HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-11-19 Bd Comm minutesCITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
November 19, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Airport Commission: September 12
Item Number: 5.a.
September 12, 2019
Page 1
MINUTES
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 12, 2019 — 6:00 P.M.
AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING
FINAL
Members Present: Scott Clair (arrived late), Christopher Lawrence, Bob Libby, Judy Pfohl
Members Absent: Warren Bishop
Staff Present: Eric Goers, Michael Tharp
Others Present: Carl Byers, John Moes, Pat Prior, Matt Wolford
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.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of the August 22, 2019, meeting were reviewed by Members. It was noted that the
header date is incorrect on the agenda. Libby moved to accept the minutes of the August
22, 2019, meeting as amended. Pfohl seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0,
Clair, Bishop absent.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
a. Airport Farming Operations
I. Farm Management Agreement — Tharp spoke to Members regarding
this agreement, stating that it is time to either cancel it or continue it. He
gave a brief overview of this agreement, noting that Farmers National
Company has been the farm manager, with John Yeomans being the
representative for the farm management. He finds a farmer who will plant
approximately 112 acres of crop land and the Airport gets roughly $30,000
from this agreement. Tharp noted that tonight, however, is just about
whether the Commission wants to continue with the farm management
agreement as it has been doing. Members agreed that they see no
reason to not continue with the agreement with Farmers National
Company and John Yeomans. Pfohl moved to continue the Farm
September 12, 2019
Page 2
Management agreement. Libby seconded the motion. The motion
carried 3-0, Clair and Bishop absent.
b. Airport Website Updated — Tharp asked Members if they would like to wait until
Clair arrived before having this discussion. Members agreed to move this item
down in the agenda, as needed. Returning to this discussion, Tharp spoke to the
desire to do a redesign of the Airport's web site. He stated that the team from
FUEL is present to help Members figure out what they want in this redesign.
John Moes and Pat Prior with FUEL joined the discussion, further explaining
what their role in this project would be. Members began a discussion of what
they would like to see on the Airport's web site. It was noted that from a pilot's
perspective they would want to know things like whether or not the tie downs are
free, is there overnight parking available, is there a courtesy car available, what
are the fuel prices, and general information about the area. Information about
the FBO would be useful, as well, letting pilots know what services are offered.
Jet Air's web site was recently updated by FUEL and it was noted that there
could be a lot of interaction between the two web sites.
The discussion continued, with Members sharing their ideas of what type of
information would be most helpful for those visiting the Airport. Tharp shared the
various ways the Airport gets information out to the public, such as on Facebook,
through press releases, and various web site calendars. The use of apps was
also briefly touched on, as was YouTube. Members continued to share their
ideas with the FUEL team, speaking to the marketing aspects of a redesign
project.
C. FAAIIDOT Projects
I. Obstruction Mitigation — Tharp stated that they have received back the
information they needed from property owners on tree removals and
replacements. AE Com should have a draft set of plans ready yet this
week, and Tharp stated that once received, they can get these plans to
the FAA for their approval. The bid process will start as soon as the
FAA's approval is given. Tharp stated that since this process has gone
on longer than anticipated, a special meeting or two may be needed so
they can get this project moving forward.
ii. Runway 25 Threshold Relocation — Tharp gave members a brief
rundown on this project.
iii. FY20 Iowa DOT Grant offers — Tharp spoke to these two grants, noting
that they have received them. He gave a brief history of what will be
involved in each project.
1. Consider a resolution accepting a grant offer for
rehabilitation of aircraft apron and taxiway — Lawrence moved
to accept Resolution #A19.12, accepting grant offer for
rehabilitation of aircraft apron and taxiway. Pfohl seconded
the motion. The motion carried 4.0, Bishop absent.
2. Consider a resolution accepting a grant offer for fuel facility
expansion — Lawrence moved to accept Resolution #A19-13,
accepting grant offer for fuel facility expansion. Clair
seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0, Bishop absent.
September 12, 2019
Page 3
iv. Fuel Farm Expansion — Tharp spoke briefly to this, noting that they will
delay signing the contract on this until they receive the State's signature
on the grant package. This is due to a change in the State's procedures.
1. Consider a resolution approving work order 2 with Bolton and
Monk for professional services for fuel facility expansion
project — Lawrence moved to approve Resolution #A19-14,
approving work order #2 with Bolton and Monk for
professional services for fuel facility expansion project.
Pfohl seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0, Bishop
absent.
(returned to item b. at this point in the meeting)
d. FBO / Flight Training Reports (item e. was moved up to this point in the
meeting)
L Jet Air — Wolford reviewed the monthly maintenance reports with
Members. Highlights included mowing; self-service fuel nozzle
replacement; purchase of a scissor -lift in collaboration with Jet Air;
prepping for the Sertoma breakfast. A new event this summer was the
Monarch Festival, which went over well according to Wolford. Game day
weekends have now started, which adds to the work around the Airport.
Speaking to Jet Air, Wolford noted that things are staying steady. He
noted that they are looking to add to their crew car fleet.
G. Airport Operations
i. Management — Tharp spoke briefly to this, stating that he is prepping for
the 2021 budget, and that the sub -committee will be hearing from him
soon regarding a meeting. Again he noted that a special Commission
meeting may be needed in order to keep current with budget timeframes.
ii. Budget — Tharp stated that during general pavement inspections, it was
found that there are some spots needing attention. He explained the
locations to Members, adding that he estimates around $4,000 to fix
these.
1. Flight Simulator — Tharp began the discussion, speaking to the
flyer that was created after last month's meeting. The idea is to
send flyers to current pilots and interested parties, asking them to
pre -pay, hopefully to a sufficient enough level, that the Airport
would not have to then put up all the money in order for this
project to get done. The discussion turned to what they might
expect as far as how long it would take to get the pay -back on
such a system. Tharp then spoke to several of the options
available to them, noting some of the costs involved. He also
spoke to some of the costs involved in getting the room readied to
house the system.
Members continued to share their ideas on how they should
proceed with this. At the next meeting, the sub -committee will
have a finalized flyer to mail out. Goers spoke briefly to the
language regarding the 'pre -pay' idea here. He asked how the
Commission would like to handle this and the various other
September 12, 2019
Page 4
aspects of such financing. Members agreed that they need to
move forward with getting this information out to the public.
2. FY2021 Budget —
iii. Events — Tharp stated that there are currently no events planned.
f. Commission Member Reports — None.
g. Staff Report — None.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR:
The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, October 10,
2019, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building. This is the second Thursday of the
month, versus the third.
ADJOURN:
Lawrence moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:35 P.M. Pfohl seconded the motion. The motion
carried 4-0, p absent.
1 s a a I
CHAIRPERSON DATE
September 12, 2019
Page 5
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2018-2019
Key:
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
TERM
s
N
o
o
N
a
o
0
0
0
0
0
NAME
EXP.
i
Sd
i
2
i
3
Nis
o
:-�
co
to
em
m
(o
co
co
eo
10
W
Warren
06/30/22
O
Bishop
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/E
Scott Clair
06130/23
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
X
X
X
Robert Libby
07/01/20
O/
O
X
X
X
E
X
X
!E
X
X
X
Christopher
07/01/21
Lawrence
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Judy Pfohl
06130/22
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
M
M
M
M
M
X
X
X
X
Key:
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
November 19, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Board of Adjustment: July 10
Item Number: 5.b.
MINUTES APPROVED
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
JULY 10, 2019-5:15 PM
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Connie Goeb, Zephan Hazell, Amy Pretorius
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ernie Cox, Ryan Hall
STAFF PRESENT: Susan Dulek, Jessica Lile
OTHERS PRESENT: Chris Pose, Marty Dostalik, Bill Horner, Laureen Ipsen, Barnard
Dutchik, Joe Meyers
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM.
ROLL CALL:
A brief opening statement was read by Goeb outlining the role and purpose of the Board and
the procedures that would be followed the meeting.
CONSIDER THE MAY 8. 2019 MINUTES:
Pretorius moved to approve the minutes of May 8, 2019. Hazell seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-0.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC19-05:
An application submitted by MidAmerican Energy for a special exception to allow for a basic
utility in a Commercial Office (CO -1) zone to build an electric substation located at the
southwest corner of the Prairie du Chien overpass of Interstate 80.
Lile began the staff report with an aerial view of the subject area. She also showed a zoning
map of the area noting the proposed substation area is zone CO -1 (Commercial Office) and the
surrounding area is zoned residential. Lile stated some basic utilities are allowed in Commercial
Office zones through the special exception process and must meet capability and screening
requirements. The purpose of this electric substation is to provide a more reliable base of
electric power to the surrounding area. There are currently seven other substations in Iowa City,
and substations must be located near the area where they are supplying power so they can tie
into existing transmission lines. MidAmerican held a Good Neighbor Meeting on Wednesday,
June 26 where ten people attended. Noise and making sure the neighboring property owners at
1823 Prairie du Chien Rd were compensated adequately were the biggest concerns brought up.
There were no issues with the proposed screening or landscaping plan proposed by
MidAmerican.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 2 of 12
Lile stated the role of the Board of Adjustment is to approve, approve with conditions, or deny
the application based on the facts presented. In order to approve the special exception the
Board must find it meets all applicable approval criteria. In this case it is specific criteria for
utilities not enclosed within a building and all the general standards.
