HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-04-06 Bd Comm minutesCITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Airport Commission: January 14
Item Number: 4.a.
January 14, 2021
Page 1
MINUTES FINAL
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
JANUARY 14, 2021 — 6:00 P.M.
ZOOM MEETING PLATFORM
Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or
impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of commission members,
staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
Members Present: Warren Bishop, Scott Clair, Christopher Lawrence, Hellecktra Orozco,
Judy Pfohl
Staff Present: Eric Goers, Michael Tharp
Others Present: Carl Byers, David Hughes, Ron Roetzel, 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:
The minutes of the December 10, 2020, meeting were reviewed by Members. Pfohl moved to
accept the minutes of the December 10, 2020, meeting as presented. Clair seconded the
motion. The motion carried 5-0.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
a. FAA/IDOT Projects
i. Obstruction Mitigation — Tharp stated that things are pretty much the
same as last month — awaiting springtime before they can finalize things.
1. Phase 1
2. Phase 2 — Tharp stated that bids were opened last week,with two
bidders taking part. He recommended the bid be awarded to Rathje
Construction for $208,680. He added that they are the current contractor
for Phase 1, as well. Tharp then responded to Member questions
concerning this project.
January 14, 2021
Page 3
version of a brief update typically given each year. This will take place on April
14, 2021.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR:
The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, February 11,
2021, at 6:00 P.M. via the Zoom meeting platform.
ADJOURN:
Bishop moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:23 P.M. Lawrence seconded the motion. The motion
carried 5-0.
)(ffa- 2 z jyZ� Z
CHAIRPERSON DATE
January 14, 2021
Page 4
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020-2021
Key:
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
TERM
Q
Q
Q
o
Q
Q
O>
Q
-4
Q
o
NAME
EXP.Se
N
Q
N—
N
s
iV
O
K)
O
O
N
Q
N
O
V
Q
N
Q
N
Q
N
O
N
O
O
N
N
Warren
06/30/22
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
Bishop
Scott Clair
06/30123
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Christopher
07/01121
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Lawrence
Hellecktra
06/30/24
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
Orozco
Judy Pfohl
06/30122
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
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
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Board of Adjustment: December 9
Item Number: 4.b.
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
FORMAL MEETING
DECEMBER 9, 2020 — 5:15 PM
FINAL
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible
or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission
members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Gene Chrischilles, Zephan Hazell, Bryce Parker, Amy Pretorius
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ernie Cox
STAFF PRESENT: Susan Dulek, Kirk Lehmann, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Cady Gerlach, Kirsten Frey, Ryan Wade, Kevin Monson, Debra
McFall-Wallerich, Calisse McPherson, Katie Ford
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 5:19 PM.
ROLL CALL:
A brief opening statement was read by Pretorius outlining the role and purpose of the Board and
the procedures that would be followed in the meeting.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC20-05:
A request submitted by Southside Developers, LC to extend the expiration date from 6 months
to 12 months for EXC20-05, a special exception approved to allow a Community Service - Long
Term Housing use in an Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone that is adjacent to a single-family
residential zone.
Chrischilles moved to approve an extension of the expiration date from 6 months to 12
months for EXC20-05, a special exception approved to allow a Community Service - Long
Term Housing use in an Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone that is adjacent to a single-
family residential zone.
Hazell seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0.
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 2 of 28
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC20-0004 & EXC20-0005 & EXC20-0006:
An application submitted by J+M Civil Design, LLC requesting three special exceptions to allow
a drive-through facility, to allow a multi -family use, and to permit flexibility through the
Commercial Reuse Exception in a Community Commercial (CC -2) zone for the purpose of
reusing a vacant building with a coffeeshop and apartment at 1120 N. Dodge Street.
Pretorius opened the public hearing.
Lehmann explained this item includes three applications for one property at 1120 North Dodge
Street. The first is for a drive-through use, the second is for a multifamily use and the third is to
use the Commercial Reuse Exception, all of which are in a CC -2 zone.
Lehmann began by showing an aerial view of the subject property, he pointed out an existing
building on the northeast corner of the site. He added there was recently a vacation along St.
