HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-07-2020 Climate Action CommissionOlowa City Climate Action Commission Agenda
Monday, December 7, 2020, 3:30 — 5:00 p.m
Electronic Meeting, Zoom Platform
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.
You can participate in the meeting and can comment on an agenda
item by going to https://zoom.us/meeting/register/
tJApdeyrrz8iGdULAdNkFU6ag8l8rnw2ZYMZ via the Internet to visit
the Zoom meeting's registration page and submit the required
information.
Once approved, you will receive an email message with a link to join
the meeting. If you are asked for a meeting or webinar ID, enter the
ID number found in the email. A meeting password may also be
included in the email. Enter the password when prompted.
If you have no computer or smartphone, or a computer without a
microphone, you may call in by telephone by dialing (312) 626-6799.
When prompted, enter the meeting or webinar ID. The ID number for
this meeting is: 944 2531 4931 0
Once connected, you may dial *9 to "raise your hand," letting the
meeting host know you would like to speak. Providing comments in
person is not an option.
Meeting Agenda:
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Nov. 2, 2020 minutes
4. Public Comment of items not on the Agenda
-Commentators shall address the Commission for no more than 3 minutes. Commissioners shall
not engage in discussion with the public concerning said items.
5. Staff Announcements
a. Action items from last meeting
b. Climate Action and Outreach Office Updates (see attachment)
6. Old Business:
a. Development Density and Carbon Emissions Draft Memo
b. Implicit bias training discussion
7. New Business:
a. Discussion of new members and commission chair
b. Discussion of idea to restructure working groups
c. Update on working groups
i. Buildings (Krieger, Karr, Soglin)
ii. Transportation (Leckband, Giannakouros, Grimm)
iii. Outreach (Krieger, Fraser, Holbrook, Bradley)
iv. Equity/Adaptation (Tate, Hutchinson)
v. Waste (Bradley, Grimm)
8. Recap of actionable items for commission, working groups, and staff
9. Adjourn
If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact
Sarah Gardner, Climate Action Engagement Specialist, at 319-356-6162 or at sarah-gardner@iowa-
cit .or . Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs.
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
IOWA CITY CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 2, 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, Ben Grimm, John
Fraser, GT Karr, Matt Krieger, Jesse Leckband, Becky Soglin, Eric
Tate
MEMBERS ABSENT: Kasey Hutchinson, Grace Holbrook
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Gardner, Ashley Monroe
OTHERS PRESENT: Ayman Sharif, Nancy Porter
CALL TO ORDER:
Krieger called the meeting to order.
APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 5, 2020 MINUTES:
Fraser moved to approve the minutes from October 5, 2020.
Leckband seconded the motion and a vote was taken. The motion passed 8-0. (Giannakouros
and Holbrook not present for the vote).
PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Ayman Sharif noted he is so grateful for the for the energy that the Climate Action Commission
and climate action movement he is witnessing in Iowa City and in the region as well, including
Cedar Rapids and Des Moines. He is very excited to see a future where climate action and
adaptation is making a change.
Climate Action Commission
November 212020
Page 2of8
STAFF/COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Action Items from last meeting: Gardner stated the first item was for working groups to
submit updates that they'd like included in the agenda, noting it didn't happen this last month.
She offered a reminder for next month's agenda: if any working groups would like to submit
updates to include, please get them to her by November 30. That gives her enough time to get
them into the agenda. Gardner added the reason to submit working group updates is because
they've been running out of time at the end of the meetings to go through them. If they have
them printed in the agenda that at least gives some sense to share with one another about the
work the working groups are doing.
Soglin suggested maybe introducing a routine of sending out a reminder of the deadline a few
days after the Commission meeting. Then, if working groups have an update, to provide it to
Gardner. Gardner said she would add this suggestion to the action items for this meeting.
Gardner stated the other action item from last meeting was for the equity and adaptation
working group to take a closer look at the letter that was submitted regarding tree removal. She
said they could give an update later in the meeting.
Voluntary Bias and Equity Training for Boards and Commissions on Dec. 2: Gardner said
this is an upcoming training opportunity they wanted to make the commission members aware
of, noting it is voluntary. Monroe added the Division of Equity and Human Rights has typically
run the trainings in the past for the Human Rights Commission, but they are opening it up to
additional board and commission members. Stephanie Bowers will send out a press release
through the City channels with more details about the training and how to participate online.
Krieger asked if this is more specific to how boards and commissions operate, stating he
recently attended another kind of general bias training and wondered if this one is different.
Monroe replied she imagines there will be some connection made between the equity and how
boards and commissions operate, but she is not certain what components are educational in
nature about bias in equity initiatives and what portion of that training is focused on commission
work specifically.
Fraser noted they spend a lot of time talking about both these topics. It would be easy to say
they know all about this and have been through a lot of training and time is very valuable, but he
would suggest that as many of them attend this as possible because it will add value to their
sincere efforts to have a focus on equity in all that they do. They may pick up some little thing
that they really hadn't thought about before, and if it's specifically oriented toward commissions
and boards that's even better. Fraser believes training in this area is very important and
participating would present the right message to the public.
Schedule presentation of Methane Study results: Gardner reminded the Commission as
part of the Climate Action Plan a consultant was brought in to take a look at the methane
emissions from the landfill. They are nearing the end of that project and interested in presenting
on the results to the Climate Commission. Gardner asked if the Commission wanted to see this
presentation in December or wait to January. Krieger noted they don't have a special topic for
next month yet so that might work. Monroe said they will check on the firm's availability and
noted there's a lot of information as the study also encompasses the wastewater treatment plant
and various configurations of projects or opportunities for the future.
2
Climate Action Commission
November 21 2020
Page 3of8
Krieger noted it would also be helpful if there is a summary document in the packet ahead of the
meeting. Monroe said they will be sure to include that.
