Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-05-02 Bd Comm minutesMTM -Tr— 5b(1) MINUTES APPROVED BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 11 — 5:15 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL 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, or 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, Chrischilles said, if there is disagreement. He asked if the only option is 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 later may decide differently on another piece of property a block away. Walz noted that the standards are always the identical for similar applications: setback standards, for example, have a set of specific criteria that are always applied. 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 follows 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 January11, 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 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. 2117 319 4/13 6/15 7/13 8/10 9114 9121 9/30 10/12 11/9 12114 1/11 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 X KEY: X = Present O = Absent OIE = Absent/Excused — = Not a Member r ��_.®or CITY OF IOWA CITY 5b(2) tm- MEMORANDUM Date: April 17, 2017 To: Mayor and City Council From: Wendy Ford, City Council Economic Development Committee Re: Recommendations from City Council Economic Development Committee At their March 23, 2017 meeting the City Council Economic Development Committee made the following recommendation to the City Council: Throgmorton moved to approve the minutes of the Dec. 13 minutes as presented. Cole seconded the motion The motion carried 3-0. Additional action (check one) x No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action - Done EDC March 23, 20171 p.1 APPROVED MINUTES CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MARCH 23, 2017 EMMA HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL, 12:00 P.M. Members Present: Susan Mims, Jim Throgmorton, Rockne Cole Staff Present: Wendy Ford, Geoff Fruin, Simon Andrew, Sara Greenwood-Hektoen Others Present: Ryan Sempf (Chamber) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None Chairperson Mims called the meeting to order at 12:00 P.M. She then asked those present to introduce themselves. Mims noted as members were gathering that they discussed setting a time limit due to what could be lengthy discussions. They decided that 1:15 P.M. would be the deadline for ending today's meeting. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the December 13, 2016 meeting were reviewed. Throgmorton moved to approve the minutes as presented. Cole seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0. Discuss TIF Policies: Mims noted that they have a very comprehensive eight -page memo in their meeting packets, put together by Ford and other staff members. Ford gave Members a brief background about the item, noting that when the current Committee started, they underwent a strategic planning session that resulted in seven different goals. One of these goals was to promote a strong and resilient local economy, with a sub -goal to review and consider amending City tax increment financing policies. As part of this review, staff was asked to begin a process of community engagement to examine all aspects of TIF, including concerns and praises about the policies. Ford noted that over a period of about six months, staff conducted eight different focus groups involving 60-70 people. Staff compiled feedback from both the focus groups and the individual participants, who also took an online survey. Staff then prepared a lengthy document, which Members received in their December 13, 2016 packet, providing the survey results and focus group summaries. At this meeting, Members asked staff to frame policy decisions and obtain more information for those areas that seemed less clear than others, particularly regarding building height, sustainability, and labor -related issues. Ford stated that staff assembled one final roundtable of developers and architects to help distill opinions about these issues. The group provided a lot of feedback around the economics of building size and how building size impacts building use. Ford continued to share the concerns of the building community, noting how buildings with more than five stories are required to go from wood frame to steel frame construction, for example. This essentially doubles the cost of framing the buildings, making the economics more difficult, especially for shorter steel framed EDC March 23, 20171 p.2 APPROVED buildings. The more height, the more opportunity there is for the building to cash flow, attracting investors and commercial lenders. Developers stated that the market for permanent residents is an environment can be differentiated from student -type housing with building amenities available and views that the buildings. Ford noted a relative small percentage of downtown residences are occupied by 'permanent residents.' Developers would like to increase the number of 'permanent' residences, according to Ford, which puts the growth of downtown on a more diverse path. Ford noted three policy decision points regarding building height. The first one would be to lay out a clear and predictable policy on building height for TIF projects. Second would be to determine how to consider the architectural impact of a project on adjacent properties. The third, revolves around how historic preservation can be encouraged. She noted staff has been discussing the opportunities surrounding the Unitarian Church, for example, and that perhaps there are other opportunities for incenting historic preservation. Throgmorton then spoke to Ford's decision points, stating that the first item would undoubtedly need some detailed and lengthy discussion. He suggested they address all of the other issues and then return to building height issues. He asked who the four people were that were involved in the roundtable discussion. Ford answered, listing Kevin Monson of Neumann Monson Architects, Martha Norbeck of C -Wise Consulting, Justin Bishop of OPN Architects, and Marc Moen of the Moen Group. Mims stated that she believes they should start the conversation and see where they stand. Cole stated that he agrees with Throgmorton, that they should focus on those areas where they will get consensus first and then address the other issues at the end. Everyone concurred. Regarding sustainability, Throgmorton stated that he agrees that LEED silver certification should be required. Hektoen asked for clarification about whether Throgmorton means actual certification or'the equivalent thereof.' Throgmorton affirmed certification, and other Members concurred. Mims noted that she would be fine with the silver certification portion, but that she needs more information about the suggestion by Martha Norbeck to require at least 8 points be attained in the energy efficiency category of LEED points. Norbeck had made this suggestion right after the roundtable meeting and presented the idea in a letter to the EDC and City Council. Throgmorton suggested they ask for more feedback from the development community on the additional eight points. Cole suggested that perhaps a higher LEED standard could be required for the highly desireable upfront TIF assistance. Ford noted that the financial implications of providing more upfront financing could be substantial for the City. Cole continued, stating his belief the City could withstand this risk and in the end, it would be worth it for achieving the higher standards. Throgmorton suggested doing a mix of upfront and rebate to lessen this risk. Fruin then spoke briefly to the issue of requiring silver LEED, and that it is not a given downtown when it comes to development. He also noted that there is a big cost difference between silver and gold LEED certification. Regarding upfront, he stated that they can mitigate their risks, but they can't eliminate their risks. He added that Iowa City has not seen default on TIF financing, but that other cities have. He suggested the committee might need to consider how to articulate when upfront financing is appropriate. Members continued to discuss TIF policies, with Throgmorton stating that he strongly prefers rebates, which has been the City's practice, but that he believes there could be merit to providing partial upfront assistance as an incentive for LEED gold certification. Mims stated that they need to evaluate how much the City willing to invest in LEED against the return to the City. She noted that they need to know the difference in cost between the silver and gold. LEED certifications, and EDC March 23, 20171 p.3 APPROVED decide if the benefit to the City in general is worth the additional money. She added that they would need to really review this type of policy in considering upfront money, and come up with a plan to be able to recover what the City has invested should a project default. Hektoen added that the City currently mitigates its risk in this situation with 'minimum assessment agreements,' that attach to the project and sometimes other assets that the developer owns in the same urban renewal area. Mims stated that with more and more developers coming in from out of the area, they need to make sure that this type of policy is written in a way to deal with bigger, lesser known firms. Fruin added that it is good to have well defined economic development policies on TIF. This helps developers see what the City is looking for with well-defined policies in place. This in turn, allows staff to know that they can draft a development agreement before the project is presented to Council. Mims stated that what she is hearing is that all three Members are in support of having silver LEED certification on residential and mixed-use projects. She stated that the City would also consider TIF on industrial or other such projects that don't meet silver LEED. Throgmorton added his inclination to require LEED silver on mixed use developments in or near downtown with 8 LEED energy efficiency points, but that they need feedback from developers on whether they feel this would be a viable thing to do. Mims questioned how we know that 8 points is appropriate, and that perhaps the right number is more or fewer than 8, and that she wants the feedback before they decide this. Moving on to affordable housing, Ford reminded Members of the affordable housing element that was added to the economic development policies, which includes the four bulleted points on page four of her memo. The policy decision point will be to determine if they want to make any refinements to the policies currently in place. Ford referred to the first bullet point — a minimum of 15% of the residential units in a TIF -assisted project must be affordable for a minimum of 20 years, or the term of the development agreement. She added that a new clarification to this policy, which staff would like to see clarified in policy, is that only the financial gap above the 10% required affordable units in Riverfront Crossings and the 15% required through economic development incentives would be considered for City financing. The fourth point in the Affordable Housing policy is that the City can negotiate a fee in lieu of providing affordable housing, and this fee would then be used for the City's affordable housing purposes. Mims stated that she is comfortable continuing with this policy. She added that this can always be negotiated on a project -by -project basis. She is also comfortable with the AMI amounts and the 110% for owner - occupied. Members agreed that staff could do some minor tweaking to clarify these points, but that in general they are in agreement. Cole asked if we should provide definitions of affordable housing and workforce housing. Fruin noted that the policies are not focused on workforce housing and are not incentivized under current policies. Cole stated that he would be okay with incentivizing workforce housing as well, because it would go towards having housing for all income levels. The other Members stated that they would not be in favor of this. Mims stated that the market is doing a good job in this area, without the need for City financial assistance, and that she would like to see what the form -based code can do for that 'missing middle' piece and workforce housing that they've talked about. Moving to social justice, Mims noted that she thinks we may be challenged by what we as the City can do with regards to the suggestions submitted by leadership in a local a labor organization. Fruin spoke to Members about discussions with the labor group. Hektoen also addressed oversight issues and that monitoring such policies would be challenging. She noted agreements could be made with the developers to abide by the labor requirements, but they often have several subcontractors under them, don't necessarily have contractors determined at EDC March 23, 2017 1 p.4 APPROVED the time of the development agreement and would be challenged to monitor the contractors employees and/or subcontractors. Mims stated that she is comfortable leaving this policy as is and having City staff direct people to the appropriate agencies when enforcement is needed. Cole stated that he believes they need to put this in the TIF agreement, to lay out expectations, and if expectations aren't met, then the City would be able to enforce this. Members continued to discuss this issue, with Mims stating she is amenable to not include this issue in TIF. Cole stated that he believes they have greater control by having an agreement with the developer, who then needs to convey expectations to the general contractor, who in turn would do so with the subs. He would still like to get feedback on this issue before they make a final decision. Discussion continued on how to handle this issue, with Fruin stating that he will make contacts and get a written response to Members on this. On to item five, other requirements — Mims noted the time and asked if Members wanted to continue. They agreed to at least start the conversation. The first issue — quality of jobs — was discussed briefly. Cole asked if it would be possible to add the project labor agreement as a requirement. Fruin noted that this is something separate and they agreed to address it later. As to the first issue, Members agreed to the current language. Secondly, class -A office space; Mims noted that they had begun to require class -A office space in TIF -related projects. She believes they should stick with this requirement and Throgmorton agreed. Cole stated that one concern he has is the need for low-cost office space for entrepreneurs and start-ups. He noted that class -A space is extremely expensive and he believes they should encourage cost-effective office space, as well. Fruin spoke to the history of this and why they have used TIF for class -A space. Moving on to the topic of hotels, Throgmorton referred to Josh Schamberger's recent guest opinion regarding the number of hotels in the area. He questioned if they shouldn't tighten up the requirements for new hotels, not immediately but in the future, and then gauge how the market is responding. Mims spoke to how they might add some flexibility here and how staff might craft such language. The Members had agreed to end the meeting at 1:15 p.m. and continue discussion at the next meeting, to be scheduled immediately. STAFF REPORT: None. COMMITTEE TIME: None. reli N :I:7=1�b91�1 None. ADJOURNMENT: Cole moved to adjourn the meeting at 1:15 P.M. Throgmorton seconded the motion. Motion carried 3-0. EDC March 23, 2017 1 p.5 APPROVED Council Economic Development Committee ATTENDANCE RECORD 2016-2017 Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused TERM A o N NAME EXP. Oi 01 J 01 J 01 � OI Ol Ol V Rockne Cole 01/02/18 X X X X X X X X Susan Mims 01/02/18 X X X X X X X X Jim 01/02/18 X X X X X X X X Throgmorton Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused 5b(3) MINUTES APPROVED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2017 RECREATION CENTER — MEETING ROOM B Members Present: Suzanne Bentler, Clay Claussen, Wayne Fett, Cara Hamann, Lucie Laurian, Jamie Venzon, Members Absent: Larry Brown, Angie Smith, Joe Younker Staff Present: Juli Seydell Johnson, Chad Dyson, Zac Hall Others Present: Del Holland, Sam Tomek, Jill Endres Tomek CALL TO ORDER Chairman Claussen called the meeting to order at 5:07 p.m. Seydell Johnson introduced RaQuishia Harrington to the Commission. Harrington is the new Parks and Recreation Program Supervisor for special and underserved populations. She fills the position left vacant by Cindy Coffin who retired in December after working for Parks and Recreation for 35 years. Harrington shared that she worked with Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County prior to coming to the City. She is happy to have the opportunity to bring her skills and connections to the City level and hopes to be able to bridge the gap by offering more programs to the various populations. Seydell Johnson shared that the department is very fortunate to have Harrington on staff as she is quite well known in the community and, in fact, was just named an honoree of the Women of Influence by the Corridor Business Journal. Claussen announced that new commission member, Angie Smith, was unable to attend tonight's meeting. She will be introduced at the April meeting. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None OTHER FORMAL ACTION: Moved by Fett, seconded by Bentler, to approve the January 11, 2017 minutes as written. Passed 6- 0 (Brown, Smith & Younker absent), PUBLIC DISCUSSION None EAGLE SCOUT PRESENATION: Hall introduced Samuel Tomek who was at the meeting to present his Eagle Scout project to the Commission. Tomek has constructed bat -houses to be placed in the timber area west of the lake at the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area. He explained that these houses will provide a habitat for the PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION March 8, 2017 Page 2 of 6 endangered Indiana bat. Bats are also known to control the insect population. Each structure will hold between 300-400 bats at one time. Laurian asked why these are necessary. He explained that as more and more trees are cut down in the U.S., bats are losing their natural habitat. He also noted that while working at the boat marina, he experienced first-hand the number of insects present at the park, explaining that bats are known to eat their own weight in bugs daily. Commission members thanked him for sharing his project and expressed their approval. HAPPY HOLLOW PARK PROJECT PRESENTATION — HBK STAFF Seydell Johnson noted that the Parks and Recreation staff has been working with HBK to create a design for the restroom and shelter at Happy Hollow Park. These structures will replace the existing facilities. A public meeting was held at the park on May 25, 2016. Approximately 15 residents attended and provided feedback for the park design. The project is scheduled to be bid in May with construction during the summer/fall of this year. Seydell Johnson is looking for feedback from the commission on the design explaining that this is not a whole park redesign. Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz from HBK was present to review the concept plans with the commission. She noted that the park is within the Brown Street historic district and expressed the importance in keeping with that character. HBK staff completed a site evaluation and that included going into the neighborhood to look at the design of the homes, paying particular attention to the types of siding and shingles used and the roof designs of the homes. In sharing the restroom design, she explained that she included a stone base, a metal roof, and a front porch type character to this structure. Laurian expressed her concern with there being no windows in the design. Fixmer-Oraiz noted that sun tubes would be included which will allow for natural lighting. Fixmer-Oraiz then shared the shelter design with the commission. She pointed out that the proposed design of the shelter reflects a lot of the same character as the restroom design. Seydell Johnson explained that the location of the shelter will be similar to the one that is there now and that it will be of a similar size. Laurian asked if it was necessary to have the angle change to the roof, stating that that would add to the cost. Seydell Johnson expressed the importance of keeping with the historic design of the homes within the neighborhood. Laurian also mentioned that perhaps there were other less expensive ways to incorporate the brick within the design; i.e. in the pathways etc. She suggested that perhaps a brick - colored paint could be used as well. Fixmer-Oraiz explained that this is an evolving plan at this point so these suggestions may be an option. Venzon asked if the construction will affect the use of the existing shelter. Seydell Johnson said that it will, however, the ball fields and playground will remain open during construction. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF Recreation Division SUDerintendent — Chad Dvson Soccer: Dyson noted that the Iowa City Kickers Soccer Club co -organized a soccer program with Grant Wood School. When it started there were two teams. Now there are 15 teams. He said that while they are happy with the growth, they are struggling to find volunteer coaches. Dyson is working with the school district, United Action for Youth and the Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County to try to resolve the issue. He asked that commission members share with him any connections they may have. School District: Dyson announced that the school district discontinued their Virtual Backpack and are replacing it with a third party website called Peachjar. He further noted that while this will allow community groups to submit fliers etc. about programs offered, there is a fee for doing so. Dyson is gathering more information on this program and will report back to commission. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION March 8, 2017 Page 3 of 6 Grant Offered: Dyson announced that the City Council approved $25,000 for a grant that is designed to advance social justice and racial equity. The purpose of the grant is to "encourage, empower and engage social justice and racial equity initiatives by funding programs that has impacts on eliminating inequities in the community." Neighborhood Development Services and the Iowa City Police Department submitted an application to fund a youth program where bicycles that have been obtained by the Police Department will be refurbished and offered for use in youth programming. Recreation staff will work in conjunction with them in the program planning. New Garden Programs: Dyson said that Harrington, as part of the Council's local food initiative, will develop garden programs for the underserved population. The department will offer the classes, supply the tools and seed, and will assist in the maintenance of the gardens throughout the season. Parks Division Superintendent — Zac Hall Community Gardens: Hall announced that the Community Garden Program is expanding. Staff has added twenty 10' x 20' plots at Kiwanis Park and sixteen of the same size to Reno Street Park. These are in addition to the already existing garden spaces at Chadek Green and Wetherby Parks. Garden plot registration will begin at 7:30 a.m. on Monday, April 3. Tree Inventory: Plan -It Geo Hall has hired a subcontractor to assist in the tree inventory. To date they have collected information on 12,000 of the 50,000 trees to be recorded. Clean -Up near CRANDIC: Staff continues working with CRANDIC Railroad to cleanup homeless encampments along the tracks on S. Gilbert St. Seydell Johnson explained that there is a process prior to removing their items. The police give them 48-hour notice. The items that are removed are kept as long as possible should anyone want to retrieve them. Most of the items left are abandoned. Recycling Update: Hall noted that staff has placed three recycling containers at Terry Trueblood Recreation Area. One is placed by two of the shelters as well as near the boat marina. Staff will continue to monitor and report. Parks and Recreation Director — Juli Seydell Johnson Seydell Johnson explained that she has recently completed a number of presentations to community groups updating them on current Parks and Recreation projects. She shared that presentation with commission. • Park Master Plan: RDG and staff have held public input meetings as well as a couple of steering committee meetings. Based on the information gathered from the public and staff they have been able to develop a draft plan. Seydell Johnson will present the plan at the May commission meeting. • Natural Areas Master Plan: The consultants have completed an aerial of the City. They were able to identify species by the heat they emit. They will be back in April to kick-off their field work. They will continue this process through the spring and summer. • Bicycle Master Plan: The Parks and Recreation Department has been actively involved with this process. The plan will be presented to council later this spring. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION March 8, 2017 Page 4 of 6 • Riverfront Crossinas — Phase 1: The design for the wetland area, trail crossing along Highway 6 and trail connections is complete. Seydell Johnson reported that the traffic circle and parking lot design are still planned as discussed at a previous meeting. Laurian reported that a few of her students researched traffic circles within other parks and found that people do not hang out in the center of these. Seydell Johnson stated that the traffic circle is not necessarily designed for people to hang out in but rather a place for visual art. Laurian said that there are traffic circles all over Europe with public art and people do not frequent them. Riverfront Crossings Nature Play Area: Seydell Johnson applied for a federal assistance grant through the Iowa DNR Land and Water Conservation Fund in the amount of $157,300 (50% of project cost) for a nature play area development within Riverfront Crossings. Amenities included in such a play area are logs for climbing, a rolling hill with a tunnel in the center, a small American ninja type course, stepping stones, a teepee area where kids can add their own brush etc. to make it a play space, as well as a small kids zip -line. She also noted that the arches that were previously at Sabin Elementary will be used in this area. • Frauenholtz Miller Park: The initial bids for this project were too high. Design staff revised the plan by removing grass berms thereby making it flatter, will only include one shelter and remove the colored concrete. The bids for the alternate design are due on March 15. • Hickory Hill Park: The consultant will do a site assessment and will create a master plan prioritizing trail, bridge and signage improvements. The large bridge at the First Avenue entrance is contracted for $141,000 which will also include bank stabilization. • Cardigan Park: The playground will be installed this summer. The remaining park with be constructed in 2018. • Creekside Master Plan: Staff has met with Snyder & Associates to kick-off this project. Neighborhood meetings will be scheduled later this spring. The plan includes a whole park redesign. The project will include a new restroom, shelter and playground. The master plan will be presented to commission in mid -summer. Construction is scheduled for 2018. • city Park: Staff will install a new playground in Upper City Park near the pool. Laurian asked why staff chose brown for the playground color. Hall explained that it was to fit with the nearby cabins. • Pheasant Hill: The neighborhood met and chose a playground for this park. The goal is to have the new playground installed by Memorial Day. A gaga pit will also be installed in this park. • Cabins: The plan to restore these cabins is ongoing. No bids came in for the project, however. Staff is working with the architect to redesign. The City will accept bids again in April or May and staff is hoping to start work by the end of the summer. • Wetherby Park: Seydell Johnson reported that the department has been given approval to go ahead with the bidding process for a sport court. This project will include two basketball and futsal court. This project is funded by Wellmark and CDBG funds. • Recreation Center Improvements: Seydell Johnson explained that this project will include remodeling of the main office area to allow for more office space. There will also be PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION March 8, 2017 Page 5 of 6 improvements to the restrooms on the first floor making them ADA accessible. Improvements to the stairs and rails will also take place. • Mercer Park Aquatic Center Improvements: Most of the improvements to Mercer will be behind the scenes. Improvements will include and new HVAC boiler system, roof repair, tuck pointing and a replacement of the lift chair at the pool. Shive Hattery has been hired as the consultant to design the project. The construction will go out to bid yet this spring. Ashton House Landscapine: Seydell Johnson said this project is being completed in partnership with Project Green. Funding for this project is provided through a $150,000 REAP grant. The project will include improvements to the back patio, the addition of a pergola along with other landscaping. The project will continue throughout the summer. She mentioned that the Ashton House is one of the departments most underused facilities. Claussen suggested that perhaps staff hold a grand re -opening ceremony after the landscaping project has concluded. • City Hall Landscaping: Tyler Baird, Horticulturist for the department, will be making improvements to the landscaping on the south side (front) of City Hall. In doing so, will also work towards providing gathering space for farmers market patrons, especially important during the construction of The Chauncey. Baird will also be making improvements on the east side of the parking ramp and the west side of Robert A. Lee Recreation Center. COMMISSION VISIONING DISCUSSION — CLAY CLAUSSEN Claussen reported that periodically the question arises as to what the Parks and Recreation Commissions role, what is their purpose and what is the mission. He explained that the commission is to support staff in their projects and programming but not to micromanage. He pointed out that the commission serves as an advisory board but questions what is necessary from commission members to do that well and to what level of involvement is expected from the members. He realizes that a number of members come on board with their own specific interests and that those interests grow during their terms. He encouraged continued commitment by the members. He encouraged members to attend neighborhood meetings when possible noting the importance of being present in the community. Laurian admitted that she was frustrated when fust on the commission not knowing what her exact role was. However, this was clarified by Mike Moran explaining that the board is in place for staff to present ideas to, get their input and then serve, as Claussen noted, an advisory board. She appreciated that explanation and has since learned to be patient through the process as things do take time but she is happy to see progress. Seydell Johnson commended the commission for their dedication to Parks and Recreation and for their ongoing support to the department staff. She said it is obvious that they care very much for Iowa City and its residents. Hamann said that she feels that commission does a pretty good job but would like the group to have the ability to become more involved in some of the bigger items such as the bicycle master plan, equity issues in the community, etc. She said it is important that members think about when it is appropriate to make themselves heard. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION March 8, 2017 Page 6 of 6 COMMISSION TIME/SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Laurian said she is very pleased to see the department using internal staff to complete parks and recreation projects. Laurian announced that she has students who are available to do work for the commission and staff. Projects could include gathering statistics, doing surveys or environmental studies and more. Laurian said regarding the commissions role, she would like the group to look at what they can do to improve water and soil for instance and would like the see the commission become a part of the bigger picture. Bentler said she echoes Laurian's sentiment, further stating that this is a very progressive community and that this fits into the overarching theme going on in the City. Venzon said she is still learning her role as a member of the commission as well as the commission as a whole and that tonight's meeting provided her a better understanding of what that role is. Moved by Hamann, seconded by Fett, to adjourn the meetint at 6:37 p.m. Motion passed 6-0 (Brown, Smith & Younker absent). PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION March 8, 2017 Page 7 of 6 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD NAME V n r TERM k e 00 $ o � \N. N M EXPIRES v o Suzanne 1/1/17 X X X X X X X X O/E X NM X Bentler Larry Brown I/1/18 O/E X X X X X X X X X NM O/E Clay I/1/18 X X X X X X X X X X NM X Claussen Maggie 1/1/17 X O/E X O/E X X X O/E X Elliott Wayne Tett 1/1/19 X X X X O/ X O/E X X X NM X E Cara 1/1/20 X X X X X X X X X O/E NM X Hamann Lucie 1/1/10 O/E X X O/E O/ X X X X X NM X Laurian E Paul Roesler 1/1/18 X X X X X O/E X X O/E Angie Smith 1/1/18 * * * * * * * * * * * O/E Jamie 1/1/20 * * * * * * * * * X NM X Venzon Joe Younker 1/1/20 X X X O/E X X O/E X X X NM O/E KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum * = Not a member at this time r05-02-1 �` .® CITY OF IOWA CITY 5 14) MEMORANDUM Date: April 11, 2017 To: Mayor and City Council From: Bob Miklo, Planning & Zoning Commission Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission At their March 2, 2017 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the February 2nd minutes with the following recommendations to the City Council: 1. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ16-00008, an application for rezoning approximately 10.26 acres located north of Scott Boulevard east of Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue from Interim Development (ID -RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12), be approved conditioned on general compliance with the concept plan showing 54 dwelling units. 