Mathias alley to the east that provided about 10 additional feet to the property. The building is
an existing building, but it's been vacant for several years. The initial part of the building was
built in 1895 with a major addition in 2003 and the building's east portion was partially within the
St. Mathias Alley right-of-way. The 10 -foot vacation (case number VAC20-0002) corrected that
issue. Lehmann pointed out that there are two parking lots on the site, one which is accessible
off North Dodge and the other accessible off St. Mathias Alley. Both are gravel and incomplete
and a drive was never built through the site due to elevation changes.
Lehmann next showed the zoning categories. The property itself is Community Commercial
(CC -2) which is the same as zoning across North Dodge Street (HyVee) and to the west, though
the adjacent property to the west is a single-family residence. To the east and south is St.
Joseph Cemetery, which is zoned low density multifamily residential (RM -12).
Lehmann stated the applicant's goal is to renovate the building and redevelop the site. The first
application is a proposed drive-through facility associated with a new coffee shop in the first
floor of the existing building. The second application would be a multifamily use on the second
floor of that building, and the third is to allow waivers from zoning standards using the
Commercial Reuse Exception which was recently approved by Council. Lehmann noted the
proposed project required two previous applications that were related, including a staff initiated
Zoning Code Text Amendment to provide flexibility for commercial zones in situations similar to
this where an existing building has issues complying with the zoning code standards, so this
Text Amendment allows them to request waivers broadly from those standards. Additionally,
there was the vacation on the west side on St. Mathias Alley, which passed December 1.
Lehmann next showed the submitted site plan for the applications. He pointed out the existing
building and noted they're not proposing any additions to the building. Lehmann stated the
biggest changes is related to access and circulation. There is a proposed one-way drive from
North Dodge Street on the north all the way to St Mathias Alley on the south with parking on the
sides. There would also be the proposed drive-through, which would branch out from the one-
way drive at the south end of the site, curve around to the north by the east side of the building
where the drive-through pickup window would be, and then exit onto St. Mathias Alley.
Lehmann noted there is minimal separation provided between the Alley and drive-through which
he'll discuss as he goes through the specific approval criteria. The drive-through would exit
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 3 of 28
close to potential inbound traffic on St. Mathias Alley, but it is curved and there would be
signage to help regulate traffic in addition to the minimal separation that's there. The drive-
through lane itself would be pickup only so there would be no order board.
Regarding pedestrian access, it is provided via a sidewalk along North Dodge Street on the
north side of the site and would go through the site to the building entrance of the coffee shop,
and then also to a separate building entrance on the south side of the building, which is how
residents would access the single multifamily dwelling unit above.
Lehmann showed an image of the building as it is today, noting the gravel parking lot. The
coffee shop again would be on the first floor and the multifamily dwelling would be on the
second floor. Looking at the east side of the building, he pointed out where the drive-through
window would be and where St. Mathias Alley is currently. He also pointed out the elevation
changes that affect the site and the trees and elevation around St. Mathias Alley.
Chrischilles asked if the white door on the building was the apartment entrance. Lehmann
stated that door is a second door for the coffee shop.
Lehmann explained the role of the Board of Adjustment is to either approve, approve with
conditions, or deny the application based on the facts presented. To approve a special
exception the Board must find that it meets all applicable approval criteria, which include
specific standards pertaining to the waivers requested and then general standards for all special
exceptions.
Lehmann reiterated in this case there are three sets of specific standards. One is for drive-
through which is found at 14 -4C -2K-3, the sets of standards for multifamily uses are at 14-413-
4A-7 And the Commercial Reuse Standards are found at 14-2C-11 D-4.
Regarding the first set of standards, they are related to access and circulation and the
transportation system has to be able to safely support the proposed drive-through use in
addition to existing uses in the area. It includes factors like street capacity, level of service,
effects on traffic circulation, access requirements, separation of curb cuts, and pedestrian
safety. For the access and circulation sub criteria, the drive-through lane must be accessed
from secondary streets, alleys or shared across access drives. To provide for safe pedestrian
movement the number and width of curb cuts may be limited and are subject to the standards
and the Code. Third is that an adequate number of stacking spaces must be provided where a
minimum of six stacking spaces is recommended for drive-through facilities associated with
eating establishments and fourth, sufficient on-site signage and pavement marking shall be
provided to ensure safe vehicular and pedestrian movements. Lehmann noted each is directly
addressed in the staff report but in this presentation he is grouping them by the broader criteria.