With regards to Basic Utilities Not Enclosed Within a Building, in all commercial zones the RDP
and ORP zones, and the ID -C and ID -RP zones, basic utilities not enclosed within a building are
permitted only by special exception. Proposed uses must be screened from public view and
from view of any adjacent residential zones to at least the S3 screening standard. In addition,
the applicant must provide evidence that the proposed use will be compatible with surrounding
structures and uses with regard to safety, size, height, scale, location, and design, particularly
for facilities that will be located close to or within view of a residential zone. For uses located in
highly visible areas, the board may consider additional design elements such as masonry or
brick facades, and walls or fencing to improve public safety and to soften the visual impact of
the proposed use. Lile noted the applicant has submitted a landscaping plan that shows
screening above the required S3 standard. Staff recommends a condition that the proposed
substation must adhere to the landscaping plan submitted, dated June 20, 2019. Lile also
stated the proposed site is surrounded by mainly vacant land at the moment with one house
currently occupied at 1823 Prairie du Chien Road. There are also other planned and ongoing
residential projects going on in the area. Lile showed an image of the landscaping plan
submitted on June 20, 2019, at the time of the planning 31 trees will be 6 feet tall with additional
shorter plantings. At the time of maturity all plantings will be 8 feet tall or taller with 23 of the
trees being over 20 feet tall. The proposed substation would have a 158 x 210 foot footprint,
there would be two 50 foot high dead-end structures that would receive transmission lines and
50 foot high shield masts. MidAmerican proposes to surround the substation with seven foot
high chain-link fence with three strands of barbed wire which makes the fence eight feet tall in
total. The proposed substation fence will be approximately 32 feet from the south property line
and approximately 55 feet from the east property line. Lile showed a map of the area around
the proposed substation, there is potential development of townhomes to the southwest of the
proposed substation and there is a senior living center that is currently being constructed along
the Foster Road extension.
With regard to the general standards:
The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
comfort or general welfare. Lile stated the proposed substation will provide a reliable base of
power to the surrounding area. There are other substations in Iowa City near residential areas
that have operated without reported health and safety issues.
The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property
in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the
neighborhood. The applicant provided sound estimates at distances from the transformer to the
property line, each distance is from 30 to 90 meters with sound levels ranging from 34 decibels
to 43 decibels. For comparison, 40 decibels is approximately the level of noise of a library, bird
calls, and ambient urban noise. Staff measured noise levels at 1:45 pm on a weekday and
sound coming from the interstate from the west side sidewalk along Prairie du Chien nearest the
proposed substation location was approximately 65 decibels. While sound in cumulative, the
addition of anything that has a difference of more than 10 decibels results in the higher noise
level being the total noise level. So one would not be able to hear the transformer over the
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 3 of 12
sound of the interstate. Additionally there are other current development projects in the area.
Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district in
which such property is located. Past substation projects have shown that residential and other
development continues in the area. The substation at 1630 Lower Muscatine Rd was built in
1962, and residences directly next to the substation were built in 1962, 1963, 1964, & 1965. The
closest residence is approximately 60 feet from the substation fence. Another example is the
substation at 1120 Mormon Trek Blvd built in 1980, and residences directly next to the
substation were built in 1987. 1988, 1990, and 1996. The closest residence is just over 20 feet
away from the substation fence. In the case considered today, the closest residence to the
proposed substation is approximately 100 feet from the substation fence and over 120 feet from
the proposed transformer.
Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being
provided. The proposed site would be accessed off of the Foster Rd extension. The proposed
substation would be installing electricity to serve the area and improving the utilities.
Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to
minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The future intersection of Foster Rd and Prairie du
Chien Rd will be controlled by a stop sign on Foster Rd. Post -construction the proposed
substation will produce minimal traffic — typically one truck a month and more if there are issues
with the substation. What traffic it does produce would be routine maintenance and inspections
on site, not a permanent employee presence.
Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered,
the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or
standards of the zone in which it is to be located. The Commercial Office (CO -1) zone is
intended for offices, businesses, apartments, and certain public & semipublic uses. The
proposed substation exceeds the minimum setback requirements for the zone and aside from
the special exception required for a basic utility, the lot meets all other requirements.
The proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as
amended. The Comprehensive Plan supports Iowa City coordinating with private utilities in
order to serve areas under development.
Lile noted today she did receive late public comment from the neighbor at 1920 Prairie du Chien
Road and passed that onto the Board members. This residence is located across the street
from the proposed substation and his concerns were health concerns of putting a power
substation close to residences that construction of a power substation would be detrimental to
the enjoyment of his property and the addition of a power substation would lower the resale
value of his home. The resident also does not believe the construction of a power substation is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not wish the substation be granted. The
resident stated if the exception must be granted then he requests sufficient screening which
MidAmerican has agreed to already, additionally access to the substation be off Foster Road,
which is also the plan.
Staff recommends approval of EXC19-05, a special exception to allow a basic utility in a
Commercial Office (CO -1) zone to build an electric substation with the following condition:
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 4 of 12
1. The landscaping and screening around the substation must adhere to the landscaping plan
submitted, dated June 20, 2019 prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
Goeb opened the public hearing.
Chris Pose (Attorney representing MidAmerican Energy) stated they are in full agreement with
the staff report, and wanted to take some time to add to the presentation and explain what a
substation does. A substation transforms power from the transmission line level, in this case
161 volt transmission lines that have been in the area since 1967, down to a level that is 13,500
volts which can be used as distribution power to run down the city streets and power into
businesses and so forth. So substations down -step the power from the high voltage
transmission lines to a usable level, which is what the equipment is designed to do. The
transmission line is what makes this site unique and site possible for this development. There is
a line through the trees parallel with the interstate just south of the substation site, which is
where the existing transmission line is and what they are trying to tap into. On the plan
submitted shows the transmission lines coming in so the distribution lines can come out of the
substation underground. Everything coming out of the substation will be underground and this
is why it is a unique location. Pose also stated they had approached the City with this idea of
putting in a substation in this corridor because MidAmerican already owns a piece of land that is
on the east side of Prairie du Chien, just to the southeast of the present site. City staff had
suggested that parcel would not be an appropriate site even though that is a piece of land
MidAmerican had owned for a number of years, it is well situated because it is right under the
transmission line that runs through on the south part of that location. However City staff felt the
zoning aspects of that parcel didn't lend itself to the idea of rezoning to commercial and instead
suggested since Foster Road Developers just had a plat approved with rezoning complete for
the land across the street and that led MidAmerican to the subject site. MidAmerican has now
entered into a purchase agreement with the owners of Foster Road Development to buy a piece
of land zoned CO -1 and have this substation put up against the interstate. Therefore
MidAmerican followed staff's recommendation to put the substation in this particular location.
Pose next addressed the residence at 1823 Prairie du Chien which is zoned as RS -12. The
owners of that property are here this evening, MidAmerican Energy is in process of working
through good faith negotiations to acquire that particular piece of property, they are keeping
those discussion between themselves and the property owners at this time, but have full
communication with them concerning this possibility and will continue those discussions even if
this exception is approved this evening. MidAmerican has a desire to acquire that property. As
for the concerns of the owner of the property at 1920 Prairie du Chien, whose concerns were
raised today in a letter, the staff report adequately addressed the concerns. With other
substations throughout the City it has shown substations does not impede development of land,
people will built around substations. Substations are important, they need to go someplace and
they provide a source of power. Staff had asked MidAmerican to provide justification as to why
they chose this particular site, there are seven substations in Iowa City and they all rely on each
other as part of the grid, the idea being if something happens to one substation another one can
pick up the slack and what MidAmerican has identified in this corridor it would be good to have
another substation to help with the potential growth that is going to happen in the northern
corridor of the city, and in addition will provide stability to the existing systems such as if one
substation were to go out for a reason such as storm this substation would be able to pick up
the power load. Lastly Pose showed a color version of the landscape plan. He reiterated they
are in agreement with the staff report, they believe MidAmerican has met all the conditions, they
made whatever changes staff had requested of them, they intend to keep working with the
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 5 of 12
property owner at 1823 Prairie du Chien if this is approved, and they believe any concerns
raised by the property owner at 1920 Prairie du Chien were addressed by the staff report.
Hazell asked if the darker green on the landscaping plan were evergreen trees.
Marty Dostalik (Civil Engineering Consultants) noted the evergreen trees on the plan are
denoted with a star shape symbol on the inside, there is a series of eight of them along the west
side, the pink trees are crab apples, underneath were the transmission lines come in and out
there are two staggered rows of dwarf evergreens (Dwarf Colorado Spruce) which will get
around 20 to 25 feet tall, they are slow growing and need to stay low so they don't get up into
the transmission lines. On the east side there are nine evergreens, there are also some
overstory trees, a few Swamp White Oak and some hackberry's in addition to all the existing
trees on the site, to the west there is brush, shrubs and undergrowth trees.
Hazell noted the plan looks good however if they are not using evergreen trees then they are
not providing screening year round, but it appears this is comprehensive.
Goeb asked how bit the entire property is. Dostalik said it is 3.1 acres. Goeb asked if all the
substations have fences with the barbed wire and Dostalik stated that is required by the
National Electric Safety Code.
Bill Horner (718 Perry Court) has been a resident of Iowa City since 1965 but is moving to 750
East Foster Road, Unit 113 which is in Lot 3 of new Vintage Cooperative. As the Cooperative it
has been a three year process of getting the land owners and developers together to create a
developers agreement that was approved by the consul on July 17, 2018. It consisted of Foster
Road Developers, Vintage Cooperative of Iowa City, and Ewing Development Services of Pella,
Iowa to construct this building. The good neighbor meeting records show notice was sent to
Foster Road Developers and with the development agreement with Vintage Cooperative and
the land owners Horner spoke late this afternoon, after calling the City, and found out this
meeting was tonight. Horner called Ray Bisby, the president and CEO of Vintage Cooperative,
who also stated he knew nothing of this substation proposal. Horner realized the members of
the cooperative are not land owners, and it is listed at the Assessor's Office as Foster Road
Developers, but as of Monday this week the last unit has been sold, all 53 have been committed
and each owner has approximately $175,000 invested in this property for a total of over $7
million. Horner understands how the good neighbor policy works, notice is sent out to the
surrounding land owners but technically the owners in the cooperative are land owners as well
and knew nothing about this until they saw the special exception sign on Foster Road. Many of
the members he has talked to are not in favor of the location of substation and feel it could have
been built on the east side of Foster Road since MidAmerican has owned land over there for
years. Horner acknowledged it has been explained tonight the City did not recommend that
area. He suggests this approval be pushed back one month so they can have better input. The
east/west transmission lines should be put underground rather than have the six high voltage
lines over Foster Road and would also recommend at least the west and south chain link fence
be a stone or brick wall because there will be several members units in the cooperative that will
face that fence. A seven foot chain link fence with barbed wire on top is not attractive.
Pretorius asked where the Cooperative will be with respect to the substation. Lile showed a
map of the area and pointed out the senior living area, which is the cooperative. Pretorius
asked when the rezoning was done from the RS -12 to the current CO -1 for the proposed site.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 6 of 12
Lile was unsure, but it was quite a while ago as it has already been through the subdivision
phase as well.
Pretorius asked when the building was slated to be done with construction. Horner said it will
be complete late this year. Third floor is to the point of installing kitchen cabinetry, second floor
is being dry -walled and first floor has all the mechanical systems in. Horner added their power
is coming from a pole that was set a few months ago on the east side of Prairie du Chien and
the MidAmerican subcontractor has buried a six inch diameter tube from that east side all along
the road to a transformer pad located to the southwest corner of the building. Their building is
not dependent on the substation. He does acknowledge a substation is probably needed in the
area with future development. Horner reiterated they are owners since they have paid into the
cooperative even though they are not property owners listed on the Assessor's site.
Goeb asked for clarification of notifying people in the area. Lile said the good neighbor policy is
optional and notification goes to property owners in a 300 foot range, the City posts a sign with
information on how to contact a representative as well as a notice posted in the paper about the
meeting and items being discussed. In this case the property owner was Foster Road
Developers.
Laureen Ipsen (1710 Prairie du Chien Road) lives on the east side of Prairie du Chien right next
to the property MidAmerican does own. Her major concern is for MidAmerican to come to a
good outcome with the people they are negotiating with and if they can't then she is not for this
development. If the property next to hers had been suitable she would have been in
negotiations and she understands the east side versus the west side but she stresses
MidAmerican needs to take care of the property owners at 1823 Prairie du Chien. She also has
a cousin moving into the senior living development and alerted her of this item as she knew they
would not be notified as property owners.
Pose responded to a couple public comments, he apologized for the good neighbor
notifications, they followed the City policy and notified only record property owners, they did not
intend to exclude anyone. When they met with the residents of 1823 Prairie du Chien he could
see out their back window Foster Road goes downhill pretty fast once you make that bend.
Therefore the senior living facility will sit much lower than the property at 1823 Prairie du Chien
and as a result and what they will be doing is looking up hill at this area and with the tree cover
that is there you can see the building proposed on Lot 2 will have the transmission lines cross
only a small portion of the eastern edge of their property. The senior living facility is down on
Lot 3 quite a ways from this site, the transmission line taps will only encumber the east side so
the remaining part of Lot 2 is still available for the use of potential development. It also impacts
why the substation is pushed to the east side of the lot and not to the west, if it goes to the west
the transmission lines would have to go right through the major portion of Lot 2, which is in
conflict of what the City's policy of don't impede the orderly development of property. With
regard to the senior living facility, they have to look up hill, they are probably going to be looking
at another building that will be built on Lot 2, and they will be looking at the landscaping from
down below before they will even see the substation site. Pose added the landscaping that is
appropriate for this location is quite simple, landscaping grows, any kind of wall built doesn't,
therefore over time landscaping will be a better screen. Pose showed photos of other
substations and screenings they had used on properties in Des Moines. Pose noted that
deferring for a month is not going to change the plan or how the property sits.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 7 of 12
Hazell asked if there were any poles connecting other than those inside the substation on the
transmission line. Pose said there will be two poles installed on the transmission line corridor to
get the tap wires into the substation, but are in the already existing transmission area. The land
which those poles are located is owned by the City. They have been sensitive to all areas
around this development, they have worked with the City on solutions in this area, and in
discussions with the property at 1823 Prairie du Chien to resolve their issues.
Pretorius acknowledged substations are very expensive and are by necessity, not just
something MidAmerican wants to do. Pose confirmed they would not make this type of
investment if it was not a necessity, MidAmerican's idea is to protect the entire grid and provide
power for the areas surrounding it. They do not just take one's land, they must be given the
land voluntarily, they try to use areas that minimize impact to existing residents, and also don't
impede any future growth and they feel confident they have done that with this particular plan.
Staff has help MidAmerican with this by suggesting modifications which they have followed.
Ipsen said people have been asking about the health issues and asked if there have been
studies to know whether these power lines cause problems for people that are living near them.
She will see them from her property, more so than the new development.
Pose said the substations they have existing in Iowa City are the best indicators of what types of
issues the substations may cause in terms of health. As the staff report indicated, the
substation on Mormon Trek Road was built first and houses built around it after, there has never
been a reported complaint of a health issues related to those power lines or substation itself.
There are sometimes discussions of electromagnetic fields, or EMFs, relating to power lines and
power equipment. What EMFs are energy waves or anything that can beam off anything
electrical and transmission lines themselves generate more of the EMF discussions as
transmission lines are high power and move through the eye of the utilities board to be
approved. However there have been no reported incidents of substations in Iowa City, or
anywhere else. Pose noted the most operative piece of equipment within the substation is the
transformer and that is the thing that does most of the work, that is located as far north towards
the interstate as possible and as far away from any further future development in the area.
There are no reported problems or issues with substations causing any difficulty to health.
Horner would like to remind the Board the rectangle in the upper right hand corner is a building
that is 24 foot tall and a lot of the other equipment is in the 20 foot tall range and the substation
elevation is higher than the co-op building but the co-op building is all 9 foot ceilings with floor
joists that are 2 foot so a 36 foot tall building and questions if the two poles that would have to
be located on the south side of Foster Road to feed the transmission lines up north would be
wooden or steel poles, wooden ones would require guide wires and steel poles would be self -
standing and more appealing.
Dostalik said the building in the upper right corner is the power distribution center control
building will only be 12 feet high. Most of the equipment is 16 to 24 feet high on average, the
highest things will be the two dead-end structures and the two wire poles on the northeast
corner. All four of those structures are about 50 feet high and are that high to catch lightening
versus hitting the equipment.
Pose wanted to reiterate there is a big elevation change from where the substation will be and
the senior residence building and over time development will happen and they won't even know
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 8 of 12
the substation is present.
Goeb closed the public hearing.
Pretorius asked if the owners of 1823 Prairie du Chien were present then lack of comment from
them assumes positive communications with MidAmerican. The Board did receive comment
from the property across the street (1920 Prairie du Chien) but knowing the actual property
MidAmerican currently owns would place the substation in that individuals back yard and
therefore the placement on the east side would be more intrusive. The current proposed
location does seem like the best location of all the options. She did add shame on the
developers and landowners for not sharing the information about the good neighbor meeting or
the exception item with the co-op owners, transparency is always the best policy.
Hazell feels the landscaping will be comprehensive and a solid covering of evergreen trees.
Goeb also thinks the City and MidAmerican has worked together well on coming to a solution
and the notifications did follow policy but is sympathetic to the future co-op residents to not be
looped in. Her question would be if it was a reasonable condition to ask for another good
neighbor meeting. Dulek said it could be added if it can tie to any of the standards. Goeb noted
she feels all the standards have been met.
Pretorius moves to approve EXC19-05, a special exception to allow for a basic utility in a
Commercial Office (CO -1) zone to build an electric substation with the following
condition:
1. The landscaping and screening around the substation must adhere to the
landscaping plan submitted, dated June 20, 2019 prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
Hazell seconded the motion.
Pretorius stated that regarding agenda item EXC19-05 she concurs with the findings set forth in
the staff report of July 10, 2019, and conclude the general and specific criteria are satisfied. So
unless amended or opposed by another Board member she recommends that the Board adopt
the findings in the staff report as our findings with acceptance of this proposal.
Hazell seconded the findings of fact.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-0.
Goeb stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a
court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC19-06:
An application submitted by ImOn Communications Company for a special exception to allow
for a basic utility in a Community Commercial (CC -2) zone to build a telecommunication hub
located at 2211 F St.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 9 of 12
Lile began the staff report with a location map of the area as well as a zoning map. The
proposed property is in a commercial zone and the surrounding area is mostly commercial with
some single family residential across the street. Basic utilities are allowed in a community
commercial zone through a special exception process and must meet capability and screening
requirements. The proposed telecommunications hub would be located in a 12 foot by 6 foot
shelter at the southwest corner of the property. The site is currently nonconforming with regard
to screening requirements. The zones require S2 screening between surface parking areas and
both the public right-of-way and abutting properties. For the special exception to be approved
ImOn would have to bring the site into compliance. All basic utilities are required to conform to
S3 screening requirements by themselves and since this is located in the Towncrest Overlay
District the hub would have to go through a staff design review process
With regards to the specific standards:
In all commercial zones, the RDP and ORP zones, and the ID -C and ID -RP zones, basic utilities
not enclosed within a building are permitted only by special exception. Proposed uses must be
screened from public view and from view of any adjacent residential zones to at least the S3
standard. In addition, the applicant must provide evidence that the proposed use will be
compatible with surrounding structures and uses with regard to safety, size, height, scale,
location, and design, particularly for facilities that will be located close to or within view of a
residential zone. For uses located in highly visible areas, the Board may consider additional
design elements such as masonry or brick facades, and walls or fencing to improve public
safety and to soften the visual impact of the proposed use. Findings are the proposed project is
located in the Towncrest Overlay District and must go through the staff design review process
that evaluates material quality, screening, and neighborhood compatibility. The applicant has
shown S3 screening and plans to surround the building with a six-foot opaque fence. The
proposed structure is not adjacent to any residential zone although the lot is across the street
from a residential zone.
Lile showed a rendering of the proposed structure, it will have a brick facade, it will be 10 feet
tall and have a smaller footprint then the surrounding structures at 12x16. The proposed
structure will be located at the rear of the lot and not highly visible and screened by the abutting
20 foot retaining wall in addition to the other screening required.
With regards to the general standards:
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, comfort or general welfare. The proposed communication system is a low voltage (48
volt) system. The system will be enclosed in a structure with a locked door, preventing
access to those not authorized and eliminating public health and safety issues.
2. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values
in the neighborhood. The proposed hub will allow for another internet service provider in
Iowa City and increase bandwidth capabilities. The proposed hub would require a small
generator to power it. Any noise it gives off would be mitigated by the proposed fence and
existing retaining wall. Additionally, this site does not abut residential properties although the
lot is across the street from a residential property.
3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 10 of 12
in which such property is located. The lot at 2211 F Street is fully developed, as are the
surrounding lots. The structure will follow all setbacks and is proposing landscaping
improvements to the site. Lile showed a rendering of the proposed building and
landscaping, it is at least three feet off the property line and landscaping and screening
proposed surround the parking and the hub itself.
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being
provided. The area is fully developed with access to utilities and other necessary facilities
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to
minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The proposed structure is located on a lot that
has adequate circulation and parking. This use would not increase traffic in the area
substantially as it would only need occasional maintenance after construction.
6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being
considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the
applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. This property is in
compliance with the zoning code in all aspects aside from the parking lot landscaping, which
the applicant has addressed. This project complies with the Community Commercial (CC -2)
standards in all other aspects.
7. The proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as
amended. The Central District Plan encourages the development of businesses that provide
goods, services and amenities to the neighborhood such as internet service.
Staff recommends approval of EXC19-06, a special exception to allow a basic utility in a
Community Commercial (CC -2) zone in order to build a telecommunication hub located at 2211
F Street.
Hazell noted the landscaping plan is ambiguous and will be decided in the future and wondered
if it was because the Towncrest Overlay. Lile confirmed it will need to go through a design
review and also the S2 standards require certain heights and species.
Hazell asked if they needed to follow S2 or S3 for this exception. Lile stated they must follow
both, the site needs to be screened S2 and the parking lot for the site is currently not screened,
which is why the site is currently non-compliant. The hub will need to screened S3 standards, it
would have the S2 screening in front of it and S3 screening would be the fence in front of the
hub itself.
Hazell asked what the purpose of the generator versus them just using power. Lile believes so
it won't go off-line.
Goeb opened the public hearing.
Barnard Dutchik (ImOn Communications) has been in Iowa City for about two years serving
businesses and have now begun serving residential areas using existing hubs. This new hub
would be used for continued expansion, roughly a hub can serve 400 homes or addresses.
These are self-contained units, all the equipment is inside, the generator is only used when the
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 11 of 12
power is out for a certain period of time, and they also use battery backups. The goal is to keep
internet service on as long as they can if there is a power outage. The hub will contain fiber
optic equipment, they would be the first fiber optic internet provider in Iowa City to homes.
Goeb asked if hubs were geographically located. Docheck said generally they try to locate a
hub centrally to a service area. He corrected that each cabinet serves 400 homes and each
hub contains multiple cabinets. So this hub can serve 2000 to 3000 homes, they try to
centralize the hubs to not have to run fiber lines to far. They try to balance it by looking for
commercial areas to build the hubs and this one made sense as it will abut the /Walgreens
property. They will lease the property they build this hub on.
Joe Meyers spoke with Thomas Rogers, who is the land owner and had no problem with
constructing this hub, there are some benefits to him such as ImOn will take care of lawn care
and property upkeep. He added the generator is necessary as there will be active equipment in
the structure and a natural gas line will be ran into the structure as well because that is what the
generator will run from. Meyers is working with a landscaper and he recommended an Emerald
Arborvitae for the space between the two parking lots which will be about 6 feet high. The
neighbor did say they push snow into that area so that may be a hindrance to have trees but the
neighbor seemed okay.
Goeb asked what is on the west side of the property. Meyers said there was a dry cleaning
business to the east as well as a small apartment complex or business.
Goeb closed the public hearing.
Hazell said it appears the applicant meets the requirements and also he is in favor of providing
more competition in the internet business as a positive to all residents of Iowa City.
Pretorius concurs.
Goeb agrees and drove by the site and it looks like a good spot.
Hazell moves to approve EXC19-06, a special exception to allow a basic utility in a
Community Commercial (CC -2) zone in order to build a telecommunication hub located at
2211 F Street.
Pretorius seconded the motion.
Pretorius stated that regarding agenda item EXC19-06 she concurs with the findings set forth in
the staff report of July 10, 2019, and conclude the general and specific criteria are satisfied. So
unless amended or opposed by another Board member she recommends that the Board adopt
the findings in the staff report as our findings with acceptance of this proposal.
Hazell seconded the findings of fact.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-0.
Goeb stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a
court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2019
Page 12 of 12
ADJOURNMENT:
Pretorius moved to adjourn this meeting.
Hazell seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 3-0
BOARD OF ADJUSMENT
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2018-2019
NAME
TERM
EXP.
2M4
519
6115
818
12112
2113
3M3
4MA
W8
7110
COC, ERNIE
12/31/2020
-
-
-
w
-
-
O/E
X
X
O/E
GOES, CONNIE
1213112019
O/E
X
X
X
X
01E
X
X
X
X
HALL, RYAN
1213112022
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
x
01E
HAZELL, ZEPHAN
12/3112021
-
-
-
--
-
x
x
X
X
X
PRETORIUS, AMY
12/3112023
--
—
—
—
--
X
x
x
x
x
KEY. X = Present
d = Absent
O/E = Absent(Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
Item Number: 5.c.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
November 19, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Climate Action Commission: October 7
Climate Action Commission
October 7, 2019
FINAL
MINUTES
IOWA CTIY CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 7, 2019, 3:30 – 5:00 P.M.
MPO CONFERENCE ROOM
Members Present: John Fraser, Stratis Giannakouros, Grace Holbrook, G.T. Karr, Matt
Krieger, Jesse Leckband, Katie Sarsfield, Eric Tate
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Brenda Nations, Ashley Monroe
Others Present: None
CALL TO ORDER
Matt Krieger called the meeting to order at 3:38 p.m.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
None
OTHER FORMAL ACTION:
None
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
None
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
Sarsfied motioned to name Matt Krieger as chairperson until January. Karr seconded the
motion. The motioned carried 8-0.
a. Introductions of new member(s) - Stratis Giannakouros has been appointed as
the University of Iowa representative.
b. Overview of final Council resolution forming the Commission
i. Included for reference in creating by-laws
ii. Commission reviewed Resolution 19-251
c. Process and timeline for new and existing members
i. Applications are now being taken on the Iowa City website under Boards
and Commissions. Deadline for applications is Tues. Nov. 12tH
Applications will go into packet on Thurs. Nov. 14th for the Council to
make appointments on Tues. Nov. 19tH
ii. New applicants first term will end in three years, Dec. 2022.
iii. Current board members terms will end:
1. Dec. 2020: Katie, GT, Matt—eligible for 2 more 3 -year terms
2. Dec. 2021: John, Eric, Grace –eligible for 1 more 3 -year term
3. Stratis (U of 1) and Jesse (MidAmerican) do not have term limits
Climate Action Commission
October 7, 2019
d. Draft bylaws
i. Committee discussed and edited these areas in the by-laws and
comments were incorporated into the working draft; Purpose of
Commission, Duties, Membership, Meetings, Amendments
Motion to pass draft by-law by Leckband pending final formatting by staff. Second by Stratis G.