2. By a vote of 0-7 the Commission denied approval of application CPA16-00004 an application submitted by Streb Investment Partnership LC seeking to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan to allow residential uses in commercial areas adjacent to the Industrial (I- 1)zone located south of the Iowa Interstate Railroad and east of Scott Boulevard. Additional action (check one) No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction _X_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action - Done MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2, 2017 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Ann Freerks, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Jodie Theobald MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sara Walz OTHERS PRESENT: Brian Gotwals, Kevin Hanick, Mark Seabold, Bob Downer RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ16-00008, an application for rezoning approximately 10.26 acres located north of Scott Boulevard east of Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue from Interim Development (ID -RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12), be approved conditioned on general compliance with the concept plan showing 54 dwelling units. By a vote of 0-7 the Commission denied approval of application CPA16-00004 an application submitted by Streb Investment Partnership LC seeking to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan to allow residential uses in commercial areas adjacent to the Industrial (1- 1)zone located south of the Iowa Interstate Railroad and east of Scott Boulevard. Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There were none REZONING ITEM (REZ16-00008): Discussion of an application submitted by Kevin Hanick for a rezoning of approximately 10.26 acres from Interim Development Single Family (ID -RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) zone for property located north of Scott Boulevard between Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue. Miklo began the staff report showing a map of the area under consideration for rezoning. The current zoning of Interim Development is in place because at the time the zoning pattern was established for the area there was no adequate street access. With the construction of the extensions of Scott Boulevard and First Avenue, it opened up this area with adequate infrastructure and now it is appropriate to rezone it to allow development. The proposed zone is Low Density Multifamily (RM -12), which generally allows for 15 multifamily dwelling units per acre. Theoretically, that would allow for over a 100 units on this Planning and Zoning Commission February 2, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 8 property, but because of the steep ravines and woodlands that density would not be achievable. Due to that, Staff is recommending regardless of who purchases this property, it be restricted to 54 dwelling units. Miklo noted that the Comprehensive Plan for this part of the City shows properties north of Scott Boulevard being appropriate for office research park. This land use designation was put in place with the adoption of the Northeast District Plan to recognize the presence of the ACT Campus. The text of the Plan notes that the amount of land designated for office development may be unrealistic and that alternative uses including residential, specifically multifamily residential, should be considered for this area. The text of the Plan also encourages a diversity of housing. Townhouse and small apartment buildings are proposed at the edges of neighborhoods, where slightly higher density housing can take advantage of being located near major arterial streets, such as First Avenue and Scott Boulevard. Therefore, Staff believes that multifamily rezoning would comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Miklo said that regarding neighborhood compatibility it is staff's opinion the proposal is compatible with the neighborhood in terms of land use. The area to the north and east contains the ACT campus. The ravine and woodland provides a significant buffer between the proposed residential buildings and ACT. The Northeast District Plan shows the possibility to two apartment buildings on the south side of Scott Boulevard just to the south of this proposal), and single family homes farther to the south. The properties to the west and east both contain wooded ravines with protected slopes and will not be developed. The proposed RM -12 zoning will be compatible with the area. Miklo stated staff also looks at traffic implications when reviewing a rezoning proposal. The current streets of Scott Boulevard and Dodge Street have more than sufficient capacity to handle the traffic they anticipate would be generated by a project of this size. Transportation Planners estimate that this proposed development will generate approximately 350 vehicle trips per day. There is concern that at the intersection of Scott Boulevard and First Avenue. It is currently a four-way stop and would likely need to be improved to include a traffic signal, or a traffic circle, to improve traffic flow in that area. Miklo said the Capital Improvement Plan includes a project to address the intersection. Miklo discussed the sensitive areas on the property, and that some of the woodland ravine would need to be cleared for stormwater management for this development. The City Engineer is still working with the applicant on the stormwater management plan. Staff does not anticipate an issue with the sensitive areas provisions for this area. However, if more than 80% of the woodlands are proposed to be disturbed, or more than 35% of the critical slopes are proposed to be graded, or there is any disturbance of the protected slope buffers, a rezoning for a sensitive areas Planned Development Overlay (OPD) will be required. Staff recommends that this application, rezoning approximately 10.26 acres located north of Scott Boulevard between Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue from Interim Development (ID - RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12), be approved conditioned on general compliance with the concept plan showing 54 dwelling units. Parsons asked if all the current structures on the property would be removed. Miklo replied that yes, the property current contains a residence and storage or farm buildings. If this proposal Planning and Zoning Commission February 2, 2017— Formal Meeting Page 3 of 8 moves forward, the applicant will buy the property and the current homeowner will build a new house on the northern panhandle of the property, that is already zoned single family. Freerks opened the public discussion Brian Gotwals (architect Shive Hattery) is working with Kevin Hanick to develop the concept for this site. The idea of this project is to maintain the natural character of the site and that resulted in a proposal with three principle buildings that are nestled close to the tree lines with a communal space in the center. Additionally keeping with the character of the property the driveways will be designed to wrap around and not cut into the tree lines. There will be three buildings, the two buildings on the right will be connected by a subgrade garage level. The short faces of the buildings are 60 feet wide, and that is what faces Scott Boulevard, rather than the principle masses of the buildings. Gotwals showed renderings and images of the proposal from various aspects. The buildings are three stories and will have 54 units total. Gotwals noted that there was discussion about the vehicular entry, particularly to the building on the right, and a recommendation that the garage door entrance be placed on the west face of the building. Gotwals stated that may cause issues, it would require a 90 degree angle turn to leave the garage, it will cause a loss of some parking spaces, and will increase the slope of the driveway. Gowals said they would like to work with the City to create some type of a visual buffer for the garage entrance instead. Dyer asked the length of the two long buildings from the parking lot to the far south end. Gotwals said that each of the buildings are 185 feet long, the center communal space is 50 feet. The building on the left is 258 feet long, but again the portions of the buildings that face Scott Boulevard are 65 feet long. Dyer asked if it were level and Gotwals said it will be level for a good portion of it but they will need to maintain some of the natural swales for stormwater management. Dyer noted her concern for accessibility for handicap visitors. Gotwals said the walkways will all meet the ADA accessible guidelines. Hensch asked about the issue with the parking entrance. Miklo said that to comply with the Multifamily Site Development Standards, garage entrances are not allowed to face the street. This Standard was created for urban areas where it is undesirable to have a large curb cut and a blank garage door up against the sidewalk in a walkable neighborhood. The applicant can apply for approval of a minor modification from the Design Review Committee to allow an alternative design that does not strictly meet the standard. Miklo noted in this situation this is not an urban setting, there will be considerable open space between the garage and the street, so the effect of having a garage door right on the street is not as significant. But it will have to go through the minor modification process. Hensch asked if the goal was to retain most of the stormwater on site, which Gotwals confirmed, Hensch asked if there was a percentage that would be directed off to the ravine to the east. Gotwals said it would be a single -digit percentage. Kevin Hanick (88 Hickory Heights Lane) noted his love of living in this part of town, he had originally thought he would want to move downtown but because of costs and accessibility. He feels this proposal is a great location, very accessible to downtown, the interstate, parks and shopping needs. These units will be built for sale, not rentals, and each unit will have two dedicated underground parking spaces. Hanick reached out to Shive Hattery because he was impressed with their work on the latest addition of Oaknoll on Benton Street with the underground parking and apartment style facility. All units will be one level, minimum of two bedroom, two bath. The target audience is working professionals or empty nesters/retirees. Planning and Zoning Commission February 2, 2017— Formal Meeting Page 4 of 8 Parsons questioned the north garage entrance on the western building and if there was consideration of having a garage entrance on the north side of the other building as well to alleviate the code concern about the south entrance to the garage. Hanick stated that coming out of that side of the building would be a steep incline. Hanick also mentioned originally the design had units above the common area that joins the two buildings, and the common area is important because they will be marketing the units as a community. Martin asked for clarification that this is not being built as a 55 and over complex. Hanick confirmed it is not, it's being designed similar to Oaknoll, but for anyone. The common space is to bring people together, perhaps for music or readings, and other activities to build a sense of community. Mark Seabold (architect Shive Hattery) stated that working with Hanick in developing this concept it has been important to take advantage of the beautiful property, the views, etc. It is about quality of life and not maximizing density, and to not sacrifice the feeling of community and nature that will be seen in this project. Freerks closed the public discussion. Hensch moved to approve the application for rezoning approximately 10.26 acres located north of Scott Boulevard east of Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue from Interim Development (ID -RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12), be approved conditioned on general compliance with the concept plan showing 54 dwelling units. Parsons seconded the motion. Freerks noted this sounds like a wonderful addition to the area and community. It has been presented nicely and it is encouraging to see the thought and care that has gone into the planning. Theobald and Dyer agreed and both commented on how nicely the project will preserve the surrounding nature and landscape. Signs added that he hopes the staff committee regarding the parking issue will look favorably on this project and it can be screened effectively with some trees or berming. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM (CPA16-0004)• A public hearing for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the language in the Comprehensive Plan to allow residential uses in the commercial zones south of Iowa Interstate railroad and east of Scott Boulevard located in Scott -Six Industrial Park. Walz noted these are the properties in the Scott Six Industrial Park that are located west of the creek, along Scott Boulevard, are zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1). Properties west of the creek and east of Commerce Lane, are zoned Community Commercial (CC -2). This includes the properties occupied the Fareway grocery story and Sinclair Gas. Residential uses may be Planning and Zoning Commission February 2, 2017— Formal Meeting Page 5 of 8 located above commercial in the CC -2 zone with special exceptions but are prohibited in the CI - 1 zone all together. If the Commission recommends to Council, and Council approves, this Comprehensive Plan amendment it could possibly permit a rezoning for those properties to CC - 2 along Scott Boulevard. The nearest residential zones are located one half mile to the north (a manufactured housing park located outside City Limits) and one-half mile to the southwest (Saddlebrook). As mentioned, the current zoning code allows residential uses to be located above ground floor commercial in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone by special exception only. About a year ago the applicant applied for a special exception to allow for residential above these properties and Staff recommended against that due to references in the Comprehensive Plan/Southeast District Plan that call for the separation of industrial and residential uses. Walz explained there is a history with the industrial uses creating noise, traffic, vibrations and odors that generate complaints from residential zones, particularly the ones north of the railroad tracks. There are also some safety concerns with large trucks and the isolation of this area. This is the only part of Iowa City that is zone specifically for industrial, and as other areas of Iowa City develop (such as Riverfront Crossings) industrial uses may be relocated to this area. There is also concern about residential traffic interfering with industrial operations as well as residents trespassing across sites. Waiz reiterated that both the Comprehensive Plan and the Southeast District Plan make mention of these concerns and throughout both the Industrial and Housing sections of the plan call for separation and buffering between industrial and residential uses. With regards to the East Side Growth Area, this property has been zoned for first, industrial then quasi -industrial uses and then commercial uses for some time. There is not a lot of traffic out in this area right now, but with the location of the new eastside elementary school (in the eastside growth area) they do anticipate more residential uses being developed north of the railroad. Higher density residential uses are contemplated for the American Legion Road and new school area. Farhter to the east along Taft Avenue, there is a plan for a park to run across Snyder Creek to act as a buffer for the residential from the industrial. The goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to direct new residential areas into areas that are contiguous with existing residential areas. Signs asked Walz to explain the General Employment/Institutional area of the Comprehensive Plan map. Walz said that was an area that was to be set aside for a large commercial office use or a use such as a church or school. This map was created prior to the new eastside school location being decided. Hench asked if the zoning to the west of Scott Boulevard was industrial as well and Walz confirmed that it is also zoned industrial. Freerks opened the public hearing Bob Downer (attorney for Streb Investment Partnership, LC) stated it appears to be somewhat of an uneven standard being applied here because there are other places in Iowa City such as Riverside Drive where the level of truck traffic is at least as heavy as it is at this property. On one hand, they are told there is not enough activity to justify residential in this area and on the other being told there is too much traffic. Therefore this application is not being looked at objectively. Downer stated that if the Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved that would not automatically allow apartments to' be constructed over first floor commercial space in this area, it would still require a special exception. So there are other processes in place that are required to be pursued by an applicant. Planning and Zoning Commission February 2, 2017— Formal Meeting Page 6 of 8 Downer said that he had represented the developer when this property was developed into industrial and commercial in 1997 zones. The industrial area has sold out more quickly than the commercial, and a strong effort has been made to sell the commercial to single -level buildings but has not reached market acceptance. There is retail in the area with the Fareway grocery store and a convenience store. Downer stated there are criteria with respect to the Comprehensive Plan that are met and reasons such as close proximity to places of employment. The applicant urges this application to be approved so the property can be fully developed to provide housing opportunities for people who are employed in the area. Development south of Highway 6 (as mentioned in the Staff report) poses a major determent to people and a safety risk. Freerks closed the public hearing. Freerks noted that Staff is recommending denial of the application, but any motion should be made in the affirmative. Hensch moved for approval of application CPA16-00004 an application submitted by Streb Investment Partnership LC seeking to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan to allow residential uses in commercial areas adjacent to the Industrial (I- 1)zone located south of the Iowa Interstate Railroad and east of Scott Boulevard. Theobald seconded the motion Signs asked if there was a sidewalk in this area on the east side of Scott Boulevard, as we should be looking for the walkability of all areas that are developing within the city. Walz responded that there was not a complete sidewalk network. Freerks noted this is important space in the Community and serves a purpose. And while there is value to having housing close to employment, there are certain areas where residential just don't work, which includes industrial, and there are already problems with smells and sounds from this area for the residential areas a half mile away. Freerks stated it would be premature to make this change before seeing how this area develops out, and any change at this time would go against the Comprehensive Plan as it is currently laid out. Martin stated the transition would be very abrupt whereas the Commission would rather see a more gradual transition from industrial to commercial to residential. Theobald noted that there is also limited industrial zoned land in the community and this amendment would add to the loss of such space. Signs can appreciate the developers desire to find some product that would work on the land, but residential makes no sense in that area. The City has spent a lot of money to develop this industrial area and there is a difference with having housing close to work versus in the middle of work. Parsons echoed Signs and that there would not be a sense of community here, rather the residential would be isolated. A vote of 0-7 was taken and therefore the motion was denied. Planning and Zoning Commission February 2, 2017— Formal Meeting Page 7 of 8 CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 19. 