For access and circulation, staff finds that the site plan uses existing curb cuts on North Dodge
Street with the entry to the one-way internal access drive coming off North Dodge. Additionally,
there's a North Dodge access at St. Mathias Alley, which is a two-way alley, though there would
be two proposed access points into the site from the alley at the exit on the south side of the site
for the one lane internal access drive and the exit to the east for the drive-through lane by the
building. The drive-through specifically is accessed through that internal access drive.
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 4 of 28
Regarding stacking, generally coffee shops can produce long queues in excess of 10 cars
during busy times. On the site plan, approximately six spaces for vehicles are provided, which
is the minimum required for eating establishments. Lehmann added there is also more than 100
feet from North Dodge Street to that drive-through entry, which provides some room for spillover
traffic. Generally, the standard is 20 feet for a stacking space so that internal access drive
provides enough spillover area for approximately five additional vehicles. In addition, the drive-
through is pickup only, there is no ordering board, so customers will order via some sort of app
or call in their order in advance. The coffee shop will also have the ability for people to go inside
and there is parking provided for that as well. Lehmann reiterated there is enough additional
room for spillover traffic which in total provides enough stacking spaces for the proposed use.
For traffic coordination, the site plan shows directional arrows at entrances and throughout the
site to help direct traffic. There are also 'do not enter' signs at all exits, and pedestrian paths on
the site are clearly demarcated from vehicular routes. As part of these criteria, staff is
recommending a couple conditions. First substantial compliance to the site plan to ensure both
adequate circulation and adequate signage and pavement markings. Second, staff recommends
improvement of St. Mathias Alley to the east and south of the site to allow the alley to
accommodate traffic that might be generated by the use. Lehmann noted the alley is currently
relatively unimproved, which is why staff is recommending improvements. Third, staff
recommends that the drive-through use remain pickup only and that there is no ordering at that
site to ensure there is turnover at the window so stacking doesn't back up too far.
Lehmann stated there are two sub criteria regarding location. First, drive-through lanes and
service windows must be located on a non -street facing facade unless the applicant can
demonstrate that a street facing location is preferable for safety and efficiency, the site doesn't
conflict with adjacent uses, and it does not compromise the character of the streetscape or
neighborhood. Second, drive-through lanes must be set back at least 10 feet from adjacent lot
lines and public rights-of-way and screened from view according to design standards.
Regarding the first point, Lehmann noted the drive-through lane and service window don't face
a street, instead they face east towards St. Mathias Alley. However there is no real setback
between the drive-through lane and St. Mathias alley on the east. Lehmann explained in this
case, the applicant has requested to waive this criterion through the Commercial Reuse
Exception, which he will discuss later as it has its own criteria. Staff recommends a condition of
these location criteria that if the Commercial Reuse Exception is approved, adequate separation
and/or screening should be required between the drive-through lane and property to the east, as
determined by the City Engineer and City Neighborhood and Development Services.
The third set of criteria is related to design standards for drive-through lanes. The number of
drive-through lanes, stacking spaces and paved area necessary for the drive-through facility will
not be detrimental to adjacent residential properties or detract from or unduly interrupt
pedestrian circulation or commercial character of the area in which the use is located. Lehmann
stated the sub criteria that that are a part of these design standards include that drive-through
lanes should be limited such that paving doesn't diminish the design quality of the streetscape
or the safety of the pedestrian environment, that drive-through lanes shall be screened from the
street and adjacent properties to the S2 standard or to the S3 standard if it's next to a residential
use or zone, that multiple windows servicing a single stacking lane should be considered to
reduce idling, that stacking and drive-through windows shall be located to minimize potential for
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 5 of 28
vehicular and pedestrian conflicts and shall be integrated into the surrounding streetscape, that
lighting must comply with outdoor lighting standards, and must be designed to prevent light
trespass and glare, and that loudspeakers or intercom systems if allowed should be located and
directed to minimize disturbance to adjacent residential uses or to adjacent uses.
Regarding design standards, staff finds that the surrounding zones and uses are generally
compatible. As stated earlier to the north there's a commercial grocer in a community
commercial zone, to the east and south there's a cemetery which is an institutional use and also
in a residential multifamily zone, RM -12, and to the west there's a residential single family home
in a CC -2 zone. Lehmann noted the site plan shows the narrow drive-through lane runs on the
south and east property lines which limits impacts to the streetscape, and stacking spaces,
driveways, and drive-through windows are generally hidden from the street. The North Dodge
Street sidewalk and continuous pedestrian route through the site does not cross the drive-
through lane. The drive-through lane is adjacent to an RM -12 zone, which is a residential zone
that requires S3 screening to the east and south, but the applicant has also requested a waiver
for that standard through the Commercial Reuse Exception, which again will be discussed later.
Staff also finds that generally conflict on the site is minimized as automobile traffic is directed
through one-way drives and pedestrian access on the site is provided through sidewalks that
separates vehicular and pedestrian traffic and provides for vehicular traffic flow. Lehmann noted
drivers may cross inbound traffic at the drive-through exit on St. Mathias Alley since that is a
two-way alley, but generally St. Mathias Alley experiences limited use because right now it
doesn't connect to the west and is really only used by St. Joseph Cemetery. In addition, the exit
is curved where it exits onto the alley to limit head on collisions and to establish right of way.
Finally, St. Joseph Cemetery has alternative access points, which helps. As for other findings,
staff shall review new lighting in compliance with current code standards as part of site plan
review, and while the code encourages multiple pickup window to reduce idling, there is only
one pickup window, but no order board and no loudspeakers or intercom systems as the drive-
through is pickup only. Staff recommends two conditions as part of these design standards.
First, if the Commercial Reuse Exception is approved, adequate separation and/or screening
should be required between the drive-through lane and the property to the east, as determined
by the City Engineer and Neighborhood and Development Services Department, and second,
that at no time in the future will there be installation of loudspeakers or intercom systems.
Lehmann next discussed the multifamily specific standards found at 14-4134A-7 which has
standards for location, density, entrances and ground level activity, in addition to some related
to specific zoning districts.
First regarding location, the proposed dwelling units must be located above the street level floor
of the building, except as provided elsewhere in the Code. In this case the dwelling units are
above the street level of the building. Second regarding maximum density, the residential
density standards for multifamily uses in commercial zones are stated in 14-2C-4 and the
application has to comply with those standards. The minimum lot area per unit required by that
table is 2,725 square feet for efficiency, one -bedroom and two-bedroom units, and 1,315 for
three-bedroom units. The property is 12,320 square feet and only contains one dwelling unit so
this use complies with these density standards. Next, regarding residential entrances, there are
a couple sub standards. First, to provide safe access, any building containing a residential use
must have at least one door in the exterior that provides pedestrian access to the dwelling units
which should face a street, public sidewalk or pedestrian plaza and be visible from and easily
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 6 of 28
accessible from said street and it cannot be solely accessed through a parking garage or from
an alley. Second, access to entrance doors of any individual dwelling units located above the
ground level floor of a building must be provided from an enclosed lobby or corridor and
stairway and three, to facilitate commercial uses at the street level the ground level floor height
should be no more than one foot above the existing level of the abutting sidewalk, which can be
adjusted for sloping sites or existing buildings. Lehmann explained regarding this standard, the
building has an exterior door facing the street but it does not provide access to the dwelling unit.
