HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-10-20 Bd Comm minutesCITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
October 20, 2020
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Airport Commission: July 9
Item Number: 4.a.
July 9, 2020
Page 1
MINUTES FINAL
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
JULY 9, 2020 — 6:00 P.M.
ZOOM MEETING PLATFORM
Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical
due to concerns for the health and safety of council members, staff and the public
presented by COVID-19.
Members Present: Warren Bishop, Scott Clair, Christopher Lawrence, Hellecktra Orozco,
Judy Pfohl
Staff Present: Eric Goers, Michael Tharp
Others Present: Matt Wolford, Carl Byers, Alex Schmidt, John Moes, David Price
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
None.
DETERMINE QUORUM:
The meeting was called to order at 6:01 P.M.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Lawrence nominted Bishop as Chair, seconded by Pfohl
Motion carried 5-0: Bishop nominated Clair as Secretary, seconded by Lawrence. Motion
carried 5-0
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The minutes of the June 11, 2020, meeting were reviewed next. Pfohl moved to accept the
minutes of the June 11, 2020, meeting as presented. Clair seconded the motion. The
motion carried 5-0.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSIONIACTION:
Tharp asked to moved Item 5.c.iii.3 up to accommodate schedule. Members agreed by
consensus.
5.c.111.3 Autocross — Tharp stated that David Price was in chat to
discuss the upcoming autocross event at the airport. Tharp stated
that with the recent conversation regarding the pancake breakfast
and the movie events, he thought it would be good to have a
discussion of this as well before the next event. Tharp noted that
the event was schedule on July 26 and that there is another on
July 9, 2020
Page 2
the calendar for September. Tharp noted that Price had submitted
a plan to have the event and allow for Covid-19 related mitigation.
Price discussed with the members some steps the group was
taking regarding the event and how to control personal contact.
Tharp stated that based on the event location at the closed
runway and the limited interaction with the terminal building area,
that he felt this was an event they could still have. He asked
members if there were any that felt we shouldn't allow the event.
Members agreed to allow the event by consensus.
a. Airport Website Update — The FUEL team stated that they took the Members'
input and recommendations received since the last meeting, and have made
some more updates to the website. They also have done quite a bit of
photography since the last meeting. The team asked Members to look at the site
and to let them know of any further changes, ideas, etc., as they hope to make
the site live soon. Schmidt then shared her screen with Members and walked
them through an overview of the changes that have been made. The `Pilot's'
page is one with the most changes, according to Schmidt. She reviewed the
additions and changes made here, and also responded to Member questions and
comments. Under the section regarding the flight simulator, it was noted that the
wording should reflect that the simulator is approved for'IFR currency and
training purposes.' There was discussion regarding an online reservation page
for the simulator. Wolford noted that they have not added this to the website in
order to keep confusion down. He added that they could put Jet Air's email
address and phone here for contact information. Continuing, Schmidt noted
other small changes and tweaks to the site. Members gave feedback to the
FUEL team, noting various changes, corrections, etc., that they found in
reviewing the website pages. Members agreed that with the discussed tweaks
and changes, the website.should be ready to go live. Members briefly discussed
what the website address would be, and they questioned Goers if having a .com
website would be appropriate, considering they are part of the City of Iowa City.
He staffed that he could look into this. The discussion continued, with the FUEL
team speaking to the three domain names they have obtained and the
Commission speaking to which would be most appropriate. Members agreed
that .org or .com appear to be most appropriate. It was decided that Tharp and
Moes will work through this issue after a little more research is done regarding
Google searches and priorities given. Tharp reminded Members that they still
need to have a discussion about the back -end maintenance and such for the
website. This was part of the original proposal by FUEL.
b. FAA/IDOT Projects
i. Obstruction Mitigation — Tharp stated that they are still working with the
landscapers on seeding and such. Hopefully the recent rain will show if
there are any issues that may need attention. A question was asked
about nighttime approaches and Tharp stated that he is still awaiting FAA
response on this.
ii. Terminal Apron/Taxiway reconstruction -- Tharp noted that the last of
the concrete was laid this morning. There is some grading work yet to be
done, as well as some asphalt patch work needed to clean up the areas
July 9, 2020
Page 3
on the north end where the trucks have been running. He expects this to
be reopened in the next few weeks.
iii. Runway 25 Threshold Relocation — Tharp stated that they are awaiting
the approved version from the FAA, at this point. Byers added that he
doesn't have anything new on this either.
IV. Fuel Farm Expansion and card reader klosk replacement — Byers
stated that he spoke with the contractor today on this, and he is planning
to begin work on this project on July 22nd. A brief discussion ensued
regarding the fuel pump and improvements that are hoped to be gained
with this project.
C. Airport Operations
I. Management —Tharp, explained the need for this resolution, noting the
changes that the State legislature made recently. Goers noted
circumstances that could change this policy, such as a function at the
Airport where It was requested that firearms not be allowed and therefore
security options would need to be in place, Goers further explained the
liability to the City/Airport If they were to not approve this. Members made
it apparent that they were not in favor of this resolution.
1. Consider a resolution rescinding Resolution A11-08
"Firearms and Weapons Policy" — Bishop moved to accept
Resolution #A20.15, rescinding Resolution #A11-08,
"Firearms and Weapons Policy." Clair seconded the motion.
The motion carried 4-1, Pfohl in the negative.
ii. Budget -- Tharp noted that they have entered a new fiscal year and that
'he should have last year's numbers by next month's meeting. He knows
that they will see losses in fuel sales and commissions, just in the last
three. to four months, due to the pandemic. The FY21 budget was In the
meeting packet and Tharp briefly highlighted some of the larger items.
Pfohl asked where they are financially with the simulator, In relation to
where they expected to be at this point. Tharp noted that again the
pandemic has caused some decreases here. He added that in its first
month they did around $1,100; last month (May) was around $700; and
he hasn't run June's numbers yet. Wolford added that they are getting
more users than had been expected.
Ili. Events --
1. Pancake Breakfast — Tharp reminded Members of the special
meeting on August 31d with the Optimist Club on whether they
would move forward with the pancake breakfast. This should be a
brief meeting, according to Tharp.
2. Summer of the Arts Drive -In Movies — Tharp stated that the first
movie night was a success. There were 43 cars present. He
added that since things are going well, the planners would like to
add a second movie night and go for a longer period. He and .
Wolford stated that they see no problem with this request. Pfohl
asked if attendees were maintaining social distancing, and Tharp
noted that they are. Wolford also responded, stating that people
are being asked to wear masks if they leave their immediate area.
d. FBO / Flight Training Reports
July 9, 2020
Page 4
i. Jet Air — Matt Wolford shared the monthly maintenance reports with
Members. He stated that its been pretty normal -- mowing, light bulb
replacement. On the Jet Air side of things, charter flights are staying
busy. Fuel sales are about 8% behind last year's at this time.
e. Commission Member Reports L Tharp welcomed new Member Hellecktra
Orozco to the Commission. Members welcomed her as well, and she introduced
herself to everyone.
f. Staff Report — Tharp stated that in the next couple of meetings they will be
looking at t -hangar rents, and budget and major project planning.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR:
The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, August 13,
2020, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building, via electronic method. Special meeting
August $14 at 6:00 P.M. Tharp will send Members a Zoom link for this.
ADJOURN:
Pfohl moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:20 P.M. Orozco seconded the motion. The motion
carried 5-0.
,)W(Z; a —
- V
CHAIRPERSON
DATE
July 9, 2020
Page 5
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2019-2020
NAME
TERM
s
EXP.
o
w
i'a
a
Warren Bishop
06/30/22
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
K
X
Scott Clair
06/30/23
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
"Christopher Lawrence
07/01/21
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Wellecktra Orozco
06/30/24
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
X
Judy Pfohl
06130/22
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X.
X
Bob Libby -
06/30/20
X
O/E
0/E
O/E
I O/E
O!E
I X
X
X
X
O/E
I NM
Key:
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
0/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
October 20, 2020
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Airport Commission: August 13
Item Number: 4.b.
August 13, 2020
Page 1
MINUTES FINAL
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
AUGUST 13, 2020 — 6:00 P.M.
ZOOM MEETING PLATFORM
Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or
impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of commission members,
staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
Members Present: Warren Bishop, Scott Clair, Christopher Lawrence, Hellecktra Orozco,
Judy Pfohl
Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp
Others Present: Matt Wolford, John Moes
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
None.
DETERMINE QUORUM:
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The minutes of the July 9, 2020, meeting were reviewed next. It was noted that the attendance
for Lawrence is incorrect, that it looks like another member's attendance was mistakenly copied
here. Tharp stated that he will fix this. Tharp then stated that he noted another error — the
header on the minutes states the meeting was held at the Airport terminal building. It should
say via the Zoom meeting platform. He will fix this as well. Lawrence moved to accept the
minutes of the July 9, 2020, meeting as amended. Pfohl seconded the motion. The
motion carried 5-0.
Pfohl then asked if they should acquire some of the mask mandate signs that the County has
and put them on the doors to the Airport. Tharp responded that he has signage on the doors,
noting the City's mask mandate.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
a. Airport Website Update — John Moes with FUEL joined the discussion. He
spoke to the Airport website, noting that the site is live now and is working well.
Moes said the website address was https://www.iowacitvairport.org Due to the
recent derecho storm across Iowa, much of the FUEL team is dealing with
personal issues. Moes asked Members to check out the site and send any
comments or questions to him. He then shared notes from Alex, which briefly
August 13, 2020
Page 2
reviewed the tweaks made to the site following comments made at previous
meetings.
b. FAA/IDOT Projects
I. Obstruction Mitigation -Tharp stated that the landscape contractor
needs to finish the seeding and a few other miscellaneous items.
1. Consider a resolution accepting FAA Grant — Bishop moved
to consider Resolution #A20-16 accepting FAA Grant. Pfohl
seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0.
iii. Terminal Apron/Taxiway reconstruction — Tharp stated that the work
here is complete.
1. Consider a resolution accepting project as complete — Bishop
moved to consider Resolution #A20-17 accepting project as
complete. Clair seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-
0.
iii. Runway 25 Threshold Relocation — Tharp briefly explained the FAA
grant for the runway threshold relocation project.
1. Consider a resolution accepting FAA Grant — Bishop moved
to consider Resolution #A20-18 accepting FAA Grant. Orozco
seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0.
iv. Fuel Faun Expansion and card reader kiosk replacement — Tharp
stated that work has begun on the fuel tank installation. Things are still
going as planned, with the tank being delivered in late August, early
September.
C. Airport Operations
I. Management
1. 2020-2021 T hangar Rates — Tharp spoke to the yearly T -hangar
rate discussion, noting that he gave Members some information in
the meeting packet to help guide this discussion. Dulek, with the
City Attorney's office, stated that as there are two individuals on
the Commission who currently rent hangar space, they should not
speak to this item as it would be a conflict of interest. Continuing,
Tharp stated that currently the Airport sees about $220,000 in
revenue for the total hangar rentals, with T hangars accounting for
$125,000 of that. Tharp is recommending a $5 increase across
the board on hangar rentals. He added that this could be a bit of a
revenue adjustment due to the COVID downturn. Members briefly
discussed Tharp's recommendation, agreeing that the $5 is a
good idea at this point. Pfohl moved to accept the Increase of
$5 as recommended. Lawrence seconded the motion. The
motion carried 3-0, Bishop and Clair recused.
2. Request for Trail along Riverside Drive - Bishop then spoke to
the issue of not being able to access the Airport easily on a bike.
He asked if other Members would be open to making a request of
the City for a trail along the west side of Riverside Drive/Old 218,
instead of the east side. Dulek suggested having one of the City
transportation planners available at the next meeting to give
Members an update on future plans. Members continued to
discuss this issue, with the idea of a subcommittee being formed.