2016 Theobald moved to approve the meeting minutes of January 19, 2016 with minor edits. Hensch seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Freerks thanked Staff for organizing the work session earlier in the evening to view Jeff Speck's presentation on "Toward a More Walkable Iowa City". Miklo asked the Commissioners to mark their calendars for February 14 & 15 because Dan Parolek, a consultant for the exploration of applying form -based codes will be in town. There will be a session on the 14'h at 5:30pm at the Library and on the 151h at 6:00 pm at the Alexander Elementary School. The session at the Library will focus on the Northside and older neighborhoods and the session at Alexander will be on the South District. ADJOURNMENT: Theobald moved to adjourn. Martin seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0. Z O y� � tY �O OU ZU N OZm N a N ai Z a Z Z Q Z J a N X X X x X x x am x x x x X X X r N x x X X X x X r T XX x w w X X l X r X X X X X X r 0 N XX X w X X X r m CD X X X X X X X r l X X X X X x X X X X x x X x co nxxooxxx iz X, X X X X X N X X X X X X X m X � X X X X X LO LO x X X X X x x a X x X XX I X n v X X XXX I X n XX X Xlwl I x M x X X X x i x CF) a X x x x x I x >Z w w w "I o 0 Q O mIt o V Y 2 Z Z Q w U - ON m of ui U) in Z w W > w = Z w Ir Q (!)= ¢ 0LL=rLI1fnF- r1 05-02-17 �I110 .® CITY OF IOWA CITY 5b(5) 'P� MEMORANDUM Date: April 11, 2017 To: Mayor and City Council From: Bob Miklo, Planning & Zoning Commission Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission At their April 2, 2017 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the March 2nd minutes with the following recommendations to the City Council: 1. By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of SUB16-00013, a preliminary plat of The Crossings, an approximately 8.49 -acre, 7 lot, mixed-use subdivision located west of Gilbert Street, between 1st Street and Highway 6, contingent upon resolution of any deficiencies or discrepancies on the preliminary plat. 2. By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ16-00008 an application submitted by Kevin Hanick for a rezoning of approximately 10.26 acres from Interim Development Single Family (ID -RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) zone for property located north of Scott Boulevard between Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue with a maximum of 60 units. 3. By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of Table 56-4: Sign Specifications and Provision in the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones as listed in Staff Report. Fascia Signs 1.5 times the length of the building wall. No longer than 90% of the length of the sign wall, sign band, or storefront, whichever is most applicable. Back lit cabinet signs, where the entire face is illuminated, are prohibited. Internally illuminated plastic trip cap letter forms are prohibited. Additional action (check one) No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction _X_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action - Done MINUTES APPROVED AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 2017 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Ann Freerks, Phoebe Martin, Mark Signs, Jodie Theobald MEMBERS ABSENT: Max Parsons STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Karen Howard, Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: Randy Miller, Kevin Hanick, Mary Bennett, Alicia Trimble, Helen Buford, Ginalie Sawim RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of SUB16-00013, a preliminary plat of The Crossings, an approximately 8.49 -acre, 7 lot, mixed-use subdivision located west of Gilbert Street, between 1st Street and Highway 6, contingent upon resolution of any deficiencies or discrepancies on the preliminary plat. By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ16-00008 an application submitted by Kevin Hanick for a rezoning of approximately 10.26 acres from Interim Development Single Family (ID -RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) zone for property located north of Scott Boulevard between Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue with a maximum of 60 units. By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of Table 56-4: Sign Specifications and Provision in the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones as listed in Staff Report. • •:0 Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There were none DEVELOPMENT ITEM fSUB16-000131: Discussion of an application submitted by 1201 Gilbert, LLC, 1225 Gilbert, LLC and 1301 Gilbert, LLC for a preliminary plat of The Crossings, a 7 -lot, 8.54 -acre commercial subdivision located west of Gilbert Street, between 1" Street and Highway 6. Howard showed a map of the properties and stated that they were recently rezoned to Riverfront Crossings South Gilbert and include the former Pleasant Valley Garden site, the building currently being repurposed for Big Grove Brewery, and the current Alexander Lumber property. The submitted preliminary plat creates a new lot and block Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 2 of 12 pattern and provides for dedication of land for a more pedestrian -oriented street network to support the proposed redevelopment of these properties according to the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. The property is divided into seven lots, lot 1 will encompass the former Pleasant Valley Garden site and is proposed to contain a mixed-use building that will front on Gilbert Street and Highway 6. Lots 1, 2, 5, and 6 will have primary frontage along Gilbert Street. Lots 3 and 4 will have primary frontage along the private pedestrian street portion of 2nd Street and along the public Ralston Creek pedestrian street, represented as Outlet A and B. Lots 3 and 4 will contain multkfamily buildings. 2nd Street will be platted as a private street (Outlet G) and will provide vehicular access from Gilbert Street west to a north -south private alley shown as outiots F and H, on the plat. The portion of 2nd Street west of the private alley will be platted according to the private pedestrian street standards in the Riverfront Crossings form- based code. The vehicular portion of 2nd Street will have an 80 -foot ROW to allow for angled or perpendicular on -street parking. The pedestrian street portion of 2nd Street will be 60 feet wide and include a 20 -foot wide sidewalk that will also serve as a fire lane for emergency vehicle access. This pedestrian street will also provide a public pedestrian route to the new Riverfront Crossings Park and to the public trail system along Ralston Creek. The 1s' phase of improvements to Riverfront Crossings Park will commence this summer and include trail connections across Ralston Creek at Highway 6 and aligned with the new 2nd Street pedestrian street. Lot 7 has primary frontage on the Ralston Creek pedestrian street, but will likely need to rely on the extension of Ist Street, which will be located on the abutting property to the north and outside the boundaries of this subdivision, to provide adequate emergency vehicle access. Development of lot 7 will be restricted until adequate emergency vehicle access can be provided. Howard noted that with regards to compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, Staff believes that this subdivision does comply and is compatible with the future vision of this neighborhood and will likely be a catalyst for further development in the area. The proposed street design meets both the conditional zoning agreement and the Riverfront Crossings Plan. The developer will dedicate outlots C, D, and E along Gilbert Street so that adequate ROW is provided for pedestrian improvements to support the increase in residential density anticipated with this subdivision. New sidewalks and street trees will be required within the public ROW as properties redevelop along Gilbert Street or may be installed as a part of a larger City project to improve the Gilbert Street corridor according to the goals of the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Ralston Creek is a regulated stream corridor and a 30 -foot stream corridor buffer is required. This buffer (Outlets A and B), will be dedicated to the City and developed as a pedestrian street according to the Riverfront Crossings form -based development code. The developer will be required to provide the trail, sidewalks, streets, alley and other subdivision infrastructure (with the exception of the trail along Highway 6 which is part of the City's park improvement project). One of the goals of the Riverfront Crossings Plan is to improvement street corridors for all modes of transportation. One of the ways to improve traffic circulation and safety, including safety for pedestrians and bicyclists is to close unnecessary driveways along arterial street corridors, such as Gilbert Street. The proposed subdivision will result in fewer driveways along Gilbert Street and the new rear alley will provide for cross access between development lots within the subdivision. Howard also noted that the right -in / right -out driveway shown on the concept plan for the subdivision does not meet the City's access management standards. The City has a process to consider exceptions to these rules under certain circumstances. The City Engineer's office has not yet reviewed this request. Howard then discussed that subdivisions usually trigger a neighborhood open space fee. The formula is based on residential density of the underlying zoning district. Since in the Riverfront Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 3 of 12 Crossings zoning districts residential density is not explicitly stated, staff will need to consider how this ordinance applies prior to the final plat of the subdivision. The developer is dedicating approximately 0.5 acres of land with the dedication of the 30 -foot buffer area along the east side of Ralston Creek. In addition, the developer will be constructing a 60 -wide pedestrian street (approximately .33 acres) that will provide public access and open space amenities along a main route to the new Riverfront Crossings Park. Final calculation of the open space requirement and any required fee will be determined at the time of final plat. Howard stated that the applicant has provided stormwater management calculations that indicate that there will be no net increase in stormwater run-off with the redevelopment of the subdivision. In addition, the developer has agreed to include green infrastructure within the 2nd Street pedestrian street, along Highway 6, and along the Ralston Creek pedestrian street to improve water quality before run-off enters Ralston Creek to meet the goals of the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan to use stormwater best management practices to control and cleanse run-off and to protect Ralston Creek and restore it as a naturally functioning waterway. All necessary storm sewer easements shall be delineated on the final plat. Staff received the most recent revision of the preliminary plat too late for detailed review by engineering and legal staff. However, as only minor discrepancies remain, staff recommends approval of SUB16-00013, a preliminary plat of The Crossings, an approximately 8.49 -acre, 7 lot, mixed-use subdivision located west of Gilbert Street, between 1st Street and Highway 6, contingent upon resolution of any deficiencies or discrepancies. Signs asked if lot 7 would remain open space or is there future development potential there. Howard stated the developer is still exploring what type of building might fit on this lot, but it will not be open space. Signs then questioned on lot 2, behind the brewery, he recalled a mention of an outdoor service area extending all the way to the creek. Howard said that 30 feet from the top of the creek bank is being dedicated to the City of Iowa City as a buffer area, which will be designed as a pedestrian street with a public trail, trees, and pedestrian -scaled lighting. The outdoor service area will be on the private property (lot 2) and will extend up to the new Ralston Creek pedestrian street. Signs also asked about driveway access to Lot 1. He remembered that in an earlier concept there was a new right -out driveway shown from lot 1 directly to Highway 6 and asked whether the developer intended to pursue that option. Theobald asked about the sidewalks on Gilbert Street, noting there is a temporary sidewalk where Big Grove is being developed, but the rest of the sidewalk won't be constructed until the rest of the area is developed. Howard explained that typically in a subdivision the developers don't put the sidewalks in until the building are built. In the case of the brewery, the City has agreed to allow them to continue to use the front parking area with the addition of a temporary sidewalk until Gilbert Street is improved. Freerks opened the public hearing. Randy Miller (representing the subdivision) answered the question from Signs about an exit from Lot 1 onto Highway 6. Miller explained that concept has been abandoned because it is a challenge to get the Iowa DOT to approve such an exit and it is also very expensive. The DOT Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 12 will only approve if needed due to expected traffic volumes and Miller did not believe that the building being built on Lot 1 would generate enough traffic for the DOT to approve the exit. Hensch asked about the right-in/right-out driveway shown in outlot C. Miller stated that for a mixed use building like what is planned for lot 1, it is important to have a right in/right out driveway to access the commercial businesses there. Signs asked if there is still a potential for a building on the back of Lot 2 in the area along Highway 6. Miller said they are exploring that option, but it would be one of the last buildings they focus on. Freerks closed the public hearing Hensch moved for approval of SUB16-00013, a preliminary plat of The Crossings, an approximately 8.49 -acre, 7 lot, mixed-use subdivision located west of Gilbert Street, between 1st Street and Highway 6, contingent upon resolution of any deficiencies or discrepancies on the preliminary plat. Martin seconded the motion. Freerks noted that this area appears to be developing in the right direction. Theobald did share her concern about outlot C and the right-in/right-out access drive, and the difficulty of getting out of there and back onto Gilbert Street. She noted that it was problematic for the Pleasant Valley Nursery to have a curb cut in this location. Howard noted that the driveway will not be approved with the plat. This right -in / right -out drive will be reviewed according to the City's access management standards. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. ZONING ITEM (REZ16-00008): Discussion of an application submitted by Kevin Hanick for a rezoning of approximately 10.26 acres from Interim Development Single Family (ID -RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) zone for property located north of Scott Boulevard between Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue. Miklo noted that the Commission recommended approval of the rezoning of approximately 10.26 acres located north of Scott Boulevard between Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue from Interim Development (ID -RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12), conditioned on general compliance with the concept plan showing 54 dwelling units, and it will be on the City Council agenda next week. Staff recommended the condition of 54 dwellings because with the RM -12 zoning it could be up to a 100 unit structure, however with the sensitive areas that it would be difficult to achieve that density without extensive grading of the steep slopes and woodland removal. The applicant has requested a modification to the condition to increase the number of units from 54 to 60. The additional units would be created by converting some to the 2 -bedroom units to 1- bedroom units. The overall exterior design and building placement is not proposed to change and it would not impact any of the wooded ravine area. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 5 of 12 Staff recommends approval of the update as it is in the spirit of the original application Hensch asked if nothing has changed other than the interior layout and Miklo confirmed that is correct. Freerks opened the public discussion. Kevin Hanick added that in developing this project they are still working on the exact floor plans and working with the individual buyers. The conclusion they've come to is that the first two buildings built will convert two units with two bedrooms and a study into two one - bedroom units. This will not affect the footprint of the building, they just realized they didn't have a one -bedroom product and feel they need to include that in their complex. Hensch asked if this change was due to market analysis and Hanick confirmed that when talking with people there is a market for one -bedroom units. Freerks asked that the change is stating from 54 units to 60 units and is wondering if it would be better to have language about a range so the applicant doesn't have to come back if there are future changes regarding units, but that would not impact building footprint. Miklo said that this will allow the applicant to do anything up to 60 units. Freerks closed the public discussion. Theobald moved to approve REZ16-00008 an application submitted by Kevin Hanick for a rezoning of approximately 10.26 acres from Interim Development Single Family (ID -RS) to Low Density Multifamily (RM -12) zone for property located north of Scott Boulevard between Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue with a maximum of 60 units. Martin seconded the motion. Dyer noted the adding of one -bedroom units is a good idea. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. CODE AMENDMENTS: 1. Consider an amendment to Title 14, Zoning Code, Chapter 5, Site Development Standards, Article B: Sign Regulations, to allow fascia (building) sign size in the C13-2, CB -5, and CB - 10 Zones to be based on the length of the sign wall. Freerks noted that additional information regarding this item was distributed to the Commission earlier in the day. Howard agreed stating that the images that were supposed to accompany the staff memo were inadvertently omitted from the packet and were forwarded by email. The images provided an example of how the proposed amendment would address signage on a proposed building in Riverfront Crossings, the new Hilton Garden Inn. Howard noted that in October of 2016, The Planning and Zoning Commission considered and approved several amendments to the Iowa City Sign Regulations in order to better implement the recommendations of the Downtown District Storefront and Signage Guidelines and to bring the sign code into compliance with a U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the regulation of signage. This was a significant revision of the sign code Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 6 of 12 regulations. The new standard for fascia (wall) signs in the downtown area was based on best practices for storefront commercial buildings, which make up the preponderance of buildings in the Central Business Zones. On a typical mixed-use storefront building, wall signs are typically located on the ground level building fagade above the storefront windows. Since buildings are typically built lot line to lot line with little or no side or rear walls visible, the sign allowance was based on the width of the street -facing wall. Prior to the recent updated sign code, the fascia sign allowance was 15% of the sign wall area. With larger, taller buildings becoming more prevalent downtown, there was concern that this standard could allow very large signs on multi -story buildings. The new standard (which was recommended by the design consultants who wrote the Downtown District Storefront and Signage Guidelines) is 1.5 times the length of street facing facade. However, there are proposed buildings and buildings under construction in the Central Business Zones and in Riverfront Crossings that are not typical storefront buildings with only one visible street- facing wall. For example, the Hilton Garden Inn at 328 S. Clinton Street will abut an alley and is taller than adjacent buildings, making visible side elevations that are suitable for fascia signage. Other buildings that could be affected by this limitation are the Chauncey (currently under construction at 404 E. College Street), and The Park@ 201, 201 E. Washington Street. Howard shared renderings of the Hilton Garden Inn to show signage needs. In light of these issues, Howard stated that Staff discussed possible solutions. A simple solution would be to have each side of a building considered separately, with the new standard of 1.5 times the length of the wall apply to each wall rather than just the street - facing wall. In addition, some clarifying language would be added to the provisions for fascia signs to ensure that the location provisions for these types of signs relate to the specific location of the sign. This allows for each building wall to be treated separately (similar to the previous standard) but still controls the size so that overly large signs and signs not proportional to the building wall are eliminated as a possibility. The storefront buildings typical to the downtown area would not be affected by this change but it would allow for adequate and proportional signage on those buildings with more than one visible wall even if those walls are not street facing. Staff recommends that Table 513 -4: Sign Specifications and Provision in the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones, is amended as follows: Fascia Signs 1.5 times the length of the S'•o zet faGiR9 facade building wall. - No longer than 90% of the length of the fagade OF 669R band sign wall, sign band, or storefront, whichever is most applicable. Back lit cabinet signs, where the entire face is illuminated, are prohibited. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 12 Hensch asked if buildings on corners that want signage on both the front and the side, would this amendment limit their ability. Howard replied it actually increases their ability for signage. Each wall would have a separate sign allowance. Freerks asked about the lighting since the buildings are elevated. Howard said the lighting standard is the same regardless of height and sign size. Freerks opened the public hearing. Mary Bennett (1107 Muscatine Avenue) came forward to speak about the deterioration of the historic neighborhoods and some of these signs (such as on the bank on south Clinton Street) can been seen from quite some distance. The amount of light these signs cause is enormous and should be reconsidered. Pretty soon Iowa City will be full of towers of buildings with signs on all four sides and it will cause people to lose sight of the beauty and character of the city, especially the downtown district. There should be discussions on how bright the signs should be and what it will look like it. Will it obstruct the view of the Old Capital Dome, which should remain the focal point of the City. Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to approve Table 51B-4: Sign Specifications and Provision in the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones as listed in Staff Report. Signs seconded the motion. Hensch noted that with regards to sign changes he is concerned about what the causation may be and the lighting issue is real and needs attention in future planning. Signs asked staff about the sign on the Midwest One bank (south Clinton Street) and agrees that it is quite large, and does it meet the proposed standards being discussed this evening. Dyer remembered asking Jann Ream and thought she said that it met the standard. Both Howard and Miklo did not know for sure, but would check and report back at the Commission's next meeting. Hektoen noted that this amendment is just about fascia signs, not about rooftop signs. Signs and Dyer noted the Midwest One sign is a fascia sign as well. Miklo said that sign was installed prior to the most recent amendments being established, so it might be larger than what is permitted today. Dyer asked what the difference was between the remote LED letterset illuminated from inside and internally illuminated plastic trim -cap signs, which are prohibited. Howard said there are technical differences and the plastic trim cap letters are larger and bulkier so are more appropriate for auto -oriented street and highway situations rather than the pedestrian- scaled signs more appropriate to the downtown area. Internally illuminated plastic trip cap letter forms are prohibited. Hensch asked if buildings on corners that want signage on both the front and the side, would this amendment limit their ability. Howard replied it actually increases their ability for signage. Each wall would have a separate sign allowance. Freerks asked about the lighting since the buildings are elevated. Howard said the lighting standard is the same regardless of height and sign size. Freerks opened the public hearing. Mary Bennett (1107 Muscatine Avenue) came forward to speak about the deterioration of the historic neighborhoods and some of these signs (such as on the bank on south Clinton Street) can been seen from quite some distance. The amount of light these signs cause is enormous and should be reconsidered. Pretty soon Iowa City will be full of towers of buildings with signs on all four sides and it will cause people to lose sight of the beauty and character of the city, especially the downtown district. There should be discussions on how bright the signs should be and what it will look like it. Will it obstruct the view of the Old Capital Dome, which should remain the focal point of the City. Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to approve Table 51B-4: Sign Specifications and Provision in the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones as listed in Staff Report. Signs seconded the motion. Hensch noted that with regards to sign changes he is concerned about what the causation may be and the lighting issue is real and needs attention in future planning. Signs asked staff about the sign on the Midwest One bank (south Clinton Street) and agrees that it is quite large, and does it meet the proposed standards being discussed this evening. Dyer remembered asking Jann Ream and thought she said that it met the standard. Both Howard and Miklo did not know for sure, but would check and report back at the Commission's next meeting. Hektoen noted that this amendment is just about fascia signs, not about rooftop signs. Signs and Dyer noted the Midwest One sign is a fascia sign as well. Miklo said that sign was installed prior to the most recent amendments being established, so it might be larger than what is permitted today. Dyer asked what the difference was between the remote LED letterset illuminated from inside and internally illuminated plastic trim -cap signs, which are prohibited. Howard said there are technical differences and the plastic trim cap letters are larger and bulkier so are more appropriate for auto -oriented street and highway situations rather than the pedestrian- scaled signs more appropriate to the downtown area. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 8 of 12 Freerks stated she understands progress and things changing but feels it is important to keep an eye on these things so that there doesn't become sign pollution, or take away from the Iowa City charm. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. 2. Consideration of amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, Chapter 5, Site Development Standards, Article A: Off Street Parking and Loading, to allow the parking requirement to be reduced by the Building Official in certain circumstances, and to allow modification to the structured parking placement standards for non-commercial uses. Miklo stated that in conjunction to the potential development of the parking lot north of City Hall and the preservation of the Unitarian Church the Council asked Staff to look into this amendment to allow more flexibility in waiving parking for residential uses in a situation like this. Miklo noted in the proposal when an historic landmark is part of the project and the proposal is to preserve that landmark, this amendment would give the Building Office the ability to waive parking requirements that would otherwise be needed for residential development. Miklo stated there is other criteria the Building Official would look at such as proximity to grocery stores, public parking or transit. An earlier draft would have allowed the amendment under broader circumstance but that was thought perhaps too broad so it has been changed to only if in preservation of a landmark. Miklo stated the second amendment is related to a liner building around a parking structure. Right now in the CB -5 zone the Code states that the first 30 feet of the property has to be devoted to something other than parking (so there is not parking right up against the street). There is a provision in the recent adopted CB -5 amendments that allows some waiver of that, but this amendment would go further to clarify that it doesn't apply for residential uses. This code requirement is meant to ensure a minimum depth for commercial uses facing the street, by ensuring any ground -level parking is at least 30 feet back from the setback line. Staff is recommending approval of these two amendments. Freerks noted her concern about these amendments, understanding the concept but thinks this needs to be tighter. She reviewed the City Council minutes where this was discussed to try to better understand as well. Freerks questions why this would not be under the purview of the Board of Adjustment, instead of the Building Official. It should be done in the public arena, as some things have impact on the neighbors and should have public comment. If this were decided by the Board of Adjustment there would be discussion and opportunities for public comment. Freerks stated she has other concerns and perhaps to defer this item would be best. Hensch asked what the advantage if of this revised process versus how it is currently handled. Miklo stated that the current process would not allow a complete waiver of the parking, so the Council wanted to provide more incentive to preserve a landmark. Freerks remarked that this situation is very specific and her fear is in the bleed. Hensch also asked who the Building Official is, if that is an official title of a City employee. Miklo stated it is the Director of Neighborhood and Building Services. Hensch felt it would be more clear to have that title listed then rather than Building Official. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 9 of 12 Dyer asked if the image Miklo showed was the current proposal. Miklo replied that the image he showed was of the Sabin Townhouses being built on South Dubuque Street, it is not this particular project. Dyer commented she thought the proposed structure would be more compatible with the Unitarian Church. Miklo explained that the image he showed was to illustrate that there can be a building with only 20 feet of depth before the parking starts. Hensch asked if one had to go through the Board of Adjustment, how long would that process take. Miklo said it is a 30 day period. Freerks said the way the amendment is written, it seems that someone in a CB -5 could purchase a historical structure and have additional other land and be able to say they will keep the historic structure but state they will have no parking on the other land they will develop. Hektoen said it must all be part of one project. Freerks noted there is no limit stated, it is open ended, as to how much parking can be waived. She noted a map might be helpful to see where historic structure might lie in the city and what potential future situations could arise. Freerks also asked if there is a plan for mitigation such as bike parking and/or cover for a bus stop. Miklo said one of the criteria the Building Official would look at is if there are things such as Zip Cars, public transportation, or some means to address the lack of parking. Freerks noted there are five bullet points in the amendment, the first is preservation of historic landmark, which is in the end recommendation as a must, but then it is followed by four other bullet points. She asked if all of those must be met as well. Hektoen said this amendment only applies if it is in relation to preservation of a historic landmark designation. Therefore the other bullet points are factors the Building Official will take into consideration if the historic preservation is met and then the level of percentage of waiver. Freerks commented that seemed very iffy as written on how that would be carried through and could be unfair from one applicant to another and there should be some types of assessment, mitigation, and plan to avoid favoritism. Even if that is never the case, the impression is there. Freerks opened the public hearing. Alicia Trimble (Director of Friends of Historic Preservation) is here to speak in favor of this idea and in the case of the Unitarian Church waiving the parking was the only way to save that historic building. Her one concern as a citizen, separate from her job, she is always uncomfortable when power is taken out of a commission or committee and given to one person. Trimble agrees with Freerks that the wording of the amendment could use some tightening so it is clear what the conditions are but overall this is a good idea to have the ability waive all the parking if it is absolutely necessary to save a landmark. Helen Buford stated her main concern is suddenly introducing into an ordinance the right of someone internally to have jurisdiction over a decision that should be in the power of the community and be allowed public address. Mary Bennett (1107 Muscatine Avenue) appreciates the Commissions understanding that this amendment takes away from community involvement. It allows a City staffer to have unlimited and arbitrary power and if someone wishes to appeal the decision would have to pay a fee to do so, which also limits the ability of a property owner or neighbor to make a complaint. Bennett acknowledges that it is all in the language, language is very powerful. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 12 In the current Code, it says in specific terms that it will "preserve and protect its historic aesthetic cultural attributes" and that is much more than one building being an historic landmark. It is also important to recognize the surrounding area of that landmark and the context in which it exists. One precious building could be disturbed and therefore ruined of its historical value by something next door. Bennett shared a concern about the density of development currently underway in Iowa City and that is going to create a lot of pressure on the existing parking. She acknowledged that people have long tried to make Iowa City more pedestrian, but the cars are still here, and it is actually very treacherous with this high density to walk in certain areas. Additionally with the high density everyone will be fighting for limited parking spaces. Bennett views this as a 40 year setback to historic preservation of this town and all the old houses that are not in landmark status will be attacked once this provision is enacted. So it should not just be about preservation of an historic landmark, but conservation of aesthetics of the community. This is a very short sided solution to one very specific problem. Ginalie Swaim (1024 Woodlawn Avenue) is the chair of the Historic Preservation Commission and has two remarks. One, there is no getting around the problem of parking in Iowa City. Secondly, she appreciates the Commission looking at this carefully and working with City Staff on this but as stated the City Council asked the City Staff to work more closely with the developer to try to come up with a better solution for the development and they did. Saving this landmark church is important to the historic preservation of Iowa City. Freerks closed the public hearing. Signs moved to defer this item until the next meeting. Martin seconded the motion. Hensch stated he is fine deferring this item but as with all deferrals the Commission needs to be very specific with why they are deferring, what their expectations are for information they want, and to not have another meeting with unanswered questions. Freerks requested the following information from Staff prior to the next meeting discussing this item: • A map of areas this amendment could affect, with historic and potential historic structures noted on the map. Miklo said they can do a map showing all CB -5 and all known landmarks and others that may have historical importance. Freerks said that would be a first visual to have an understanding of what the impact of this might be. She reiterated that it may not be the historic structures only, but also what is in- between, and how will in play in with the character and feel of the area. Her goal is to not do damage to everything else just to save one structure. • She stated she is interested in the Board of Adjustment taking care of these items, not just having it be the decision of the Building Official. It is not a negative on any one person, these things need to have public input so everyone can understand the impact. • She would like limitations in numbers or percentages on parking spaces, as a governor on this for impact over time, especially in larger areas. • The language in the amendment needs to be more clearly stated on what criteria needs to be met for the waiver. This is especially important if this is to go before the Board of Adjustment, people need to know exactly what the requirements are. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 11 of 12 • Need for mitigation, bike racks, bus stops, etc. There is mention of places where there will be Zip Cars, but if parking is being removed then there has to be a requirement for mitigation options. • Need clarification on how this fits in with the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings parking plan. Howard noted that this is covered under the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings parking plan and typically a developer would pay a fee in lieu of parking. The fees are then used to support public parking structures. Freerks stated then with this amendment there would be no fees and therefore could result in a lack of funds to the City. Freerks reiterated that this amendment would be a very big waiver and should be thought through carefully and how the City plans to address parking demands over time. She stated her concern is that a historic structure could be purchased and then other property could be purchased that is really quite charming and part of the city and the City will be held hostage to having to lose out on parking in an area. She also agrees with Bennett's concern regarding community character and how this will develop if in a broader area and will pieces fall apart just to make other things happen. Hensch stated his concern is that Iowa City is a community that wants to have lots of citizen participation and he doesn't want to do anything to impede that. Signs asked if an exception like this cannot be made under current regulations. Miklo confirmed it cannot. The Board of Adjustment could waive parking for the building itself, but not for adjacent buildings without charging the impact fee which then may make it financially unfeasible to save the church. Freerks understands that but it could be worded as the area within the borders of Gilbert Street, Iowa Avenue, Van Buren, and Burlington Street to make it more specific. Miklo stated that the map Freerks is requesting is a good idea and it should show the implications if any beyond this area. Martin agreed that it is a concern to have this decided by just the Building Official and having the Board of Adjustment conversation is worth exploring. Theobald agreed. Additionally would like to know what the City is looking at for future parking issues. Anecdotally the parking has gotten worse and this was the first Christmas she didn't buy a single gift downtown because she couldn't find parking, the ramps were full. Theobald also commented that this is an aging population and their habits are hard to change. Freerks agreed and that is why she thought the Downtown District Parking Plan was in place and made accommodations for mitigation. Signs agreed with Freerks' comments on mitigation because the amendment refers to the options of bike parking, shared vehicles, etc. but there is not a requirement for that. Signs came out as a car driver, and he is very concerned about anything that takes away parking in the downtown area. He also admitted he doesn't shop downtown very often because of parking limitations. He said having a parking ramp four or five blocks away is not close enough for many customers. Martin noted while she is also a car driver, she is very anti -car and loves the idea of no parking, but that may not be realistic. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 12 of 12 Signs also noted he feels this should be a Board of Adjustment issue. He also feels that this issue was already dealt with when the property was rezoned and now the Commission is being held hostage that if this is not approved the church will be torn down. That is very frustrating. Freerks noted that with the recent walkability session they all attended (with Jeff Speck), there were ideas (such as rideshare within buildings or bus passes as part of leases) so there are options out there and need to be explored before just taking away parking. Dyer noted her concern is with the amount of development, the current parking structures are not enough to support it. Stating there is a parking ramp nearby was made in support of the Chauncey Building, and there is the other student apartment building going up across Iowa Avenue, and presumably something by the rec center and the thinking that one parking ramp will solve all these problems (in addition to having the farmers market) is short -sided. Cars cannot park on top of one another. Dyer noted that during the daytime there are lots of empty spaces on Iowa Avenue by Seashore Hall but suspects that is because the parking meters are for only one hour and classes longer than that. But then at night all the parking is full downtown. The Chauncey Building will be adding entertainment venues so that will add impact as well. Signs asked if the City has a parking plan. Miklo replied that the Transportation and Resource Management Department manages the public parking facilities. Theobald also commented on the bus system in Iowa City, which has not been changed for a very long time, and she lives in a neighborhood that has a poor street network design and her home is not convenient to a bus stop. She noted that the west side of the city has an aging population that would likely want to take buses if available. Miklo suggested having the Director of Transportation Services come talk to the Commission about the City's parking/transit plans. He said he would try to schedule that for a meeting when there is a light agenda. A vote was taken and the motion for deferment carried 6-0 Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes of February 2 2017. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: None. ADJOURNMENT: Theobald moved to adjourn. Martin seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 6-0. Z O UO �o: �O OU UWn T Z w N O Z w N0N ca Z 0W ZF E¢ J a M X X X x O X X N X X X X X X X C" Z X X X X X x x r N X X X X X X X r N X X X O X X X r n �xxxxx0x r 0 x x x O X X X m p X x X x X X x a - X X X X X x x � xxxxxxx N x x 0 0 x X x r izx0xxxxx NxXxxxxx an �x0 XX xxx N X X X X X X X 4xxxxxix n axxxxx1x n Z X X X X O I X m Y W O Q rL = w a ¢ ❑ V Y 2 Z Z Q W U) U) W Lu W Q w Ou_2 EEL NF a a) N ` 7 � X.0 c m C� a) tea¢ o a¢nz u u w u xo0, W Y r •- 1 05-02-17 CITY OF IOWA CITY 5b(6) �Ott V. °',� MEMORANDUM Date: April 11, 2017 To: Mayor and City Council From: Bob Miklo, Planning & Zoning Commission Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission At their April 2, 2017 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the March 16th minutes with the following recommendations to the City Council: 1. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, Chapter 5, Site Development Standards, Article A: Off Street Parking and Loading, to eliminate the parking requirement for properties in the Downtown Planning District, Zoned CB -5 and, in part, Historic District Overlay, and to increase the required bicycle parking and to allow modification to the structured parking placement standards for non-commercial uses. 2. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends that the requested rezoning from County Commercial (C) to County Residential (R) for approximately 11 -acres of property located in Johnson County at 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway SE be approved, subject to an agreement requiring future annexation and granting City approval for any subdivision, lot split or development of the property to assure compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and Fringe Area Agreement. Additional action (check No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction _X_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action - Done MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 16, 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: Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo, John Yapp OTHERS PRESENT: RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: 1. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, Chapter 5, Site Development Standards, Article A: Off Street Parking and Loading, to eliminate the parking requirement for properties in the Downtown Planning District, Zoned CB -5 and, in part, Historic District Overlay, and to increase the required bicycle parking and to allow modification to the structured parking placement standards for non-commercial uses. 2. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends that the requested rezoning from County Commercial (C) to County Residential (R) for approximately 11 -acres of property located in Johnson County at 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway SE be approved, subject to an agreement requiring future annexation and granting City approval for any subdivision, lot split or development of the property to assure compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and Fringe Area Agreement. 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 CODE AMENDMENT: Consideration of amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, Chapter 5, Site Development Standards, Article A: Off Street Parking and Loading, to eliminate the parking requirement for properties in the Downtown Planning District, Zoned CB -5 and, in part, Historic District Overlay, and to increase the required bicycle parking and to allow modification to the structured parking placement standards for non-commercial uses. Yapp reviewed the staff memo, which addressed the concerns raised by the Commission at the last meeting. He recommended approval of the revised amendment. Dyer noted that when they looked at the concept presented when the property was rezoned to Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 7 CB -5, the proposed parking lot for the development included a liner building with parking behind it, and asked if that is City parking and not the parking that would otherwise be required for the residential units. Yapp replied that when that project was first proposed it was proposed as a combination of City parking and parking for the residential units and that is still the case. The difference is the last time the City Council discussed the project it was stated there would not be as much parking for the residential units. The City Council direction was to reduce or waive the parking requirement for the residential units, but the goal is to still provide some parking for the residential units. Freerks noted that in the staff recommendation part one subsection two it states "for properties located in the Downtown Planning District (which is a much larger area) zoned CB -5 and in part..." and in the past the Commission has stated exact boundaries (street names) because in the future the Downtown Planning District can change. Hektoen noted her concern about allocations of spot zoning so there needs to be articulation for a reasonable reason for distinguishing this property from other CB -5 zones and therefore in the Commission's recommendation it would help to keep the area listed as Downtown Planning District and not state exact boundaries. Hensch asked for the reason it is delineated the way it is. Hektoen stated at this point this is the only property that applies, but the rationale is based on the Comprehensive Plan and wanting to preserve historic properties. The rationale is the parking is not necessary in this situation and the public is better benefitted by preserving that historic property. Freerks reiterated her concern about this specific area eventually trickling into other areas. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one Freerks closed the public hearing. Signs moved to recommend approval of amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, Chapter 5, Site Development Standards, Article A: Off Street Parking and Loading, to eliminate the parking requirement for properties in the Downtown Planning District, Zoned CB -5 and, in part, Historic District Overlay, and to increase the required bicycle parking and to allow modification to the structured parking placement standards for non-commercial uses. Theobald seconded the motion Freerks noted that the change to the language is positive and outlines the rules without special exception needs. But it does make her nervous to have the blanket area. Parsons asked what were the boundaries of the Downtown Planning District. Yapp said it was Van Buren Street on the east, Iowa Avenue on the north, Clinton Street on the west, and Burlington Street on the south. Signs agreed with the issues Freerks raises and questions that himself. Hektoen stated that while this is a code amendment, in the eyes of the law it is a rezoning. If the Downtown Planning District is rezoned in the future, the Commission will have the ability to look at this area again. Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 3 of 7 Hensch said he is sympathetic to Freerks concern but noted that anything can change in the future and will have to just be addressed at that time. Martin stated that she is fine with the recommendation Parsons asked if another structure in the CB -5 zone of the Downtown Planning District gets historical status, would this new rule apply as well. Yapp confirmed it would and buildings would have to be designated as landmark status for this code amendment to apply, and to get that a historic zone overlay would have to put in place which does come before the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. ZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ16-00008/SUB16-00012)' Discussion of an application submitted by Kevin Hanick for a rezoning of approximately 10.26 acres from Low Density Multifamily Residential (RM -12) to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD/RM-12) zone and a preliminary plat of Larson Subdivision, a 2 -lot, 12.28 -acre residential subdivision located north of Scott Boulevard between Hickory Heights Lane and First Avenue. Miklo stated that the City is still working on the stormwater management issues as well as a few other technical issues so Staff recommends deferral until the April 6 meeting. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to defer this item until the April 6 meeting. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. COUNTY ITEM (CZ17-00001): Discussion of an application submitted by Linda S. Lovik for a rezoning from County Commercial (C) to County Residential (R) for approximately 11 -acres of property located in Johnson County at 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway SE in Fringe Area B. Miklo stated that the Fringe Area Agreement between Iowa City and Johnson County provides for City review of any rezoning within the fringe area, and the City then makes a recommendation to the County Planning & Zoning Commission and then the County Board of Supervisors has the final say. For any subdivision in the area, the City also has review. Although the City only recommends on rezonings, they do have to approve any subdivisions. This particular property is clearly within the City's growth area. Miklo noted they do anticipate it will be annexed into the City relatively soon. In terms of the current zoning it is commercial in Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 7 the County, which is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan for the area which calls for it to be residential. Therefore Staff recommends that the requested rezoning from County Commercial (C) to County Residential (R) be approved, subject to an agreement requiring annexation in the future and granting City approval for any subdivision, lot split or development of the property to assure compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and Fringe Area Agreement. Parsons asked what activity was happening at the location to have it zoned currently as County Commercial. Miklo stated that the County rezoned a large portion east of the City as commercial back in the 1960's and it has been that way since. Signs asked about the intention to create an additional residential lot at the location and would that be included under the agreement for City review. Miklo confirmed it would. Freerks opened the public hearing Seeing no one Freerks closed the public hearing Parsons moved to recommend that the requested rezoning from County Commercial (C) to County Residential (R) be approved, subject to an agreement requiring annexation in the future and granting City approval for any subdivision, lot split or development of the property to assure compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and Fringe Area Agreement. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: MARCH 2. 2017 Signs commented that several parts of the discussion regarding the code amendment on parking where not included in the minutes. The Commission agreed to defer and ask that the minutes be more detailed to reflect the Commission's discussion. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Signs asked Staff about the approval of the change in the ordinance regarding amplified noise that the Commission recently reviewed in the Riverfront Crossings District, particularly around the Big Grove Brewery area: he referred to an article in the news this week about them holding concerts in the back area. Signs doesn't believe that coincides with what the Commission approved. Miklo stated that the concerts would be allowed under the temporary use permits which are covered by a different part of the code. Dyer commented that there appears to be a big parking problem at that Big Grove Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 5 of 7 Theobald agreed it will be a challenge. Signs noted that the capacity for the restaurant more than exceeds any possible parking options. Martin asked about the building next to the Kum & Go on Burlington Street across from the University Recreation Building, she noted it is constructed right up to the wall of the Kum & Go and is the plan for the Kum & Go to leave that spot. Miklo stated not necessarily, in the CB zones buildings can be built right up next to one another. ADJOURNMENT: Martin moved to adjourn. Parsons seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 7 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2016-2017 KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member 3/1T7417 4/21 5/5 5/19 6/2 7/7 712118/4 911 10/6 10/20 11/17 12/1 12/15 1/19 2/2 312 3/16 DYER,CAROLYN X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X FREERKS'ANN X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X X X X X X X O/E X X X O/E X O1E X X X X X PARSONS, MAX O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X SIGNS, MARK — X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X THEOSALD, JODIE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member Approved Minutes January 19, 2017 MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION JANUARY 19, 2017 ROOM 208, IOWA CITY/JOHNSON COUNTY SENIOR CENTER Members Present: Mark Holbrook, Kathy Mitchell, Cheryl Clamon, Lorraine Dorfman, Margaret Reese Members Absent: None Staff Present: Michelle Buhman, Kristin Kromray, Ashley Monroe Others Present: CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Holbrook at 4:00 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 8. 2016 MEETING: Motion: To accept the minutes as amended from the December 8th, 2016 meeting. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Reese/Mitchell PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. DISCUSSION OF COMMISSION VISITS AND ALTERNATIVES: Holbrook volunteered to attend the 16`h Board of Supervisors meeting. Holbrook noted that it is important to communicate with both the city council and the board of supervisors about all of the things occurring at the Senior Center. Although it is not always possible to have a commissioner attend a City Council or Board of Supervisors meeting each month commissioners need to think about how to communicate what is occurring at the Senior Center regularly. Monroe reminded the Commission that there is time for public comment for items not on the agenda at the beginning of each City Council meeting and that those comments are limited to five minutes per person. The commission discussed having a sign-up sheet for each month. Staff will pull that together for next month. 5b(7) Approved Minutes January 19, 2017 REPORT OF FYI BUDGET MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL: Buhman reported that Kopping presented the Senior Center proposed budget to the city council on January 7t'. The presentation highlighted the Senior Centers programs, fundraising efforts, and updates to promotional and marketing plans. In FY16 the Senior Center had a cost recovery of 28%. The fall appeal for Friends of the Center has raised about $20,000 and room rentals have gone up. The Friends of the Center have finished updating the current bylaws, new policies and will be recruiting new volunteers in the upcoming months. The development specialist position has not been filled, but is being re -advertised this month. Reese inquired if the development specialist position was still a half-time position. Buhman said that it was. If a suitable candidate is not hired this time around the Center staff will investigate the possibility of creating a full-time position. The commission discussed membership retention. Staff will be discussing this further in the future to find reasons why some participants do not renew their memberships. :*i6L'Lul6*9Is] .luI4JAI - 4:;61:II The commission has two open spots. Due to gender equity guidelines these will need to be filled by men, both of whom live within the city limits. Commissioners were encouraged to speak with anyone they know who might be interested. OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW: Work is continuing on the Friends of the Center website. It is anticipated that it will be completed in February. Elder Services is partnering with Horizons: A Family Service Alliance based in Cedar Rapids. The meals are made by Horizons and then prepped into the trays for delivery at Elder Services location in North Liberty. Buhman reported that the RFP for all of the programs funded by the Older Americans Act are due in July to Heritage Area Agency on Aging. All programs have a 4 year contract length. She is unsure if Elder Services will submit a proposal for the nutrition program. If Heritage does not receive any applications or they do not find a suitable applicant Heritage would take over the program. Kopping and Buhman met with Jill Gleason of Heritage to discuss the various programs funded through the Older Americans Act. If the Senior Center were to apply for a grant additional staff would need to be hired, or a serious reorganizing of current staff would need to occur. Due to this it was decided that this would be Approved Minutes January 19, 2017 a significant shift in the Senior Centers mission and these grants (including the meal program grant) will not be pursued. Craig Buhman had surgery and will be out of work for about two months. Staff members from other departments have been helping on Tuesday mornings. Buhman has been working with Monroe to secure additional maintenance help on Monday's and Tuesday's until Craig is able to return to work. Kopping had foot surgery and will be off of work until the end of January. The Open House at the beginning of the month was successful and resulted in 10 new members, over 100 people attended. March 9t' will be the Zachary Benedict age friendly community event. Buhman is currently seeking sponsorships throughout the community. She recently learned that the University of Iowa Regional and urban planning department will donate $1000 to the program. Spring classes are going well. No classes have been cancelled due to low enrollment. There are a few classes that have waitlists and many classes are full. The newcomer's breakfast is scheduled for next Friday. So far only 7 people have enrolled. Kromray noted that this is very unusual and she is hoping more people will sign up before the deadline. Commissioners discussed that perhaps number are down due to the Open House. Kromray noted that the Open House occurred last year a few weeks before the Newcomers Breakfast and it did not affect attendance. Holbrook noted that maybe a different time of day would be good for a newcomer's event. Kromray said she would discuss it with the membership committee. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: The Commission positions will need to be on next month's agenda. Commissioners discussed the need to have an understanding of what the responsibilities of the positions chair, vice chair and secretary entail. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: To Adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Mitchel/Clamon Approved Minutes January 19, 2017 Senior Center Commission Attendance Record Year 2016 Name Term Ex ires 3/17/16 4/21/16 5/19/16 6/11/16 6/16/1617/21/16 No meeting 8/18/16 9/15/16 10/20/16 11/17/16 12/8/16 1/19/17 Joy Beadleston 12/31/19 X NM O/E X NM O/E -- -- -- -- -- -- Cheryll Clamon 12/31/18 X NM O/E X NM X X X NM X X X Lorraine Dorfman 12/31/19 -- X Jack Hobbs 12/31/16 O/E NM X X NM X O/E O/E NM X O/E Mark Holbrook 12/31/18 X NM X O/E NM X X X NM X X X Jay Honohan 12/31/16 X NM X X NM X X X NM X X Kathy Mitchell 12/31/19 X NM X X NM O/E X X NM X X X Margaret Reese 12/31/17 X NM O/E X NM X X X NM X O/E X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting = Not a member 5b(8) Approved Minutes February 16, 2017 MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION FEBRUARY 19, 2017 ROOM 205, IOWA CITY/JOHNSON COUNTY SENIOR CENTER Members Present: Mark Holbrook, Kathy Mitchell, Cheryl Clamon, Lorraine Dorfman, Margaret Reese Members Absent: None Staff Present: Michelle Buhman, Kristin Kromray, Linda Kopping Others Present: CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Holbrook at 4:00 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM JANUARY 19, 2017 MEETING: Motion: To accept the minutes from the January 19, 2017 meeting. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Clamon/Mitchell PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Kopping reported she is back to work after a medical leave and a family emergency. DISCUSSION OF COMMISSION VISITS AND ALTERNATIVES: A sign-up sheet was passed around for the remainder of the year for commissioners to sign up to speak to the city council and board of supervisors. OFFICER ELECTIONS: The commission discussed the open positions for chair, vice chair, secretary and commission liaison to the steering council. Mitchell noted that historically the secretary and commission liaison positions have been held by the same person. Buhman noted that while this was true, they are two separate positions that could be held by different commissioners. Approved Minutes February 16, 2017 Motion: To accept the nomination of Margaret Reese for the position of chair. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Mitchell/Clamon Motion: To accept the nomination of Mark Holbrook for the position of vice chair. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Clamon/Dorfman Motion: To accept the nomination of Kathy Mitchell for the position of secretary. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Holbrook/Reese Motion: To accept the nomination of Kathy Mitchell for the position of commission liaison to the steering council. Motion carried on a vote of 510. Clamon/Holbrook OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW: Buhman reported the Friends of the Center website is moving forward successfully. The design elements are in place and some of the pages are complete. The calendar function will be focused on next. Craig Buhman will be returning from medical leave next Tuesday. The library, parks and rec and police department were able to have staff members come to the Senior Center on Monday and Tuesday mornings to assist in maintenance duties. An actualor for one of the boilers failed and was replaced at the price of $1000 Architect Zachary Benedict will be at the Senior Center on March gt' for various programs including a 6 p.m. presentation and panel discussion on the topic of age -friendly communities. Hills Bank and the University of Iowa Urban Planning Department will be sponsoring the event along with Friends of the Center. Hills Bank will promote this program to their members. This event, as well as the Senior Center, was highlighted in a well -attended Obermann Center program discussing aging in place. Buhman and Edrington presented to the Retired School Personnel last month and made a number of good contacts within that group. AI Dawson had a well-received program regarding the history of the building that currently houses Beadology. Due to this program Buhman was able to network with Karen Kubby regarding the potential of partnering on some beading classes. The Membership Committee hosted a Newcomers Breakfast in January. Normally this event has about 40 people who attend. This time only 14 participants came. While it was a smaller group, the breakfast was very nice and allowed all of the new members to introduce themselves and get to know all in 2 Approved Minutes February 16, 2017 the group. Kromray reported that the membership committee had talked about having the newcomer's events more frequently, but Kromray noted that staff will need to look at budget concerns and integration with other potential new member events. Buhman has been working with Pat White to relocate a mural by Mildred Pelzer The mural currently is located at Longfellow Elementary school and needs a temporary home while Longfellow under goes a remodel. The commission discussed the potential kitchen remodel. Staff discussed that room rental fees would take a long time to recoup costs from a potentially expensive remodel. Currently staff is considering a remodel that is smaller in scope but would create a kitchen space that would be appropriate for a classroom kitchen as well as a space that a caterer could serve from. The development specialist position advertisement ended at the end of January. Kopping is currently reviewing applications. There will be a closing art reception for the Iowa Disability Creative Works show tomorrow. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Commissioners discussed the two open seats on the commission. Many noted they have mentioned the openings to people they think would be interested. Reese suggested looking into ways to partner with other organizations regarding the potential kitchen remodel. Commissioners discussed various potential organizations to approach. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: To Adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Michelle/Reese. Approved Minutes February 16, 2017 Senior Center Commission Attendance Record Year 2016 Name Term Expires 4/21/16 5/19/16 6/11/16 6/16/16 7/21/16 8/18/16 9/15/16 10/20/16 11/17/16 12/8/16 1/19/17 2/16/17 Joy Beadleston 12/31/19 NM O/E X NM O/E -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Cheryl] Clamon 12/31/18 NM O/E X NM X X X NM X X X X Lorraine Dorfman 12/31/19 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X Jack Hobbs 12/31/16 NM X X NM X O/E O/E NM X O/E Mark Holbrook 12/31/18 NM X O/E NM X X X NM X X X X Jay Honohan 12/31/16 NM X X NM X X X NM X X Kathy Mitchell 12/31/19 NM X X NM O/E X X NMEX X X X Margaret Reese 12/31/17 NM O/E X NM X X X NMO/E X X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting -- = Not a member 4 Approved Minutes February 16, 2017 5b(9) APPROVED MINUTES Iowa City Telecommunications Commission January 23, 2017 — 5:30 P.M. City of Iowa City Cable TV Office, 10 S. Linn St. - Tower Place, LEVEL 3A Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 5:30 P.M. Members Present: Nick Kilburg, Laura Bergus, Derek Johnk Members Absent: Paul Gowder Staff Present: Ty Coleman Others Present: Gerardo Sandoval Recommendations to Council: NONE Approval of Minutes: Bergus moved and Kilburg seconded a motion to approve the December 12, 2016 minutes as presented. The motion passed unanimously. Announcements of Commissioners: Bergus noted that she had recently posted information on Facebook about the Telecommunications Commission vacancy. Johnk said he had posted information about City board and commission vacancies in general, through his neighborhood association's Facebook page, and noted that the post had received over a hundred views in a short time. Coleman said he had arranged with Communications staff to have a release created to promote the vacancy. Coleman said he was reminded that the vacancy was for a term ending in July of 2017 and that it could be a good opportunity for someone to try it out. Coleman also noted that he learned of a requirement for the Commission to be gender -balanced, meaning that the vacancy would need to be filled by a female. Short Public Announcements: None Consumer Issues: Coleman said the issue dealing with CenturyLink service noted in the Consumer Issues Report was still active, but that the customer said she had not yet called in a ticket to continue the resolution process. Coleman said the customer had called CenturyLink before and was told that she should be receiving service at speeds that differed from what she was experiencing during the call. Coleman said the customer seems to have taken the proper steps to rule out her own equipment. Johnk noted that some of the issues reported dealt with a fiber cut that had occurred in December. Coleman noted that one of the outages reported was due to extreme cold temperatures. Coleman said he was waiting to receive a report from Mediacom regarding outages that occurred in Iowa City in 2016. Mediacom Report: Coleman said he had included Mediacom's letter regarding gigabit service in the meeting packet since he had inadvertently put a different letter from Mediacom in December's packet. Johnk said he had noticed increased Internet speeds with his Mediacom service, stating that subscribers recently received a service tier upgrade at no additional charge. Coleman said Mediacom had recently revised its channel map in order to open up more bandwidth for Internet services. Coleman said the change didn't impact subscribers greatly, noting that some Mediacom equipment simply needed to refresh the channel map. Those receiving cable directly from the wall to their TVs needed to rescan for channels, as many of the QAM (quadrature amplitude modulation) channel assignments had changed. Coleman said it was reported that TiVo boxes may have taken a bit longer to update. Coleman said the change was announced in subscriber bills. Johnk said he noticed Mediacom had also pushed communications out through KCJJ radio. Coleman said that the City Channel 4 website's listing of Iowa City channel positions had been updated to reflect any changes that occurred. Coleman said the channel locations of the local access stations had not changed, including the QAM channels associated with them. Local Access Reports: Sandoval reported that a group called the InterDance Collective had recently been producing programs for PATV. Sandoval said PATV is collaborating with the group for an Iowa dance week event in April. Johnk asked whether the organization had been in contact with the Senior Center. Sandoval said he would look into it. Sandoval said that PATV is encouraging the public to register through an online guidelines class in order to make it easier for people to become members. Sandoval noted that they have put guidelines information into a Prezi presentation, which includes audio for the visually -impaired, on their website. Those who watch or listen to the presentation can then go to PATV's facility to take a test in order to continue the membership process and move on to classes for learning about cameras, studio use, and editing. Sandoval said he had recently visited other Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) stations in California, focusing mostly on public access. He said that many public access stations now have state-controlled contracts. Sandoval also noted that access representatives he met complimented PATV on its website. City Cable TV Office Report: Coleman referred to an upcoming event being held by ImOn in early February, saying he and two Commission members were planning to attend and would report about the event during the February 2017 Telecommunications Commission meeting. Coleman also said APPROVED that the Cable TV Office would soon be starting another Multimedia Internship, which assists with the production of the City's weekly, informational program. Adiournment: Johnk moved and Kilburg seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was at 5:51 p.m. TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 12 -MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD (x) = Present (o) = Absent (o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused) Gowder Bergus Kilburg Johnk Homewood 04/25/2016 x x o/c x x 05/31/2016 x x x x o/c 06/27/2016 o/c x x x o/c 07/25/2016 o x x x o/c 08/29/2016 x x x x x resignation 09/26/2016 x x x o vacant 10/24/2016 x x x x vacant 11/2612016 Meeting not held due to lack of quorum. 12/12/2016 x x o/c x vacant 01/23/2017 o/c x x x vacant 02/27/2017 Meeting not held due to lack of quorum. 03/27/2017 x x x o/c vacant (x) = Present (o) = Absent (o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused) APPROVED MINUTES Iowa City Telecommunications Commission March 27, 2017 — 5:30 P.M. City of Iowa City Cable TV Office, 10 S. Linn St. - Tower Place, LEVEL 3A Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 5:35 P.M. Members Present: Nick Kilburg, Laura Bergus, Paul Gowder Members Absent: Derek Johnk Staff Present: Ty Coleman Others Present: Gerardo Sandoval, Bond Drager Recommendations to Council: NONE Approval of Minutes: Bergus moved and Kilburg seconded a motion to approve the January 23, 2017 minutes as presented. The motion passed unanimously. Announcements of Commissioners: None Short Public Announcements: None Consumer Issues: Coleman noted that he had included complaints from January and February in the meeting packet. Coleman noted that a number of the complaints reported in January were in connection with outages that had taken place. Kilburg noted one complaint where Lee Grassley had provided information about outage times and found it to be useful. Coleman referred to the report of Mediacom's outages in 2016 and asked if anyone had questions. Coleman said he noticed that for one of the outages, the duration did not seem to match according to the dates listed for it and that he would need to look into it further to understand the data. Coleman said he wasn't certain of the threshold used for the report in terms of the size of the outage, but noted he had asked Lee Grassley for a report of the major outages that occurred in Iowa City in 2016. Coleman noted that there was only one complaint received in February. Gowder said he wasn't sure what to make of the cluster of remarks about Mediacom's market power and the perceived monopoly. Coleman said that an outage often compels customers to contact the City's Cable TV Office. Coleman also said that there is a greater chance that APPROVED those who call his office to file complaints have some awareness that the City has an agreement with the cable company, though many aren't aware that the franchise agreement is non-exclusive. Coleman reiterated that the cluster of these types of complaints is likely due to the outages. Mediacom Report: Coleman said he hadn't recently touched base with Mediacom's Lee Grassley and noted that he hadn't received any information from Grassley to report to the Commission. Coleman stated that he inquired with the City's Legal Department and the City Clerk's office about whether Mediacom had returned the letter of credit that is required as part of the local franchise and learned that neither office had seen it. Coleman said he asked Grassley to look into the matter. Local Access Reports: Sandoval said that he had wondered about what would happen after 2018 with regards to the Commission, the Public Access Television (PATV) channel, and PATV's role, stating that he hoped for PATV to continue its services. Sandoval said PATV is thinking about how to reinvent itself, with the possibility of providing additional media and technology services. Sandoval noted that PATV owns the property in which it resides and said there could be a possibility of partnering with another non-profit organization to create a bigger center and providing other services. Sandoval said he had experience with starting a non-profit in California called Digital NEST (Nurturing Entrepreneurs Through Science and Technology). Sandoval said he feels this kind of service isn't currently accessible to the Iowa City community. Sandoval said PATV is thinking about fundraisers and other ways to raise money to sustain itself as a non-profit and to continue its public access mission. Sandoval said a beer tasting event had recently taken place at Beadology to support the Iowa Dance Week. Sandoval said the event went well and that local brewers donated their products. Sandoval said PATV's next fundraising event is called "I Drag for PATV," for which people will donate to see participants drag at the event to be held at Studio. Sandoval reported that PATV staff had been contracted to provide production support for a recent culinary challenge event using three cameras, switching live, and projecting content onto a screen. Sandoval said that PATV was able to use its equipment to support a major production event, larger in scope than other projects PATV had previously taken on, and that the production went well. Sandoval said that people are learning about television production and are showing up to produce shows at PATV and that things are going well. Gowder asked if PATV had considered working with the local entrepreneurial incubator APPROVED crowd. Sandoval said he had spoken with Mark Nolte of ICAD and the CEO and president of ImOn and noted that they have pointed him towards other business contacts with whom to consider connecting. Sandoval said that he would present more as partnerships develop. Bergus commended Sandoval and PATV for being proactive and positive. Coleman asked who contracted with PATV for the culinary challenge production work Sandoval had mentioned. Sandoval said it was done for the University and was part of a conference involving an association of university chefs. Sandoval said the culinary challenge portion of the conference featured nine chefs from nine universities and was similar to culinary challenge programs often seen on TV. Drager said that the Library was not worried about changes that would come with the expiration of the City's franchise with Mediacom in 2018. Drager said some Library staff were not aware of the changing franchise, but said that changes have been expected. Drager said the Library Channel had been developing its online video presence in order to ensure that the Library can continue to get video programs to the public and that Library administration has stated there would continue to have a purpose for video production at the Library. Coleman clarified that when the local franchise expires and moves to a state -issued franchise, the access channels will continue. City Cable TV Office Report: Coleman said that he and two of the Commission members did not end up attending the ImOn luncheon event referred to at a previous meeting, as recommended by Legal staff, to avoid any perception of City representatives being influenced by the business. Coleman said his office would be sending two of its staff to a regional conference hosted by Wisconsin Community Media and the Alliance for Community Media - Midwest. Coleman said that Jack Brooks and Joel Bouwers would be attending the sessions to learn from presenters. Coleman also said that Brooks had won two Excellence Awards in the Best of the Midwest video contest for work on the Iowa City Update and Iowa City In Focus program series. Coleman said that these programs have become flagship programs for the City and that Brooks had done a great job of continuing to develop and improve the shows by trying out new ideas since joining the staff last August. Municipal Broadband Feasibility: Gowder asked for an update regarding a meeting with City Council. Coleman said a meeting date would be scheduled in the coming months. Bergus said the Commission needs to know what kind of information the Council is looking for, noting that the issue came up as a reaction to a request for funding that appeared not to be fully informed. Bergus said that the Council's discussion included a desire to hear from the volunteer members of the Telecommunications Commission before any decision would be made to spend City money to investigate the topic. Bergus said she vaguely recalled a task force APPROVED created in the early 2000's to look at the issue, which included Mediacom, the University of Iowa, the City of Iowa City, SouthSlope, and presumably Coralville and North Liberty. Bergus said she recalled that Steve Fleagle had provided input to the City on the feasibility of a municipal broadband network. Bergus said she recalled learning that Iowa City is different than many communities in that it has a lot of fiber in the ground owned by many entities that is not well coordinated. Bergus recalled learning that municipal broadband would require a citywide build -out or rental of existing facilities from entities who may be better positioned to provide services. Bergus said a lot has likely changed since that time. Bergus also referred to when Google Fiber was a topic of discussion and believed that the application process was investigated and that reasons were identified for Iowa City not being a good fit for the program, which may have had to do with the University already providing robust services and infrastructure. Gowder asked whether records of these discussions were available for the Commission's review prior to meeting with the City Council. Bergus asked to find out what the Council wants to know. Gowder said the Commission should also consider what it wants the Council to know about the topic. Bergus said her gut feeling was that at the time of the two mentioned discussions, a municipal broadband system did not make sense for Iowa City. However, Bergus questioned what might have changed since then that would potentially change the analysis of the proposal. Bergus said providing the Council information an example of what the cost might look like, using another community's experience, would be beneficial. Gowder asked if the City could request a basic overview of the creation of the system in Cedar Falls. Coleman agreed that it would make sense to contact the City of Cedar Falls. Coleman also said his office could search for Telecommunications Commission records where the topic was discussed and any records referring to the discussions mentioned by Bergus. Bergus recalled that the discussion involving area stakeholders consisted of a couple of meetings and that efforts did not continue following the meetings. Kilburg asked about the timeframe for meeting with the City Council about the issue. Coleman said there would be sufficient time to gather information and continue the discussion amongst the Commission before a meeting with Council would take place. Gowder suggested that the Commission may need to hold a special work session of its own in advance of meeting with the City Council, once commission members have had a chance to review relevant information, in order to agree upon a coordinated set of recommendations. Coleman recalled the document created by a law student that was referred to in the Council's February 7, 2017 work session and meeting packet and suggested that the Commission review it and the Council's discussion about it. Coleman said he would send the related documents to the Commission. Bergus said that commission members may wish to research the topic individually in order to educate themselves. 4 9vig-ITIMUM Adjournment: Kilburg moved and Bergus seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was at 6:10 p.m. TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 12 -MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD (x) = Present (o) = Absent (o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused) Gowder Bergus Kilburg Johnk Homewood 05/31/2016 x x x x o/c 06/27/2016 o/c x x x o/c 07/25/2016 o x x x o/c 08/29/2016 x x x x x resignation 09/26/2016 x x x o vacant 10/24/2016 x x x x vacant 11/2612016 Meeting not held due to lack of quorum. 12/12/2016 x x o/c x vacant 01/23/2017 o/c x x x vacant 02/27/2017 Meeting not held due to lack of quorum. 03/27/2017 x x x o/c vacant 04/24/2017 x x x x vacant (x) = Present (o) = Absent (o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused)