire station. The financial framework is viable in staff's view, however there is no question that preservation is only achieved after significant public cost. The City Council needs to be the judge if that cost matches the community value achieved with the preservation of the church property. The two variables presented in Plan C are worth serious consideration. While drive through bays have always been desired, staff believes they come at a cost that exceeds their value. The most critical investment that could be made into the existing fire station is one that would allow the residence quarters to be relocated from the current second floor location to the ground floor, thus improving response time and providing a safer work environment for employees when exiting the station on an emergency call. While this benefit would be achieved in the eventual capital project that would connect the existing fire station to the new bays, staff believes it could also be achieved within the current footprint of the existing station. Thus, the new bays are not needed to achieve the highest priority capital improvement for Fire Station 1. With this in mind, the City is paying a high price for bays that eliminate a nuisance (i.e. temporarily stopping traffic on Gilbert), but are not critical to achieving the more desired outcome of relocating residence quarters to the ground floor. The City's Economic Development Policy provides flexibility for the City to allow the developer to meet his affordable housing requirement off-site on other property that he owns in the community. By doing so, TIF is not needed to fill the gap created by the artificially suppressed rents in what otherwise, is a high rent area. Because the City would still purchase six units to be managed by the Housing Authority, there would still be an affordable housing component to the project. Additionally, the off-site affordable housing units would be located in an area that is not restricted under our affordable housing location model. Staff believes that the removal of the fire station bays and the off-site dispersing of the affordable housing requirements strengthen the financial viability of the project. The City will retain cash from the land sale proceeds that can be invested in the community in a manner that provides greater value than the proposed fire truck bays would. Similarly, financial savings from off-site affordable housing would lessen the financial burden, yet still produce the exact same affordable unit production in desirable areas of the community. Staff recommends pursuing both of these Plan C options more fully with the developer. Plan D could build upon decisions made regarding the Plan C variable noted above. Due to site constraints, parking is unquestionably driving up the price of this development. Current projections put the cost per space of the structured parking at over $40,000. Typically, the City achieves a cost per space closer to $25,000 in our structured decks. Because of the downtown location and proximity to two decks within a block of the site, parking is not critical to the successful marketing of the residential units. By eliminating parking requirements we can likely drop the total development costs considerably and potentially retain more spaces for City use. While there has not been sufficient time to fully explore this with the developer, staff believes it is worth pursuing. If Council concurs, we would initiate a code amendment immediately that would be tied to historic preservation and narrowly tailored to this situation. To summarize, staffs recommendation is to remove the fire station component, allow for the provision of off-site affordable housing units to satisfy our economic development policies, and to immediately initiate a code amendment to waive parking requirements in exchange for historic designation of the church. By doing so the City's costs will drop considerably while still achieving many of our original goals for this project. Council Direction Needed January 26, 2017 Page 10 Due to increasingly accumulated carrying costs associated with the church property, the developer has a need to move forward in an expeditious manner. While final details including precise financial, development, and legal aspects of the project still need to be ironed out, the developer is seeking strong indication from the City Council of its preferred path forward. Assuming one of more of the paths forward is acceptable to the City Council it is staff's intent to begin negotiating a development agreement with the thought that no future Council direction will be needed until the final approval of that agreement is presented. In an effort to focus discussion and provide the developer and staff the needed direction, it is suggested the City Council address the following questions: If Plan B proves to be the only viable path forward, is the Council comfortable with the general framework of that concept (100% TIF over 20 years and investing all land sale proceeds back into the project)? 2. If determined to be viable for the developer, would the City Council prefer the fire station component be removed from the project and replaced with a residential use? (saving the City $2.2 million in land sale proceeds and avoiding a future capital project to make the bays usable)? If determined to be viable for the developer, would the City Council be comfortable allowing developer retained affordable housing units to be located off-site (potentially eliminating the need for the reinvestment of any of the $3.3 million in land sale proceeds)? 4. Would the City Council be supportive of a narrowly tailored code amendment that would eliminate parking requirements for the residential components of the project in exchange for the designation of the church as a landmark building? This could drop the financial gap considerably, allow the city to retain ownership of surface parking, and shorten the duration of any TIF commitment. January 26, 2017 Page 11 The following are the slides staff shared at the Work session on January 17, 2017. City Hall Block with flood plain delineated Original Project r January 26, 2017 Page 12 Original Project - Plan A VIEW - NORTHWEST (Intersection of Gilbert St. and Iowa Ave.) Original Project - Plan A SITE PUN or iM AW -W ti N IGS W 1110f 11.1 n Nn Xurnv,lM eWnrn mww+M�+,a, January 26, 2017 Page 13 Plan A Total Developmentcost $39.3 million Public benefits: • Fire truck bays • Office space: 2 floors for future expansion (11K SF) • 6 units Affordable Housing owned by City, plus 6 units for rent (15%) • Preservation of Church • Parking structure (-118 City spaces) City resources: $3.3 million from land sales proceeds +$3.7 million TIF (20 years) + $8.8 million in cash or other funds $15.8 million purchase price of fire truck bays, commercial space & parking deck + $1.08 million in Affordable Housing funds purchase price of 6Affordable Housing units Deyelopmentgap remaining: $5.1 million January 26, 2017 Page 14 Plan B Total Development Cost $34.3 million Public benefits: • Firetruckbays • 6 units Affordable Housing owned by City, plus units for rent (15%) • Preservation of Church City resources: $3.3 million granted back to developerfrom land sales proceeds +$5.6 millionTIF to fill Development gap (20 years) $8.8 million $1.1 million purchase price of fire truck bays $6.6 million development gap for some of residential, AH + church gap + $1.08 million in Affordable Housing funds purchase price of 6 Affordable Housing units + $32,500/yr for - 40porking spaces leased from Developer Preserves Church Adds 15 units of Affordable Housing Space for future fire expansion in 5K sf floor of commercial Expands tax base No cash outlay Activates street frontage Plan B Loss of control of City property No City -owned parking Annual lease expense for critical parking Requires significant capital expense to fit out fire bays and connect to existing station Increases pressure on adjacent parking facilities Commits Tax Increment January 26, 2017 Page 15 Email from John Yapp regarding parking options TO: amm rvm 1ubjc FW: OpE for mdu Norate park nicluinirriiint Dab: Wednesday, Lnuan 25, 201711:56:51 AM Wendy — here is a recap of the parking reduction possibilities. In addition, the Code allows for a parking reduction of up to 50e9A (with approvaIf rom the Board of Adjustment) for adaptive reuse of a historic property. This would apply for some kind of adaptive reuse of just the Church property, but would not apply to the City -owned property. Just thought I would mention it. Let me know if Ts From: John Yapp Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 10:59 AM To: Wendy Ford Cc: Doug Boothroy Subject: Options for reducing onshe parking requirement Wendy — there are three code sections that may affect the parking requirement for the Allen project: 1) Minor modification to exempt up to 30% of units from the parking requirement provided those units are committed to an affordable housing program i.e. the parking requirement for the affordable units may be exempted. 2) Downtown and RF Crossings parking district: i. residential parking requirement may be reduced by 50% administratively provided a fee is paid for 75% of the cost to construct said parking ii. Residential parking requirement maybe reduced by 50%-100%with approval of a special exception through the Board of Adjustment (applicant must present evidence that it is not feasible to provide at least 50% of the parking on-site —this is not the case for the proposed allen project, and I do not see this as a viable option) iii. The current fee (based on 100% of the cost) is $26,053 per space 3) For a liner building masking a public parking facility (the townhouses in this case), the private parking requirement may be exempted provided monthly permits are made available to residents so they can park in the public parking facility. I don't know that this is a realistic option, as the parking would still need to be constructed, it just allows the City to own the parking facility as opposed to the developer owning private parking. Even if sorra parking requirement for the residential uses is reduced, the residences will still create parking demand on public (on -street and off-street) parking supply. The code language is summarized below. Feel free to forward this for Tuesday's discussion. January 26, 2017 Page 16 14.5A -4f(4): Minor Modification For Parking Reduction In The Central Business Zones: In the CB -5 and CB -10 zones, a minor modification may be granted as specified in section 14-413-1 of this title exempting up to thirty percent (30%) of the total number of dwelling units contained in a building from the minimum parking requirements, provided that those dwelling units are committed to the city's assisted housing program or any other affordable housing program approved by the city. (Ord. 16-4668, 7-5-2016, eff. 8.14016) 14.5A -4F(5): Downtown And Riverfront Crossings Parking District: For qualifying development as set forth below, the number of required on site parking spaces may be reduced in order to facilitate said development according to the provisions of this subsection. a. Qualifying Development: To quality for a parking reduction under this subsection, the proposed development: 1) Must be located in the downtown and riverfront crossings parking district; 2) Must not result in the demolition of a property that is designated as an Iowa City landmark, registered on the national register of historic places, or individually eligible for the national register of historic places; and (Ord. 14-4586, 6-3-2014) 3) Must include uses, elements or features that further housing, economic development, or other goals of the comprehensive plan, including the downtown and riverfront crossings master plan. (Ord. 16-4675, 320-2016) b. Parking District Boundaries: Properties described below shall be considered part of the downtown and riverfront crossings parking district: 1) Properties located within the area bounded by Burlington Street on the south, Van Buren Street on the east, Iowa Avenue on the north, and Capitol Street on the west. For purposes of this subsection, this area shall be referred to as the central business district; and 2) Properties zoned south downtown subdistrict (RFC -SD), university subdistrict (RFC -U), and central crossings subdistrict (RFC -CX) that are located north of the Iowa Interstate tail line. c. Reduction Of The On Site Parking Requirement: 1) For qualifying development, the off street parking requirement may be reduced by up to fifty percent (50%), provided a fee is paid in lieu based on the number of parking spaces that would otherwise have to be provided. 2) For qualifying development where it is infeasible to provide at least fifty percent (50%) of the required parking on site due to specific qualifying site constraints as noted below, a developer may request a special exception to reduce the parking requirement by up to one hundred percent (100%). provided a fee is paid in lieu of each parking space not provided on site and the following review and approval criteria are met. The board of adjustment will review such a request according to the following approval criteria: A) Convincing evidence has been presented that it is not feasible to provide at least fifty percent (50%) of the required residential parking on site due to a lack of alley access, a lot width narrower than sixty feet (60'), a lot orientation that makes it infeasible to provide on site parking and meet storefront depth requirements of the zone, or other unique circumstance; and B) The proposed project will be designed in a manner that is sensitive and complementary to adjacent properties designated as Iowa City landmarks, registered on the national register of historic places, or individually eligible for the January 26, 2017 Page 17 national register of historic places. See subsection 14 -3C -3C, "Design Review Guidelines", of this title for guidance on the factors to be considered to comply with this standard. This standard is not intended to impose any particular architectural style, but rather to foster a harmonious rhythm and proportion of building elements along a street frontage and ensure that differences in mass and scale are mitigated through facade articulation and upper story stepbacks; and C) The proposed project will be designed in a manner that will contribute to the pedestrian oriented, urban character of central Iowa City as envisioned in the downtown and riverfront crossings master plan. d. Payment Of Fee In Lieu Or Required Parking: 1) Where the city has allowed up to a fifty percent (50%) reduction in the parking requirement, the developer shall pay a fee for each space otherwise required in the amount of seventy five percent (75%) of the estimated cost of constructing a structured parking space. 2) Where a special exception has been granted reducing the parking requirement by more than fifty percent (50%), the developer shall pay a fee in lieu of the provision of each space otherwise required in the amount of ninety percent (90%) of the estimated cost of constructing a structured parking space. 3) The estimated cost of a structured parking space is twenty four thousand dollars ($24,000.00) in 2013 dollars. This fee shall be adjusted annually based on the national historical cost indexes contained in the most recent edition of "Engineering News Record", as amended. In the event the national historical cost index is negative in any edition, the fee shall remain at the amount previously set under this paragraph. 4) The city shall calculate and assess the entire fee upon issuance of a building permit. The fee payor may pay the entire fee at the issuance of the building permit, or may elect to pay the fee in three (3) equal annual installments, the first of which shall be due and collected at the issuance of the building permit. If the fee payor elects to pay the fee in three (3) annual installments, the fee payor shall execute an agreement with the city before the city issues a building permit, which agreement sets forth the timing and amounts of the remaining installments to be paid and also sets forth that, upon confirmation by the Iowa City finance department that the fee payor has defaulted on an installment payment, the city clerk shall cerffy the outstanding fee balance to the Johnson County assessor as a lien upon the premises for which the building permit was issued. Said lien will not preclude the city from pursuing recovery of the fee by other legal or equitable remedies. 5) All fees paid shall be deposited in the downtown and riverfront crossings parking district restricted fund, as set forth in this subsection. Monies held in the restricted fund, including any accrued interest, shall be used for the purpose of acquiring land for and constructing public parking facilities located in the downtown and riverfront crossings parking district. 6) In the event that bonds or similar debt instruments are issued for the acquisition or construction of the aforementioned property, infrastructure or facilities within the parking district, monies held in the restricted fund may be used to pay debt service on such bonds or similar debt instruments. 14-5A.4F(7): Parking Reduction For Liner Buildings: For liner buildings constructed to mask a municipal parking facility, the private off street parking requirement may be reduced by up to one hundred percent (100%) 9 parking for uses located within the liner building is provided within the associated public parking January 26, 2017 Page 18 facility. Monthly permits shall be made available for purchase to residents, businesses, or other tenants located within the liner building, but speck parking spaces within the associated parking structure may or may not be designated for use by said permit holders, at the discretion of the city. Compensation for construction of said parking shall be made to the city with the amount and terms of said compensation determined through an agreement with the city, which shall be executed prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the subject liner building. John Yapp Development Services Coordinator I City of Iowa City, IA 319.356.5252 1 ioho-y=_fdiowa-citv_ore January 23, 2017 Iowa City Community School District Board 1725 N. Dodge Street Iowa City, IA 52245 Transmitted via email Dear Chris and Directors, IP5 EST M6 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org I want to share with you my thoughts about the September bond referendum decision you must make during your work session on the 24"'. Ideally, I would be conveying the views of our City Council as whole, but the timing of your meeting relative to ours has made that impossible. I know you have been considering two alternative means of funding the remaining half of the FMP. One would authorize issuing G.O. bonds to fund the entire $194 million required to complete the Plan, whereas the other would authorize a smaller bond ($75-95 million), with subsequent actions depending on whether the State Legislature extends the I% SAVE tax. I think I have a pretty good understanding of the pros, cons, and uncertainties associated with each of the alternatives. I am especially conscious that the choice you must make entails a great deal of political judgment and guesswork. Will the State Legislature extend the SAVE tax for another 20 years? Are voters likely to suffer from "bond fatigue" should they be asked to approve a second small bond two or three years after the first? Would voters be even more opposed to paying the property tax increase associated with the $194 million bond issue? And would the projects in the smaller bond and a subsequent one (if necessary) be geographically balanced enough to receive support from all parts of the District? As I see it, the two alternatives represent different ways of achieving identical ends. On balance, I am inclined to favor going with the full bond, but I won't try to sway your decision one way or another. You understand the complexities of the choice far better than I do, and I trust you will deliberate carefully and make a decision that is in the best interest of the children, parents, and taxpayers of all parts of the District. At the risk of bringing up topics you have already discussed, I would like to offer a couple of suggestions. If you choose the $194 million alternative, please find effective ways to help property owners and other residents understand why the projects in the last half of the FMP are part of a whole and are worth their cost. You have to find a way to convey these points simply and clearly rather than bury voters in details. One good possibility might be to prepare one or more videos which show the great FMP improvements that have already taken place (e.g., the improvements at Twain Elementary and the construction of Liberty High) and the ones that will be produced by approving the bond referendum (e.g., improving Mann and Kirkwood). January 23, 2017 Page 2 It might also be helpful for voters to learn that the District intends to issue several bonds over time in order to generate the full $194 million. If the State Legislature extends the SAVE tax after the $194 million bond referendum is approved, the funds generated by SAVE would enable the District to avoid issuing some or all of those additional G.O. bonds. Best regards, &Jogrnorton Mayor of Iowa City Julie IP6 Subject: FW: Fee & Dividend Endorsement Resolution Request From: Jim Throgmorton Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 8:11 AM To: Julie Voparil Subject: Re: Fee & Dividend Endorsement Resolution Request Thank you, Julie. Yes, please do include it in the next info packet. Sent from my Pad From: James McCoy [mailto:mccovfamCalmchsi.coml Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 8:15 PM To: Julie Voparil Subject: RE: Fee & Dividend Endorsement Resolution Request Julie, Thank you for your correspondence. I have attached the standard "Fee and Dividend Leaders Endorsement letter", The standard "support climate action' letter and a repeat of the sample city council endorsement letter formulated by members of the Iowa City Climate Advocates Team as a specific example of what other cities have done. Thanks very much for your attention to this very important issue. If I can be of assistance in any way at any time please let me know. Sincerely, James McCoy From: Julie Voparil [mailto:Julie-VoparilCaliowa-city.orgj Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:13 PM To: 'mccovfamCobmchsi.com' Subject, Fee & Dividend Endorsement Resolution Request Re: Letter received from you on Jan. 9. Mayor Throgmorton wanted me to get in touch with you regarding the (2) endorsements (resolutions) you submitted. Can you please send BOTH to me and I will forward to Mayor and Council. Thanks, Julie Voparil Deputy City Clerk City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street 4f(5) Julie Voparil From: James McCoy <mccoyfam@mchsi.com> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2017 10:30 PM Attachments: Council FD1Y Subject: Fee and Dividend Endorsement Resolution Request C(0) Attachments: Longer CFand D (draft 6).docx Mayor Jim Throgmorton Councilmembers Kingsley Botchway, Rockne Cole, Terry Dickens, Susan Mims, Pauline Taylor, John Thomas I am writing on behalf of the Iowa City Climate Advocates, a non-partisan group of citizens working to create a sustainable, carbon -neutral community and educate people about human -caused climate change. A major focus of our work is building awareness and support for policies to better account for the costs of burning fossil fuels and to promote a level playing field for other forms of energy production. I am writing you today to tell you about a proposal to create a federal carbon fee and dividend program and to seek endorsement by the Iowa City Council. The "Carbon Fee and Dividend" is a revenue -neutral charge on carbon dioxide emissions and the return of net revenues to households. A fee would be placed on fossil fuels at the source (oil well, coal mine, or port of entry), starting at $15/ton of CO2e and increasing over time. Revenues generated by this fee would be returned as quarterly or monthly dividends to all U.S. residents. About two-thirds of households will break even or receive more than they pay in higher prices for increased energy costs. Such a dividend program is similar to the "Alaskan Permanent Fund" which sends annual checks from North Slope investments to all state residents. It would inject billions of dollars into the economy, spur innovation, and build aggregate demand for low -carbon products at the consumer level. This market approach to developing non -carbon energy production has support across the political spectrum. Supporters range from national political leaders such as George Schultz, former Secretary of State under Ronald Reagan; climate scientists such as Dr. James Hanson, director of Columbia University's Climate Science program; business leaders in the energy sector (BP, ExxonMobil, Duke Energy, and others), and environmental organizations. We commend your efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Iowa City, most recently by setting emission reduction goals and initiating a planning effort to determine the best means of achieving these goals. These efforts would greatly benefit by having supportive federal policies in the form of an appropriate price on carbon. We urge you to endorse the Carbon Fee and Dividend program and have attached a sample City Council endorsement resolution. We would be happy to provide any other information you would find useful in considering this proposal. Sincerely, James McCoy Community Leader's Letter to Congress Organization/Individual Endorsing Action on Climate Change WHEREAS... The costs of climate change—including destabilized weather patterns, rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and other serious impacts - now pose a substantial threat to the health, prosperity, and security of Americans. The costs are real, they are growing, and they are already burdening businesses, taxpayers, municipal budgets, and families. Our economy, infrastructure, public safety, and health are directly at risk. Prudent action now will be far less costly than the consequences of delayed response and will create a more stable business environment for our nation. THEREFORE... I/we urge Congress to sponsor and/or support measures that will: • Acknowledge the serious threat posed by climate change • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a clear, transparent, and effective way www.citizensclimatelobby.ora/leaders I endorse@citzensclimatelobby.oro L Citizens' Climate Lobby Signing as an... ❑ Organization (e.g. business, congregation) ❑ Individual (e.g. elected official, business owner) Organization Name (e.g. Citizens' Climate Lobby) Full Name (e.g. Mark Reynolds) Contact Name (e.g. Mark Reynolds) Title (e.g. Executive Director) Contact Title (e.g. Executive Director) Organization (e.g. Citizens' Climate Lobby) Address: City: State: ZIP., E-mail: Signed*: Date: *I affirm I have the authority to sign on behalf of this individual/organization Signature is: ❑ Public ❑ Private - will not be shared with anyone outside of Citizens' Climate and Congress www.citizensclimatelobby.ora/leaders I endorse@citzensclimatelobby.oro L Citizens' Climate Lobby Community Leader's Letter to Congress Organization/Individual Endorsing Carbon Fee & Dividend WHEREAS... The costs of climate change—including destabilized weather patterns, rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and other serious impacts - now pose a substantial threat to the health, prosperity, and security of Americans. The costs are real, they are growing, and they are already burdening businesses, taxpayers, municipal budgets, and families. Our economy, infrastructure, public safety, and health are directly at risk. THEREFORE... I/we urge Congress to support Carbon Fee & Dividend as a key element in reducing the risks of climate change. Carbon Fee & Dividend will significantly reduce carbon emissions, create jobs, grow the economy, save lives, and protect households from higher energy prices. Carbon Fee & Dividend will place a fee on fossil fuels at the source (at the well, mine, or port of entry), beginning at $15/metric ton CO2 equivalent emissions, and steadily increase annually at $10/metric ton. 100% of the net fees are returned to American households on a per -capita basis as a monthly dividend. Finally, a border adjustment assesses a fee or rebate on goods traded with countries without a comparable carbon price. Enacting such a policy will: • Send a clear price signal to entrepreneurs and existing businesses to invest in a clean -energy economy • Protect lower and middle-income households, as two-thirds of families will break even or receive more in dividends than they would pay for in higher living expenses • Create jobs, as the dividend puts money back into local economies • Discourage domestic businesses from relocating where they can emit more CO2 and encourage other nations to adopt an equivalent price on carbon www.citizensclimotelobbv.ora/leaders I L Citizens' Climate Lobby Signing as an... ❑ Organization (e.g. business, congregation) ❑ Individual (e.g. elected official, business owner) Organization Name (e.g. Citizens' Climate Lobby) Full Name (e.g. Mark Reynolds) Contact Name (e.g. Mark Reynolds) Title (e.g. Executive Director) Contact Title (e.g. Executive Director) Organization (e.g. Citizens' Climate Lobby) Address: City: State: ZIP: E-mail., Signed*: Date: *1 affirm 1 have the authority to sign on behalf of this individual/organization Signature is: ❑ Public ❑ Private -will not be shared with anyone outside of Citizens' Climate and Congress www.citizensclimotelobbv.ora/leaders I L Citizens' Climate Lobby RESOLUTION CALLING ON THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS TO PASS A REVENUE NEUTRAL CARBON FEE AND DIVIDEND PROGRAM Whereas, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has stated that "warming of the climate is unequivocal" and it is "extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the warming since the mid -20th century" with "atmospheric concentrations of CO2, Methane and Nitrous Oxide that are unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years'; and Whereas, conservative estimates by the world's climate scientists state that to achieve climate stabilization and avoid cataclysmic climate change emissions of greenhouse gases must be brought to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050; and Whereas Iowa City has experienced costly flood damage from extreme weather events; and Whereas, presently the environmental, health and social costs of carbon pollution is not included in prices paid for fossil fuels, but borne directly or indirectly by all Americans and global citizens; and Whereas, the City of Iowa City recently passed a resolution calling for a 26-28% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2025 and 80% reduction by 2050; and Whereas, efforts to reach these goals would be greatly enhanced by compatible national legislation that creates financial disincentives for continued dependence on fossil fuel energy production; and Whereas, a national revenue -neutral carbon fee starting at a relatively low rate and increasing steadily over future years is a market based approach that would have minimal impact on the economy while sending clear and predictable price signals to businesses to develop and use non -carbon based energy resources; and Whereas a dividend program would distribute revenues from such a fee to all Americans and minimize negative impacts on household energy budgets; and Whereas, border adjustments—carbon content based tariffs on products imported from countries without comparable carbon pricing and refunds to our exporters of increased costs from carbon fees—can maintain the competitiveness of US businesses in global markets; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY: That the United States Congress should pass Carbon Fee and Dividend legislation which places a progressively rising fee on fossil fuels at the source, distributes all revenues on a per capita basis to American households, and imposes a border adjustment on imports and exports to maintain American competitiveness. Further resolved, that the chief clerk of the council will transmit copies of the resolution to our representatives in Washington: Senator Charles Grassley, Senator Joni Ernst and Congressman David Loebsack. �;~.® CITY OF IOWA CITY 1P7 MEMORANDUM Date: January 26, 2017 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Bob Miklo, Senior Planner Re: Historic Preservation Grants Last year the Historic Preservation Commission applied for a CLG Grant from the State Historic Preservation Office for the purpose of hiring a historic preservation consultant to update the Historic Building Survey of the Central Business District, last completed in 2001. The goal of the project was to identify downtown properties worthy of designation as landmarks or as part of a historic district. The Commission had requested a $12,000 grant requiring a local match of $8,000. We were not awarded the grant. The Commission also applied to the National Park Service for a Civil Rights Grant for Tate Arms at 914 S. Dubuque Street, and the Iowa Federation Home at 942 Iowa Avenue. We have been awarded this grant, which will fund National Register of Historic Places nominations and create signage and print and digital materials to educate the public about the history of these two buildings, which provided housing for African American students at the University of Iowa. We anticipate beginning this project in March. More information about the grant is available on the City's website: https://www.icgov.org/news/historic-preservation-commission-awarded-national- park-service-civil-rights-g rant Julie Voparil LL8MMJ From: Geoff Fruin Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 4:12 PM To: Julie Voparil Cc: Simon Andrew; Ashley Monroe Subject: FW: 1 -Gig internet speeds in 309 Iowa communities; Mediacom makes IA first Gigabit state Attachments: 1 Gig city list, IA and nearby.pdf; Brief view of 1 -Gig lowa.pdf; IA Congressional delegation.docx Info packet please. Thanks— Geoff hanks— Geoff From: Phyllis Peters [mailto:ppeters@mediacomcc.com] Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 3:42 PM To: jlundell@coralville.org; khayworth@coralville.org; tjohnson@coralville.org; cityadmin@sharontc.net; cityhills@sharontc.net; Marian Karr; Geoff Fruin; Jim Throgmorton; lonetreecity@iowatelecom.net; rheiar@northlibertyiowa.org; amy.nielsen@northlibertyiowa.org; oxfordcityhall@southslope.net; shueyville@southslope.net; steve.stange.solon@gmail.com; swisher2@southslope.net; steven. lee. berner@gmail.com; dboldt@tiffin-iowa.org; uhclerk@yahoo.com; wally@university- heights.org Subject: 1 -Gig internet speeds in 309 Iowa communities; Mediacom makes IA first Gigabit state This affects residents living in numerous communities in Johnson County— Mediacom Communications Makes Iowa First Gigabit State in the Nation Des Moines, IA—January 18, 2017 — Mediacom Communications today announced the company has launched 1 Gig Internet service across its entire Iowa footprint. As a result, all of the nearly 1 million households in the more than 300 Iowa communities passed by Mediacom's fiber -rich digital network will be able to enjoy download speeds that are up to 40 times faster than the minimum broadband definition set by the Federal Communications Commission. "Since 1999, Mediacom has invested $3 billion of private capital in Iowa to ensure that hard-working families throughout the Hawkeye State receive the same advanced communications services as America's largest cities," said Mediacom's founder and CEO, Rocco B. Commisso. "As a result of these investments, I am extremely proud to announce that Iowa is not only Mediacom's first gigabit state, but now leads all U.S. states in gigabit broadband availability." "I launched Connect Iowa nearly five years ago with the goal of making Iowa the most connected state for broadband in the Midwest," said Governor Terry Branstad. "Today's announcement by Mediacom means that over three quarters of the homes in our state now have access to world-class internet speeds, and that Iowa is positioned at the forefront of America's transition into the gigabit era." "In today's global marketplace, access to ultra -fast broadband services is critical to ensuring sustainable economic growth within our rural communities," said Lieutenant Governor Kim Reynolds. "The fact that Mediacom is making gigabit speeds available throughout its entire Iowa service area puts hundreds of small towns across our state on the cutting edge of broadband technology." Mediacom was the first major U.S. cable company to fully transition to the DOCSIS 3.1 "Gieasphere" platform, the latest generation of broadband technology. (more details and a LIST of IOWA CITIES attached) How fast is 1 -Gig? A gigabit = 1,000 megabits —a lightning -fast way to download data — 1 -Gig per second for downloads, paired with 50 Mbps upload speed 1 -Gig speeds power all the streaming, downloading and gaming Mediacom customers want o Download a 2 -hr HD movie (3 GB file) in 28 seconds with 1 -Gig speed • To download that same HD movie with a 7 Mbps DSL connection, it will take more than 1 hour o Mediacom's Gigasphere network is built for multiple users —so everyone can enjoy what they want, how they want, on multiple devices — all at the same time. 1 -Gig helps Iowans live the future now • Just as transportation engineers built larger roads to handle population & business booms, Mediacom has prepared its network for the explosive rise of connected devices. o There are more internet-connected devices than human beings on the planet. • In the U.S., 25% of Americans have more than 7 internet-connected devices in their homes — connecting to much more than laptops and desktop PCs • Internet use is exploding ... and consumers everywhere, depend on internet connectivity for more applications than ever before. o Monitors & controls for home automation and security, from locks and cameras to heating and lighting controls o Devices and appliances that anticipate a consumer's needs and can take action to address those needs (digital assistance from music selections to a refrigerator inventory) Streaming — Iowans stream more data than ever — using Netflix and Amazon, and using mobile apps that put their cable TV channels on tablets and smart phones so they stay connected to lives sports on ESPN, BTN, etc. A 2 -hr HD movie will take more than one HOUR to download using DSL service with 7 Mbps speeds — but the SAME movie will download in just 28 -seconds with a 1 -Gig connection. Actions that take nearly 4'/i hours with a 25 Mbps connection can download in less than 7 minutes with 1 -Gig internet. A good example is an Online Video Game (50 GB file) -- downloads require major internet power for the ultimate gaming experience. More than 4 hours or less than 7 minutes? Iowans now have a choice that saves time — and is ideal for multiple devices connected in today's homes. How fast can you download a game with 1 Gig? DOWNLOADING A 5P GE VIDEO GAME 04:26:40 00:06:40 :5+�yr� i6J01nt�rrrr Phyllis Peters Communications Director Mediacom, Field Operations Group West Des Moines, IA 50266 Phone: 515-246-2295(o)515-707-7148 (m) ppeters@mediacomcc.com Mediacom Adair County Greenfield Stuart Adams County Corning Allamakee County Harper's Ferry Lansing New Albin Waukon Waukon Junction Appanoose County Centerville Audubon County Audubon Benton County Belle Plaine Newhall Norway Vinton Black Hawk County Cedar Falls Elk Run Heights Evansdale Gilbertville Hudson LaPorte Raymond Washburn Waterloo Boone County Boone Madrid Bremer County Denver Janesville Sumner Waverly Buchanan County Clarke County Des Moines County Fairbank Osceola Burlington Hazleton Woodburn Danville Independence Middletown Clayton County West Burlington Buena Vista County Clayton Alta Edgewood Dickinson County Lakeside Elkader Arnolds Park Storm Lake Garnavillo Lake Park Guttenberg Okoboji Butler County Marquette Orleans Aplington McGregor Spirit Lake New Hartford Strawberry Point Wahpeton Parkersburg West Okoboji Shell Rock Clinton County Camanche Dubuque County Calhoun County Charlotte Asbury Lake City Clinton Dubuque Manson DeWitt Dyersville Rockwell City Goose Lake Epworth Twin Lakes Low Moor Farley Peosta Carroll County Crawford County Sageville Carroll Denison Glidden Emmet County Dallas County Estherville Cass County Adel Atlantic Booneville Fayette County Dallas Center Elgin Cedar County DeSoto Fayette Durant Dexter Maynard Tipton Granger Oelwein West Branch Perry West Union Redfield Cerro Gordo County Van Meter Floyd County Clear Lake Waukee Charles City Mason City Woodward Rockwell Franklin County Ventura Davis County Hampton Bloomfield Sheffield Cherokee County Cherokee Decatur County Grundy County Decatur City Beaman Chickasaw County Lamoni Conrad Fredericksburg Leon Dike New Hampton Grundy Center Delaware County Reinbeck Clay County Manchester Spencer 40 f Hamilton County Jasper County Linn County Monroe County Randall Colfax Bertram Albia Webster City Lambs Grove Cedar Rapids Lovilia Lynnville Fairfax Hancock County Monroe Hiawatha Montgomery County Britt Newton Lisbon Red Oak Duncan Prairie City Marion Villisca Garner Sully Mt. Vernon Toddville Muscatine County Hardin County Jefferson County Atalissa Ackley Fairfield Louisa County West Liberty Eldora Columbus City Iowa Falls Johnson County Columbus Junction Osceola County Coralville Fredonia Harris Henry County Hills Morning Sun Mt. Pleasant Iowa City Wapello Page County New London Lone Tree Clarinda Westwood North Liberty Lucas County Essex Oxford Chariton Shenandoah Howard County Shueyville Lucas Cresco Solon Palo Alto County Elma Swisher Madison County Emmetsburg Lime Springs Tiffin Earlham University Heights Winterset Pocahontas County Humboldt County Laurens Dakota City Jones County Mahaska County Pocahontas Gilmore City Anamosa Beacon Humboldt Monticello New Sharon Polk County Oxford Junction Oskaloosa Altoona Iowa County Wyoming University Park Ankeny Amana Bondurant East Amana Keokuk County Marion County Clive Homestead Keota Bussey Des Moines Marengo Sigourney Hamilton Grimes Middle Amana What Cheer Knoxville Johnston North English Melcher-Dallas Mitchellville South Amana Kossuth County Pella Pleasant Hill Williamsburg Algona Pleasantville Polk City Bancroft Sheldahl Jackson County Burt Marshall County Urbandale Maquoketa Lakota Green Mountain West Des Moines Miles Swea City Le Grand Windsor Heights Preston Marshalltown Sabula Lee County Pottawattamie County Fort Madison Mills County Avoca Keokuk Glenwood Montrose Poweshiek County West Point Mitchell County Grinnell Osage r Nnternefg —ter Ringgold County Wapello County Illinois communities Kellerton Agency included in this January Mount Ayr Eddyville 1-Gig launch; other IL Eldon launches in coming Sac County Ottumwa months Sac City Warren County Carroll County Scott County Carlisle Savanna Bettendorf Hartford Thomson Blue Grass Indianola Buffalo Norwalk Henry County Davenport Cleveland Eldridge Washington County Colona (& Green Rock) Le Claire Kalona Orion Long Grove Riverside McCausland Washington Jo Daviess County Mount Joy Wellman East Dubuque Panorama Park Galena Territories Park View Wayne County Galena Pleasant Valley Corydon Princeton Rock Island County Riverdale Webster County Andalusia Walcott Barnum Carbon Cliff Clare Coal Valley Shelby County Fort Dodge East Moline Harlan Hampton Winnebago County Milan Story County Buffalo Center Moline Ames Forest City Oak Grove Huxley Leland Rock Island Nevada Silvis Slater Winneshiek County Taylor Ridge Story City Calmar Decorah Whiteside County Tama County Ft. Atkinson Albany Dysart Ossian Erie Garwin Spillville Fulton Gladbrook Lyndon Tama Worth County Morrison Toledo Kensett Prophetstown Traer Manly Northwood Taylor County Bedford Wright County Belmond Union County Clarion Creston Eagle Grove 309 IA communities 1 Internet Iowa is now the nation's first Gigabit state Mediacom is taking the lead nationally when it comes to deployment of 1 -Gig broadband services —and it's happening here in Iowa with widespread deployment of a new -generation internet service available to all homes located along our extensive, fiber -based network. • With 5,214 miles of fiber optics powering Mediacom's Iowa broadband network, communities large and small can enjoy the internet at warp speed — 309 IA communities. o 1 -Gig speed for all ... not limited to a few large cities or selected neighborhoods; our Iowa network passes 1 million homes (within reach of 75% of Iowans). • No other state has yet to make such an extensive transition to a "Gigasphere" platform — the newest broadband technology (DOCSIS 3.1). This technology deployed across the state puts Iowa ahead of other states in terms of gigabit speeds widely available in residential areas (for many years, Iowa businesses, schools and hospitals have connected to Gigabit+ Fiber Solutions from Mediacom Business) — now homes, too. Cable's innovative Gigasphere technology (DOCSIS 3.1) uses the existing wiring that most people already have in their homes. Mediacom's network delivers 1 -Gig speeds as a result of a $1 billion investment to transform existing infrastructure with new innovations in broadband network technology (no need to dig up streets or lawns). 1 -Gig internet service from Mediacom — What are the details for a residential customer? 1 Gig download speeds (1,000 Mbps) and 50 Mbps upload speeds o Data usage allowance of 6 TB Introduction of another choice for super -fast internet speeds -- 0 500 Mbps download speeds and 30 Mbps upload speeds o Usage allowance of 4 TB How fast is 1 -Gig? • A gigabit = 1,000 megabits. 1 -Gig per second for downloads, paired with 50 Mbps upload speed • 1 -Gig speeds power all the streaming, downloading and gaming Mediacom customers want o Download a 2 -hr HD movie (3 GB file) in 28 seconds with 1 -Gig speed • To download the same HD movie with a 7 Mbps DSL connection, it takes more than 1 hour. o Mediacom's Gigasphere network is built for mufti pie users —so everyone can enjoy what they want, how they want, on multiple devices — all at the same time. 1 -Gig helps Iowans live the future now • Just as transportation engineers built larger roads to handle population & business booms, Mediacom has prepared its network for the explosive rise of connected devices. o Today there are more internet-connected devices than human beings on the planet. o In the U.S., 25% of Americans have more than seven (7) devices in their homes — connected to much more than just laptops and desktop PCs. Internet use is exploding ... and consumers everywhere depend on internet connectivity for more applications than ever before. o Monitors & controls for home automation and security, from locks and cameras to heating and lighting controls o Devices and appliances that anticipate a consumer's needs and can take action to address those needs (digital assistance from music selections to a refrigerator inventory) Brief timeline for Mediacom's delivery of high-speed internet in Iowa: Privately -funded investment to rebuild, inter -connect and transform Iowa's telecommunications infrastructure totals some $3 billion — including the latest 2016-2017 expenditures to deploy Gigasphere broadband in Iowa. January 18, 2017 — Iowa Governor Terry Branstad and Lt. Governor Kim Reynolds joined Mediacom's founder and CEO, Rocco Commisso, to announce a technology milestone — Iowa as the first Gigabit state. March 14, 2016 — Mediacom announced a $1 billion capital investment underway to widely deploy a 1 -Gig broadband network and provide communities with other enhanced broadband services. January 2010 — Waterloo, Iowa (and adjacent communities) topped the charts with the FASTEST residential broadband speeds in North America, as Mediacom launched Ultra 105 Mbps speed using the new innovation of DOCSIS 3.0 technology. 2002 — Mediacom began offering internet service —just one year after the company's 2001 purchase of cable systems throughout Iowa. Speed Facts — Mediacom's always -faster internet service in Iowa • In the past 15 yrs, Mediacom increased internet speeds, OR added new faster -speed tiers, 11 times. • Between 2002 and 2017, standard internet speeds for Mediacom customers rose SIX (6) times - from 1.5 Mbps to 60 Mbps; multiple times, ever -faster speed tiers were added. • To keep ahead of consumer demand for more speed, Mediacom began offering 150 Mbps speeds in 2014. • 2015 - FCC revised its definition of broadband, setting a new speed threshold at 25 Mbps (down) x 3 Mbps (up); by then, Mediacom more customers were choosing speeds of 50 Mbps of faster. wig � Internet Internet wncmn Medmcom) U.S. Senator Charles Grassley — Elected officials representing Iowans in the U.S. Senate and Congress shared comments in response to the news of Mediacom widespread deployment of 1 -Gig internet service. Those public comments appear below. "Fast and reliable broadband service is important for Iowans, whether for economic development, entertainment or education. I'm always glad to see companies investing in their networks to provide better service throughout the state. I want to make sure policymakers keep excessive regulations in check so there is an environment that makes such investment possible." — Senator Chuck Grassley First District Congressman Rod Blum — "Mediacom's expansion of 1 Gig Internet into our rural Iowa communities is an exciting development that will empower our businesses, content creators, and the next generation of entrepreneurs with some of the fastest Internet speeds in the country. The increased bandwidth will also be an important asset to our farmers and producers, allowing them to access consistent and high quality video streams of auctions while increasing upload speeds to more effectively market their products through video. Iowa continues to lead on rural broadband, and we are proud to have Mediacom as a partner in that effort." — Representative Rod Blum Second District Congressman Dave Loebsack — "Today's announcement is great news for communities across Iowa. Connectivity is vital for families and businesses to compete in the 2151 century and I am pleased that Mediacom has expanded their 1 Gig internet service to communities of all sizes throughout Iowa. As the Co -Chair of the Rural Broadband Caucus, I have worked to ensure all corners of our state, including families, schools, businesses and healthcare providers, have access to high speed broadband. Folks living in Iowa deserve to have the same access to broadband as those living in large cities." — Representative Dave Loebsack Third District Congressman David Young — "Ensuring broadband access for all Iowans is a key part of our state's continued economic growth. Continued private -sector investments will help Iowa businesses, farmers, schools, and families stay connected to the global economy." — Representative David Young Fourth District Congressman Steve King — "Today's announcement of Mediacom's investment to widely deploy 1 -Gig speeds to towns of 500 means that Iowans will have access to the country's fastest internet speeds. This expansion will help sustain economic growth within our rural communities, and our farmers and small businesses will be given the same opportunities as those in the rest of the state and country." — Representative Steve King Julie Voparil IP9 From: Daniels, Sheila M <sheila-daniels@uiowa.edu> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 8:31 AM To: Ron Knoche Cc: Tom Markus; Council; Jason Havel; Kent Ralston Subject: Re: Pedestrian Walkway- Newton Road Hello Ron - Thanks for our conversation this morning - just wanted to debrief here: This morning at Sam I went to the pedestrian crosswalk with a couple other people (Newton and 5 Lincoln). This is also where there is a bus stop. The bus stopped and so the pedestrians were able to pass. HOWEVER, a car bypassed the bus and tried to move into the oncoming traffic lane to cross in front - thereby almost hitting myself and the other pedestrians. This is not the first time I have seen this happening. It was, needless to say, a terrifying situation as the driver did not show any remorse at doing this. I called you to discuss the matter because I find that although there are signs, people who do not follow them and furthermore, I do not know if it is illegal to bypass a city bus, as we discussed. I would hope that if you must stop for kindergartners to get on the bus, you should stop for your doctors, students, nurses, etc. You had mentioned possibly having an intern do some research into this, increasing law enforcement presence, or installing the HawkAlert system which seemed like a good solution. This is a difficult location but because of the bus stops in the area and the high volume of staff and students milling about, plus the hasty drivers on a windy road, this is becoming a dicey situation and one I was hoping to address before leaving the city in the fall. Thanks for your time and attention, Sheila Daniels From: Ron Knoche <Ron-Knoche@iowa-city.org> Sent: Friday, December 4, 2015 2:47 PM To: Daniels, Sheila M Cc: Tom Markus; Council; Jason Havel; Kent Ralston Subject: RE: Pedestrian Walkway - Newton Road Sheila, The pedestrian crossing signs were installed yesterday. Once again thank you for bringing this signage issue to our attention. Have a great weekend! Ron Ronald R. Knoche, PE Public Works Director City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa Email: ron-knocheCeDiowa-citv.or¢ Phone: (319) 356-5138 Cell: (319) 430-3625 Fax: (319) 356-5007 From: Daniels, Sheila M [mailto:sheila-daniels@uiowa.edu] Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 1:41 PM To: Ron Knoche Cc: Tom Markus; Council; Jason Havel; Kent Ralston Subject: Re: Pedestrian Walkway - Newton Road Hi Ron, I was just wondering when you think the signs might go up? I haven't noticed anything placed but understand it might take some time. Thanks, Sheila On Oct 27, 2015, at 12:49 PM, Ron Knoche <Ron-Knoche@,iowa-citv.org> wrote: Ms. Daniels: Thank you for your email to the Council dated October 23a. I have had an opportunity to review the intersections you mentioned. Although there are pavement markings delineating the pedestrian crossing for the pedestrian, as you mention, there are no signs warning the drivers. We will be installing signage at these crossings within the next few weeks. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Ron Ronald R. Knoche, PE Public Works Director City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa Email: ron-knochena,iowa-citv.ore Phone: (319) 356-5138 Cell: (319) 430-3625 Fax: (319) 356-5007 From: "Daniels, Sheila M" <sheila-danielsna,uiowa.edu> Date: October 23, 2015 at 10:42:31 PM CDT To: "council(a,iowa-city.ore" <councilaiowa-citv.orQ> Subject: Pedestrian Walkway Dear Council Members, I recently moved to Iowa City to attend a residency program in orthodontics at The University of Iowa. I am writing because I have noticed quite a lack of pedestrian cross signs surrounding the dental school and medical campus. There are crosswalks, but not signs to cars to tell them to slow down for pedestrians. With all the hills, this makes crossing the street extremely unsafe and, despite the fact that I look both ways every time I have noticed that cars absolutely do not stop to allow me to cross the street. There are two areas in particular I would like to mention: the crosswalk between Lincoln Avenue and Newton and the crosswalk between Woolf and Newton. Prior to living in Iowa City, I spent 5 years in Richmond, Virginia and grew up in Ann Arbor, Michigan - both cities with ample pedestrian crossings and where cars are made to allow people walking to have the right of way. I mention this to you because I am seriously concerned for the people on the medical campus - I am sure there is going to be an unfortunate circumstance, for myself or another person, as there is no reminder to vehicles to slow for pedestrians. I have loved my time so far in Iowa City, but this situation makes me very uncomfortable and I wanted to bring it to your attention. I do hope you'll consider a crossing sign for pedestrians in these 2 spots, or at the very least, put up a sign instructing cars to yield - and perhaps enforce these signs with police patrol for some time after the signs are placed. Thank you for your time - I just wanted to bring the matter to your attention. Respectfully yours, Sheila Daniels Sheila Daniels D.D.S. Orthodontic Candidate The University of Iowa, 2017 MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 11 — 5:16 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL LM PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Bryce Parker, Gene Chrischilles, Connie Goeb, Becky Soglin, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Susan Dulek, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT: None CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. ROLL CALL: CONSIDER THE December 14. 2016 MINUTES: Goeb moved to approve the minutes of December 14, 2016. Weitzel seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0. (Parker abstaining) NOMINATION AND SELECTION OF BOARD CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR: Walz explained to the Board that usual process was to go in order of seniority on the Board but that there was no requirement to do so. Weitzel moved to follow board tradition and nominated Soglin for Board Chair and Chrischilles for Vice Chair. Goeb seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. REVIEW OF BOARD PROCEDURES: Walz reminded board members that the procedures had been updated by the Board in December, 2015, in order to update various changes in departments and to make some language more clear. Staff did not believe any additional changes were needed but invited the Board to share any concerns or questions. Chrichilles asked about the filing of decisions and how that was done. Walz explained that once the Board meeting is over and a decision regarding an application is made, she types up any pertinent facts that the Board referred to in making its decision. She noted that the Board often adopts the staff report as its findings, in which case she summarizes those findings, adding anything additional that comes up in the meeting. That is then provided to the Board Chair to Board of Adjustment January 11, 2017 Page 2 of 5 approve and sign. This is then filed as a part of the permanent public record attached to the property as special exceptions and variances run with the property. Chrischilles asked why the Board does not review the written decision. Walz explained that she tries to have these written and recorded before the next Board meeting since there are some time sensitivities: anyone who wishes to appeal a decision (whether an applicant or a nearby property owner) must do so within 30 days from the date on which the decision is filed. Often applicants wish to move forward with establishing a use or building whatever has been approved. If we put off the decision for 30 days and then there is another 30 days in which someone can file an appeal, that delays the applicant's opportunity to get started. Also, if approved the applicant typically has 6 months to begin making progress on the special exception. Because of these time sensitivities it is best to move forward with filing within a reasonable time. The City Attorney also reviews and signs all decisions. Dulek noted that because decisions are filed at the county, anyone purchasing that property is on notice of what changes the Board has approved. Chrischilles asked about Article V—reconsideration. Walz explained that the Board itself must approve a request to reconsider. She provided an example of how this might come about: if someone, say, had provided either false or inaccurate information that the Board used in making its decision. If someone, including the applicant subsequently found more accurate information that could speak to a concern, they could ask for reconsideration. Also, someone could ask for reconsideration if the Board had imposed a condition, based on either misinformation or lack of information. Perhaps the condition was something that really imposed a hardship for the applicant and they found information that they believed the Board might reconsider in order to remove that condition. Dulek noted that a Board member who had voted on the prevailing side would have to make the motion to reconsider. Soglin requested that the new procedures be uploaded to the City's website. The site currently has the old version. REVIEW OF BOARD PROCEDURES: Walz invited the Board to ask any questions it had about general board practice. Chrischilles asked about the amount of time allowed for review. The Board typically has from Saturday preceding the meeting until the Wednesday meeting to review, but has not had the opportunity to hear from the public or other Board members. A decision then can feel rushed if there is disagreement. Is the only option to defer. Dulek, said the Board could meet the next day or two. The only exception with regard to time limits is that decisions on cell towers need to be made in a certain amount of time. Walz said the Board can always ask for additional information. If a case is controversial, in that members of the public come to protest an application, the Board needs to determine whether there is any pertinent information in their concern—any usable information. Walz explained that special exceptions are written into the code and the criteria are directly from the code. The Board needs to look at what is reasonable in terms of evidence. Has the applicant satisfied the criteria? A variance is very different. A special exception is not someone asking to ignore the zoning code or to be alleviated of review—the language of the criteria is right in the code. The code acknowledges the need for flexibility and then gives us the criteria to look at in determining whether flexibility is appropriate in the context being reviewed. Board of Adjustment January 11, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Chrischilles noted that the Board must rely a great deal on the staff report, so how can findings be done that are different from what staff is reporting. Walz explained that usually something will come up—either from the public or the applicant—or the Board has observed something. Parking is often a sensitive issue and it is a hard one to balance. Often there can be reasonable disagreement on how much parking demand is too much. Is the applicant offering something reasonable to address parking demand or is there something in the neighborhood that is happening that suggests to you that a tipping point has been met and there is too much demand such that it affecting the quality of life or reasonable expectations of the neighborhood. A board member might say, I don't find that the applicant's efforts are enough; the evidence is insufficient. Walz reminded them that no BOA decision is precedent setting. The Board may decide one way on one piece of property and months late may decide differently on another piece of property a block away. Walz noted that the standards are always the same for same application: setback standards, for example, have a set of specific criteria. The general criteria apply to all special exceptions. She noted that when an application comes in, she walks through the criteria just the same way as the Board does. There is no assumption that an application should be approved on denied until staff goes through the criteria for itself. If there are problems, staff will point those out and offer ways to address those issues if possible. Staff then looks at context. For example with parking, different neighborhoods have different parking demands and different expectations. Walz explained that the zoning code sets up rules but also it states what rules have some flexibility. That flexibility is a special exception—say, a setback reduction. Then the code says the specific criteria for determining whether to grant that flexibility. So there are criteria listed for how to determine whether a setback reduction should be granted or whether it is appropriate to allow a daycare center in a residential zone, for example. Each request is reviewed within its own location context, but the criteria are always the same. Walz noted that when the Board is truly conflicted, they can take extra time but that all deliberations must be in public. Extra time can be 15 minutes or a day or a month, whatever the Board needs to get the information or consider information provided during a public meeting. The Board needs to be reasonable and it needs to be fair to everyone involved. Dulek briefly explained ex parte communication as well as the difference between legislative decisions as made by City Council and quasi judicial decisions as made by the Board. Soglin wondered if applicants could do a better job filling out the criteria. Walz explained that applicants have difficulty understanding the general criteria. While the applicant may not respond to the general criteria—and she does always instruct them to do so—how they demonstrate satisfaction with the criteria (or not)—really follow from the specific criteria. That is, the site plan or building or business plans. The Board can always email Walz with questions or requests for additional information and she will provide will provide it at the meeting. In some cases it may make sense to provide it ahead of the meeting, in which case she will also provide it to the applicant. The Board is allowed to look at the zoning code or the Comprehensive Plan (district plan or Historic Preservation Plan) whenever it wishes, but it should not do other research. Everyone needs to be working from the same information. Board of Adjustment January 11, 2017 Page 4 of 5 There was a brief discussion of the amount of time that the Board has to review applications Soglin asked to add a sentence or two to the opening statement to make it clear that the Board received the information recently and the meeting is the first opportunity they have had to discuss the information. This would drive the point home that no outcome or decision is predetermined—the public hearing is the actual review process. Walz said that staff really does want to know ahead of time if there are public objections because any issues can then be part of staff review. This may result in staff asking an applicant to change aspects of their application or even, depending on the nature of the concern, staff recommending denial of the request. Walz summarized how the staff report is drafted using the criteria and consulting with all the various departments providing input. Dulek explained that if the City Attorneys office is involved in a recommendation (if there is a City interest) it would seek outside council for the Board as it did for the appeal. Soglin asked that the BOA Frequently Asked Questions for could be updated on the web. She also asked for the various BOA guides be laminated and provided to all. ADJOURNMENT: Weitzel moved to adjourn this meeting. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. Meeting Adjourned 6:10. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENDANCE RECORD NAME TERM EXP. 2/17 3/9 4113 6115 7113 8/10 9114 9/21 9130 10/12 11/9 12/14 1111 PARKER, BRYCE 1/1/2022 -- -- -- -- — -- -- -- — -- -- -- X GOEB, CONNIE 1/1/2020 X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X CHRISCHILLES, T. GENE 1/1/2019 X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X SOGLIN, BECKY 1/1/2018 X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X WEITZEL, TIM 1/1/2021 X X X X X X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present 0 = Absent 0/E = Absent/Excused -- = Not a Member MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 19, 2017 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Ann Freerks, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Jodie Theobald MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Karen Howard, Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: Liz Maas RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of SUB16-00011 the preliminary plat for Dean Oakes Seventh Addition, a 1 -lot, .826 -acre residential subdivision on the east end of Bristol Drive. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment, recommending that an application submitted by S & G Materials to Johnson County for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for sand and gravel mining on property south of their current site at 4059 Izaak Walton Road be approved subject to compliance with the mitigation plan (CPU16-0004). By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends amending the outdoor service areas regulations in Title 4 of the City Code, and temporary use provisions in Title 14 of the City Code, to allow limited use of amplified background music for eating and drinking establishments in the Riverfront Crossings - South Gilbert and West Riverfront subdistricts. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval an amendment to City Code Section 14 -2G -7F-9, Sign regulations in the Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Code, to change the sign allowance for fascia signs for manufacturing uses in the South Gilbert Subdistrict. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of the amendments to the standards for the South Gilbert Subdistrict of Riverfront Crossings in City Code Section 14 -2G -3A to address building and parking placement for properties that front on Highway 6 as specifically outlined in the staff report. CALL TO ORDER: Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There were none Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2017— Formal Meeting Page 2 of 11 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM (CPA16-0004): Consider a motion setting a public hearing for February 2 for discussion of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the text to allow residential uses in the commercial zones south of Iowa Interstate railroad and east of Scott Boulevard located in Scott -Six Industrial Park. Miklo explained that it is a requirement that the City announce that there is an amendment to the Plan being considered at the February 2, 2017 meeting. Hensch moved to set a public hearing for February 2 for discussion of CPA16-0004. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. DEVELOPMENT ITEM (SUB16-00011): Discussion of an application submitted by Oakes Construction for a preliminary plat of Dean Oakes Seventh Addition, a .826 -acre, 1 -lot residential subdivision located on the east end of Bristol Drive. Miklo began the staff report showing a map of the area noting that there are two parts of Bristol Drive and the thought is that someday the street may come through and connect. The likelihood of that is low due to steep ravines and difficulty of providing sanitary sewer service to the area east of Bristol Drive north of Dubuque Road. The zoning of this area and surrounding area is RS -5 low-density single family and the area to the east is rural residential (RR1) because it drains away from the city and currently cannot be served by the sanitary sewer network. The proposal is to take the last remnant piece of property, just east of Dean Oakes Fifth Addition and plat it for a single-family lot. Because of the slight possibility of a future road connection, the City is recommending a hammerhead turnaround to allow for fire trucks or large vehicles to turnaround. Miklo noted that the subdivision complies with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and Subdivision Regulations. Staff recommends that the preliminary plat for Dean Oakes Seventh Addition, a 1 -lot, .826 -acre residential subdivision on the east end of Bristol Drive be approved. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one Freerks closed the public hearing. Signs moved to approval of SUB16-00011 the preliminary plat for Dean Oakes Seventh Addition, a 1 -lot, .826 -acre residential subdivision on the east end of Bristol Drive. Parsons seconded the motion. Freerks noted that with the terrain and how the area is laid out it is probably best use of otherwise wasted space. Martins asked if this lot has City sewer and Miklo confirmed it does A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 3 of 11 CONDITIONAL USE ITEM (CU16-00004 Discussion of an application submitted by S & G Materials to Johnson County for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for sand and gravel mining on property south of their current site at 4059 Izaak Walton Road. This property is located south of Iowa City and west of the Iowa River in Fringe Area C of the Fringe Area Policy Agreement but is outside of the Iowa City Growth Boundary. Miklo explained that the County Zoning Code allows these types of uses Conditional Use Permits by the County Board of Adjustment. The County Code gives the opportunity for any City within two miles to comment and make a recommendation. If the City recommends against such a conditional use permit then it requires a super majority (or four out of the five) members of the Board to approve. Miklo noted that the City's interest in this area is more on a regional basis, it is outside the City's growth area, and we do not anticipate that it will be annexed into the city, but it is along the riverfront which the City sees as a resource for open space and recreation. He said that is the context in which staff reviewed this application. Miklo stated that this is a continuation of a sand and gravel mining operation that has been in operation for a number of years. It began on Izaak Walton Road and with the City's recommendation the County allowed expansion in 2006. This would be the third expansion. City and County staff inspected the property with Liz Maas, a consultant to S & G Materials, who outlined the mitigation, mining, and restoration processes both underway and planned on the applicant's property. S & G must meet the requirements of the Johnson County Sensitive Areas Ordinance, which requires that for every acre of wetland impacted, two acres of wetland must be constructed. Staff believes S & G Materials has demonstrated a commitment to proper habitat restoration and sustainable mining practices. Staff recommends that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment, recommending that an application submitted by S & G Materials to Johnson County for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for sand and gravel mining on property south of their current site at 4059 Izaak Walton Road be approved subject to compliance with the mitigation plan. Martin asked if the environmental expert that was on the inspection noted any infringements on the river currently. Miklo said that much of the property is in the flood plain and is reviewed by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and also the activity does not go right up to the river, there is a buffer zone. Signs asked about the blue line stream. Miklo explained that a blue -line stream is a stream that shows up on the US Geological survey maps. Some streams are small and do not have water running through them year-round and tend not to show up on the survey maps. Miklo said blue - line streams are regulated. Freerks asked if there would be tree buffer between the operation and the adjacent road. Miklo said the applicant could address that. Martin asked if the owners of the homes in the area were told about the meeting and this proposal. Miklo said not the City meeting, but they will be informed of the County meeting regarding this item. Freerks opened the public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 4 of 11 Liz Maas (620 Ronald's Street) works for Transition Ecology and is representing S & G Materials on this application. She noted that the basins shown on the map and that the one marked C does not actually go all the way to the road and because of that topographically there is no sand and gravel mining proposed for that area with this project, so that will serve as a buffer. Additionally no additional truck traffic will be on Oak Crest Hill Road SE. Maas noted that Blue -line streams are federally regulated as well as by the State and the County. In addition, because this property has wetlands on it, which are also federally protected, so they are careful to not touch any of those areas on this property. The impacts they are proposing are mostly old ditches that have been carved by farmers over the years to allow for drainage, which may look like wetlands but are considered farm basins. Any areas they are disturbing they are offsetting the impact with the construction of mitigation sites (such as the area to the north). Additionally after they are done mining in an area, they are required to create wetland shoreline areas. With regards to the question about the river, the other entity that manages these types of sites is an organization called MSHA and the Iowa Department of Agriculture also permits this activity and have regulations on how close to the river the mining can actually be. During the flood of 2014 and 2008 this area flooded but some of the area sits high enough that it was not flooded. Recently they received a "no rise" certificate for the entire property to illustrate that the sand piles and activities on the property are not causing rise of water upstream. Hensch asked what the anticipated life span of this quarry would be. Maas stated that the preexisting quarry has been in operation for the last 15 years and probably has another 2-3 years to finish out, depending on need. The second additional will probably be in operation another 15-20 years. Freerks closed the public discussion Hensch moved to recommend that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment, recommending that an application submitted by S & G Materials to Johnson County for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for sand and gravel mining on property south of their current site at 4059 Izaak Walton Road be approved subject to compliance with the mitigation plan. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: 1. Discussion of an amendment to outdoor service areas regulations in Title 4 of the City Code, and temporary use provisions in Title 14 of the City Code, to allow limited use of amplified background music for eating and drinking establishments in the Riverfront Crossings - South Gilbert and West Riverfront subdistricts. Howard explained that the City has received a request from Big Grove Brewery, who are repurposing an existing building along South Gilbert Street, to allow amplified music in its proposed outdoor service area, which is part of the restaurant that will be behind the Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 5 of 11 brewery. This area is in the South Gilbert area of Riverfront Crossings. Amplified sound is currently not allowed in any outdoor service areas in the City, as most of the outdoor service areas are in the downtown area and are in close proximity to each other and it would be difficult, if not impossible, to prevent noise spillover. However in outlying areas, where there are currently no outdoor service areas or where they will likely be more spread out, low level background music may not be a problem. Several surrounding communities do allow low level background music to create an ambience for outdoor dining. Staff felt given that outdoor service areas are not as prevalent in the outlying areas of Riverfront Crossings, it may be reasonable to allow amplified background music, regulated through a seasonal temporary use permit. Staff recommends establishing the new allowance in the areas of Riverfront Crossings that are currently more commercial in character, the South Gilbert Subdistrict and the West Riverfront Subdistrict. Temporary use permits allow for rules regarding design, location, hours, and volume on a seasonal basis with conditions that are appropriate for the unique circumstances of each application. It also allows for modification or nonrenewal of the permit if there are problems. Staff recommends to add language to the temporary use section of the Zoning Ordinance, and an amendment to Title 4 (the outdoor service area portion). The rules would be similar to those that were adopted a few months ago for the rooftop service areas allowing amplified sound through a temporary use permit. The following conditions would apply: 1. Amplified sound is only allowed if the OSA is located more than 300 feet from any residential zone. 2. Amplified sound shall be limited to background music intended to enhance the outdoor dining experience associated with an eating or drinking establishment and therefore should be kept at a low volume that will not inhibit normal conversation within the OSA and will minimize carry to areas outside the OSA. 3. Amplified background music is only allowed if the OSA is located more than 100 feet from any other OSA, unless it can be demonstrated that the amplified sound from the OSA is not audible within the other OSA. 4. The City may restrict the hours when amplified sound may be used. However, in no case shall amplified sound be permitted between the hours of 12:00 midnight and 10:00 AM. 5. Amplified sound may be restricted or prohibited during public events, festivals or concerts. 6. The applicant must submit a sound mitigation plan to the City that illustrates to the satisfaction of the City how the design of the OSA will minimize carry of noise to areas outside the OSA. The sound mitigation plan shall include information regarding the methods that will be used to minimize the carry of noise, such as specialized screen wall materials, sound deadening techniques, placement and orientation of speakers, control of volume, or similar. That plan shall include anticipated decibel levels and note how the volume will be controlled. The City may require additional measures to remedy any violation of the City's noise or nuisance ordinance, as determined by the City. 7. Live entertainment, movies, DJs, or presentations using amplification are not allowed under this permit. A separate temporary use permit is required for those types of special events. Freerks asked if there was a standard to determine what "low volume" should be. Howard said that will be determined based on characteristics of the site and through demonstration of how spillover noise will be controlled. The applicant will have to address it in their mitigation plan. The City can request adjustment if noise becomes a nuisance. Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 11 Martin questioned the inclusion of the West Riverfront Crossings District as it currently already has residents. Howard explained that each application for a temporary use permit will be considered on a case by case basis and it will be up to the applicant to demonstrate that there will not be spillover noise to neighboring properties. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to amend the outdoor service areas regulations in Title 4 of the City Code, and temporary use provisions in Title 14 of the City Code, to allow limited use of amplified background music for eating and drinking establishments in the Riverfront Crossings - South Gilbert and West Riverfront subdistricts. Martin seconded the motion A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. 2. Discussion of an amendment to City Code Section 14 -2G -7F-9, Sign regulations in the Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Code, to change the sign allowance for fascia signs for manufacturing uses in the South Gilbert Subdistrict. Howard explained that the City has received a request from Big Grove Brewery to allow larger fascia signs (wall signs) than are currently allowed in the Riverfront Crossings South Gilbert District. When the brewery started renovations on the property it was zoned CI -1, which has a larger fascia sign allowance than what is allowed in the South Gilbert Subdistrict of Riverfront Crossings. The building is set back from the street and has large areas of blank fagade without the typical storefront windows and entryways that would be required of new commercial buildings in the Riverfront Crossings District. When the property was rezoned to Riverfront Crossings, the new storefront fascia signage provisions applied. Big Grove did not anticipate a change in sign regulations when the property was rezoned to Riverfront Crossings and was planning to create more visual interest on the fagade with creative wall signage, but the new lower sign allowance will be inadequate. In this particular case the Brewery is considered a "cottage industry", meaning it's the type of manufacturing use that may sell wholesale but also has a significant retail component. Cottage industries are allowed in Riverfront Crossings. The Brewery is trying not only to manufacture beer, but to attract customers to their restaurant and bar, so there is reason to create more visual interest in the fagade, to fit into what will become a walkable, mixed-use neighborhood in the near future. Howard noted that in commercial zones outside the downtown area where buildings are often setback from the street without prominent storefront features, fascia signage may cover up to 15% of each wall of a building. It makes sense to maintain consistency with these other zones for the rare instance where an existing building is repurposed and does not meet the storefront frontage standards that will be required of new commercial buildings in Riverfront Crossings. The larger sign allowance provides the flexibility to design signage that will create visual interest for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists on a cottage industry building such as the Brewery. Since the South Gilbert subdistrict is the only area of Riverfront Crossings where this type of situation is likely to occur due to its history as a quasi -industrial area, staff recommends limiting this new sign allowance to this subdistrict. Staff recommends amending paragraph 14 -2G -7F -9a, regarding signs in South Gilbert Subdisctrict as follows: Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 11 In the South Downtown, Central Crossing, Park, and South Gilbert Subdistricts, signage on mixed-use and non-residential buildings should be allowed according to the standards that apply in the CB -10 Zone, as set forth in Article 14-513, except in the South Gilbert Subdistrict, where the maximum sign area for fascia signs for Cottage Industries and associated uses located in existing buildings with facades that do not meet storefront standards is 15% of the sign wall. Signs asked if Howard could explain how the signage review correlates with the design review of buildings such as this. Hektoen interjected and explained that since the Town of Gilbert Supreme Court Ruling the City has taken itself out of the business of design review for signs to avoid facing potential First Amendment Claims of violation of freedom of speech Signs questioned how such a blank fagade was allowed in Riverfront Crossings. Howard acknowledged that this situation is unique because they are repurposing an existing structure that does not have typical storefront features. She noted that all new buildings including those for cottage industries in the Riverfront Crossings area will have to comply with the more strict storefront design standards. The larger sign allowance will help to mitigate what would otherwise be fairly blank facades that are visible from the street by allowing more of the facade to be covered with creative signage. Miklo added that the work on the brewery began under the old zoning of CI -1, so the Riverfront Crossings storefront standards did not apply at that time. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Freerks closed the public hearing Parsons moved to approve an amendment to City Code Section 14 -2G -7F-9, Sign regulations in the Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Code, to change the sign allowance for fascia signs for manufacturing uses in the South Gilbert Subdistrict using the revised language Staff distributed at the meeting. Martin seconded the motion. Signs asked about what is considered signage versus what is just artwork on the building. Howard said the drawings included in the packet were just concepts that the brewery was considering and they have not settled on a final design yet. Staff has informed them that if the signage is part of their logo it is considered a sign, but if it is an image that is not part of their logo or their name, then it would be considered artwork and not subject to the sign allowance. In other words, they could cover the entire facade with a mural as long as it did not contain their logo. Signs stated he is torn, he likes the concepts, he likes the reuse of the building, but seems like it will not fit the character of what the Riverfront Crossings Plan called for in this area. Howard emphasized that the amendment just allows for larger fascia signs. The building was repurposed before the property was zoned Riverfront Crossings, so the storefront standards were not required at the time. While the location of the building and the large blank facades are not ideal in meeting the Riverfront Crossings form -based code standards, if the sign amendment is not approved, the current storefront sign guidelines will apply. The amendment under consideration is not whether or not to allow the brewery but whether to allow fascia signage to be larger to create more visual interest on building facades that are nonconforming with the Riverfront Crossings storefront standards. Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2017 - Formal Meeting Page 8 of 11 Dyer stated she likes the amendment, she noted however that she was hoping when this building was redeveloped there would be an addition to the front of the building so that it would be more in keeping with the Riverfront Crossings Plan and code to fit into the future walkable neighborhood. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Discussion of amendments to the standards for the South Gilbert Subdistrict of Riverfront Crossings in City Code Section 14 -2G -3A to address building and parking placement for properties that front on Highway 6. Howard noted there is really only one property that has frontage on both Highway 6 and Gilbert Street, so the requested amendment would have limited application. The developer that is in the process of designing a new building on the former Pleasant Valley Nursery site has requested that we consider allowing one aisle of parking between a new mixed-use building and Highway 6. The building will have a storefront frontage aligned close to Gilbert Street with access from the public sidewalk to the main lobby for the residential units above in compliance with the form -based code. However, to use the remaining land south of Big Grove Brewery more efficiently, the developer would like the new building on the Pleasant Valley site to have another longer storefront facade oriented toward Highway 6. Howard showed some renderings from the architect on how the building would be oriented. Since Highway 6 will never be an urban street with on -street parking to activate commercial storefronts, it makes sense to allow one aisle of parking between the building and the Highway 6 frontage. This would be similar to the allowance made in the form -based code along the west side of Riverside Drive south of Benton Street. Staff recommends adding a provision to the form -based code to address the unique frontage condition along Highway 6. Staff recommends amending 14 -2G -3A -3b, Building Placement (in the South Gilbert Subdistrict), by amending paragraph (1) and adding a new sub -paragraph (e), as follows: b. Building Placement (1) Principal buildings shall be placed to the front and corner of lots and aligned along setbacks in compliance with the following requirements as shown in Figure 2G-4, except as indicated below: (sub -paragraphs (a) - (d) remain the same) (e) In the South Gilbert Subdistrict, for a lot with frontage on both Gilbert Street and Highway 6, the building facade that faces Highway 6 may be aligned along a pedestrian way with abutting perpendicular parking spaces aligned along an east -west drive aisle located between the building and Highway 6. Therefore, the maximum setback along the Highway 6 frontage may be adjusted accordingly. Amending 14- 2G -3A -4b.(1), Primary Street, Pedestrian Street, and designated Ralston Creek Frontage Setback (E) and Screening, by amending sub -paragraph (a), as follows: (a) Surface Parking, Loading, and Service Areas: 30' min. from primary street building facade and located behind fully -enclosed, occupied building space, except as allowed in paragraph 2(b), below. Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 9 of 11 Amending 1 2G -3A -4b.(2), Parking, Loading, and Service Areas (in the South Gilbert Subdistrict), by adding a new subparagraph (b), as follows: (b) In the South Gilbert Subdistrict for a corner lot with frontage on both Gilbert Street and Highway 6, one double loaded aisle of surface parking is permitted within the private frontage area along the Highway 6 frontage. Surface parking must be setback a minimum of 10' from the Highway 6 right-of-way and screened to the S2 standard. Said surface parking must be setback 10' min. from the Gilbert Street right- of-way and 3' min. from the primary street building facade on Gilbert Street and screened to the S2 standard. (subsequent subparagraphs, currently (b) - (c), are re -lettered accordingly) Martin asked what the language was prior because it seems like the area is already following these guidelines. Howard stated that with the new form -based code no parking is allowed between the buildings and the street so that is why this amendment is now necessary. Dyer asked if there would be entryways on the Highway 6 side to the storefronts. Howard confirmed there would be, as well as parking on that side. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Freerks closed the public hearing Hensch moved to approve the amendments to the standards for the South Gilbert Subdistrict of Riverfront Crossings in City Code Section 14 -2G -3A to address building and parking placement for properties that front on Highway 6 as specifically outlined in the staff report. Martin seconded the motion. Hensch stated he liked this proposal. Signs agreed Freerks noted the importance of maintaining sufficient green space as these types of projects move forward. Howard noted that due to the repurposing of the Brewery building (rather than demolish and a new building being built) meant there was less room on the property to the south to meet the original Riverfront Crossings plan. In other words, efficient use of the remainder of the Pleasant Valley site would mean that the building would be oriented with the longer building fagade facing Highway 6. Given that it would be difficult for businesses to have front doors facing Highway 6 without a typical urban street frontage, some alternative means of creating a street frontage is necessary. Street trees and parking area screening would be required and the property owner is also contemplating green infrastructure along this frontage which will create more green space. Dyer noted that makes two of the buildings then in this area noncompliant to the form -based code and the Riverfront Crossings Plan. Howard agreed, but the amendments proposed for this corner are intended to make the new building compliant with an alternative standard to make the best of a challenging situation. Freerks noted that along with new buildings the City encourages reuse of existing buildings as well. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 11 CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: DECEMBER 15, 2016 Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes of December 15, 2016. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Miklo distributed a survey from the Human Rights Commission. ADJOURNMENT: Parsons moved to adjourn. Martin seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0. Z. O_ U) U) a' OU C7 M o Z W N U OZ06 � N � N W Z Z Q Z J a 0) Txxxxxxx w N X X X X X X X r ry X X XLL, X X X r X X X X X LU X r O o xx X Lu 0 X x x T o X XX X X x X T l x x x x x x x cox x x x x x x X X LU a x X X ti x 6 X X X X x v x x X X X x x o� X- X X X X X tC) Q X X X X X x X x X x x X ' X n 4 X x x x x I X r X X X X 0 I X M ,x x x X x I X rn r x x X x X I X N N X I X X I x r X J Z W W W W O O Q Y O Y Q a N a y o U�U�O uj CO W Lu U) D:' Zw oLL=�aa.m� 0 N ` L) a) U w E c o c o c cn�Q o CL Q Z 11 uw�� XOO I } Y