August 13, 2020
Page 3
Bishop and Clair stated that they would be.open to this. They will
provide the Commission with information at an upcoming meeting.
Ill. Budget
1. FY21 Iowa DOT Aviation Program —Tharp stated that the draft
program Is out now. Funding has been reduced dramatically,
according to Tharp.
Ili. Events —
1. Pancake Breakfast — Canceled.
2. Summer of the Arts Drive-in Movies — Weekly through August.
3. Autocross — September 20 — Tharp spoke to the July event,
noting that things went well for the club and they are still planning
to'hold their September event.
d. FBO 1 Flight Training Reports
1. Jet Air — Matt.Wolford shared the monthly maintenance reports with
Members. Highlights included mowing and clean up of trash, fuel farm
maintenance, etc. Pfohl asked if the derecho caused any major damage.
Wolford said the biggest thing were three trees that are total losses and a
lot of limbs down. Everything else has been very minor. Power was out
at the Airport at one point during the storm, making opening doors on the
hangars Impossible. Wolford spoke to the possibility of having a
generator on the premises so they could power runway lights, hangar
doors, etc., during outages such as this. Members agreed that looking
Into having a generator should be a higher _priority. Speaking to Jet Air,
Wolford said they are continuing to stay busy in all areas of their
business.
e. Commission Member Reports — Clair asked Tharp about the status of the Army
Reserve building. Tharp stated that they still have the lease on the building. He
did speak with a leasing agent who said the Army Reserve just hasn't filed the
paperwork to dispose of It yet. The lease expires in February, 2021. Members
asked to put this on next month's agenda, so they can discuss it further.
f. Staff Report — Tharp stated that he is still without power at his house and is still
cleaning up tree damage.
SET NEXT REGUL . R MEETING FOR:
The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, September 10
2020 at 6:00 RM. via the zoom meeting platform.
ADJOURN:
Pfohl moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:53 P.M. Lawrence seconded the motion. The motion
carried 5-0.
CHAIRPERSON DATE
August 13, 2020
Page 4
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020
NAME
TERM EXP.
o
w
Warren Bishop
06130/22
0/
0/
E
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
Scott Clair
06/30/23
X
X
x
x
x
x
X
x
Christopher Lawrence
01101121
X
x
x
X
x
x
x
X
Hellecktra Orozco
06130/24
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
M
M
M
M
M
X
X
Judy Pfohl
06/30122
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
Kw..
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of'Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = AbsentlExcused
NM = Not a Member at this time
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
October 20, 2020
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Board of Appeals: September 9
Item Number: 4.c.
1
APPROVED
MINUTES
IOWACITYBOARD OFAPPEALS
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2020
ELECTRONIC MEETING
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 29.8)
An electronic meeting was being held because a meeting in person was
impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of
Commission members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
MEMBERSPRESENT: Andrea French, Scott McDonough, Andrew Martin (arrived 4:07pm),
JimWalker
MEMBERS ABSENT: John Gay
STAFF PRESENT: Tim Hennes (Sr. Building Inspector), Stan Laverman (Senior Housing
Inspector), Sue Dulek (Assistant City Attorney), Brian Greer (Fire
Marshal)
OTHERS PRESENT: Crissy Caganelli, Dan Broffit, Catherine Gerlach
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None.
puma
ma�Z�1:���
Tim Hennes called the meeting to order at 4:00 PM
ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
MOTION: McDonough moved to elect Andrea French as chairperson of the Board of Appeals. Walker
seconded.
VOTE: French was elected as chairperson of the BOA bya 3-0 unanimous vote (Martin not present for
the vote).
MOTION: Walker moved to elect Scott McDonough as vice -chair of the Board of Appeals. French
seconded.
VOTE: McDonough was elected vice -chair of the BOA by a 3-0 unanimous vote (Martin not present
for the vote).
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES:
Hennes noted that in the minutes there were two recommendations to Council that were not actually
I
APPROVED
recommendations, so those should be omitted or deleted.
MOTION: McDonough moved to approve the minutes from the July 1, 2019 meeting with revisions.
Walker seconded.
VOTE: The motion was approved by a 3-0 unanimous vote. (Martin not present for the vote)
REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM HOUSING CODE SECTIONS 17-5-17 F. 1. f. AND 17-5-17
G.J. (PROPOSED BUILDING ON PARCEL# 1022133012 [EAST OF SHELTER HOUSE AT 429
SOUTHGATE AVE AND WEST OF 505 - 509 SOUTHGATE AVE]):
Hennes explained the request, there's two provisions in the Housing Code that the appellant would
like to have the Board review and give a variance on. First is the escape and rescue window in
every sleeping room requirement and also that every habitable room shall have a window or skylight
directly to the outdoors. He also noted that Assistant City Attorney Sue Dulek provided a memo to
the Board outlining the four conditions that must be met to grant this variance.
Dan Broffit (Neumann Monson Architects) began by noting the building as they are proposing it will
fully meet Building Code, they are not seeking any kind of a variance there. He also said 0 this
application sounds familiar, it is because they sought a variance to the exact two same Housing
Code provisions a couple of years ago when they constructed Cross Park Place. Broffit explained
that was the permanent supportive housing that Shelter House constructed and manages over on
the southeast side of town and that application was approved. Therefore, this time they have the
benefit of having those units in place and can understand how those have functioned in practice.
Broffit stated for this development the unit layout which Is attached to the packet shows it's a
relatively small unit and is Intended for single occupants only and none of these units will be
occupied by more than one person at a time. There Is a separate living room/kitchen area and then a
separate bedroom area that is divided by a bathroom that sits in between and they are open to each
other. There's no door or anything to close off those spaces since it's just a single occupant
however, it was determined back when they did this the first time that sl nee that corridor between the
two spaces does not meet the minimum habitable space dimensions, it would be considered a one
bedroom unit. Due to the size of the units and the nature of the site, much as it was with Cross Park
Place, it makes it difficult to develop the site due to the space constraints and to get the number of
units that was desired and is allowed by the special zoning for this particular use type. Broffit stated
they are asking that the window into the living room and kitchen area essentially function as both the
required rescue window for the unit that Is required by provision 17-5-17 F.1 and as the minimum
glazed area for the unit required by provision 17-5-17 G. Broffitt noted there are a few reasons why
this particular unit design is desirable with the bedroom not having a window directly to the exterior
and separated from that one which the Shelter House folks can speak to more but having a separate
bedroom is preferred for privacy concerns and to have the unit design follow trauma informed design
principles by trying to remove excess stimuli from the sleeping area and providing them with a place
where they can voluntarily withdraw from the public facing spaces. It does offer an advantage for
federal grant applications that that they are in process for, and also since this housing development
will be funded long term, largely by housing vouchers, it does provide an advantage there. Broffit
stated the feedback they received from the units constructed at Cross Park Place is that the units
have functioned very well as intended so those are the reasons why they would like to proceed with
this variance.
Broffit next addressed some of the concerns about making sure that this meets the intent of the
Code and is going to provide adequate life safety. This building is being proposed to be developed
as 1-1 Condition 1 occupancy, not a R occupancy, a one occupancy per unit and the rescue windows
are triggered in the Building Code only when it is R2 or R3 or R4 occupancies. The provision that is
in the Housing Code does not make a distinction between R occupancies and I occupancies; it just
1
APPROVED
simply says dwelling units which these would be dwelling units. But going to the I occupancy offers a
few extra levels of life safety protection, first and foremost being that it would require a full NFPA13
sprinkler system. There are also some additional provisions that are required for fire alarm and
detection systems that go along with that I occupancy and the Building Code is more restrictive on
heightened area. Additionally, this building will be staffed 2417 and so if there is any kind of an
emergency, there will be staff on site that is able to sound the alarm. Broffitt believes that provides a
basis for why they don't feel that the rescue window is necessary to be directly into the bedroom
however they will be providing a rescue window It will just be in the living room and there's very little
barrier being that the unit is open to get from the bedroom area to the rescue window that will be
provided.
As far as the natural daylight provision, they do have some reasons why they would like to have the
bedroom area be in a place where one is able to withdraw. The minimum glazing area is 8% of the
floor area typically for habitable spaces in dwelling units, they would propose that the glazed area
that they provide for the unit be at minimum 8% of the total floor area of habitable space that would
be the living roomikitchen area, the corridor between the two rooms and the bedroom. They would
consider all of that space when figuring the minimum glazed area. To illustrate examples Broffit
showed some photos of what the units at Cross Park Place look like.
Crissy Caaanelii (Shelter House) stated they are happy to answer any questions but noted that
Broffitt did a very good job of explaining the logic behind and the desire to have the floor space or
the floor plan that they propose. She added they have about a year and a half of track record now of
the units being occupied over at Cross Park Place and it is working really well. She also noted it is a
very delicate issue as far as not wanting those windows directly in the sleeping area, certainly for the
trauma informed aspect of it, but also because it Is a preventive measure for not only the tenants
and for the staff, but for the neighborhood. She explained that other providers that they worked with
years ago when they were developing this concept noted that was the major concern that they had
and what they would change in the properties that they had developed and working with the
population. They are housing entirely a population that meets HUDs definition of chronically
homeless and that means that individuals health is very deteriorated, there Is a chronic mental
illness, chronic substance abuse, and frankly, their brain chemistry is permanently changed. A lot of
impulsivity issues result from that and so other providers in the country that they reached out to
having a standard floor plan with the bedroom facing the windows caused a lot of problems with
neighborhood complaints. This proposed floorplan avoids that. it is a protective measure, it is a
preventative measure, and it is not compromising people's enjoyment of their units or their safety.
McDonough asked Fire Marshal Greer if he had any issues or concerns, which he did not noting with
the I occupancy, they are getting a much stronger and fuller sprinkler system and an alarm system.
Stan Laverman stated the building will be compliant with the current Building Codes and he had no
concerns with the Board granting a variance.
MOTION: Walker moved to grant the variance from Housing Code sections 17-5-17 F.1 and 17-5-17
G based on the unnecessary hardship in carrying out the strict letter of the Code and the particular
circumstances presented, specific application of the provisions would be arbitrary in this case.
Extending the time would not solve the issue. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose
and intent of the code and public health, safety and welfare are maintained. McDonough seconded.
VOTE: The variance was approved unanimously 4-0.
ADJOURNMENT:
APPROVED
MOTION: Walker to adjourn the meeting. Martin Seconded.
Meeting adjourned at 4:32 PM
,gc.Tt+j (;t Chairperson, Board of Apl3tfals Date
Board of Appeals
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2020
September 9, 2020
NAME
TERM
EXP.
1/20
2/3
3/2
4/6
5/4
6/1
7/6
8/3
9/9
10/12
11/2
12/7
John Gay
12/20
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
O/E
O
Scott McDonough
12/21
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
X
X
Andrew Martin
12/22
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
X
X
Andrea French
12/22
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
X
O/X
Jim Walker
12/23
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
X
X
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
-- = Not a Member
Item Number: 4.d.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
October 20, 2020
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Civil Service Commission: September 24
Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical
due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff and the public
presented by COVID-19.
Minutes — Final
City of Iowa City Civil Service
Thursday, September 24, 2020 — 8:00 a.m.
Members Present: Melissa Jensen, Rick Wyss, Ann Rhodes
Members Absent: None
Staff to the
Commission Present: Karen Jennings, Tracy Robinson
Other Parties Present: City Manager Geoff Fruin, Assistant City Attorney Eric Goers,
Attorney to the Civil Service Commission Mike Kennedy, Appellant Attorney Skylar
Limkemann
Recommendation To Council (become effective only after separate Council action):
None.
Call To Order:
Jensen called the meeting to order at 8:03 a.m.
Certification of Hiring List for the Position of Police Chief:
After a brief discussion, Rhodes moved to certify the list as presented, Wyss seconded,
and all were in favor.
Fix Time and Place to Reopen Terry Tack Appeal Hearing:
After discussion and guidance from Kennedy that Zoom meets due process as long as
there is a full opportunity to view exhibits, for cross examination and for the Commission
to ask questions, Wyss moved that the hearing be held via Zoom, Rhodes seconded and
all were in favor.
Rhodes moved to hold the hearing on October 15 and October 16, Wyss seconded and all
were in favor.
Tack Appeal Hearing Procedural Issues:
Rhodes moved to secure the services of a court reporter, Wyss seconded and all were in
favor. Due to a scheduling conflict, it was agreed that the Commission would meet on
September 28, 2020 at 8:00 a.m. to discuss the remaining procedural issues.
Adjournment:
Wyss moved to adjourn, Rhodes seconded, all were in favor and the meeting was
adjourned at 8:59 a.m.
Board/Commission: Civil Service Commission
Attendance Record
Year 2020
(Meeting Date)
Name
TERM
EXPIRES
2/7/20 2/19120 3118120 912120
9/24120
Melissa Jensen
4/5/21
X X X X
X
Rick Wyss
4/1/24
X X X X
X
Ann Rhodes
414/22
--- --- --- X
X
Stephanie Houser
414/22
--- --- --- ---
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
--- = Not a Member
September 24, 2020
TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Courtoll
RE.- Civil Service Certlf led Ust — POLICE CNfV ~
CITY OF IOWA ZITY
X110 Ust Washington Street
Iowa City, taws $224n•1826
(I 19) 356-5)06
0319) 3564609 FAX
wimm. I clov. ots
We, the undersigned members of the Civil Se vloo Commlr.6lortfQT Jowa City, Jowa, do hereby certJfy the
following named person as eligible for the position of PolieeChief,
Dustin Liston
IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
L -1 '1� �--
Ann Rhodes
t
ATTEST, I'
KSIW Frushling, City Clerk,
Item Number: 4.e.
r � �
At
+ at1Mw��al
+•ate_
CITY OF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
October 20, 2020
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
October 20, 2020
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Climate Action Commission: August 3
Item Number: 4.f.
MINUTES
FINAL
IOWA CITY CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION
AUGUST 3, 2020 — 3:30 PM — FORMAL MEETING
ELECTRONIC MEETING
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible
or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission
members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Madeleine Bradley, Stratis Giannakouros, Grace Holbrook, Kasey
Hutchinson, John Fraser, GT Karr, Jesse Leckband, Becky Soglin,
Eric Tate
MEMBERS ABSENT: Matt Krieger
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Gardner, Ashley Monroe, Brenda Nations
OTHERS PRESENT: John Barr, Zach Harrelson, Benjamin Grimm
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None
Soglin called the meeting to order.
APPROVAL OF JULY 6, 2020 MINUTES:
Fraser moves to approve the minutes from July 6, 2020.
Tate seconds the motion, a vote was taken, and the motion passes 8-0 (Giannakouros not
present for the vote).
PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
John Barr just wanted to thank Juli Seydell-Johnson for her extensive update on the plans by
the parks department. Certainly, the question he posed in June was pretty broad, not just
specific to Scott Park, and she did a great job of providing a broad overview, but he thinks it is
Climate Action Commission
August 3, 2020
Page 2 of 10
incumbent upon everyone with this specific park issue to then come back and make it more
specific in a future date.
Beniamin Grimm gave quick update on the school district progress and climate actions, they are
trying to find a consultant to look at the whole breadth of their climate action efforts and their
entire operation and what they've implemented and what they can still implement. Their goal is
to figure out some sort of plan that would work into the facility's master plan 2.0 effort, which he
believes is slotted for 2023. He also noted there is some movement again on the environmental
stuff with the AmeriCorps staff and they are going back and revisiting their recycling pilot
programs at the one junior high, one high school, and one elementary school. Grimm stated
given the current COVID situation, they're kind of waiting to see how that all pans out as to
when students were back in the building and how they would actually implement that with the
projected cafeteria complex complications with social distancing and everything.
STAFF/COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Action Items from last meeting: Nations noted the first one was for her to add the co -benefits
sheet to this packet, which she did. She added that Soglin worked on that and it is in the packet
and they're also on the Google Drive. Nations sent the link for the transportation. She also sent
the Human Rights Commission statement about the recent developments that was requested.
Finally, she got the future zoom meetings set up.
Updates from Climate Action and Outreach Office: Nations stated they're going to be doing
these updates every other month in rotation with updates of the 100 -day report. Some of the
recent activities that they've been doing are they just awarded the climate action grants, they
awarded seven and they're listed on page 17 of the packet. They also finished up the fiscal
year 2020 grants except for two that wanted an extension because of COVID reasons, which
was granted. Nations noted they're finalizing two more grants and have an award to Johnson
Clean Energy District on hold for now until they get things going with the new AmeriCorps
members.
They launched the Climate Action at Work, the green business recognition program. They have
ten applications so far that they're hoping to award businesses or organizations for their climate
action work. Nations asked if there is a Commissioner that would like to review the nine
applications and help staff make decisions.
Regarding the metrics, which will be discussed in more detail later, she listed out all five
categories which she is hoping they can agree on tonight and then she can have two or more
years of data to present next month to see how it's looking from when they completed the
Climate Action Plan because they'd like to have an update for the two year anniversary.
Nations noted the monarch festival launched on Sunday, it was a virtual festival but very popular
as they had in less than 24 hours over 1000 hits, which is pretty good because that's twice as
many as they probably had at an actual in person festival. We have some good videos and
really cool information. The Farm to Street event has been cancelled for this year.
Gardner is working on the climate festival and the publicity is going to launch this week. Gardner
stated the climate festival website is live and ready to be viewed. There are some interactive
elements that will be added in as they're developed, including the launch video, which was just
Climate Action Commission
August 3, 2020
Page 3 of 10
completed today. She noted they are anticipating the first press release going out this week,
and then they'll start marketing that pretty aggressively in the weeks ahead. Gardner added they
are continuing their outreach to businesses and organizations to participate and have gotten
some wonderful responses back already. Utility insert ads and advertising about the event went
out over the weekend.
Gardner next discussed the marketing RFP, noting they are just finalizing the dates as to when
folks need to get questions to them for the question and answer section and also the date then
for the final application. They expect that to be nailed down and then the RFP itself will go out
this week.
Nations asked if Gardner had any updates on the climate ambassador program? Gardner
stated she did, and she's been making some wonderful headway in developing the modules for
that. She noted they seem to be on track to launch the application for it during the climate
festival and then expect the program itself then to launch sometime in October.
Nations noted they did finalize getting the contract for the EV readiness planning program, it
was awarded to ICF, which is a consulting firm that has done both regional and city EV
readiness plans. They are excited to start kicking that off and so they'll have their first call with
them sometime in the next week or two.
Nations stated she still have not gotten all the information she needs to to complete the
greenhouse gas inventory for 2019, she needs information from MiclAmerican and from Eastern
Iowa Light & Power.
Monroe next discussed the tree planting project and the Fair Trade information that's in the
agenda packet. One of the objectives in the Accelerating Climate Action Report is framed as a
private tree planting effort in coordination with Project Green. Monroe said they are still
continuing to pursue a potential partnership with Project Green and hopefully this project can
start that. It's a pilot program that would be an instant rebate for any customers that would like
to purchase a tree. They haven't finalized the cost share yet but would think that will be
indicated by the cost of the actual trees in stock. They've reached out tentatively to both Iowa
City Landscaping and Earl May, just based upon the fact that they're based in Iowa City and
would be the nurseries that would be more likely to have stock available and additionally partly
to support the local businesses. They would coordinate a list of eligible type species in
coordination with the City's forestry division and then residents can choose whatever planting is
appropriate for them and the City would repay the nursery for the balance of the cost. Monroe
noted they are thinking carefully about equity and want to make sure that people are able to
transport a tree or can be assisted with any type of delivery or tree planting. Homeowners or
property owners who are eligible for some other type of discount or income eligible program at
the City will be eligible for assistance with transporting and planting, they have yet to define
what the requirement would be for that but are trying to make it as low barrier as possible.
Additionally, if somebody comes to the City and has no interest in the program because they
can't afford whatever that tree cost is, the City might be able to cover either the whole balance
of that tree purchase or a greater portion to reduce the cost dramatically. Monroe is curious
about what the Commission's feedback might be about this, please communicate with Nations,
3
Climate Action Commission
August 3, 2020
Page 4 of 10
Gardner, her or anyone. Monroe added this effort will be paired with education about tree care,
both through the City and through the nursery that's facilitating that action. Monroe stated this
program can get more trees in the ground in a quicker amount of time and give the residents a
greater responsibility and pride and in that tree care.
Tate noted it looks like from an equity standpoint, the City is focusing on access to this program,
monetarily and physical ability, etc., and wondered if they are going to track demographic
characteristics of who takes advantage of this program so they can assess the equity on the
back end. Monroe replied she hasn't given a lot of thought to the racial or ethnic demographics,
they would want to track the location of plantings so that they can establish a mapping of
whatever the increase to the tree canopy is as well as tracking the geographic distribution of
where the trees are planted. She is not sure how they would collect that racial or ethnic
information but if the Commission feels very strongly about doing that, they'll figure out a way to
do it.
Tate asked if there is any sort of application process or any sort of paperwork that needs to be
filled out to participate in this program? Monroe replied that is still in development. It could be
very simple paperwork in order for them to get a voucher or whatever it is if they distribute it that
way. The could include other demographic information on the application as well.
Tate stated there's two principles that would work here, one is distributional equity in this
resource that the City is providing and the second is the individual one. One approach is to do it
based on places so they can compare neighborhoods and parts of the City and the other
approach is on the individual level and it's not always easy to compare those and see if the
individuals are benefiting from this program, are they representative of the area of town that
they live in, for example, and just looking at area of town can only tell so much. Therefore, if
they want to look at the distributional equity of this and any other program, they need to collect
the data.
Monroe stated if they have a general consensus or a lack of opposition they will work through
the finer details of the program and she is hoping to get this out later this month so people can
start planting in the fall when it gets a little bit cooler. Perhaps they can work through the
working groups maybe to bring it back and just fine tune anything with the equity working group
and maybe the outreach groups and make sure they're okay to go ahead. The Commission
agreed to a general consensus of the program.
Giannakouros added there is a website called native plant finder, and it's run by Dr. Tallamy, at
the University of Maryland, and they've developed a way that one can prioritize and rank what
kind of trees or shrubs are planted in a yard by zip code and therefore maximizing the
interactions of moths, butterflies, etc. He noted on campus they plant a lot of gingko and it
might as well be made of concrete as it's useless in terms of biodiversity. So, it depends on
what the program they're trying to do is if it's like shade trees and those benefits versus
biodiversity that should be prioritized. The City arborist probably knows the same things but he
would like to see some kind of an assist to homeowners so that for example planting an oak is
probably the most important thing they could plant in the backyard as it has such a an impact on
moth species and that in turn leads to caterpillars which leads to birds having food.
4
Climate Action Commission
August 3, 2020
Page 5 of 10
Giannakouros is happy to discuss this more offline but thinks it would be cool to see that
biodiversity component, at least the education piece so if someone decides not to get a tree like
that, they at least understand the impact that decision can have on biodiversity in the City. If it
isn't done in private backyards, we're not going to have tons of biodiversity.
Monroe agreed and thanked Giannakouros for bringing that up, they absolutely want to
encourage the biodiversity, that will be part of that education component and part of that pre-
selected species. The City wants to share why the there are certain preferred trees.
Nations asked about this website where you can look at it by zip code and see the lists all of the
different tree species. Giannakouros said there's a website called native plant finder, and it's run
through a National Wildlife Federation and Doug Tallamy is the advisor to that effort. It's not
really user friendly, or super intuitive.
Soglin stated she would have a concern about upkeep of the trees through the first two or three
years and whether folks are going to be provided things like fencing if they're in an area with
deer, and other help maybe in that first and second year. She noted that the failure rate of trees
can be so high and obviously they would want to avoid that. Monroe agreed noting they are
experiencing that quite a bit with the publicly transplanted trees, so they are definitely sensitive
to that and yes they want to provide resources and make sure that that people have whatever
supplies or guidance that they need. She thinks this would be a really great opportunity for
some type of volunteer group or connections for Project Green or others to help with that effort.
Leckband stated he would be remiss if he didn't add they need to be sure to include some
information about One Call if they're digging holes in their yard. They don't want anyone hitting
a gas line or a power line or water line or sewer line when they're digging.
Frasier stated he happen to notice on a neighborhood website the other day someone had been
on vacation or something and came home, this was in Manville Heights, and they noticed that a
number of trees had been removed and they were rather shocked about this. Frasier
understands that a tree is not a tree is not a tree is not a tree but at the same time, he is
wondering since they're enforcing this concern, and really building on planting trees, planting
trees, planting trees, if there's a possibility of putting up some sign or billboard or notice, so
when people see that trees are being assassinated, they understand why and what the reason
is and that the trees are in fact going to be replaced, etc., so you there isn't an undue concern
on the part of the citizenry. When they take out trees maybe they ought to make an extra effort
to notify the population why that is, in fact happening. Monroe acknowledged that's a good
comment and stated that Parks and Recreation does give notice to people but there are
instances where that could be missed. If there are other ways the City can go about notifying
neighborhoods or areas then she is happy to pass the message along to staff.
Monroe wanted to mention that she, Nations, and Wendy Ford from the City met with
MidAmerican staff the other day about their rebate and incentive programs that are residential
and commercial scale. It's helping the City to develop a better, more informed program as they
move forward with the TIF and urban renewal area project that is in the process of approving
final approval to move ahead with amending those areas so they can get rebates for energy
efficiency projects. MidAmerican gave them a bunch of good ideas that she thinks they can
Climate Action Commission
August 3, 2020
Page 6 of 10
move forward into new development with the Commission for additional electrification projects
and those kinds of things.
The final thing Monroe wanted to mention is the Fair Trade campaign information that was
included in the agenda packet. Just as an FYI the Human Rights Commission has been in
discussion about implementing an effort to join the Fair Trade campaign for the City and she just
wanted to add it to their awareness that another Commission is in discussion about this. Of
course, there's climate implications that go along with the Fair Trade initiatives so there can be
further discussion at another date, but she wanted to include it so that they're aware that a
resolution has been drafted. It hasn't been brought to Council yet, but they're getting close.
Nations shared that Katie Sarsfield decided to resign from the Commission and that's why she's
not at this meeting. Because they have applications still that are pretty recent, Council will be
probably looking at those to appoint a new member at their next at their next meeting.
Giannakouros volunteered to be on the review committee for the climate action at work, the
green business recognition program.
REVIEW AND DISCUSS FINALIZING ALL METRICS:
Nations stated they want to quickly review the metrics and see if there are any comments on the
proposed final metrics that were include in the agenda packet. She noted there's still probably a
month or so if they gather the data and it doesn't look right or it seems like they forgot
something, at the next meeting they can add those. They have spoken with the buildings group
and she feels pretty good about getting their renewable energy from MidAmerican and Eastern
Line & Power and the Iowa Power Plant and keeping track of that because it has such a big
impact on emissions and then looking at residential, commercial and industrial, their
greenhouse gas emissions as a group and then they would also include the municipal buildings.
She also worked with the transportation working group and discussed looking at vehicle miles
traveled, bus ridership, transportation mode split, number of electric vehicles in City vehicle
miles traveled divided by the amount of gasoline that they use and those went pretty well and
realizing that transportation modes split is estimated data, but it's a good way to see how people
are getting around town. Regarding waste she talked to the landfill about looking at the total
landfill tonnage, which comes from the whole county, so looking at that divided by the county
population, and looking at the recycling and organic tonnage. She'll be working with them on
figuring out what numbers are the best. Nations stated the two last ones were actually the
hardest to do, she talked to the adaptation and equity group and they're wanting some more
data, but it seems like because at every single meeting they talked about trees that they need
some numbers about trees for tree canopy and shade. She is going to have some new data on
a grant that she's working on but doesn't know if they'll be able to have it annually nor the
number of new trees planted. They can track the number of trees planted with the City project,
but as Soglin said just because someone plants a tree it doesn't mean in three years, it's still
alive. Looking at trees and also the number of trees that the City plants and overall tree
numbers seems to be really important to the public and is important for a lot of reasons. They
are also thinking about looking at the stormwater management program cost share for residents
and maybe also including something for other stormwater public projects too, she will try to find
out more and start trying to get the data for that. Finally, she noted Krieger thought it would be
2
Climate Action Commission
August 3, 2020
Page 7 of 10
good to track something like the number of organizations doing climate action at work, even
though it may not be a big impact on the emissions, but just showing the number of
organizations that they recognize, or also the number of people that complete the climate
ambassador program. Those last two areas were hardest to find numbers on so if anybody has
any input or any ideas of other things that they could track she is totally open to suggestions.
Fraser asked if as a group should they have any concern or thoughts relative to COVID impact
on recycling pop can and bottles? Is that stuff being recycled since people aren't able to get
their nickel for it? Some grocery stores are back in the business of taking some of those, but a
lot could potentially end up in the landfill. Soglin notes that is a great topic, but they might have
to table it because it's not on the agenda and while it's important to the immediate issue of the
metrics, it's kind of a separate issue. Nations added they won't have 2020 data until the middle
of 2021 but agrees COVID is going to change a lot of stuff, things like transportation and the
data is going to be wonky and they're just going to see a weird year and not trends.
OUTREACH AND MESSAGING REGARDING THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION:
Soglin noted this refers to the Commission and the goals. What they had asked last time was for
everyone to go back to their working group and ask the two questions that were posted here of
what can be done now regarding outreach and messaging, and what can or should be done
after the marketing report. Perhaps each working groups can report what they discussed and
ideas.
Transportation: Leckband noted they didn't have a meeting this past month, so they haven't
addressed the questions yet. Personally, he feels they need to try to engage on equity and
socio-economic differences and transportation modes and impact.
Outreach: Gardner stated in terms of what can be done, obviously the Climate Fest next month
is going to forward a lot of those goals. One of the things she's been talking about working on
with the Climate Ambassador program and Climate Action at Work is consistency of messaging.
She is sure that's something they're going to hear in response to the marketing RFP as well.
She pointed out that one of the things that all three of those have in common is that each of
them focus very specifically on the five sections of the plan and that's just a baseline approach,
to make sure people know there are five sections of the plan and then from there build up. She
reiterated that once they get the report back in response to the RFP, they'll show how to refine
that and build on that messaging.
Equity and Adaptation: Hutchinson noted they didn't discuss these questions specifically but
one thing that came to light at the meeting with the Refugees Alliance of Johnson County that
Nations invited to our last group meeting, was some major communication divides with some
groups that they should probably be engaging with. So, she thinks one thing maybe that the
equity group can facilitate with regard to what can be done now is identifying those
communication divides with assistance from various groups and figuring out how to approach
that.
Waste Working Group: Bradley noted they haven't had a chance to meet given that Sarsfield
resigned, but in terms of what can be done now is to review actionable items within the working
groups.
7
Climate Action Commission
August 3, 2020
Page 8 of 10
Buildings Group: Soglin shared the building working group discussion on this, they also had
some discussion about digital divide, which perhaps intersects with some of the things that
adaptation group was concerned about. They thought that for what can be done now is just on
active topics to maybe go back to the to the goals and look at them and see what's truly active
and where there's opportunity. For example, Karr and Krieger had been reaching out to the
realtors and that's happening now, so they want to recognize which of the actions are already in
progress. Related to that is if there's a way to give a heads up to groups and individuals that the
marketing firm may want to engage with them, so they're first interaction isn't just someone
trying to schedule a meeting with them, but give them a head's up that the firm will want their
input and this may be happening in a couple months. This will allow them the ability to start
thinking a little bit about the topics. There was someone who mentioned that the City of
Evanston had done a survey and that might be a good resource. Also, it is important to note the
commercial versus residential side of things to really understand that one approach may not
meet everybody's needs. And then for going forward, there were thoughts about once the
marketing firm is engaged, that the branding be easy for everybody to understand, not too
complicated and to always keep in mind the co -benefits as they had noted that was a prominent
part of the Ann Arbor Climate Action Plan.
EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR ALL CLIMATE ACTIONS:
Soglin noted she came across the article that Nations included in the agenda packet. A quick
summary is as Fraser noted, there's COVID related impacts on things like recycling, and there
will be immediate as well as long term effects. This article is about planning and climate related
projects, such as, getting folks to be able to eat meals in the streets since they shouldn't be
inside a restaurant or closing down streets for bike lanes. There are neighborhoods that have
been overlooked, sometimes lower income or neighborhoods of people of color. Given some of
the comments that were made at the meeting last time, she just thought it was just a really
relevant topic for them to be thinking about going forward.
Tate noted one of his takeaways from an article was also whose priorities or projects are being
fast tracked? Whose priorities do they reflect? Soglin agreed, noting there is a sentence in the
article stating they are fast to make changes that wealthy white residents value. Tate added
some of what the author suggested as sort of solutions were along the lines of modes of
engagement. He thinks they are a bit challenged, they have to make sure that it's in a place it's
accessible and maybe the time that's accessible. Stephanie Bowers talked about some other
things like the way that it's advertised or maybe there's free parking or childcare or food or
something like that, which is all sort of being up ended by COVID because they're not having
any of these in person meetings, which he thinks is probably accentuating the disparities with
sort of engagement and opportunities to rectify that. Therefore, he feels they need to be even
more thoughtful than pre COVID.
Soglin noted that Gardner has connections to other cities on communications and maybe they
can learn from other people's successes and unintended mistakes and what works and doesn't
work.
Fraser noted when he reads articles like this, the term that's coming up in his mind to remind
him to think deeper is this term institutional? Institutional, a big deal, it's just institutional is
8
Climate Action Commission
August 3, 2020
Page 9 of 10
embedded everywhere to the degree that they don't even recognize that it's embedded. He
must really ask himself is there truly equity or is it institutionalized to such a degree that they
need to change a lot in order for there to be equity.
UPDATE ON WORKING GROUPS:
Equity and Adaptation: Hutchinson noted the majority of her notes were recapping the
meeting with Refugees Alliance of Johnson County.
Waste: Bradley noted they have not met since the last meeting.
Buildings: Soglin noted their major discussion was about the metrics and communications and
outreach.
Karr added through the Johnson Clean Energy District they have distributed about a quarter of
their LED light bulbs in Iowa City, and they're working through the process of trying to get the
word out and get those distributed in the COVID world. They're hopefully getting flyers to the
neighborhood centers in multiple languages this week, that took a little bit of time to get some
translations done, but they're working on that.
Transportation: Giannakouros said they did not meet.
RECAP OF ACTIONABLE ITEMS FOR COMMISSION, WORKING GROUPS, AND STAFF:
Soglin gave a recap of the actionable items. First if any Commissioner had additional thoughts
about the tree program make sure to follow up and connect with Monroe on that.
Soglin noted Nations had sent out the statement from the Human Rights Commission but it was
not officially on the agenda to be able to discuss it, so could that be on a future agenda.
Nations will add it to a future agenda.
Soglin next addressed the scheduling of the next meeting, the next meeting was supposed to be
September 7th as it always is the first Monday of the month, but that lands on Labor Day.
Nations proposed to move the meeting to Tuesday, September S, and everyone agreed.
Nations added if the Commission has any input on the metrics, they could send those to her.
She will have two years of metrics available for review at the next meeting.
Fraser added an action item from himself, he kept waiting for COVID to go away and the City
offices to open but he's going to give up on that and will get in touch with Gardner to help her
with the Ambassador Program.
Gardner added although it's not necessarily something that has to be done by next month, she
hopes that all the Commissioners can be thinking ahead to the Climate Festival that will take
place in September. They're going to be asking residents and organizations and businesses to
post something online talking about why climate action matters to them or the types of climate
action they take. There are more details on the website and there's a hashtag to use
#IowaCityTakesAction and it is her hope that each of the Commissioners will at least consider
Ir]
Climate Action Commission
August 3, 2020
Page 10 of 10
posting something as a way of participating in the festival.
ADJOURNMENT:
Tate made a motion to adjourn.
Giannakouros seconded the motion.
A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously.
CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2019-2020
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM No
Meeting
-- -- = Not a Member
10
O
F�-
N
F-�Ili
W
Un
01
-1J
00
NAME
TERM EXP.n\i
N
N
o
^
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
Madeleine Bradley
12/31/2022
--
--
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
John Fraser
12/31/2020
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Stratis
Giannakouros
UI Rep
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Grace Holbrook
12/31/2021
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
Kasey Hutchinson
12/31/2022
--
--
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
GT Karr
12/31/2020
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Matt Krieger
12/31/2020
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
MiclAmerican
Jesse Leckband
Rep
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
Katie Sarsfield
12/31/2020
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
--
Becky Soglin
12/31/2022
--
--
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Eric Tate
12/31/2021
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM No
Meeting
-- -- = Not a Member
10
Item Number: 4.g.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
October 20, 2020
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Historic Preservation Commission: August 13
-.®fir CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 13, 2020
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner
Re: Recommendations from the Historic Preservation Commission
At its August 13, 2020 meeting, the Historic Preservation Commission have the following
recommendation to the City Council:
A consensus of the Commission recommends that City Council direct staff to provide staff time
and expertise devoted to the support of a subcommittee of Commissioners and the public
charged with investigating, preserving, and sharing the untold history of our community,
particularly of those who are historically underrepresented.
Additional action (check one)
No further action needed
_X_ Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 1 of 11
MINUTES APPROVED - REVISED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
August 13, 2020
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd, Helen Burford, Sharon DeGraw, Lyndi
Kiple, Jordan Sellergren, Austin Wu
MEMBERS ABSENT: Carl Brown, Cecile Kuenzli, Quentin Pitzen,
STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: None
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or
impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff, and
the public presented by COVID-19.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
A consensus of the Commission recommends that City Council direct staff to provide staff time and
expertise devoted to the support of a subcommittee of Commissioners and the public charged with
investigating, preserving, and sharing the untold history of our community, particularly of those who are
historically underrepresented.
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the electronic meeting to order at 5:30
p.m. utilizing Zoom.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS:
516 Fairchild Street— Goosetown/H o race Mann ConservationDistrict (garage and drivewav remodel)
Bristow explained 516 Fairchild Street is in the Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District and is
the house that's on the corner and right next to North Market Square Park. It is also a house that was
rehabilitated by the UniverCity partnership and sold to the current owner. As part of the UniverCity
partnership project they removed some non -historic awnings and replaced many of the windows, they
resized a kitchen window and they removed the cellar as they think this house originally had a
crawlspace and someone dug out the basement. Because of that there were two chimneys that were
no longer supported so they were removed. Additionally, the roof material was replaced and along one
side there was an projecting canopy that was also removed. The current owner is going to continue
with improvements to the house.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 2 of 11
Bristow explained this house has a potentially long history. It is a form that's similar to the I -House.
This house is not quite two stories tall and normally an I House is two stories tall, meaning that the eave
would just be higher above the windows. This is more like a one and a half story house. This particular
house had a one-story kitchen addition put on the back at one point in time, and there was a garage
and then a breezeway was enclosed to connect them all. Currently, the garage has an apartment with a
bathroom on the second floor and a living space on the first floor because it was a rental situation for a
long time. The exterior wall angles so it slopes from the outer edge of the one-story addition back to the
garage. Bristow pointed out the space where there is laundry and entry into the kitchen. She also
pointed out a driveway on North Johnson, which is the street around the park that this connects to.
There is about a 15 -foot drive curb cut and a 10 -foot wide driveway. Bristow showed a sketch of those
spaces. Bristow stated right now it has three evenly spaced columns holding up the roof projection
which. Since it covers a walk it will remain. The structure of it will be altered because the one of the
main portions of the project is returning the two -car garage to a two -car garage so the door and window
that are currently in one half will be replaced with an overhead door. Bristow believes that the existing
overhead door will need to be slightly adjusted to the side so that both doors fit.
Next Bristow explained the breezeway will change so it's no longer a wall slanted from corner to corner.
and the window and door that are in that location will become just a door. She did add to the project
that if the owner ever wanted to replace the really large egress apartment style window in the gable
with something that was more appropriate for a garage, she would suggest approval for that. Bristow
cannot say that is a goal of the property owner but during the project she might decide that's something
that she wants to do, and it's something that staff would support.
Moving onto the new driveway, Bristow explained at first it had been edited so that it was just a double -
wide driveway all the way in but the guidelines suggests having a driveway be the single wide driveway
that then flares upon the approach to the garage. Part of that is to minimize some of the pavement and
activity that's happening in the sidewalk area. Bristow showed some sketches of how that driveway
might actually work. The guidelines talk about an 8 to 10 -foot driveway with a three foot turning radius
on each side, which would be a 16 foot curb cut. The driveway would then would widen at the point
needed to go into the garage. Bristow noted this is not a traditional driveway length, typically the Code
requires that a driveway is 25 feet between the property line, which is on the far end of the sidewalk, to
the garage. This does not have that so it's grandfathered in with its current condition and doesn't need
to be changed because of the fact that they're not really enlarging this part of the driveway. Bristow
next showed an image of the proposed garage front with two overhead doors and the single passage
door.
Bristow showed the current plan that shows the angled wall with the entrance and noted one of the
doors and windows shown is a laundry area. She stated part of the project involves changing that
window configuration because the owner is going to put a bathroom there, so instead of two windows, it
will become one. There is a very large slider window that was installed at one point by a landlord for
egress for a tenant in the back of the garage. One of the relocated windows would be put in that
position to minimize the opening and make it more like a typical garage opening. Bristow noted that the
garage and breezeway have lap siding and the house itself has asbestos siding. So there is some
concern about what happens at the new corner where it transitions from the asbestos to the lap siding.
The new plan shows the single opening and the new bathroom area and the reduced openings in the
main part of the garage. The plan shows where the second overhead door is and how the entrance wall
will now be stepped back from the corner of the main house and project slightly from the garage so it
will help define those three different spaces.
Bristow noted the owner has submitted a flat panel garage door, it is metal but kind of like a stucco
texture, but it's still flat. The owner is reusing the passage door and the windows. Bristow suggests as a
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 3 of 11
condition for approval is to revisit the corner where the asbestos on the house will end up being
exposed and the wall moves to see how that ends up being detailed.
Boyd opened the public hearing. No one chose to comment so Boyd closed the public hearing.
Boyd commented that it seems like an exciting project.
MOTION: DeGraw moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 516
Fairchild Street as presented in the staff report with the following condition: the siding
condition at the northeast corner of the house is reviewed and approved by staff once exposed
as part of the project. Burford seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0.
424 Clark Street — Clark Street Conservation District (porch reconstruction)
Bristow explained this is another exciting project at 424 Clark Street in the Clark Street Conservation
District. Bristow did check with the owner this morning and she did not have any damage at this house
from the Derecho storm. The house has an interesting history because it's hard to determine what's
going on. It has a layer of rolled asphalt siding and then also a layer of fake brick shingled asphalt
siding. So there are two layers of asphalt siding over whatever is the original siding. Bristow pointed out
a dormer and noted that is an addition and there is a smaller hip dormer in the front. Some historians in
the past had considered that the house might have some Colonial Revival influences but it may also be
a Prairie School design. There were some shutters on it that they thought were original in the past, but
they were not positioned or fit properly so they were probably not original. However, there are multiple
areas on this house where there's some horizontal emphasis in the windows, there's a pretty wide eave
overhang. Additionally, there's a really wide brick band at the bottom and she is suspicious that there
might be stucco underneath the two layers of asphalt. This building was built to be what they call flats,
even on the historic map, so it was always apartments. It had a small entry porch, the roof is original
and underneath there are some porch piers that line up that are brick that match the base of the house
and are also original.
Bristow explained this project came about because the past owner had poured a concrete slab for the
porch floor and it was actually deteriorating, rotting through, and needed to be replaced. Additionally,
the new owner also wanted to remove the stone, therefore it's a two-part porch reconstruction project.
Bristow showed a detail of the stone. Bristow stated all that will be removed. Currently the porch has
steel pipe columns and metal covering all of the soffits. Bristow pointed out a little bit of a column
capital that still shows to give some clues about some of the size and shape of the originals. It likely
had just the two fairly simple, fairly trim columns. The current proposal is a simple square column.
Bristow noted it appears it would align up with what they have for the column capital and the base. It
actually has a little bit of a taper which would fit more with Prairie School but also with the Craftsman
time period in which the house was built.
Bristow stated at this point the project is the removal of the stone, which since that's a non -historic
element, could be a staff review and the redesign of what would be an appropriate column. The original
remnant of the porch railing would be copied on the other side. Bristow said staff does add one
condition to make sure that that the battered or angled size really will fit, but overall approving the idea
of a square column, knowing that if the angled side doesn't fit, then it would be a straight sided column
instead.
Boyd opened the public hearing. No one commented so Boyd closed the public hearing.
Burford asked about in the forefront of the photograph of that building, it showed another door and
perhaps not actually a porch, but there is something that's built out there. Bristow acknowledged the
overhang in the back there. Burford asked if there was any discussion about complementing that to the
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 4 of 11
work that's being done on the front porch. Bristow stated this house has a new ownership and at the
moment she thinks that they're working slowly and taking things step by step. Bristow noted when she
looked through the history and the property records, there was a time when someone added a
basement apartment in what was a garage and that was probably at one point an entry to an apartment
that later was decided to be abandoned by removing the stairs. It is possible that there will be a
potential future project to remove the door and put a window in or something.
MOTION: DeGraw moved to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 424 Clark
Street, as presented in the staff report with the following conditions. If the proposed battered
column does not appear to align with the existing elements appropriately, modifications,
including straight columns will be approved by staff. The columns will have simple square
bases and capitals. Burford seconded the motion. uj,g motion carried on a vote of 6-0.
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF
Certificate of No Material Effect — Chair and Staff Review.
418 North Gilbert Street — Northside Historic District (rear stoop repair)
Bristow stated they are replacing a stoop and stairs that's off the alley. Bristow did not have a photo but
showed something similar with the same kind of railing. She noted it's around on the alley. It's just a
simple stoop step that existed that rotted out. They are able to save some of the railings, some they
have to rebuild, but they're matching it all exactly.
608 Dearborn Street — Dearborn Street Conservation District (front porch flooring and railing
replacement)
Bristow noted 608 Dearborn street is actually two properties. It is a Moffitt house and the front porch is
not Moffitt, it was an addition added later but it has been rotting out and they're replacing the floor and
some of this railing is rotting as well.
608'/2 Dearborn Street — Dearborn Street Conservation District (deck floor replacement)
Bristow explained the half is a converted garage that is a living space in the back, and it has an entry
deck and for that one they will be saving the railing and reinstalling it but replacing the floor.
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF
Minor Review —Staff Review.
1220 East Court Street- Longfellow Historic District (reopening front porch and new stair construction)
Bristow stated this is a project to open this porch up, however they suspect there's some lack of
columns so they've started talking to the owner about that and they might need to come back to the
Commission for approval, similar to the project approved earlier in this meeting. For a porch design
they are currently looking for a house to use as a model. The house has a hip roof and has an off -
centered gable projection. But currently, they're going to remove a step and remove the enclosure part
and discover what they discover when they do that.
418 Church Street — Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (aluminum siding removal, siding
and trim repair and porch repair)
Bristow stated this is one of the many properties this year that is removing their aluminum siding and
repairing and painting. It's a staff review to remove the synthetic siding and she met with the owner to
talk about it, there are just some very basic details that are missing including a drip cap, crown edge
and some sills and stuff like that. Bristow stated it's all pretty basic and there's evidence of what was
there, so it'll be an exciting project to have uncovered.
1107 Burlington Street — College Hill Conservation District (new guardrail)
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 5 of 11
Bristow explained this is a house that was flipped a while ago and has been for sale for a while and
because of a Code change there is need to install a guardrail on the side porch.
AMENDMENTS TO THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION GUIDELINES.
Originally when the first minor review items were created, the ones that include decks and ramps and
things like that, the Commission reviewed each one an agenda item where staff would present it to the
Commission, the Commission would discuss it, and then the Commission would vote on it and create a
certificate of appropriateness that has all the conditions on it, making it eligible for staff review. Doing so
doesn't mean that applicants can say they met all the conditions so they're approved, or they can do it
without coming to staff, they still need to come to staff and submit an application. What this is approving
is that these things that would normally be alterations or changes that need to go to the full Commission
and have generally tended to approve them in the same way over and over and over again could now
be approved by staff. This type of review helps streamline the process. The Commission needs to
decide if they feel comfortable with staff reviewing the application if the conditions that are listed are the
extent of the conditions that you want, or all necessary conditions.
Basement egress window and window well alteration project as minor review
Bristow explained she has very few examples of finished projects so some of the example images she
showed are actually are not perfect examples. In this case they are talking about an egress window that
replaces an existing basement window by maintaining the width of the window and replacing the height
to provide an egress window. Bristow stated in order to get something that meets egress requirements,
it's going to be a casement window, so that it opens enough. City requirements also include that if the
rest of the house is historic, it's usually going to have some double hung windows or something like
that, so the egress window must have a mutton bar configuration so that it resembles the other
windows and is not just a modern casement window. Another condition is that the window well has to
be a certain size in order to meet Code and is a material that matches the foundation. If the house has
a stone foundation, they tend to approve those rough faced block configurations but not say poured
concrete so they tend to either match or blend with the foundation.
Boyd asked if the Commission is in favor of moving it first to a minor review and then if there's broad
consensus around that, they can talk about any specific potential changes.
Boyd noted they had a broad consensus and asked if there's any changes the Commission wants to
make through conditions.
Burford said her only question is the implication here is that the window opening needs the Code
requirements size for an egress window and there may be instances where the property owner would
have to increase the size of the opening to accommodate an egress window. Bristow said the reason
that it would come to the Commission in the first place is that it is changing the size of a window
opening on a structure in a historic district. So far she has never had one that had to change the width
because basement windows tend to be a little awning windows or a little hopper windows and they do
tend to be a width that will allow them to meet egress if they change the height only.
MOTION: Burford moved to approve basement egress window and window well alterations as
a pre -approved item eligible for a Minor Review if the following conditions are met:
• The egress window is required by code
• The egress window will be installed in a basement and is located on the back of the
building or in the back half of either side of the building
• The window will fit the width of the existing window and only require a change to the
window height
• The new window will be wood or metal clad wood casement window with a muntin bar
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 6 of 11
adhered to the inside and outside of the window to mimic a double -hung window
• The window well is constructed of a material to match or blend with the existing
foundation, at least as exposed above grade.
DeGraw seconded the motion. Ib& motion carried on a vote of 6-0.
Front Step and Stoop alteration project as minor review
Bristow noted they have quite a few times when people need to alter or somehow change front steps or
stoops or rebuild them. Sometimes it's because they currently have a precast step that can't actually
remain if they want to change it. The conditions are that if the building does not have a traditional
covered porch where the stoop is planned so they're not removing anything. The landing will be
restricted to approximately five feet by five feet and positioned level with the entry door. She continued
to say the railing will follow the guidelines for balusters and handrails, the steps will have closed risers
and a toe kick, the stoop will be supported on piers or posts aligned with the corner posts and the
space between the piers will be enclosed with skirting. All wood will blend with the house or be painted
to blend with the house. Bristow shared some images of examples.
Boyd noted this was the one that seemed like the one the Commission has done least frequently of
these five so he was looking forward to understanding it a little better. Bristow stated the reason why it
might be less frequent but is the most problematic of all of them is because since she's been here, staff
has been doing them as minor reviews.
Sellergren was curious in one of the images shown about the way the back columns of the of the railing
came into contact with the porch columns and if that's something that would be taken into
consideration. Bristow acknowledged that one is a little odd because there's an original porch pier and
they had to create something for this railing to attach to. Bristow said they would always want it to have
something so that the railing ends are not just attaching to the wall of the house. She stated they have
quite a few porches in town where the railings are grandfathered in at a historic height and now by
Code, it can't be that height so they tend to solve that problem by making the new part to be at the
correct height, and they tend to have to make two posts in order to make that happen. And sometimes
they needed to add a handrail to steps and those would actually have to probably be metal.
MOTION: Bufford moved to approve Front Step and Stoop additions as a pre -approved
item eligible for a Minor Review if the following conditions are met:
• The building does not have a traditional covered porch at the entrance where the
stoop is planned
• The landing will be restricted to approximately 5 feet wide by 5 feet deep and will be
positioned roughly level with the entry door, not a step down from the door
• The railing will follow the guidelines for balusters and handrails, including the use of
posts
• The steps will have closed risers and a toe kick (overhang from risers and stringer)
• The stoop will be supported on piers or posts aligned with the corner posts in the railing
• The space between the piers will be enclosed with porch skirting if the space is
greater than 18 inches
• All wood elements will be painted to blend with the house.
Sellergren seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0.
Solar panel installation project as minor review
Bristow showed an example of a garage at 813 Ronalds Street of solar panels. The conditions are that
solar panels are installed as to not impact the street view of the house so would be installed on an
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 7 of 11
outbuilding roof or the rear facing roof of the primary building or are on a non -street facing side
elevations. For a staff review they would not be installed on a street elevation on a house, they would
most likely be installed on an outbuilding or on the back. They are to be installed as close to the roof
surface as possible. The installers like to put them at a certain angle to maximize their solar heat gain
so sometimes they are not actually parallel to the roof surface, sometimes they have to be slightly
slanted so that they have a better angle. Staff would still ask that they are fairly similar instead of being
really propped up at an extreme angle. Additionally, the frames and brackets would be a color that
blends in with the roof surface and that any of the equipment they install is on the back.
Wu asked if there is any reason why there's such strong restriction on putting panels on sides of the
building that would face the street and what if the building is on a corner lot and has less space that
panels can be put on versus one that's in the middle of a walk. Bristow said they tend to take their
direction from the National Park Service because they have also started talking about some of the
appropriate places and the guidelines currently include something about not installing these modern
vents, modern solar panels, skylights, things like that on the street elevation because they do impact
the historic character of the property. So that's one of the reasons that if they can go on an outbuilding
even if that surface faces the street, it's the outbuilding instead of the house or the primary and more
important building, but also trying to avoid a street elevation. Now that does mean that a corner lot does
have the potential to have a gable that faces one way and a roof surface that faces the other way and
that could minimize their ability to have solar panels. There are also situations where there are trees
that also block the sun and make it so that some roof surfaces aren't appropriate at all because they
don't get enough sunlight.
Boyd thinks that maybe over time there may be more openness to putting these on places that are a
little more visible but those shouldn't be minor reviews and should be up to a Commission to decide if a
placement is appropriate in a in a different location.
Wu said then theoretically if there was a building where the ideal place to put an array would be on the
front, street facing, part of the building, the owner could come to the Commission and they can improve
it that way. Boyd confirmed that was correct.
Burford asked if they want to include the word roofing in here, because there are now solar roof tiles.
Bristow said she wouldn't recommend that because that is more of a roof replacement and they have a
minor review for roof replacement and this is for things that have gained consensus over time and not
necessarily for things that they haven't had to deal with yet.
MOTION: Sellergren moved to approve Solar Panel Installation as a pre -approved item
eligible for a Minor Review if the following conditions are met:
• The solar panels are installed on an outbuilding roof or the rear -facing roof of a primary
building or are on a non -street facing side elevation, not impacting the street view of the
house, if the preferred locations are not possible
• The solar panels are installed close to the roof surface and at an angle that is similar to the
roof surface
• The frame and brackets for the panels are a color that blends with the building roof material
• Any equipment is located away from a street -facing elevation, preferably on the back
of the structure.
Wu seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0.
Skyliaht alteration project as minor review
Bristow was having audio difficulties so Boyd explained these are for skylight installations and they
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 8 of 11
have talked about these as similar in some ways to the solar panels by trying to install them on rear
facing roof slopes, that they're framed in materials and colors that blend with the roof material, that
they're low profile so that they don't kind of stick out above the roof, blend in and size is fitted between
roof joints and have a length that is no more than three times the width.
Kiple agreed it is very similar to the solar panels, so it makes sense.
Boyd is curious about the length and width requirements. Bristow put that in there because in modern
construction there's a current fad for really long, thin skylights so those would not be appropriate for just
a staff review. The standard size that tends to fit within those dimensions would be what staff could
review.
MOTION: Kiple moved to approve Skylight Installation as a pre -approved item eligible for a
Minor Review if the following conditions are met:
• Skylights are installed on rear -facing roof slopes or on side elevations that do not face the
street
• Skylights are framed in metal and in a color that blends with the building roof material
• Skylights are low profile, follow the angle of the roof and do not include fish-eye lenses or
other elements that protrude more that 6 inches above the roof surface.
• The skylight is sized to fit between roof joists and have a length that is no more than 3 times
the width.
DeGraw seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0.
Commercial sign installation project as minor review
Bristow stated the conditions for commercial sign installation will fit some of the more recent projects
the Commission has reviewed. The sign is a surface -mount or painted sign installed in existing historic
sign band or is a projecting sign located below the second floor windowsill and a minimum of eight feet
above the sidewalk and projecting a maximum of four feet. She noted the dimensions actually come
from the Sign Code so in order to meet the City Sign Code they will meet that as well. All of the
direction for this is taken from the Downtown District Sign Guidelines that they created, as well as the
City Sign Code and past projects that the Commission has reviewed using the Secretary of the Interior
standards. The sign must be scaled to fit the building and takes architectural features and proportions
into consideration. The sign shall not obscure any of the original architectural features. Signs on
masonry buildings are anchored into the joints instead of the masonry. The materials do not damage or
discolor historic materials over time, Bristow included that because of the current fad for Corten steel
because it does rust and would discolor. Finally, if the sign is illuminated it is part of the Sign Code that
it can't just be a big plastic bubble with painted letters, where the whole sign is illuminated. Bristow
showed examples of signs downtown.
Boyd noted they have done several of these in the past and have said they should think about
considering moving these to minor review. Additionally, to be responsive to commercial interests there
are pressures to move more rapidly on some of this stuff.
Kiple asked if the business owners are provided with these guidelines so they can just make it really
easy on themselves and get it done. Bristow said yes, they tend to talk first to the building official who
knows there are specific downtown sign guidelines.
Bristow added in response to what Boyd was said saying more than half of the signs that they have
approved since she been here they've had to call special meetings to get them approved because of
the timeframe and so not only is it helping them just do it faster and with less stress but it also allows
the Commission not to have quite as many special meetings and is also is a good thing for the
downtown properties as well.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 9 of 11
MOTION: Kiple moved to approve Commercial Sign Installation as a pre -approved item
eligible for a Minor Review if the following conditions are met:
• The sign is a surface mount or painted sign, installed in an existing, historic sign band
on the front of a commercial building, or
• The sign is a projecting signs located below the second -floor window sill, a minimum of
8 feet above the sidewalk and project a maximum of 4 feet.
• The sign is scaled to fit the building and takes into consideration the architectural
features and proportions of the building in its design
• The sign shall not be installed on or obscuring any original architectural features
such as columns, pilasters, band boards, or trim.
• Signs on masonry buildings are anchored into masonry joints and do not damage
historic masonry
• Sign materials do not damage or discolor historic materials over time (such as rust)
• The sign has limited illumination. Plastic signs with painted letters where the entire face
of the sign is illuminated is not allowed
DeGraw seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JULY 9, 2020
Boyd had one amendment as they were talking about this subcommittee and asked the City Council to
provide some staff time to help support that subcommittee, but they haven't moved it forward because
he had not heard back from them. In many of the minutes when they move something forward to
Council, there is like a recommendation to Council so he'd like to amend the minutes to include that
recommendation to Council.
MOTION: DeGraw moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's
June 11, 2020 meeting as amended. Burford seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote
of 6-0.
COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION:
Sanxav-Gilmore House update, 109 Market Street
Bristow stated the agreement was approved by City Council and the Board of Regents, in fact the
Board of Regents was very excited, and the University has determined a use for the building which was
always a key part of the relocation in making it a viable house. It will become the future home of the
Nonfiction Writing Program as they apparently are creating a writing area related to some of the
properties they already have near the President's home. They've hired an architect to go through the
process of the figuring out what rehab and coordinating the relocation.
Development Update, 400 Block North Clinton Street
Bristow stated this is the project they talked about at the last meeting. Council told staff to move
forward with the development and are working with a developer. They reviewed the condition of the
exterior of the historic building to talk to the developers about what they would recommend and
eventually some kind of rehabilitation plan would come before the Commission. Overall, the process is
going to be an extensive one because it involves some Code language and the rezoning for the
landmark and acquisition of other properties so it is a complicated process. Assuming that everything
continues to move forward, they will do a rehabilitation plan for what is needed on the exterior of the
house. Bristow noted the house was in pretty good condition considering, most of the brick is in good
condition and a lot of the mortar is pretty good, there are just general areas where there's been water
damage over time and a few missing wood elements. Russett added in speaking with the property
owner they were agreeable to the rehabilitation plan and were also agreeable to salvage for 401 & 112
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 10 of 11
East Davenport.
Boyd stated that obviously a lot of the historic neighborhoods suffered some tree damage, among other
things in the Derecho storm and Bristow, Russett, himself and Friends of Historic Preservation are
going to meet on Monday to talk about figuring out kind of the best approach to reach out to people.
They're using some of the models used around 2006 tornado and will keep folks posted as they can via
email.
Boyd stated next month on the agenda will be the National Historic Register nomination for downtown.
The property owners downtown are receiving an official letter from the State Historic Preservation
Office, they're also receiving a joint letter from him as chair and Nancy Bird, the executive director of
the Downtown District, talking about why both of their organizations jointly support the effort and to
reach out to them directly if there are concerns
ADJOURNMENT: DeGraw moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Kiple.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Rebecca Kick
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
August 13, 2020
Page 11 of 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2019-2020
TERM
NAME
EXP.
8/19
9/12
10/10
11/14
12/12
1/09
2/13
3/12
4/09
51114
6/11
7/09
8/13
AGRAN,
THOMAS
6/30/20
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
--
--
BOYD, KEVIN
6/30/23
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
BROWN, CARL
6/30/23
__
__
_
X
O/E
BURFORD,
HELEN
6/30/21
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
CLOREGOSIA
OSIA
6/30/20
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
-'
--
DEGRAW,
SHARON
6/30/22
X
O/E
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
KARR, G. T.
6/30/20
X
X
--
--
--
--
-
--
--
--
--
--
--
KUENZLI,
CECILE
6/30/22
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
KIPLE, LYNDI
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
PITZEN,
QUENTIN
6/30/21
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
SELLERGREN,
JORDAN
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
WU, AUSTIN
6/30/23
__
__
__
__
__
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Item Number: 4.h.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
October 20, 2020
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Planning & Zoning Commission: August 20
I t,.®4,, CITY OF IOWA CITY
`Q�w MEMORANDUM
Date: October 9, 2020
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner
Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission
At its August 20, 2020 meeting, the Planning & Zoning Commission have the following
recommendations to the City Council:
By a vote of 6-0 the Commissions recommends approval of CREZ20-0001, an application for a
rezoning of approximately 1.76 acres of County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) within
Fringe Area B — Outside the Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area.
By a vote of 3-3 (Craig, Signs and Townsend dissenting) the Commission recommends denial
of CREZ20-0002, an application submitted by Bryan Jensen for a conditional use permit to allow
for a dog kennel and daycare facility on Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway in
unincorporated Johnson County.
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
MINUTES FINAL
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AUGUST 20, 2020 —7:00 PM
ELECTRONIC FORMAL MEETING
MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Mark Nolte, Mark
Signs, Billie Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Joshua Engelbrecht, Eric Goers, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Scott Ritter, Jessica Plowman, Bryan Jensen
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical
due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff and the public
presented by COVID-19.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL.
By a vote of 6-0 the Commissions recommends approval of CREZ20-0001, an application for a
rezoning of approximately 1.76 acres of County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) within
Fringe Area B — Outside the Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area.
By a vote of 3-3 (Craig, Signs and Townsend dissenting) the Commission recommends denial of
CREZ20-0002, an application submitted by Bryan Jensen for a conditional use permit to allow for
a dog kennel and daycare facility on Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway in
unincorporated Johnson County.
Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. He welcomed new Commission member Nolte
and also noted that Commissioner Carolyn Dyer has submitted her resignation so there is
another opening on the Commission.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 20, 2020
Page 2 of 10
CASE NO. CREZ20-0001:
Applicant: Lindsey N. Fudge
Location: 4477 Sioux Avenue SE, Unincorporated Johnson County
An application for a rezoning of approximately 1.76 acres of County Agriculture (A) to County
Residential (R) within Fringe Area B — Outside the Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe
Area.
Engelbrecht began the staff report with some background information. This property falls within
Fringe Area B outside Iowa City's growth area, the application proposes it to be rezoned to
County Residential and the applicant has also submitted a subdivision application to the County
to create two lots. Per the Fringe Area Agreement subdivisions of land into fewer than three lots
continue to be regulated by the County which is why the subdivision application isn't presented
tonight. Engelbrecht showed an aerial view of the property showing the full parcel outlined in
yellow with the white being the portion to be rezoned. The parcel is surrounded by County
Agricultural Land Use zone and is within Area B outside growth. Engelbrecht showed some
pictures of the area noting there is already a dwelling on the property. He also pointed out lots of
County Agricultural open space with some development in the distance, more open space and
agricultural use to the east across the street, and then more development in the distance and
open space to the south.
Engelbrecht stated in terms of compliance with the County's Comprehensive Plan and the Future
Land Use Map of the County's Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as suitable for
agricultural uses and the Agricultural Land Use category typically includes land devoted to
agriculture with limited residential development. The City and County Fringe Area Agreement is a
component of the City's Comprehensive Plan and it applies to areas outside of the City's
jurisdiction that are planned for in the City's Comprehensive Plan. This agreement provides
guidance regarding land development within two miles of the Iowa City corporate limits. Staff
relies on this Agreement to review rezonings in the Fringe Area. So, the proposed rezoning is
located in Fringe Area B, and as noted several times is outside the City's growth area.
Agricultural uses are preferred in this zone, or in this area, and restricts to land uses consistent
with rural agricultural land use such as row crops, animal husbandry and very limited residential
development. In summary, the County Land Use Plan and the City County Fringe Area
Agreement recommend agricultural uses in this area, which does not directly align with the
proposed rezoning. However, the residential use already exists on this parcel and the proposed
rezoning would not allow for additional residential units to be developed.
The role of the Commission is to provide a recommendation to City Council on the rezoning
based on Fringe Area Agreement and then Johnson County Board of Supervisors is the ultimate
decision maker. The next steps are after the Commission, the City Council will review and
provide a recommendation to the Johnson County Planning Commission.
Staff recommends that although the proposed rezoning does not directly align with the policies
outlined in the adopted Fringe Area Agreement, staff recommends approval of the rezoning for
the following reasons. The first is that the subject property already consists of residential
development and dividing the parcel and rezoning the 1.76 acres would better reflect the current
land usage. Second the proposed rezoning would not allow for further residential development
as only one unit is allowed based on the size of the lot.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 20, 2020
Page 3 of 10
Hensch asked what Fringe Area Agreement they are operating off as he knows the southeast
area of Iowa City Fringe Area agreement had expired some time ago. Is this based on that
expired Fringe Area Agreement or is there a current agreement that hasn't expired yet. Russett
stated the Fringe Area Agreement hasn't expired yet and they are still operating under that one.
Hensch asked if in this rezoning are they planning on building a new structure on that 1.76 acre
parcel. Engelbrecht stated the application didn't specify so he is not entirely sure but doesn't
assume so.
Hensch asked approximately how many miles this is from City limits. Engelbrecht is unsure, but
noted it is less than two miles.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Scott Ritter (Hart -Frederick Consultants) is representing the applicant and is available to answer
any questions. He did note at this time he knows of no other buildings to be built there.
Hearing no questions for the applicant, and no other public input, Hensch closed the public
hearing.
Signs moved to recommend approval of CREZ20-0001, an application for a rezoning of
approximately 1.76 acres of County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) within Fringe
Area B — Outside the Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area.
Nolte seconded the motion.
Hensch noted given the distance from the City, it's not in the growth area and it looks like it's
probably close to the two mile outer limit and there's already an existing structure on there he
support this application.
Signs asked the staff again that there appears to be a little remnant of nonagricultural use or
non -field use just to the north of the subject property and could that be re -subdivided at some
future time to build another house. Russett replied that would have to be rezoned first before it
could be subdivided.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
CASE NO. CREZ20-0002:
Applicant: Bryan Jensen
Location: Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Hwy; Unincorporated Johnson County
An application for a conditional use permit to allow for a kennel and dog care facility in the
County Residential (R) zone within Fringe Area B — Inside the City's Growth Boundary of the
City/County Fringe Area.
Engelbrecht noted this application is for a conditional use permit within Fringe area B for kennel
and dog care facility. He showed an aerial view of the property and the distance from Iowa City.
The property is zoned County Residential and there is a low-density residential development to
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 20, 2020
Page 4 of 10
the east and then mixed use and multifamily development to the west. The application is also
within Fringe Area B however, this one is inside the growth area of the Fringe Area Agreement.
Regarding the background, this is an application to Johnson County Board of Adjustment for the
allowance of a dog kennel and daycare facility in Johnson County. A conditional use permit
allows for a conditionally permitted use on a specific property and the role of the County Board of
Adjustment is to determine if a dog kennel and daycare facility meets the supplemental
conditions based on the facts presented and they may impose additional conditions if they deem
necessary. Engelbrecht pointed this out to make a distinction between the Commission's
discretion in policymaking ability and the County Board of Adjustment roll of approving an
application based on if it meets required conditions and criteria.
The proposed land use is a kennel intended to provide daycare and boarding for dogs with the
ability for the customers to request additional services such as grooming (which would require
another conditional use permit in the future). The subject property is located inside of the Iowa
City growth boundary and the City's Northeast District Plan identifies this area as appropriate for
single family residential. Engelbrecht showed some pictures of where the facility would be
located and the concept plan showing the proposed kennel and sign. He noted there is
development in Iowa City further down the road, open space to the north, and then more open
space and some development to the east. The Johnson County Supplemental Conditions state
proposed daycare facility and kennel must comply with the following supplemental conditions
from section 8.1.23 of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. The first is the
kennel shall not be located on parcels fewer than five acres except for as provided in the section.
The property is approximately 8.4 acres so the first condition is already met and that means that
the second condition doesn't necessarily apply. The second conditions is kennels may be
located on parcels three acres or larger if the facility does not provide overnight boarding
services and no more than four dogs which do no reside on the property are present at any given
time. The third is that all structures and run areas used to house or exercise animals shall be set
back a minimum of 200 feet from all property lines. Engelbrecht noted due to the layout of the
site, it is unlikely that the project will be able to meet this condition however, the setback can be
reduced to 100 feet through the County Special Exception Process. The fourth condition is that
animal boarding facilities may exceed the limits for keeping of dogs or cats contained in the
section when counting animals temporarily boarded for compensation. The number of animals
permanently residing on the premises shall comply with set limits at all times.
Regarding the City analysis, the proposed kennel and daycare facility use is allowed as a
conditional use in County Residential zones and development projects within Iowa City's
projected growth area shall conform to City Urban Design Standards contained in Title 14,
Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets
and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. In addition to
complying with the City's Urban Design Standards, staff wants to ensure future street
connectivity in this area. Additionally, because the site is located near existing residential uses,
staff is recommending the following two conditions for this development. The first being all
overnight boarding facilities are located within a soundproof building. Second prior to obtaining
any building permits from the County, written approval from the City on the location of any future
building or structures is required.
Engelbrecht showed an aerial view of the subject property noting it is anywhere from 160 to 230
feet from residential uses, which is the reason for wanting to implement the soundproofing
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 20, 2020
Page 5 of 10
condition. The existing north/south streets, Nex Ave and American Pharoah Drive, are over
1,000 feet apart so another north/south street is needed in this area, as well as the extension of
Grindstone Drive, which is currently stubbed. Staff recommends that all County Supplemental
requirements be fulfilled in addition to the conditions that will be recommended by staff.
Engelbrecht reiterated the applicant can request a reduction in the 200 foot setback requirement
through the County Special Exception Process.
The role of the Commission is to determine if the dog kennel and daycare facility should be
recommended for approval to City Council and then City Council will make a formal
recommendation to the Johnson County Board of Adjustments.
Staff recommends approval of an application submitted by Bryan Jensen for a conditional use
permit to allow for a dog kennel and daycare facility on Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert
Hoover Highway in unincorporated Johnson County, subject to the following additional
conditions:
1. That the overnight boarding facilities be located completely indoors within a soundproof
building; and
2. Prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City on the
location of any future building or structure (including fences) to ensure future street connectivity.
Martin asked if this application falls under the purview of needing to do Good Neighbor meeting
because this is an area surrounded by Iowa City. Hensch stated likely not because it is in
Johnson County corporate limits.
Hensch noted the Commission has looked at this parcel before for different agenda items in the
past and recalls the development to the west, the multifamily there, created a lot of stormwater
issues and runoff to the property to the south so he wants to ensure for this application the City
Urban Design Standard are met. He asked if the City have a review process as that
development occurs to make sure that happens. Russett stated that since this parcel is over two
acres and a non-residential use is proposed, the City would review the site plan. Since it's not
being subdivided at this time, they would look at it to ensure compliance with Urban Design
Standards, which includes stormwater management.
Hensch's second question is mostly just an education piece for the Commission on a Conditional
Use Permit, once that's granted, does it go on in perpetuity with the property regardless if the
property changes hand, or if the use ceases for at least a year. Russett stated she is not entirely
sure if it's in perpetuity or if they need to be renewed. She did note if there are any issues with
the use after it's built such as complaints from neighbors, for whatever reasons, it can come back
to the County Board of Adjustments for review.
Craig stated she was going to ask about the good neighbor policy as well because it does seem
there are a lot of people that live within throwing distance of the new dog kennel and the
Commission doesn't know what kind of information the neighbors are going to get about this
proposal or not. That concerns her as the City limits are to the east and the west. She has
concerns about all the exceptions that they're asking, it's smaller than the Johnson County Code
says it should be, they're asking for an exception to the setback, it's in the middle of all this
residential. Yes there is commercial on the corner but then there is multifamily housing, and it
just feels like this whole piece should hook up to the other residential property on east. It doesn't
seem logical to her that they're going to plunk down what she sees as a commercial use in the
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 20, 2020
Page 6 of 10
middle of what is currently residential and most logically would stay residential. She noted she
drove out there today and it's a very attractive looking multifamily housing unit.
Craig also questioned, it may not have anything to do with their decision making, but they talk
about how they're going to use existing water and septic which also serves the house. Currently,
it serves both houses and also one driveway is now going to serve the houses and 50 people a
day coming to drop off their dogs. Russett noted she can't speak to that, it will have to be
reviewed at the site plan stage and they would have to meet the well water and septic
requirements but the City would have requirements in terms of our Urban Design Standards and
ensuring that if this area's annexed it could be connected to City water and sewer. Craig asked if
this application was in the City limits would staff still be approving it.
Hensch stated about a year ago the Commission did approve a rezoning for a dog kennel
operation at the north east corner of Dodge Street. Townsend remembered but noted that
wasn't in the middle of a residential area, it was an area with a lot of other commercial buildings
around it, as opposed to this one, which is in a residential area.
Signs noted the Code called for a 200 -foot setback from all property lines and looking at the map
he doesn't see any way in the world they're going to be even close to that setback from the
property lines. Additionally, the report made reference of the need for connectivity to Grindstone
and the possible need to have another street coming off of Herbert Hoover. If that new building is
built smack in the middle of that parcel the other little building that's existing will make it hard to
meet that connectivity. Russett said they would like see Grindstone connect with Nex Avenue.
She also acknowledged with the existing structures having a north/south street may be difficult,
but that's why they want to review the site plan because the location map and the concept that
they've provided is a very rough concept. Signs asked if the site plan review would come back
before the Commission or is that just a staff level review? Russett stated it would be a staff level
review.
Engelbrecht reiterated the applicant can request a reduction of the setbacks. Townsend asked
regarding the setbacks, would those proposed come back before the Commission. Russett
noted those would just go to the County Board of Adjustment.
Signs asked if this property can be further subdivided and if they did have room to take
Grindstone over to Nex Avenue and bisect the property, could it be subdivided to where
development can be done on that southern half of the property. Russett said it may need to be
rezoned, but she does believe there could be more development there. Signs noted then it puts
the structure closer to another residential area.
Russett spoke to two items that came up in the discussion. The first is the notifying the property
owners and the County doesn't have a good neighbor policy that she aware of but they do have
notification requirements. The neighbors are being notified of the County Board of Adjustment
meeting. And second, this is an unusual situation where they have City and Unincorporated
County boundaries like this and as Engelbrecht mentioned in his staff report there had been
interest in annexing this land, however the City can't annex this land because there is some
unincorporated County to the south which would create an island of unincorporated land which is
not allowed by State law.
Signs asked if that piece of property remains un -annexed for a length of time can the connection
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 20, 2020
Page 7 of 10
between Grindstone and Nex Avenue still be made and does the City have any control over that
connection and/or the development to the south of that new connection. Russett stated the City
would review any rezoning of the area which would go to the Commission and Council and any
subdivisions of this land would have to go to the Planning Commission and need to be approved
by City Council and need to meet the Urban Design Standards and street connectivity.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Jessica Plowman stated she is speaking on behalf of Bryan Jensen and Dave Jensen the
brothers that own all 14 acres of that land. Dave lives in the house the small skinny parcel to the
west, and the small structure referred to as a house is actually a garage that's probably in
disrepair and needs to be torn down. She added there is an unused well under that property that
they will utilize for the dog kennel so it doesn't utilize the same well as what's on current houses.
The other thing she wanted to address was the 200 -foot setback, she has talked to Johnson
County and they said that it shouldn't be a problem for them to get the 100 -foot setbacks. They
could fit a 60 x 100, 6000 square foot, building that is long and skinny in there and but that would
not allow for an outdoor area for the dogs to go out. So there is a high possibility that they would
take an acre of land to the east that Brian also owns with this parcel that they would take a little
bit of that to allow for the area for the dogs to relieve themselves and that would meet the 100 -
foot setback and could fit a building there. Plowman added they would make the building
soundproof; they are very sensitive to the neighbors and the noise. She also added on the east
side of the property there is a creek and that absorbs the noise a little bit.
Hensch asked if Plowman could elaborate about the soundproofing or the hours that no dogs
would be outside because sound seems to be an issue. Plowman stated after 6pm no dogs will
be kept outside, they'll be put inside for the evening. They would need evening potty breaks but
they'd go out one by one, and no group of animals will not be left out after 6pm. They're all be
housed inside overnight and stay inside until 7am.
Hensch acknowledged it doesn't occur at this level right now, but if the Board of Adjustment
asked for some shrubs or trees or something to add for an additional sound barrier, is that
something they would not object to. Plowman confirmed there would be no objections, and
noted there are so many trees out there, noting they did have some damage with the recent
storm, but there are so many trees that from the street one can't see the house and they wouldn't
be able to see this building either.
Townsend asked if there was additional land that they own then why didn't they allow enough for
those 200 -foot setbacks.
Bryan Jensen stated that setback is from the sliver to the west and his brother has three acres so
that setback is from his house. The whole area is in different parcels, there's three acres to the
west and then there's the 11 in the middle, etc.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Signs moved to recommend approval of CREZ20-0002, an application submitted by Bryan
Jensen for a conditional use permit to allow for a dog kennel and daycare facility on Lot 2
and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway in unincorporated Johnson County, subject
to the following conditions:
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 20, 2020
Page 8 of 10
1. That the overnight boarding facilities be located completely indoors within a
soundproof building; and
2. Prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City
on the location of any future building or structure (including fences) to ensure future
street connectivity.
Nolte seconded the motion.
Hensch noted they have to remember the layers of review of the Code that are above them on
this and that the Board of Adjustment will hear this also since this is in the unincorporated area,
and it is an existing structure that exists where the special exception can be granted by the
Board of Adjustment for that 100 -foot setback. He also thinks they addressed it pretty clearly
about the soundproofing, their willingness to do some plantings or something to assist with that.
He knows with a lot of development around there, the boarding of pets is really important and
there is a shortage of that Iowa City as a pet owner, therefore, this is something that he will be
supporting.
Craig noted big concerns about the flow of residential as a beautiful new residential building is
there to the west, and then there's going to be what most people would perceive as a
commercial use before the residential picks up again. Additionally, the fact that this is
surrounded on two sides by Iowa City she is having a hard time getting over those two things.
Hensch understands that but noted they have to remember that any platting to occur must be
approved by others and those issues will be addressed. They are talking about a conditional use
here and shouldn't get too overly concerned on things that have to happen yet in the future.
Townsend added her concern is not everyone is a pet owner, and not having that 200 -foot
setback between the residences and this new use would be a concern to her.
A vote was taken and the motion failed 3-3 (Craig, Signs and Townsend dissenting).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: AUGUST 8,2020:
Craig moved to approve the meeting minutes of August 8, 2020.
Townsend seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
0IOM
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 20, 2020
Page 9of10
ADJOURNMENT:
Townsend moved to adjourn.
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020-2021
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
HENSCH, MIKE
MARTIN, FI-111FEBE
NOLTE, MARK
SIGNS, MARK
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member