Soglin said if the Commission will have some new members beginning in January and this is
something that's going to require a discussion over several meetings, maybe they would want to
hold off until January. Krieger agreed and decided to wait until January to have this
presentation.
Updated Action Plan report: Monroe stated that based upon feedback from the Commission
at a previous meeting there was interest in providing additional opportunities to focus some of
the Commission actions, or the working group actions, on what is needed to move ahead on
some of the Climate Action Plan items. Monroe showed the report on the individual actions,
identifying the actions needing Commission input, such as building incentives or building
education projects, etc., at the bottom of each section. She asked the Commission to please let
staff know if they would like to see it in another way. Monroe noted they have updates and
continued progress in many of these items in the report.
Monroe also wanted to note in the agenda packet staff included an example of their new park
rental agreements for athletic facilities just in case there was an interest in the Commission
looking at what a green rentals policy might be for the general public. They wanted to start with
a pilot for athletic facilities during sports tournaments because those were existing and easy to
incorporate. She added the same holds true for electric vehicle preference for the purchasing of
vehicles, they revised their policy to state that the first preference is going to be to consider
electric and other efficient vehicles. Monroe noted while it's not a major difference in their
procedures, it at least outlines it in print and it's very clear to staff that's reviewing the policy
what the plan is.
OLD BUSINESS:
Building Density and GHG Emission: Krieger noted a draft memo on building density and
greenhouse gas emissions was included in the agenda packet. It was created in response to a
request from City Council. As the Council reviews requests from developers on projects, or for
requests for bonuses related to higher density, they're trying to get a better understanding
around the impact of those requests on the Climate Action Plan and greenhouse gas emissions.
This project was deferred to the Buildings Working Group and that working group has been
working for several months now putting together this memo. The memo outlines the initial scope
and some of the general findings. He added the Buildings Working Group did look beyond the
initial two actions in the action plan that were initially discussed as part of this issue related to
energy efficiency, new buildings and contiguous growth by also looking across all the actions
just to see if there was an impact that this issue had on those. Therefore, in this memo they
really dove into each of those and provided a summary of what their perspective was on that.
Krieger reiterated this is a draft and they would be interested in hearing any other additional
comments or feedback, suggested revisions, etc. The Buildings Working Group will revisit this at
their meeting Thursday and then bring it back to the Commission at the December meeting for
final approval and a vote to send the memo onto Council.
Gardner thanked the Buildings Working Group for all the hard work they put into the memo.
01
Climate Action Commission
November 2, 2020
Page 4 of 8
Krieger acknowledged there was a lot of good discussion amongst the group as they all have
different perspectives from different backgrounds.
Discussion of making a formal statement around equity:
"Racial discrimination and social injustice have no place in our nation or Iowa City. They
produce disparities in health, poverty, and decision -making power that increase vulnerabilities to
climate change and hazards. As Climate Commission members, it is our responsibility that the
climate actions we advocate serve to diminish these disparities. We acknowledge that the
stakes of climate change are highest for the most vulnerable members of our community. We
commit to ensuring that equitable approaches and social justice are integral to our discussions,
decision -making, and actions. We recognize that public engagement must include diversity. To
assess equity in the climate actions we consider, we will use the equity and co -benefit review
checklist and related tools, and welcome guidance from the City's Human Rights Commission
and the City's Office of Equity and Human Rights."
Soglin noted when they discussed this last time, Tate raised some really good points about
complexity and depth of racial injustice, so they wanted to reflect that better in the statement.
Tate stated he liked the updated statement and that second sentence in particular where it says
disparities and health poverty and decision -making power. Soglin noted those words are more
than part of setting the background and how imperative it is that they act with thoughtfulness in
this regard. She added the statement does not replace actual action but as a group they felt it
was important to have a statement.
Tate made the motion to approve the revised formal statement regarding equity.
Karr seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS:
Update on Working Groups:
Buildings (Krieger, Karr, Soglin) —Krieger noted they were working on density and their memo.
Transportation (Leckband, Giannakouros) — no updates
Outreach (Krieger, Fraser, Holbrook, Bradley) — Gardner stated they reviewed statistics from
the Climate Fest, noting that they had over 35,000 views of videos, and nearly that number of
views for social posts. They are starting to think ahead to next year's Climate Fest. Recognizing
that the chances of having a widely distributed vaccine in time to start planning is probably is not
highly likely, the idea for next year's Climate Fest is to begin planning something that can be
deployed virtually but converted to a live event should circumstances allow. They also talked
about the launch of the Climate Ambassador Program, which is underway at this point and
they're having good meetings with that group. They are starting to think ahead to other ways
that climate ambassadors can be involved in efforts once they complete the training. The
working group also talked about the marketing RFP. There was a wide range of prices in terms
of what was submitted and also services. However, they are getting ready to move into the next
phase of the review, which is scheduling interviews. Finally, the outreach group also took a look
at the letter on tree removal that was submitted and did some thinking and some discussing
about future outreach efforts connected to other projects that they might anticipate getting
4
Climate Action Commission
November 2, 2020
Page 5of8
similar negative pushback on. They discussed ways that they might gather resources to help get
the word out as to why those steps are necessary and what they hope to achieve with them.
Krieger agreed there was a good discussion around a multi -pronged approach, one involving
education, but education through multiple means/modes. So for people who are active in those
areas, or trying to get beyond just the normal means of communication and then also doing that
outreach ahead of time, rather than just sort of reactionary.
Krieger added one more thing is that the Outreach Working Group is going to be going through
the educational based actions that are in the accelerated actions and just looking at what the
outreach group could be doing to help support that. He noted they are looking at it through the
lens of responsibility, whether it is the Commission's responsibility or work the working group
could be doing, and also looking at the climate ambassadors in terms of what might be needed
from them and thinking more specifically about different layers of interaction and involvement.
Equity/Adaptation (Tate, Hutchinson) - no major updates from last month as a working group,
they hope to be more productive this month.
Tate would like to comment on Monroe 7s question about the trees and would say that there's
three considerations to think about. First is geography, are there certain areas of town that are
deemed higher priorities based on existing canopy. He noted equity doesn't just need to be
population based, it could be geographic, which also often aligns with population. Second is on
the cost, it appears there's going to be cost subsidies for the transportation and planting, but he
didn't see anything about the purchase of the trees. Also, he doesn't know to what extent these
costs are actually going to be a barrier. Third is outreach and how will people know about this
program, is it going to reach all property owners.
Monroe responded to Tate's comments. First, as they receive requests for vouchers, for the
Root for Trees Program, they are recording a very minimum amount of information, people are
giving their name and an email address so they can send the voucher either to the email or to
mail it to them, and the address where the trees will be planted. She noted they are taking and
reporting the addresses and putting them into a map layer. Something she has been doing is
developing a map that has emphasis on the climate initiatives and thinking about programs that
touch the projects in the climate action and adaptation plan and other City services or facilities
such as access to parks, to transportation, bus stops, etc. On the map that can be overlaid with
census data. She is adding the request for trees into that map, so they'll be able to see the
geography and what that spread looks like. In her initial review of about 200 applications she
could see a fairly good spread geographically which was positive. Regarding the costs for the
trees, they did offer a 50% discount for the tree purchase itself. For the income eligible
households, which essentially are anybody who would be eligible for the reduced rate at parks
and recreation programs or City utility discount program, they are offered a 90% discount. So at
most, even with a $250 tree, they'd only be paying $25. Monroe recognizes that's still a barrier
for some people but they did try to reduce as much as was reasonable. She added there might
be other programs where they can just flat out give away trees at some point. She was also told
that staff had planned to do some interpersonal outreach and would be walking neighborhoods
where they knew that there was potentially a lack of tree canopy and she can get a report back
on that.
Tate thanked Monroe for that and noted he would be interested in learning more about the
5
Climate Action Commission
November 2, 2020
Page 6of8
mapping project application because from an equity perspective the ability to put resources on a
map is something they've been talking about for quite a long time.
Krieger agreed and noted some of the conversations they may have on the Buildings Working
Group as they start evaluating performance and making improvements is starting to try to
understand how they can look at energy use data on a smaller more specific scale than just city
wide.
Tate noted another thing that might come out of this now that they're generating data is to see
what the incentive was, and what was the eventual uptake of that. Was the group more
representative or less representative than the overall population? The data might give some
insight on what are the financial levels of barriers for environmental projects where citizens have
to have some sort of stake in it.
Monroe is excited about it and said the end goal is to make sure that whatever they are putting
forward either has the backing and interest from the Commission or has roots in the plan itself.
Another component would be ensuring those reached are representative of persons they most
want to assist, or that there aren't any disparate impacts on any particular population. By taking
all the information they have and putting some data to those activities and making sure that
outcomes are either what they would expect or that they can learn from going forward.
Tate said he wanted to make a comment on equity in general. He has been drawn into so many
national conversations over the last four to six weeks from groups like the National Academies
of Sciences and FEMA that are really starting to try and think about how to deal with equity. One
of the things coming out of all these efforts is a persistent lack of data for being able to assess
equity, so it is important to think about building a structure in similar programs in order to collect
data. Once they have that data they can do baseline assessments.
Waste (Bradley) — No updates, but if any other commission members are interested in the
waste, an extra member might be nice.
Krieger added at the last meeting they talked about expectations around the working groups
going forward. Part of that was including a report ahead of the meeting so they can get into the
packet. He acknowledged not all the working groups are going to work at the same pace or
have the same responsibilities. As an action item for the next meeting he encouraged all the
working groups to look at the action plan and the updates Monroe provided and provide any sort
of updates or steps that they're taking to make progress on those items.
Tate noted they discussed the membership and balance of the working groups in terms of
representation.
Grimm stated with the transportation group there's not a lot going on, but within the school
district have a lot going on with waste, so he'd be happy to jump over and assist on that one.
Gardner said the ambassador trainees this coming Saturday are going to be talking about the
waste management section of the plan and she would mention serving as a community member
on that working group or others as a potential future opportunity.
10
Climate Action Commission
November 21 2020
Page 7of8
Krieger noted at the next outreach meeting they will start talking about how they can help move
additional community members to those working groups to get some additional perspective,
outside involvement, and engagement.
RECAP OF ACTIONABLE ITEMS FOR COMMISSION, WORKING GROUPS, AND STAFF:
Gardner said she will send out an email reminder a few days after this meeting with the date to
submit items for the agenda. She and Monroe will work with the methane study consultants to
check their availability for presenting in January. Commissioners can individually send
comments on the building density memo to the Building Working Group ahead of next month's
meeting and then the final copy will be brought to the December meeting to vote on. Krieger will
submit a summary of working group expectations to be included in next month's agenda packet.
All Commissioners are asked to review the work plan that was included in this month's agenda
packet. Finally, Gardner will update the working group membership to reflect new membership
in the Commission.
Soglin provided one slight clarification on the building working group: if there are comments on
their memo, please submit those to her or Krieger by this Thursday as they are meeting to
discuss it then. If that is not possible, please submit them by November 20 at the very latest,
because they're going to need some time as a group to discuss anything and also get the memo
into the packet in time for they December 7 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT:
Krieger made a motion to adjourn.
Soglin seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously.
CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020
\
\
Uri\
\
\
\
N
o
N
�
NAME
TERM EXP.
N
N
Ni
Ni
IN
IN
IN
N
N
0
NJ 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
rQ
0
0
NJ
0
Madeleine
O/E
X
Bradley12
31 2022
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
John Fraser
12/31/2020
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Stratis
X
X
Giannakouros
UI Re p
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Grace Holbrook
12/31/2021
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
0
Climate Action Commission
November 21 2020
Page 8of8
Kasey
Hutchinson
12 31 2022
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
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
O/E
X
X
X
Jesse Leckband
MidAmerican
Re p
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
Katie Sarsfield
12/31/2020
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
--
--
--
Becky Soglin
12/31/2022
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Eric Tate
12/31/2021
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
Ben Grimm
10/31/2022
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
X
X
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM=No
Meeting
-- -- = Not a Member
Climate Action and Outreach Office Updates: Oct./Nov. 2020
Recent Activity
Community -wide Climate Action
• TIF-funded climate action incentive program launched
o Outreach letter and one -sheet developed
o Focus on urban renewal areas where TIF incentives will sunset first; Meetings held with
Sycamore Mall and P&G
o Funding available (up to $250,000) for HVAC and lighting system upgrades, building
automation controls, solar power and water heating systems, envelope improvements,
mechanical upgrades, and alternative refrigerant systems
� Green Iowa AmeriCorps
o Shift toward Home Energy Kit delivery (contactless) instead of Home Energy Audits due
to COVID conditions
0 162 audits/energy kit deliveries so far
0 41 education/outreach events so far
• Energy Efficiency Outreach
o Parade of Homes Entry Sponsorship
■ Working in partnership with the HBA, Iowa City will sponsor a home showcasing
energy efficient design; application in development
o Planning underway for Earth Day Neighborhood Energy Blitz
■ Exploring partnerships with school environmental clubs, AmeriCorps to enable
door-to-door campaign
Marketing RFP
• Interviews with two highest scoring firms on 11/30 and 12/2/20
• References checked for both firms
• Consensus meeting for interview panel scheduled for next week
Climate Ambassadors
• First cohort will complete training on 12/19
• Plans underway to recruit second cohort from first batch of applicants and begin training in
January
Current Grant Projects
• IEDA-Eastern Iowa EV Readiness Planning
o Second steering committee meeting held 11/17
o Existing conditions report generated
o Stakeholder meeting planned for January
• Heartland Carbon Sequestration
o Draft Iowa City Carbon Management Plan received and under review
Staffing
• Part time communication assistant hired: Bridget Williams
• Interviews underway with finalist candidates for Climate Action Analyst position
Ongoing Projects
Equity Outreach Program
• Updated/simplified Community Based Organizations (CBO) and stakeholder list, presented to
DEI director for review
• Updating contacts for all CBOs
• Shortened report being drafted for review
Implementation of Accelerating Iowa City's Climate Actions, tracking and reporting
• Continuing to work the plan for the 2020 actions
• Starting to think ahead to 2021 (Phase 2) goals
Reporting and Metrics
• 2019 community -wide GHG inventory completed
• Data collection for CAAP metrics for prior two years finalized
Communications (with part-time Sustainability Communications Assistance)
• Ongoing monthly Sustainability Newsletter
• Second annual update on CAAP completed & included in December newsletter
• Climate Action Quiz based on toolkit in development to launch in January
o Participants will have results emailed to them with side -by -side pie charts showing their
areas of highest climate engagement and City's emissions profile, along with New Year
resolution suggestions
Municipal Energy and Climate
• Data collection for municipal utilities tracking ongoing
• Tracking water usage of municipal facilities
• Municipal GHG inventory reporting (— every 5 years)
• Staff Climate Committee— municipal climate plan
o Working with staff to incorporate GHG reductions and increasing sustainability practices
within City operations (new analyst position will take over these responsibilities)
Ongoing Sustainability Groups and Committees
• Urban Sustainability Directors Network groups
• Heartland (Midwestern) Monthly calls, annual meeting
• Johnson County Sustainability Working Group, quarterly meetings
11t 1 • •
mL ClimateActionAdatat*ionPlan
CITY OF IOWA CITY y
UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE ANNI
With robust climate action goals set in August 2019, the creation of a Climate Action Commission, the
adoption of accelerated climate actions earlier this year, and the addition of a Climate Action
Engagement Specialist to the staff, the City has carried out a series of climate action! in the form
of education, incentives, regulation, City policy, and specific projects in these key areas:
da
The City planted prairies and native
plants at its properties and some of its
parks, promoting a diverse ecosystem.
The City planted a total of 400 trees this last
year, more than doubling the previous year's
total, and launched Root for Trees to help fund trees on
residential properties.
The City awarded more than 200 Stormwater Best
Management Practices (BMP) Grants last year.
The City's housing rehab program -
continues to focus on energy efficiency, '
through projects like the solar panel
installation on a Sandusky Street home, with
low -interest loans and grants.
► Green Iowa AmeriCorps continues to improve home
energy efficiency by providing free energy audits and free
weatherizations to community members.
Applicants from three Iowa City urban renewal areas are
eligible for up to a 50% match on energy efficiency
projects, thanks to tax increment financing.
The City's new Public Works Facility won an energy
efficiency award for its many construction innovations.
► Iowa City and two partner cities in the
Midwest received a grant to develop tools
to assess and measure carbon drawdown
efforts, such as increasing tree canopy and composting.
More than 3,300 tons of material were recycled through
the City's curbside organics program, a 50% increase
from the previous year.
Az7r, q=r!
The Iowa City Area Transit Study shared
a draft proposal in October 2020 for
system improvements incorporating
community input and best practices.
A $3 million grant from the U.S.
Department of Transportation will allow
the City to purchase and/or lease new electric buses.
The spring 2020 addition of an electric vehicle (EV)
charging station in the Tower Place parking ramp
increased the total number of public EV charging
stations in City ramps to six.
► Iowa City and five partner communities in eastern Iowa
received an Electric Vehicle Readiness Grant from the
Iowa Economic Development Authority to prepare a
plan for the wider adoption of electric vehicles.
The City revised its fleet policy to include provisions
stating a preference for electric vehicle and alternative
fuel equipment. The City's idling reduction policy
outcomes are being tracked for future reporting.
► The City applied for Gold Status as a Bicycle Friendly
Community from the League of American Bicyclists and
will be notified if awarded in 2021.
Iowa City held its first virtual Climate
I Festival in September 2020, where
the City shared information about electric
vehicles, meatless meals, and local green buildings.
► Five Iowa City businesses received Climate Action at
Work Awards from the City in September 2020, when
the program debuted.
Community Climate Action Grants were awarded in
spring 2020 to eight local entities.
The City held its first Climate Expo in November 2019 to
update the community on climate initiatives.
See climate metrics and more on the back page
Iowa City Climate Actions Goals
45%
reduction in
greenhouse
gas emissions
by 2030
NET ZERO
emissions by 2050
1r600rODO
1,400rODC
1r200rODO
Ia000a 000
Y 800,ODO
400rODO
200rODO
0
2019 Community -Wide Emissions
(metric tons of carbon dioxide emitted)
22,203
3%
Iowa City Community CO2e Totals by Sector
Electricity
■ Natural Gas
Coa I
PEI Transportation
Waste
Industrial Corn m ercia I ■ Residential' U I Power Plant
T ra n sp ortation Waste 2010 Base I i n e 2030 Target
20,50 Target Ft edu ction Tren d Li ne
For more detailed information about the City's progress on climate
action and adaptation goals: https://bit.ly/3eAB7.
Coming soon:
Revamped Iowa City transit services
Electric vehicle readiness plan
Exploration of projects to capture methane at City Landfill and Wastewater
Treatment facilities
Draft for IC CAC to review at its December 2020 meeting.
From: Iowa City Climate Action Commission, BUILDINGS WORKING GROUP
DRAFT Memo RE: Development Density and Carbon Emissions
BACKGROUND
Property developers can apply to the Iowa City staff Form -Based Code Committee, and, depending on
the request, to the City Council for `bonuses' to add height to their projects beyond the maximum base
height. In exchange for the additional height, the developers must provide prescribed community
benefits. The City Council has questioned what impact granting these requests has on overall carbon
emissions (also known as greenhouse gases or GHGs) and specifically on the Climate Action and
Adaptation Plan (CARP) they adopted in September 2018. To aid their decision -making, the City Council
asked the Climate Action Commission (CAC) to make recommendations.
SCOPE
This memo outlines the primary issues and offers advice based on the expertise of the CAC's Buildings
Working Group (BWG) members and our research, with review by the entire CAC. While BWG
members have backgrounds in planning, sustainability, architecture, construction, facilities
management and statistics, we want to be transparent that we are still limited in our ability to
comprehensively address building height issues. With that in mind, this memo offers suggestions
rather than prescriptive actions.
We considered how selected CAAP actions might be impacted by increased building height and
large-scale development projects. We examined 17 of the 35 total actions that were applicable. The
crux of the matter relates to the pros and cons of taller buildings in terms of (1) amount of GHG
emissions, (2) control of sprawl, (3) equity and community connection, and (4) the zoning code
regarding maximum height allowed.
OVERALL FINDINGS
Taller buildings (defined for our community as those above six stories) built in areas zoned for
increased density generally support goals in the city's CRAP. However, there are tradeoffs relative to
other city and community goals, and within the plans goals. At the same time, there can be co -
benefits, such as for equity and community connection. In some cases, this may require some policy
change and other deliberate action. Each development proposal must be considered individually for
its particular circumstances. We know city staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of
Adjustment and the City Council are already very mindful of many issues when reviewing development
applications. We suggest that all staff and commission/board members involved in development
decisions be trained on the CAAP goals. We also recommend there be an impact assessment and trend
analysis of taller buildings and projects approved with a height bonus as they relate to the CAAP
actions at a minimum of every five years to help measure effects. Measurement would help develop a
greater understanding of the impact and assist with future decision -making. As city staff noted in
discussions, other projects can significantly affect GHG emissions in the city core; however, this memo
focuses on the specific inquiry from City Council to the Buildings Working Group to address the impact
of taller buildings and greenhouse gas emissions.
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
Embodied Emissions vs Operational Emissions
Embodied carbon includes emissions related to project procurement and construction while
operational emissions are those GHG emissions attributed to day-to-day use. The CAAP is based on
operational GHG emissions within the community, and the metrics are operational or consumption
based. Some of the plan actions also address emissions beyond the community borders, such as the
Sustainable Lifestyle actions related to regional and global food production. The embodied carbon of
buildings fits within the latter category as the majority of building materials installed in Iowa City is
harvested or sourced, manufactured, and shipped from outside the community. A preliminary review
of embodied carbon is included in this memo, but we recognize this is a rapidly developing area of
research for the building industry.
What Scale of Development is Considered "Large" or "Tall"?
The zoning code limits building heights based on location; but frequently, the request for height
bonuses are to build above a six -story maximum height. At the same time, the Federal Aviation
Administration and the community's airport flight paths limit buildings in Iowa City's downtown core to
fewer than 20 stories depending on the specific site location. This is important to understand because
much of the available research reviews building size based on a much larger scale, comparing buildings
anywhere from 3 stories to 100+ stories, which is well beyond the scope of the City Council's request.
Density Impacts on Affordability, Inclusion, and Equity
Affordability and equity are also crucial considerations. Taller buildings constructed near the
downtown core are located on more desirable properties and thus the higher value of those
properties makes development more expensive. A recent project downtown was purchased for the
highest cost per square foot of any property in Johnson County. That, in turn, translates to higher
purchase costs and rent rates for smaller square footage. More expensive housing in the
downtown/near downtown neighborhoods then pushes affordable housing outward to other areas of
the community, not allowing for people of diverse backgrounds and incomes to benefit from the more
compact walkable neighborhood and services provided downtown.
RECOMMENDATIONS: The BWG recommends the impact of land and development costs on
affordable housing in the community should be tracked over time to evaluate trends. The Riverfront
Crossing Form -based Code already includes an affordable housing requirement for residential
development. We also recommend affordable housing units be incorporated into developments
throughout downtown/near downtown (not just in the Riverfront Crossing District) to offer those
benefits to a more diverse population rather than the 'fee in lieu of being the default solution. A
height bonus is part of existing options for added affordable housing.
ANALYSIS OF CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN (CAAP) GOALS
The analysis outlined below reviews development density through the framework of the applicable 17
CAAP actions. Resources that helped shape our recommendations were more readily available for
some actions than others. Generally, our review showed that in relation to the CAAP there are more
benefits to denser, taller buildings than negative impacts.
Buildings Action 1.3 — Increase Energy Efficiency in New Buildings
Building elements that most impact energy efficiency are the mechanical and electrical systems and
the building envelope: wall materials, thermal insulation, air barriers, and openings (doors, windows,
and louvers).
A taller building can stack the same amount of living space into a smaller area as numerous shorter
buildings spread out over a larger area. This stacking reduces exposure to elements and provides more
insulation to each living unit within the structure. For example, imagine 10 single-family homes on one
block as 10 cubes, each with six sides that need to be insulated and protected from the weather. Now
imagine the same 10 homes as apartments stacked on top of each other. The top and bottom of each
cube are now protected from the elements, reducing the amount of materials and insulation needed
per unit. Typically, less energy is then needed to heat and cool those homes within the taller building.
This is advantageous for both operational and embodied carbon emissions.
Compared to many existing buildings in the community that were less concerned with GHG emissions
when they were constructed and may have lower performing envelopes, glazing, insulation, etc., new
buildings have the ability to control those elements that may be installed for the lifetime of the
building. New buildings can also take advantage of the latest technology and install more efficient
mechanical and electrical systems. The question is whether an owner or developer will decide to install
more efficient systems. Whether new buildings are short or tall is not the deciding factor; it's whether
there is a drive or incentive to install higher performing systems.
The market can sometimes drive this --for example, if home seekers know their utility bills will cost less
because a home is more efficient, that might be a driver for purchasing/renting the home. Most often,
the biggest drivers to installing more efficient systems are initial cost or policy, regulation that does or
does not require it, and any incentives. Examples from other cities show that an incentive program
that offsets initial costs and streamlines the regulatory approval process helps overcome barriers to
enhanced energy efficiency and performance. Iowa City currently has an incentive program tied to TIF
monies that requires certification under a green building rating system --either LEED or NGBS.' Shorter
buildings that meet current zoning regulations don't trigger a more thorough review process and
often don't seek financing incentives that would require certification and higher performance
standards.
RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that buildings that qualify for the utility's Commercial New
Construction program or similar incentive programs should be required to participate in those
programs. Sometimes, developers are unaware of these opportunities.
Longer -term, we recommend that all development projects include a projected energy use
assessment and/or a sustainability assessment as part of the permitting process. The assessment
could be comparable to LEED, NGBS, or the City could develop a set of high-performance standards.
1 LEED or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design is a green building rating system managed by the U.S.
Green Building Council. NGBS or National Green Building Standard is a green building rating system managed by
Home Innovation Research Labs
However, at this time we have not found an "easy" assessment. More research is needed. For publicly
owned buildings, there are many examples of programs to build sustainability into such buildings.
These examples could perhaps serve to inspire standards for private development.
Buildings Action 1.4 — Increase On -site Renewable Energy Systems and Electrification
A taller, denser building has higher energy demand over the same site area of a shorter building.
With more demand but the same available space for rooftop solar arrays, the opportunity for on -site
renewable energy systems to meet the increased demand on a taller building is very limited. For
example, one recent downtown project projected that a rooftop solar array would meet only 5 to
10% of the building's total power needs. Recently updated mechanical and fire codes require more
maintenance and safety clearances around roof -mounted solar arrays. These requirements reduce
the overall area available for arrays and thus reduce the overall production capacity.
With the community's utility provider dedicated to achieving 100% renewable energy for its power
production (determined by the annual average production across its entire portfolio), achieving
higher production of on -site renewable energy is not as advantageous from an emissions points of
view as it would be in a community that is supplied more by fossil -fuels on average. At the same time,
solar can provide service when wind power from the utility is not available. The local utility will
maintain some coal and/or natural gas plants so they can maintain a stable baseload of power, and
there can be financial savings over the long run for buildings owners who use solar. It may be more
important in the Iowa City community to convert building systems from natural gas to electrical
power. Taller buildings with distributed systems tend to have mechanical systems that are electrical
power -based, rather than natural gas -based, to minimize the number of gas meters and lines running
through the building and to eliminate additional trades and materials in the project. While there is not
documented evidence that shorter buildings (i.e. six stories or less) use natural gas more often than
electrified systems, it could be more likely and should be reviewed further.
Buildings Action 1.6 —Support Energy Benchmarking Tools
Energy benchmarking and management tools are useful for at least two main reasons: they provide a
reference for the market to compare projects and help identify trends and opportunities for
decreasing energy use and/or costs.
One significant disadvantage for some large developments relates to electrical utility meters.
Oftentimes property owners prefer that each tenant pay their own utilities, determined by the meter
serving an individual's apartment/condo. When this is the case, the whole building can't be tracked in
the benchmarking program; each individual unit would need to be added to the tracking program by
the utility account holder. It makes for a very burdensome activity that's unlikely to be comprehensive
(people may not have time, interest or computer/language skills to enter their own data and they may
also lack incentives to do so). Alternatively, the City or the building owner should work with the utility
to make this data readily available and work around barriers that rely on individual input.
RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that energy benchmarking opportunities be extended through
2 https://www.usgbc.org/articles/florida-city-passes-green-building-ordinance
4
educational/outreach to developers of local properties, no matter the size or age of the property. We
also recommend the City, community partners, and property owners advocate for a mandatory
energy benchmarking program.
Transportation Action 2.1— Increase Use of Public Transit Systems
There are many factors related to reducing vehicle miles traveled and overall transportation related
GHG emissions. Land development and density are major factors. When more people live in a
denser area with services nearby, they could potentially drive less and have fewer vehicles per
household. That decision is often dependent on mixed -use development — having a mix of housing,
workspace, and desirable services and amenities nearby.' Another major factor is the availability of
public transit. When a robust transit system is available, more people use it.
If more people are concentrated in denser areas rather than in outlying areas, it could potentially
shift the use of the public transit system. There might be an increased transit need within the denser
area for accessing destinations, especially those more than one mile from the core as well as for
outbound travel to access outlying areas even further away. We wanted to raise these observations
and we realize the city's Transit and Resource Management Department is knowledgeable about
trends seen in cities of similar size. A transit primer for small cities in Oregon noted that linear routes
can better serve downtowns versus circuitous routes (p. 34 of "Transit in Small Cities.").4
Transportation Action 2.2 —Embrace Electric Vehicles, Alternative Fuel Vehicles, and Other
Emerging Technologies
Parking provisions for low-rise development (six stories or fewer) and mid to high-rise development
(seven or more stories) have taken two different paths in our community. A cursory review of parking
requirements for low-rise (and less dense) development often results in spaces provided at -grade in
surface parking lots adjacent to the buildings or as one-story of parking located below the building. A
building's residents may use on -street parking when the development doesn't provide enough space
to meet needs. High-rise development (higher density) typically includes multiple levels of parking in
the lower and/or underground floors of the buildings to meet the city's parking zoning ordinance
and/or they are located near managed parking structures and are able to take advantage of
community -based approaches to off-street parking. These examples outline the potential benefits and
synergies of taller/denser development and the importance of its location.
In addition, it may be easier and less expensive to install electric vehicle (EV) charging stations within
parking structures where the required infrastructure is nearby compared to surface parking lots
where infrastructure needs to be added. This would seem to make a case for taller/denser
development. When households in denser neighborhoods reduce their number of vehicles, they tend
to increase use of car -sharing services. There's a potential opportunity to increase EV use in the
community by supporting and transitioning car -sharing services to electric vehicles.
3 The National Academies Press, Transportation Research Board Special Report 298, "Driving and the Built
Environment. The Effects of Compact Development on Motorized Travel, Energy Use, and CO2 Emissions".
4 "Transit in Small Cities" Primer: https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/RPTD/RPTD/`2ODocument%20Library/transit-
faci l ities-i n-sma I I -cities. pdf
Transportation Action 2.3 — Increase Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation
Similar to Transportation Action 2.2 denser developments in already developed areas reduce the need
for vehicles and/or use of vehicles and their contributing GHG emissions. As outlined in the CRAP, more
walkable neighborhoods increase the likelihood of walking and bicycling. Developers should continue to
be encouraged/required to install bicycle parking and storage options that are protected from weather
for the residents of the property.
Transportation Action 2.4 — Increase Compact and Contiguous Development
Taller, denser development in developed areas of the community such as downtown or the Riverfront
Crossings neighborhoods directly meets the intent of this action although it is not limited to larger
developments. Compact development includes the "Five Ds": density, diversity, design, destination,
and distance to travel ("Land Use and Driving" by the Urban Land Institute).' Mixed -use (i.e. diverse)
developments, a combination of residential and commercial uses within the same property, help
reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) across the community and should be encouraged and
incentivized. Studies show mixed -used development and other features (design, etc.) can reduce VMT
considerably within a particular area and by extension lower the average VMT throughout a
community. Factors related to the Five Ds and VMT reduction were studied by a Massachusetts State
Smart Transportation Initiative (2017), which found a 4.7% reduction through just mixed -use
development. As this type of development is usually done in conjunction with other measures (e.g.
density and sidewalk coverage), VMT reductions are even higher, around 16%.6 A study by the Arizona
Department of Transportation showed VMT can be reduced by approximately 25% through mixed -use
development.' These reductions then translate to reduced greenhouse gas emissions and potentially
savings in road maintenance.
Transportation Action 2.6 — Manage Parking Options
The recommendations associated with this action in the CAAP include reducing parking requirements
for development projects and incorporating more comprehensive approaches to alternative modes of
transportation for residents, including car -sharing, carpools, bicycles, and walking. As part of the site
and/or design reviews for projects, city staff could work with developers to encourage the
development of comprehensive transportation plans for their projects. It's our understanding staff plan
to re-evaluate city parking standards.
A new report (October 2020) from the Brookings Institute, "Connecting People and Places: Exploring
New Measures of Travel Behavior," addresses issues related to most of the Transportation actions and
topics discussed above. The report shows how digital data and new tools can help large metro areas
(e.g. Chicago) better understand how people actually do travel, and thus better inform municipal
transportation -related decision -making and planning.' While these geographic areas have much larger
populations than our metro area, the findings and discussion about geospatial data could help in Iowa
City's efforts.
s https://uIi.org/wp-content/uploads/ULI-Documents/Land-Use-and-Driving-Low-Res.pdf
6 https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/02/21/a-six-point-plan-to-cut-traffic/
' https://archives.huduser.gov/scrc/sustainabiIity/newsIetter_092712_3.html
s https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Corridors-of-Demand.pdf#page=17
Waste Action 3.1— Increase Recycling at Multi -Family Properties
Unlike single-family residences, larger multi -family properties do not have curbside pick-up provided
by city services. Recycling at these properties must be contracted through independent hauling
companies, which involves management and expenses that have been barriers to wider adoption by
local developers. In 2016, the City passed a resolution, which is now in effect, requiring all multi -family
facilities larger than four units to provide recycling for their tenants. The policy is enforced through
rental permit renewals. We applaud the City for taking action to fulfill this need.
Waste Action 3.2 — Increase Composting of Organics
See Waste Action 3.1 for similar issues. While recycling has been mandated for multi -family properties,
composting has not. While we understand composting is a newer service in the community and is
growing, we recommend a similar approach to recycling in the future.
Waste Action 3.3 — Reduce Waste at the Source
Consumption is a personal choice, so there is limited impact on this issue; however, larger, denser
developments are opportunities to make a broader impact on source reduction and thus reduce GHG
emissions. With more people living in one location, education of the residents in multi -family facilities
could be more efficient and effective.
Waste Action 3.4 — Establish Partnerships to Divert Construction Waste from the Landfill
Large developments with larger mass have higher volumes of construction waste than smaller projects
and thus a greater potential impact if that waste could be diverted from the landfill. There is a unique
opportunity to partner with developers of these projects to approach waste diversion in a more
comprehensive way. Prefabrication can cut down on on -site waste. However, locally, most
prefabrication (prefab) has been limited to the building envelope on large-scale multi -unit projects, per
local architects' and builders' experience.
Previously developed sites, such as those located in the downtown core and nearby neighborhoods,
have more demolition waste as a result of removing existing structures, and this is an added concern as
the downtown area is redeveloped. As with cardboard recycling, it is likely that a mandate along with
facilitating the ease of depositing of debris (e.g. specific wood and masonry deposit areas at former bus
barn) would divert more construction waste from the landfill.
RECOMMENDATION: A waste management plan could be required as part of the permitting process. Or
alternatively, the City could provide the service to these construction projects as an incentive to divert
waste from the landfill. Involving Habitat Restore and expanding their capacity to receive materials
could also benefit. The action should also be expanded to explicitly include demolition waste, not just
construction waste.
Adaptation Action 4.5 — Assess Citywide and Neighborhood Stormwater Management
Developments of any size should be carefully reviewed for their stormwater management plans.
While not always the case, taller, denser buildings tend to have zero lot lines based on their location,
so most stormwater is collected on the roof. This stormwater could be managed in such a way as to
slow outflow to the city's stormwater system through collection and holding for a period of time in at -
grade or below -grade storage and water quality tanks or through use of green roofs to absorb the
water. Currently, the City's Public Works uses a standard that is believed to meet this goal. Smaller,
less dense developments might have more surface parking and thus more hardscape and stormwater
to manage, but potentially could have more site/landscape to infiltrate the stormwater on -site.
Adaptation Action 4.6 —Expand Iowa City's Tree Canopy
Because larger developments tend to have zero lot lines with little or no open space, there are fewer
opportunities for trees on the property as compared to smaller developments. We recommend city
staff work with developers to identify opportunities for tree planting as part of the site plan review
within the property boundaries and/or within the right-of-way. Trees can help capture carbon as
outlined in the CAAP. City staff is currently reviewing landscaping and street tree regulations.
Sustainable Lifestyle Action 5.1— Encourage a Plant -Rich Diet
Compared to single-family residences, multi -family properties of any size could take the opportunity
to educate residents of the beneficial impacts of a plant -rich diet. More people in one location has
the potential for larger impact. Building -wide programs and events could reinforce this education
through targeted outreach.
Sustainable Lifestyle Action 5.2 — Expand Community Gardens and Access to Healthy, Local
Food Trends
Multi -family developments of all sizes generally have less access to on -site or nearby community
gardens as they tend to have less on -site open space and/or are located in denser, more developed
neighborhoods. Potential opportunities to expand community gardens for residents of these
properties would be to incorporate urban agriculture practices including roof gardens and/or indoor
vertical gardens, which could be discussed during the development review process and other
educational means. There could also be educational opportunities about access to existing community
gardens; however, this could have a negative impact on GHG emissions related to residents traveling
to the community garden locations.
Another approach could be to encourage access to local CSA's (community supported agriculture)
by designating the multi -family property as a hub for weekly distribution. This could have the
added benefit of contributing to equity, wellness and the local food economy.
Sustainable Lifestyle Action 5.3 — Encourage the Purchase of Local Products and
Responsible Purchasing
The construction of larger developments requires more materials and resources than smaller projects.
There is an opportunity to partner with, encourage, or mandate through new policies the use of
responsible purchasing standards. These types of standards are included in green building rating
systems, and the strategies could be required as part of incentives for developers. This type of
purchasing may at first glance appear to do more to reduce embodied and offsite emissions than
operational emissions. However, if durability, energy efficiency (as appropriate) and other
procurement factors are considered, there is more chance to reduce operational GHGs as well.
Iowa City Climate Action Commission
Buildings Working Group, December 2020 Meeting Report
Summary of recent activities:
1. Finalized draft of the Development Density and Carbon Emissions Memo for review by the full
commission.
2. Continued discussions with the Iowa City Area Association of Realtors on opportunities to
'green' the local Multiple Listing Service. The MLS software is complex and some building
characteristic categories are more readily available than others. Providing something like an
energy score may require expensive upgrades that would be a barrier for ICAAR. The ICAAR
representatives are going to meet internally with their committees to review the opportunities
available and other potential methods for improving residential energy performance.
3. The BWG has had preliminary discussions with MidAmerican Energy and their ability to provide
census tract data for future analysis. This could be useful in dissecting the community -wide data
to the neighborhood level to better understand where to focus future programs and efforts.
Future discussions will focus on specific uses of the data before an official request is made.
4. The BWG received an update on activities by The Johnson Clean Energy District and their efforts
on existing residential energy efficiency programs. The pandemic has forced changes in their
program as volunteers are not able to go into homes to assist with upgrades. They are focusing
more on lighting and LED upgrades and distribution.
S. The Solarize Johnson County group buy program recently wrapped up and will soon be
announcing final results.