8-0 passed.
e. Identify resources for new members- These documents were suggested:
L Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
ii. Equity Tool
iii. Community -wide GHG Inventory
iv. Climate Action Toolkit
v. Social Media links
vi. History of group
f. Administrative Tasks
L Next meeting: Monday, November 4 at 3:30 p.m. at City Hall
ii. Big Grove Climate Event, Thurs. Nov. 21St Doors open 5:30, event begins
6:00 p.m.
iii. Upcoming trainings for commission members
ADJOURN:
Karr motioned to adjourn the meeting at 5:02 p.m.. Holbrook seconded the motion. The
motion carried 8-0.
Climate Action Commission
October 7, 2019
CLIIIIATE ACTION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2019-2020
fX1P.P.ftna n2fP1
NAME
TERM
EXp.
a
.r
John Fraser
12131!10
X
Stratis
Giannakouros
U of I
representative
X
Grace Holbrook
1213181
X
G.T. Karr
1213180
X
!Batt Krieger
1213180
X
Jesse Leckband
MidAmerican
representative
X
Katie Sarsfield
12131!10
X
Eric Tate
12131x11
X
KEY: X =Present
O = Absent
O/E = AbsentlEzcnsed
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
Item Number: 5.d.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
November 19, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Community Police Review Board: October 8
Final/Approved
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES — October 8, 2019
CALL TO ORDER: Vice -Chair Monique Galpin called the meeting to order at 5:35 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sam Conaway, Latisha McDaniel, David Selmer (5:38), Orville Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Chris Olney
OTHERS PRESENT: Legal Counsel Erek Sittig and Iowa City Police Chief Matherly
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
None.
REPORT FROM NOMINATION COMMITTEE
Conaway and Selmer did not have a chance to meet so no report was given.
MOTION TO FIX METHOD OF VOTING
Motion by Conaway, seconded by McDaniel to fix the method of voting to be by voice vote.
Motion carried, 4/0, Townsend absent.
NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF CHAIRPERSON
Motion by Selmer and seconded by Townsend to nominate Galpin for Chair.
Motion carried, 5/0.
MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF CHAIRPERSON
Motion by Selmer and seconded by Townsend to close nominations.
Motion carried, 5/0.
BALLOT OR VOTE
Motion by Conaway and seconded by Townsend to elect Galpin for Chair.
Motion carried, 5/0.
NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF VICE -CHAIRPERSON
Motion by Conaway, seconded by McDaniel to nominate Townsend for Vice -Chair.
Motion carried, 5/0.
MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF VICE -CHAIRPERSON
Motion by Conaway and seconded by McDaniel to close nominations.
Motion carried, 5/0.
BALLOT OR VOTE
Motion by Conaway and seconded by Selmer to select Townsend for Vice -Chair.
Motion carried, 5/0.
CPRB
Oct 8, 2019
Page 2
CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by Selmer, seconded by Townsend, to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended.
• Minutes of the Meeting on 09/24/19
• ICPD General Order 99-05 (Use of Force)
McDaniel had questions regarding General Order 99-05 (Use of Force) OPS -03.4 V. Procedures
Paragraph 2(d): No distinction shall be made relative to the age of the intended target. Chief Matherly
explained the various criteria that must be met. The Board agreed to send a suggestion to Chief
Matherly to add language to clarify wording in the order.
Motion carried, 5/0.
NEW BUSINESS
None.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
None.
BOARD INFORMATION
None
STAFF INFORMATION
None.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion by Conaway, seconded by Selmer to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section
21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or
federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's
possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential
personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school
districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized
elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are
made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to
the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of
government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to
that government body if they were available for general public examination.
Motion carried, 5/0. Open session adjourned at 6:05 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION
Returned to open session at 6:34 P.M.
CPRB
Oct 8, 2019
Page 3
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change)
*NeyembeF 13, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm - November 12, 2019 (correction)
*December 10, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
*January 14, 2020, 5:30 p.m. Helling Conference Rm
•February 11, 2020, 5:30 p.m. Helling Conference Rm
Conway advised he would be absent for the November meeting.
Olney noted November meeting is the 12th not the 13tH
ADJOURNMENT
Motion for adjournment by Townsend, seconded by Conaway.
Motion carried, 5/0.
Meeting adjourned at 6:36 P.M.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2018-2019
eetin Date
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
TERM
12/11/18
1/8/19
2/20/19
3/12/19
4/9/19
4/29/19
5114/19
1111/19
7/11119
8113/19
9/10/19
9/24/19
10/8119
NAME
EXP-
NO
QUORUM
Donald
6/30/19
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
King
-
Monique
6/30/20
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Galpin
Orville
6/30/20
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Townsend
Latisha
6/30/21
X
X
O
X
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
McDaniel
David
6/30/21
O
X
O
X
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
Selmer
Sam
6/30/23
X
X
X
X
Conaway
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
Item Number: 5.e.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
November 19, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Planning & Zoning Commission: October 17
CITY OF IOWA CITY
®��� MEMORANDUM
Date: 11/12/2019
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner
Re: Recommendations from Planning and Zoning Commission
By a vote of 4-3 (Baker, Martin, Signs dissenting) the Commission recommends approval of
ZCA-1904, Amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to single- family site
development standards with the amendment to exclude add ons that are strictly for sidewalk
use and access to the dwelling and staff will work out the details.
By a vote of 6-1 (Townsend dissenting) the Commission recommends approval ZCA19-02,
amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to the Riverfront Crossings
affordable housing requirements.
Additional action (check one)
No further action needed
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
_X_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
S:RECform.doc
MINUTES FINAL
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 17, 2019 —7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING
E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max
Parsons, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Eric Goers, Ray Heitner, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Oliveira
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 4-3 (Baker, Martin, Signs dissenting) the Commission recommends approval of
ZCA-1904, Amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to single- family site
development standards with the amendment to exclude add ons that are strictly for sidewalk use
and access to the dwelling and staff will work out the details.
By a vote of 6-1 (Townsend dissenting) the Commission recommends approval ZCA19-02,
amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to the Riverfront Crossings
affordable housing requirements.
Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
CASE NOS. ANN19-01 AND REZ19-01:
Applicant: Allen Homes, Inc.
Location: North of American Legion Road and east of Eastbrook Street
An application submitted by Allen Homes, Inc. for an annexation and rezoning from County
Residential (R) to Interim Development — Single -Family Residential (ID -RS) for approximately
35.29 acres of land currently in unincorporated Johnson County and located north of American
Legion Road and east of Eastbrook Street.
Heitner noted this is an application submitted by Allen Homes, Inc. for an annexation and
rezoning from County Residential (R) to Interim Development — Single -Family Residential (ID -
RS) for approximately 35.29 acres of land currently in unincorporated Johnson County and
located north of American Legion Road and east of Eastbrook Street. Heitner stated the
applicant is requesting deferral of this application. On September 16, staff forwarded a proposed
condition for this rezoning which requested conveyance of a temporary construction easement
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 2 of 11
along the north side of American Legion Road. Due to an internal staff miscommunication this
condition was not included in the staff report, however this afternoon staff informed the applicant
that it intends to include the temporary construction easement as a condition of this rezoning.
Upon hearing this news, the applicant requested a deferral of the application to allow for
additional time to study the proposed temporary construction easement.
Parsons moved to defer ANN19-01 and REZ19-01 per the applicant's request. Townsend
seconded the motion.
Signs asked for staff to also be prepared to talk about the plans for American Legion Road at the
next meeting.
A vote was taken and the he motion passed 7-0.
CASE NO. ZCA19-04:
Discussion of Amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to single- family site
development standards.
Russett stated the background on this proposed amendment is the City wants to have
neighborhoods that provide a variety of housing choices and options for all residents and this can
be challenging in the core of the community which is dominated by student housing. So the
proposed text amendment is in response to a recent state legislation that limits local control of
city's zoning and regulations related to neighborhood stabilization efforts. Russett showed a
slide of the timeline of what has transpired over the past few years. In April 2017, the state
legislature passed a bill prohibiting cities from enforcing any regulations that limit occupancy of
rental property based on existence of familial status. In response to that legislation, in April 2018,
the City adopted a neighborhood stabilization ordinance that made many changes to the Zoning
Code. The changes included updating the rear setback requirements to discourage
inappropriate additions in backyards, limiting the number of bedrooms in attached single family
and duplexes to four and updating the private open space requirements for onsite open space.
The City also moved to annual inspections for rental properties and increased nuisance and
property maintenance enforcement. Lastly, the City adopted an ordinance that capped rental
permits at 30% in certain neighborhoods for single family and duplexes. Then in April 2019, the
state legislature passed a bill prohibiting cities from adopting or enforcing rental permit caps so
therefore in May 2019 in response to that state legislation the City adopted a 10 month rental
permit cap moratorium until March 2020 on the issuance of new rental permits for single family
and duplex units in areas that exceed that 30% rental cap.
Russett noted the City adopted this moratorium in May with the following goals of new
regulations in mind. One, to ensure single family detached structures and duplexes provide
healthy and safe living environments; two, maintain neighborhood characteristics and housing
options suitable for a diverse demographic in the City, particularly in older single family
neighborhoods; and three, prevent the overburdening of City infrastructure and operational
resources. Without the ability to regulate occupancy or enforce the rental permit cap staff has
spent the last few months exploring other options and other ways to address concerns related to
neighborhood stabilization. Due to the comprehensive nature of the 2018 Zoning Code
Amendments, as well as the additional resources that have been put forth for nuisance
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 3 of 11
abatement and property maintenance enforcement, staff is only proposing one change towards
Zoning Code at this time and it's related to single family site development standards and
specifically, front yard paving and front yard setback for single family homes and duplexes.
Russett showed a table with a summary of the current regulations and the proposed regulations.
Currently, parking spaces are allowed in the front setback area as long as it leads directly to a
parking space and at least 50% of the front setback area remains open space. Staff is proposing
to keep the regulation moving forward but add an additional requirement that states that any
additional paved areas must be separated by at least nine feet of open space from any of
conforming parking spaces or aisles. Russett showed a picture of an example of what the City
would like to avoid, a conforming parking space to the garage and the conforming space in front
of that garage with another space. This particular property owner requested some additional
paving to the left of that parking isle in that driveway for a grilling area, but they're using it for
parking and that's the type of improvements to avoid. Of course the City wants property owners
to be able to improve their site and to provide a patio and grilling areas and the like, but it
shouldn't be used for parking. Russett showed other slides of properties that are examples of
what they are trying to avoid. What staff is proposing some additional paving is allowed within
that front setback area but it must be separated by at least nine feet of impervious surface from
any of the conforming parking spaces. Additionally 50% of that front setbacks area must remain
as open space. City staff has done some outreach on this proposed amendment and meetings
have been held with the Greater Iowa City Landlord Association, the Iowa City Area Association
of Realtors as well as the Neighborhood Council and no major issues have been raised with the
proposed amendments.
Russett noted in terms of next steps after the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation this will go to City Council for a public hearing and consideration of the
amendment.
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed text amendment related to additional paving in
the front setback area of single family homes and duplexes.
Hensch stated he's always heard and presumed it's illegal to park in Iowa City in a front yard if
it's on grass. Russett confirmed that was correct. Hensch asked how the actual dimensions were
determined. He noted he does not like front parking at all and thinks it destroys the character of
the neighborhood. Russett said staff was proposing nine feet as open space area between the
conforming parking space and any in any additional paving based on current parking space
dimensions. Currently, the standard parking space is nine feet by 18 feet and what they want to
do is have it separation distance enough that discourages parking across the open space area
so they settled on nine feet.
Baker assumed anything that already exists, like the example in the staff report, is grandfathered
in and is not going to be affected. Russett confirmed that as long as it's a legal use and properly
permitted. However in the example in the staff report, the additional paving allowed in that
location was not permitted for parking so they cannot park there. Baker noted then the solution
staff is proposing looks like they are just adding a driveway that has access to the street.
Russett said it would be to the sidewalk so there would be no drive. Baker asked if somebody
just wanted to put in concrete in their front yard and extend it to the sidewalk, how wide could
that extension be. Russett stated the requirement is that no more than 50% of that front setback
area can be paved, 50% has to be open space, so as long as they met that requirement they
could add concrete to their front yard.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 4 of 11
Baker stated he is having a hard time seeing how this amendment is going to change behavior,
other than parking there's no other advantage to the homeowner adding a concrete slab in their
front yard. Russett stated the City stillswant to allow people to make those improvements if they
need a patio space, it just can't be adjacent to the driveway and people park on it.
Martin noted there's so much that's already done, and when looking at the timeline of what's
been going on with rental permits, how did the City come up with this solution as it doesn't
correlate. Russett acknowledged they struggled with thinking about additional amendments that
could be made to address the recent state legislation. The one thing they heard from the
enforcement staff is that they're seeing additional paving in the community like additional paving
adjacent to the driveway. While that is currently allowed, the paving can be there for a patio, it
cannot be used for parking. However it is being used for parking and it's hard for enforcement
staff to actually catch them in the act. It will be much easier for them to enforce this new
standard, which states that there needs to be a separation distance. If this amendment gets
adopted and someone paves right adjacent to their conforming drive aisle they automatically are
in violation of the Zoning Code. Enforcement staff doesn't need to keep following up and driving
past the property hoping they catch them in a violation.
Martin asked if there's been a rental house and now a single family is going to buy it and they've
got two kids that are teenagers and are also driving. In the beginning statement a diverse
demographic of people living in these neighborhoods was the reason for these change and that
includes families too. Normal families may need additional parking because a modern family
does not usually live on one car, parking then is an issue. Russett appreciated Martin's point
about larger families who do need more parking, but currently, even if it was a larger family, they
couldn't put additional parking next to their drive right now.
Baker feels this is still going to be an enforcement problem, people can say they are going to
build a patio space but then use it for parking. Russett stated it is the City's enforcement staff
who have to deal with these issues every day and with this amendment adding the additional
separation requirement, it would be easy for our enforcement staff to go out and see there's no
separation between the conforming drive and the additional paving, therefore it's a violation.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Mike Oliveira (330 North Gilbert Street) stated one of the things this regulation creates is a
problem for lots with the garage that sticks out in front of a house, as it appears on a typical Iowa
City house. They have had an additional drive added to the side of the drive to a single or two
garage to accommodate additional vehicles for the owner of the house or their teenage kids.
Oliveira shared some examples he printed out from very high end homes listed at over a million
dollars and worked his way down. This may be a knee jerk reaction to this situation where it
would hurt other people down the road and Oliveira being a potential developer of a lot of infill
lots sees this as a potential problem. He feels this amendment, the way it got worded needs
some work. Oliveira showed an example at 925 Meadowlark Drive, it's listed for $1,190,000 and
it's an example of a house with their garage and additional sidewalk. For another house he saw
listed it had a swimming pool or deck a violation, even though it was separated by a driveway by
a fence, but it did not appear to have a nine foot separation. Oliveira feels the City's requirement
of least 50% the front setback area must be open area accomplishes that purpose. The example
slides would be grandfathered as legal conforming developments, so he feels the only purpose
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 5 of 11
of this ordinance change is to affect future development or alterations to a house. He showed
more examples and reiterated the City needs to take more consideration on this
recommendation.
Martin noted that looking at the Meadowlark property, would that be a problem in the future.
Russett noted it would be helpful if Mr. Oliveira could point out on each of these examples what
he thinks is would be an issue. Oliveira said he did add a narrative underneath base on the
ordinance and what the problem is noting there are many different styles of houses in the
community.
Russett doesn't see any issues with the 925 Meadowlark Drive example. Oliveira pointed out it
would be the extension to the drive left of the garage, adding space there. If someone had a
house like that, and had five kids, teenagers, they would want an extra place to park their cars
and not tie up all the garages under that current ordinance, the way it's written one couldn't do
that. Russett stated they actually could, what he is showing here would still be allowed under the
proposed ordinance, it is a drive that is adjacent to a conforming parking space. There is a three
stall garage and therefore they could have three cars behind those conforming garages.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Parsons moved the Commission recommend approval of ZCA-1904, Amendments to Title
14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to single- family site development standards.
Signs seconded the motion.
Baker asked if a lot of these extensions are being built under these circumstances. Russett
replied she doesn't know the exact number, but it is has come up as an issue from the
enforcement staff. Baker noted if this ordinance is passed, the existing ones are still going to
have the same problem. Also if people are asking for patio spaces in their front yard, moving
that patio space to the center of the yard is the logical consequence of the ordinance. Russett
stated it would depend on the size of the lot and the location of the lot. This ordinance will
prohibit in the future someone using a new patio as an extension of the existing driveway. The
patio can be adjacent to the driveway, it just can't be in the front setback area.
Hensch confirmed this doesn't affect any existing structures unless it's currently being used
improperly. Additionally it doesn't take away anybody's ability to put an impervious surface in
their front area for fire pit, a picnic area, etc., as long as it isn't used as parking and 50% of the
area is still open. Russett confirmed that was correct. Hensch noted the key issue is to make
sure it's not a faint to create a parking space. If there is the nine foot separation, then it clearly is
not a parking space and has to be used for whatever other purpose it is. He noted he has
several friends who live on Johnson Street and it is just a cluster of cars in people's yards. It is a
big problem with them regarding the quality of life. This ordinance is not going to solve all the
problems because it doesn't address the issue of current structures that have the pavement
there, but at least it can stop it from spreading.
Baker asked for one small clarification. Under the current regulations if somebody wanted to add
a paved recreational area in the setback, they could do with no separation. With the new
ordinance they can still add a paved recreation area in the setback, they just need a nine foot
separation from any other pavement. Hensch confirmed a homeowner can do whatever they
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 6 of 11
want with their property such as a picnic area in the front or a grilling area. He acknowledged
this may not solve a whole lot of problems, but it's at least a step.
Dyer stated the particular example in the staff report is in violation now. Russett confirmed the
use of it as parking is a violation of the Zoning Code. The concrete isn't a violation, but the way
they're using it is. So if an enforcer comes along and sees cars parked there they can issue a
citation.
Martin feels then the goal is to put more cars on the street, which she acknowledges is a
negative way to look at it but as a bicyclist and as someone who lives near downtown she would
want more cars off of the street. Regardless, she cannot understand how this verbiage can help
rental codes and make a difference in parking.
Russett clarified the proposed ordinance isn't changing how they currently allow and where they
allow parking.
Signs agreed he doesn't like concrete in front yards either and feels putting a nine foot grass
strip between it and some other concrete isn't going to stop any illegal parking. If there is an
enforcement issue now, there will still be an enforcement issue later.
Townsend asked if this would also apply to those that sell their cars and boats on their front
yards. Russett stated that is a whole other issue.
Hensch is not sure this will solve much of a problem because it doesn't do anything to fix existing
structures, but it does clarify things for the future. It doesn't limit the options with the homeowner
and it makes things easier to distinguish violations both for the homeowner and for the code
enforcement officer. Hensch added they need to minimize the amount of concrete overall
because of the whole storm water and the drainage issues. So even though he doesn't think this
will solve much he will vote in favor of this.
Dyer does see it as a problem if someone wants to put a sidewalk right next to the driveway as in
some of the illustrations that Mr. Oliveira brought forth. If someone added a garage and wanted
a sidewalk from the garage to go beside that towards the front of the house to the front door that
would seem to be a violation of this proposal and she doesn't see the problem with having a
sidewalk.
Russett agrees with that and stated they could clarify the Code language to state that it doesn't
apply to sidewalks, that additional paving wouldn't apply to sidewalks or any access to the to the
home.
Hensch asked if they should amend the motion or is that just a note staff will take to City Council.
Russett would like to discuss it further with staff.
Parsons moved to amend the motion to exclude add ons that are strictly for sidewalk use
and access to the dwelling and staff will work out the details.
Signs concurred and seconded the amendment to the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-3 (Baker, Martin, Signs dissenting).
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 7 of 11
CASE NO. ZCA19-02:
Discussion of Amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to the Riverfront
Crossings affordable housing requirements.
Russett began with background, in 2016 the City amended the Riverfront Crossings Code to
include an affordable housing requirement. This applies to any residential projects that include
10 or more dwelling units. The affordable units must equal at least 10% of the total number of
units in the project and those units must be affordable for a term of 10 years. The developer has
some options on how that affordable housing is provided, it can be provided on site, off site, a
fee in lieu could be paid or land contribution could be made. This requirement has been
implemented for the past three years and staff has identified some issues with the existing
ordinance. The first is that the definition of affordable rental housing excludes housing that has
received Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) from the Iowa Finance Authority. The second
issue is that the definition of income eligible households does not cap non -retirement assets.
Staff is proposing a couple changes mainly to the definitions of that Code. The first is to amend
the definition of affordable rental housing to include housing that has received Low Income
Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and it's rented to income eligible households so those units could
be counted toward the affordable housing requirement. The second amendment is to amend the
definition of income eligible household and clearly state that households with greater than
$100,000 in non -retirement assets are not eligible for affordable housing units. Non -retirement
assets would include liquid assets such as a checking account, savings account, money market
account, any property that they could sell, but it would not include any retirement savings.
Next steps: Pending recommendation from the Commission this will go to City Council for a
public hearing.
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed text amendment related to the affordable
housing requirements and the Riverfront Crossings Code.
Dyer asked what it means that it does not include housing that received low income tax credits,
are the criteria for low income tax credits different from what is considered affordable housing.
Russett explain there are a couple different standards, one is HOME HUD fair market rents for
determining the rent limits and those are different than the rental limits and requirements of the
LIHTC program. They are both affordable housing programs, but the standards are a little
different. Dyer asked if this would increase or decrease the availability of affordable housing.
Russett noted the low income housing tax credit is an incentive in the State that a lot of
affordable housing developers use to leverage additional funds to get more housing, more
affordable housing units in the City. Russett is unsure if it would be more or less, but it would
clarify that there was a low income housing tax credit project Riverfront Crossings, those units
could be considered part of that affordable housing requirement whereas now they aren't.
Parsons asked what the process is to verify someone's non-cash or income assets. Russett
explained there is housing staff that request information on income, and that needs to be verified,
they do it annually, and they work with either a property management group or whoever's renting
those units. She noted there was a situation recently where someone was applying for an
affordable housing unit and they had non -retirement assets, properties in various parts of the
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 8 of 11
country, but their income was low enough that they qualified. That situation was flagged and staff
realized maybe they need to reconsider who would be eligible for these units.
Hensch asked for a project that's funded with LIHTC monies, does that entire project have to
follow those low income guidelines for the entire project. Russett acknowledged that yes, they
need to follow the terms of the program. So, for example, the Riverfront Crossings Code requires
a 10 year term for the affordable units and the LIHTC programs requires 30 years so they would
be subject to that 30 year requirement.
Townsend asked where the 10 year limit come from because is 10 years really a long enough
period of time for someone who really needs affordable housing? Russett said that time period
was developed back in 2016 when the Code was amended and they determined at that time at
least 10% of the units need to be affordable for a 10 year term. Townsend questioned if it really
effective and solving the problem if after 10 years the units are no longer affordable. She also
asked if a developer pays a fee -in -lieu of low income affordable housing where that money goes
and who determines how that money spent. Russett explained it goes to the City and housing
staff keep track of the money that comes in and it needs to be spent in Riverfront Crossings for
affordable housing. It goes into an affordable housing fund. Townsend asked with the
contribution of land for affordable housing, who pays for the housing if housing is built on that
land? Russett said they have not had anyone take advantage of that option yet so they haven't
really seen that play out yet she would need to look to see how it is clarified in the Code.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Mike Oliveira (330 North Gilbert Street) came forward to state he just got done reading a new
book about the whole issue of inclusion. He is worried when the City says they are going to limit
somebody that has savings of $100,000. This is because there are some people out there of a
different race, maybe not white, but maybe Hispanic, Chinese, different cultures that have
different saving patterns, but are economically depressed, that would qualify for this. Even
though they have over $100,000 in savings, just because of their extended families, a lot live with
them. Either additional parents didn't show kids. Oliveira noted there are a lot of Hispanics and
South Americans dealing with Homeland Security and these families are saving to put money
away because of that and they may reach that threshold and be disqualified. Oliveira feels the
threshold needs to be raised not just an arbitrary number that staff may have come up with. He
would like to see some data on the table, where staff arrived at the $100,000 amount, was it from
other cities, because he knows from living in Chicago for 22 years some of those programs are
not that low on the criteria for some of the subsidized housing on asset based.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Parsons moved for the Commission to approve ZCA19-02, amendments to Title 14,
Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to the Riverfront Crossings affordable housing
requirements.
Signs seconded the motion.
Signs clarified the 10 year piece came from lengthy conference committee of city staff,
homebuilders and developers. There was a lot of give and take to try to get to the point of
having this inclusionary housing period. The 10 years was part of that give and take. He agrees
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 9 of 11
with Townsend that it's not long enough by any stretch of the word, but that's a different issue
than what they've got to deal with tonight.
Hensch asked given Sign's intimate knowledge of his whole involvement in that process, does he
think the overlooking of the Iowa Finance Authority financing was just an oversight. Signs
confirmed absolutely. He added they are seeing more of the LITHC being used now than back
then, but because of because of the emphasis on affordable housing currently statewide and
nationwide it's certainly a tool that we want to encourage the use of.
Townsend is not in favor, the developers are not giving us anything, they are getting more height
to their buildings, which means they can build more units, which means they are going to get
more money.
Signs noted however the LITHC requirement is 30 years of affordability, not just 10 year.
Dyer has thought for some time the developers have so many outs here that that it doesn't seem
like affordable housing is likely to get built in Riverfront Crossings very often. The idea was for
affordable housing there because it is close in to downtown and ideal for working people. She
also wonders if, because of the really serious need for affordable housing now, if the resistance
would be less now than there was a few years ago and they could expand on the 10 years. All
over the country there's a shortage of affordable housing now, but at the time this was adopted
the City was seeming to be so bold and intrusive on developers. Now it seems like everybody
knows there's a shortage of affordable housing but that wasn't so evident at the time.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1 (Townsend dissenting).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 3. 2019
Parsons moved to approve the meeting minutes of October 3, 2019.
Townsend seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Russett noted they had the Iowa APA conference last week in Iowa City and it was very well
attended. There were over 200 registrants and then an additional 50 plus speakers with some
great sessions.
Baker asked for an update on Council deliberations for the project down on South Gilbert and
Prentis streets. Russett said that has not been approved yet, at the meeting on Tuesday they
voted on the second reading of the regulating plan amendment and the first reading of the
rezoning and those were both the recommended for approval 7-0. But they still have to have a
third reading on the regulating plan amendment and the second and third reading on the
rezoning ordinance.
ADJOURNMENT:
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 10 of 11
Parsons moved to adjourn.
Townsend seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2018-2019
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
3/15
(W.S.)
4/2
4/5
(W.S)
4/16
4119
5/3
5/17
6/7
6/21
7/5
8/16
9/6
9/20
10/18
12/20
1/3
BAKER, LARRY
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
DYER, CAROLYN
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O
O/E
O
X
X
X
FREERKS, ANN
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
-- --
-- --
-- --
`-- --
X
X
X
HENSCH, MIKE
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
MARTIN, PHOEBE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
PARSONS, MAX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
SIGNS, MARK
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
THEOBALD, JODIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
`-- --
`-- --
-- --
`-- --
`-- --
`-- --
`-- --
TOWNSEND, BILLIE
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
1/17
(W.S.)
2/4
2/21
3/7
3/21
4/4
4/18
5/16
6/6
6/20
7/18
8/15
9/5
10/3
10/17
BAKER, LARRY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
DYER, CAROLYN
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
FREERKS, ANN
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
HENSCH, MIKE
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
MARTIN, PHOEBE
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
PARSONS, MAX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
SIGNS, MARK
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
THEOBALD, JODIE I
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
TOWNSEND, BILLIE
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
r X
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
Item Number: 5.f.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
November 19, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Public Art Advisory Committee: September 5
r.® CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: 11/06/2019
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Marcia Bollinger, Staff to Public Art Advisory Committee
Re: Recommendation from Public Art Advisory Committee
At their September 5, 2019 meeting the Public Art Advisory Committee made the following
recommendation to the City Council:
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0, the Public Art Advisory Committee recommends approval of the draft
Public Art Strategic Plan pending corrections as discussed and to move forward to the
City Council for their review and adoption.
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
S:RECform.doc
APPROVED
MINUTES
PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE
SEPTEMBER 6, 2019 — 5:OOPM
ROBERT A LEE RECREATION CENTER — MEETING ROOM A
MEMBERS PRESENT: Vero Rose Smith, Steve Miller, Wendy Brown, Eddie Boyken, Juli
Seydell Johnson, Ron Knoche, Andrea Truitt
STAFF PRESENT: Marcia Bollinger, Sarah Helmer
PUBLIC PRESENT: Astrid Carlson, Ulrike Carlson, Olive Adams, Lauren Williams, Steve
Schuette, Rachael Arnone, Ariane Parkes-Perret
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0, the Public Art Advisory Committee recommends approval of the draft
Public Art Strategic Plan pending corrections as discussed and to move forward to the
City Council for their review and adoption.
CALL TO ORDER
Rose Smith called the meeting to order at 5:02 pm.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
Steve Schuette updated the committee. on the Art Safari. The goal of the Art Safari is to create
an event which combines artist's studio presentations and exposes the public to artists working
in their community. They have a Facebook page (IC art safari) and an email
(ICartsafari(a)outlook.com). The next step is to get more people in the community involved.
There is an upcoming event scheduled for September 7th and 8th at Schuette's home on Sunset
Street and four artists will be displaying their work in the neighborhood. He invited all to attend.
Rose Smith updated the committee on upcoming museum events:
• Jax Deluca — Grants Administrator for the National Endowment for the Arts. Gave a
presentation on potential grants which this committee should consider applying for in the
next fiscal year.
Jax Deluca will be presenting a performance art piece which is open to the public and free
being held in the Visual Arts Building on campus. Students from the school of music will be
participating. The piece is a meditation on slowness.
The Stanley Art Museum will be holding an event on September 6th which is free to the
public. This event will be held at the old Film Scene location from 5-7.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 1. 2019 MEETING
Knoche motioned to approve the minutes, Seydell Johnson seconded. Meeting minutes were
approved.
PRESENTATION BY SOUTH EAST JUNIOR HIGH ART STUDENTS — LONGFELLOW
PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL MURAL
Rachael Arnone, the art teacher,at South East Junior High described the method of selection for
the muralist winner, a program which is in its fourth year of participation with the City. All
students in her class create a mural design and vote on their favorite designs. The top two
designs are chosen to create the mural in the Longfellow pedestrian tunnel.
Ulrick Carlson and Olive Adams then presented images of their proposed murals to the
committee and answered questions regarding their ideas and inspiration.
Carlson was inspired by images of bones and forests. Adams was interested in Wiccan religious
imagery, the seeing eye, flowers and her mother's green eyes.
Rose Smith asked the students questions about their ideas:
• Do the two pieces tell a story together? Adams said that she hadn't thought about the idea
of x-ray before.
• What do you think will be most challenging about the murals? Students answered that the
shadows and shading would be difficult as well as the line work and potential stenciling.
Brown asked what was currently on the ceiling and Arnone answered that nothing was on the
ceiling. Seydell Johnson brought up the possibility of wet conditions that might be averse to
painting. Bollinger answered that scheduling the event in the fall krather than the spring has
helped address that issue.
Rose Smith thanked the students and Arnone for doing the mural project every year.
Brown inquired about a schedule. Arnone estimated that the work would happen in September
and October.
COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENTS OR COMMITTEE REPORTS
(There was time immediately following the presentation from Southeast Junior High Students
and prior to the public meeting to discuss committee announcements.)
Bollinger spoke briefly regarding additional artist input into the Strategic plan.
Rose Smith inquired if any staff had ever applied for an Our Town Grant through the NEA.
Seydell Johnson said she had in a different position. Bollinger and Truitt commented that
Summer of the Arts and the University of Iowa coordinate on a grant with the City to provide art
programming for students participating in the Dream Center programming. Timeline for NEA
grant submissions was discussed as beginning in December. Rose Smith suggested this might
be an opportunity and suggested the committee could host a series of grant writing workshops.
She said we could bring people from the NEA and other regional arts organizations. Rose Smith
and Truitt discussed the application process, the need for guidance and the potential for our
committee being able to help the community in that way.
Rose Smith discussed PS1's recent acquisition of two homes on Gilbert Street next to the
Haunted Bookshop. Fundraising for improvements to the homes had produced $25,000. The
first show is scheduled in October. Truitt was impressed with PS1's effort to preserve the
structural and historical integrity of the house.
PUBLIC INPUT MEETING — IOWA CITY PUBLIC ART STRATEGIC PLAN
See Attached Notes for detailed description of requested changes.
Bollinger stated that the next steps in review of Public Art Strategic Plan would be to schedule
with the City Council. The committee discussed and agreed that the October meeting that would
typically be held the first Thursday of the month could be moved to when the City Council
meeting was scheduled in October.
Brown clarified that the policy updates would not need to be done prior to the October meeting
with City Council.
Moved by Seydell Johnson and seconded by Miller to approve the draft of the Public Art
Strategic Plan pending corrections as discussed and to move forward to the City Council for
their review and adoption. Approved unanimously.
COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENTS OR COMMITTEE REPORTS (CONTINUED)
Rose Smith invited comment from non -committee members. Howard Horan introduced himself
and mentioned that he donated two of the Kovalec wooden sculptures located in Willow Creek
Park and acknowledged the work of the Public Art Committee.
Miller discussed a potential art acquisition by the City. The sculpture of the man playing the
piano on Muscatine Ave was willed to the artist and the artist is inquiring if the City would like to
purchase the piece.
STAFF REPORTS
Bollinger mentioned that she had worked with the design consultant to create language for the
plaque that will be located adjacent to the sculpture by Kenneth Snelson — Four Modular Piece
that was soon to be relocated to the Riverfront Crossings Park. Seydell noted that the Three
Sisters sculpture would soon be installed at Chadek Green Park. Bollinger also mentioned that
she met with a member of the Airport Commission to discuss the potential for public art at the
airport.
ADJOURNMENT
Knoche motioned to adjourn and Miller seconded. Meeting adjourned at 6:55 PM.
Public Art Advisory Committee
Attendance Record
2018-2019
Name
Term
Expires
10/4
11/1
12/6
1/10
3/7
4/4
5/2
616
7/11
8/1
9/5
Wendy Brown
1/1/2020
x
x
O/E
O/E
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Erin Fitzgerald
1/1/2020
x
Ron Knoche
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Juli Seydell-
Johnson
x
x
x
x
O/E
x
x
x
x
x
x
Vero Rose Smith
1/1/2021
x
x
x
x
x
O/E
x
x
x
x
x
Steve Miller
2/1/2021
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Andrea Truitt
1/1/2022
--
--
x
x
x
x
x
x
--
x
x
Eddie Boyken
1/1/2022
--
--
--
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Key
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a member