Instead it provides access to the coffee shop. Similarly, the dwelling entrance does not face a
street, public sidewalk or pedestrian plaza, but it is easily accessed from a private sidewalk that
provides safe access. Lehmann noted this is another standard that the applicant has requested
a waiver from through the Commercial Reuse Exception. He stated that access to the entrance
of that dwelling unit is enclosed, and the ground level floor height is approximately one foot
above the sidewalk but it is an existing building and could be adjusted as it is a sloping site but
no portion of the of the ground level is proposed to be more than three foot above the level of
abutting public sidewalks so that shouldn't be an issue. Finally, regarding standards for ground
level floors of buildings, there are two sub standards. The first is that the ground level floor -to -
ceiling height must be at least 14 feet, and second, the ground level floor must meet commercial
use building code specifications. In this case, it's an existing building where the ground level
floor -to -ceiling height is 8.5 feet so that is a standard that the applicant is requesting to be
waived with the Commercial Reuse Exception. With regards to building code specifications, the
building is an existing structure, so staff will ensure that any improvements requiring a building
permit meet commercial building code specifications and sprinklers will be required as part of
that building permit process. Lehmann next noted there are other zone -specific criteria that
affect properties in CB -5 and CB -10 zones, and in this case the property is not zoned CB -5 or
CB -10 so those criteria are not applicable.
Lehmann moved onto the standards for the Commercial Reuse Exception. He reiterated this
was recently approved by Council so it's not in the online zoning code yet but will be located at
14-2C-11 D-4. In summary, the requested exceptions are, first, for the general setbacks and
screening requirements for the drive-through lane along the east property line; second for the 10
foot setback for drive-through lanes on the east and south property line; third, for the S3
screening for drive-through lanes on the east property line; fourth, for a residential entrance on
the front of multifamily buildings in CC -2 zones; and fifth, for a ground level floor to ceiling height
of 14 feet for multifamily uses.
For specific standards, the first is whether the exception is necessary due to existing building or
site constraints that make it difficult to meet that standard. Lehmann reiterated the existing
structure was built in 1895, with a major addition in 2003, both of which were completed prior to
the City's current zoning code. Also the east portion of the building was partially within the St.
Mathias Alley public right-of-way which was corrected by the recent vacation and due to this
location and the time when it was built, the location of the building on the site makes it difficult to
meet setback and screening standards for the drive-through lane because there isn't really any
space between the drive-through lane and the alley. Lehmann reiterated staff is recommending
a condition to provide separation and/or screening to the east for mitigation purposes. He also
noted it's difficult for it to meet multifamily use standards as they relate to ground level height
and entrance locations for that multifamily use since it was built prior to current zoning codes.
The second criterion is that the exceptions will be compatible with and/or complimentary to
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 7 of 28
adjacent development in terms of building mass and scale, relative amount of open space,
traffic circulation, general layout and lighting. Lehmann noted the building mass and scale and
site layout will not change much due to the proposed project, and open space south of the
building will be reduced as the drive-through lane goes in but they will still have enough to
comply with City standards for multifamily uses. He stated the project does improve traffic
circulation and should carry expected traffic, and it also has the benefit of providing a route
through the site that does not currently exist and creating some alley improvements that will
improve circulation around and through the site. Staff recommend a condition that the owner
obtain a temporary use of right-of-way permit for St. Mathias Alley, to provide some space for
separation and/or screening for the drive-through lane along that alley. With regards to lighting,
it will be reviewed during site plan review, and generally staff finds that the multifamily and drive-
through use exceptions are compatible to adjacent development with conditions as
recommended by staff.
The third criterion is that the exception will not adversely affect access, views, noise, stormwater
runoff, light and air, and privacy of neighboring properties any more than what a development
that satisfies the applicable standards. Lehmann stated in this case, staff finds that the
exceptions will not affect views, noise, stormwater runoff or light and air any more than a
compliant development would, as those would be dealt with by City's existing standards and
processes. However, access may be affected by the drive-through setback exception as it's
requested, specifically where it exits on the St. Mathias Alley but staff believes that won't do so
any more than a property that would have satisfied that requirement. Privacy may be affected by
waiving the drive-through screening to the east but there are currently two cemetery buildings
and existing trees that generally buffer the drive-through lane from the cemetery. In addition,
again staff recommends a condition to require some separation and/or screening to the east.
Fourth, the exception is not contrary to the intent of the standard being waived or modified. In
this case, the intent for entrance locations for multifamily uses in commercial zones is to provide
safe access for residents in mixed use buildings. Staff finds this intent is maintained because
the pedestrian walkway on the site provides safe access from the dwelling to the right-of-way.
With regards to ground ceiling height for multifamily uses in commercial zones, the intent is to
facilitate commercial uses at the street level. Staff finds that intent is maintained because the
applicant has a commercial tenant already lined up and improvements to the site facilitate future
commercial use. For setbacks from drive-through lanes, the intent for setbacks generally is to
maintain light, air, and separation for fire protection and firefighting access, to provide
opportunities for privacy, to reflect the general building scale and placement within the City
through a reasonable physical separation between buildings, and provide flexibility to the site so
it's compatible with certain uses. Staff believes this intent is maintained as approximately 20 feet
will still be provided between the drive-through lane and the adjacent cemetery property. As for
screening for drive-through lanes, the intent is to improve the appearance of streetscapes for
residents, to create aesthetically pleasing and functional living environments, to protect and
enhance property values, and to provide transition between dissimilar uses. In this case, staff
believes this intent is maintained because the existing trees and buildings effectively screen the
drive-through from adjacent cemetery uses and because of staff's recommended conditions.
The final requirement for the Commercial Reuse Exception is that the exception be in the public
interest. In this case the property's been vacant for years, the parking lot and alley are
constructed of gravel and are in disrepair, and occupying the property with neighborhood
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 8 of 28
commercial and residential uses and improving the site circulation, parking lot and alley are in
the public interest.
Lehmann stated those were the specific standards for the drive-through, multifamily and
Commercial Reuse Exception waivers requested so next he will discuss the seven general
standards.
First, the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, comfort or general welfare. Lehmann stated generally the multifamily -related waivers
from zoning won't affect the health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The drive-through lane
and related exceptions will increase vehicular traffic to the site but access through and around
the site will be enhanced and alley improvements are included in the project. Lehmann noted
concern that conflicts may be created with the drive-through lane exit onto St. Mathias Alley but
staff believes those will be mitigated through careful signage and pavement marking design.
Another consideration is that in the morning, when a coffee shop has its the highest use, it may
be difficult for vehicles leaving St. Mathias Alley to turn left towards Iowa City due to inbound
traffic on North Dodge Street, but it would be no more so than if another CC -2 eligible use came
to this site, so staff finds that it doesn't negatively impact those standards. In addition, staff finds
that the effects of decreased screening and setbacks east of the building are partially mitigated
by existing landscaping and buildings at the cemetery and will be further mitigated by staffs
recommended conditions. Lehmann noted the site plan shows the removal of two trees. On
August 6, 2019, the City declared a state of climate crisis and established carbon emission
reduction goals and trees are an important component of climate mitigation adaptation.
Therefore, staff recommends a condition that any trees removed be replaced on site as
approved by the City Forester, but, overall the exceptions won't be detrimental to or endanger
the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare.
The second general standard is that 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. Lehmann stated generally the proposed uses are compatible with
those of nearby properties and site developments and occupancy won't diminish or impair
property values. He noted screening and/or separation on the east property lines, as
determined by the City, will also mitigate any impacts on the cemetery. Therefore, staff finds the
proposed exceptions will not injure the use of or enjoyment of nearby properties.
Third, the establishment of the proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding properties for uses in the district that are allowed.
Lehmann noted the surrounding area is fully developed already and has a mix of institutional,
commercial and residential uses in commercial and multifamily zones. A mixed-use coffee shop
with a multifamily unit is compatible with these uses and zoning districts and only the property to
the east currently utilizes the alley so offsite improvements to St. Mathias Alley will actually
benefit property owners by improving circulation. In addition properties that share a property line
to the west will be separated by adequate setbacks as to not affect future work on their property,
and requested exceptions will not impede normal orderly redevelopment of adjacent properties.
The fourth general standard is that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary
facilities have been or are being provided. Lehmann stated in this case, sufficient utilities
primary streets and necessary facilities are established for this neighborhood and can meet the
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 9 of 28
proposed site requirements. Proposed internal circulation will be sufficient for vehicular and
pedestrian access for the renovated building with improvements to St. Mathias Alley. These
improvements will include, but are not limited to, obtaining a temporary construction easement
from the property owner to the east. Finally, regarding drainage, stormwater must be mitigated
per City Code to avoid downslope impacts in the south because that's where stormwater on this
site sheds. Again, the owner must obtain a permanent stormwater drainage easement from that
property owner.
The fifth criterion is that adequate measures have been taken or will be taken to provide ingress
or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. In this case the public street
in question is North Dodge and the development will increase traffic to the site but the one-way
drive through the site and the drive-through lane both exit onto St. Mathis Alley. This
consolidates potential conflicts with to a single point, which minimizes impacts on North Dodge.
Sixth, except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being
considered, it will conform to all other applicable regulations or standards for its zone. Lehmann
stated staff will ensure that the site design conforms with all other zoning standards and
regulations during site plan review. There will also be additional reviews based on the conditions
by the City Engineer and Director of Neighborhood and Development Services.
The final general standard states the proposed exception must be consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan. Lehmann stated the Comprehensive Plan designates this area on its
Future Land Use Map as general commercial, there are provisions that support "defined
commercial nodes and small scale neighborhood commercial centers" and they also encourage
retaining and expanding local businesses. This site is also in the North District Plan area and
that Future Land Use Map has this designated as retail or community commercial and the North
District Plan includes goals that talk about locating medium density housing in areas with good
access to arterials such as North Dodge Street and that are close to neighborhood commercial
areas and also encourages focusing commercial activity in existing nodes along major arterial
streets and notes the Hilltop Tavern, which is a mixed use just down the street, as an example
of that. So generally, this proposal is consistent with these Plans.
Lehmann stated staff did receive two pieces of correspondence regarding this application from
the same group. St. Joseph's Cemetery initially wrote to oppose the project but later amended
their letter to not oppose to it. The cemetery is building a new slab -on -grade structure, so they
were initially concerned about how potential elevation changes in the alley, if raised, might affect
their site and specifically their new structure. However, they did not object to the drive-through
or commercial uses. They responded later that after communication with the applicant, the
cemetery was satisfied with the project if it proceeds as stated.
However due to the correspondence, Lehmann stated staff wants to amend its report to include
the following. In the general standard regarding adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and
necessary facilities, staff noted the proposed internal circulation will be sufficient for vehicular
and pedestrian access to the renovated building with improvements to St. Mathis Alley. Staff
would like to include a statement that says "which will include but is not limited to obtaining a
temporary construction easement from the adjacent property owner". Where staff talks about
how stormwater must be mitigated per City Code to avoid downslope impacts to the south, staff
would like to add to the report "which will include but is not limited to obtaining a permanent
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 10 of 28
stormwater drainage easement from the adjacent property owner'. Lehmann noted these
changes were conveyed by email to the applicant after staff received input from St. Joseph's,
they were included earlier in this presentation, and they are to be carried into staff's
recommended conditions which will be read in a second. These changes don't really affect the
meaning, but rather makes it more explicit about what staff believes is required.
Overall, staff recommends approval of the three special exceptions, EXC20-0004 to allow a
drive-through facility, EXC20-0005 to allow multifamily use in a community commercial zone
and EXC20-0006 to allow waivers from zoning standards for the reuse of existing building in a
commercial zone, for the property at 1120 N. Dodge Street, subject to the following conditions:
1. Substantially comply with attached site plan dated November 3, 2020 which will include but
is not limited to obtaining a permit stormwater drainage easement from the adjacent property
owner according to the City Stormwater Management Code;
2. Prior to site plan approval, obtain a temporary use of right-of-way permit with the City along
the west side of St. Mathias Alley for the length of the drive-through lane, as specified by the
City Engineer and approved by the City Attorney's Office;
3. Plant at least one new tree onsite for every tree removed, the location and species of which
must be approved by the City Forester prior to site plan approval;
4. Improve St. Mathias Alley abutting the property to the east and south, and any sidewalk
crossings, as determined by the City Engineer prior to site plan approval. Improvements must
be accepted by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy which will
include but is not limited to obtaining a temporary construction easement from the adjacent
property owner;
5. Provide for screening to the east and/or separation between the drive-through lane and St.
Mathias Alley, as determined by the City Engineer and approved by the Director of
Neighborhood and Development Services prior to site plan approval. These must be accepted
by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy;
6. No loudspeaker or order board for the drive-through use may be installed; and
7. The drive-through must remain pick-up only.
Hazell had a question regarding where the door for the residential is. Lehmann said it is on the
back of the property. He showed a photo that shows the door and that pedestrian access will
wrap around the west building face, and come around to the back. He also pointed out in the
photo the trees and shrubs, and those will need to be approved when the applicant submits a
landscaping plan as part of the general site review.
Chrischilles asked for clarification on what pickup only means. Lehmann stated it means all
ordering is done online or by phone and the window is only for pickup, though customers can go
inside as well.
Chrischilles asked if there was any correspondence from the next-door neighbor in the single-
family dwelling Lehmann replied no, but that there was someone to speak tonight during the
public comment.
Ryan Wade (applicant) noted it's been about three or four months of conversation going back
and forth with staff, Council members, and P&Z members as well. Regarding background on
this building, he's looked at it and tried to figure out a use for it and then the ladies from Press
Coffee approached him and thought they would be a perfect fit at this location. So he reached
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 11 of 28
out to the City Administrator, a few Council Members and P&Z members to get their opinion of
the site location and to see what kind of ramifications or of special exemptions are needed and it
was a pretty lengthy list of things that they were asking for and that the City would need to deal
with. After about a month of discussion they realized this could work and so that's why they are
here tonight. He is just here to save this building that has been sitting empty for at least 20
years and is excited about bringing something to the north side of town. There's been a lot of
excitement about this new location and this potential new coffee shop. Press Coffee has been in
business for seven or eight years and have a good reputation in Coralville.
Chrischilles asked what the hours of the coffee shop are. Wade said he believes they're going
to be open from six o'clock in the morning until seven or eight o'clock at night. Chrischilles
asked if that would be every day. Wade is not sure what their hours will be on the weekends.
Katie Ford (Press Coffee) stated what they've done in Coralville will transfer over to the Iowa
City location which would be 6am Monday through Saturday, and then lam on Sunday. She
noted the closing time is up for negotiation because as they're open through COVID, during this
time they were closing at 1lam and noon to contain the business and deal with staffing issues.
Also usually when open later in the afternoon they would see students, etc. but because the
students weren't around, they would close early. In the future she believes they will be open
until seven or eight, depending on the flow and the traffic of the area.
Chrischilles asked if they have a drive-through pickup setup at their current location and are
they already set up with an online ordering system and how has that been functioning. Wade
said that is how they've been doing it during COVID and were doing it even before COVID.
Ford said they use an app called Jump Coffee, it's local app for local coffee shops so the big
box coffee places will not be on this because they already have their own apps, this is to help
out smaller local businesses. Encounter Cafe and Capanna in North Liberty are on Jump as well
and that's how they have been able to stay open during COVID. People would order on the app
and then pick up in the vestibule with no contact. They will continue to use the Jump app when
they fully reopen, which has not been determined, but they don't know the state of the world at
that point so the app is revamping to have the guest specify whether they will be coming in store
for pickup or if they will be going through the drive up pickup window which is the style that
Capanna has in North Liberty.
Parker asked what is the average time from when one orders and they show up at the building
to receive the drink. Ford said they have a 10 minute out setting.
Pretorius asked the applicant if any of the seven conditions set forth in the staff report posed
issues for them and are they in agreement. Wade replied he will agree to all of them and thinks
they're well thought out. He noted they've had a lot of internal discussions about all of them so
he has no issues. He did share the only one he didn't like was the potential call box for the
future, he didn't hear about that until tonight, but this building might be here for another 40 years
and who knows what will go in there. Not being able to have a call box next to a cemetery is
probably something he will address in the future but tonight he's not too concerned about it.
Debra McFall-Wallerich (representing property at 1116 North Dodge Street) noted it is a single-
family dwelling that her grandparents built it in 1957 and it's been in the family ever since.
There is a family member who currently lives in that single-family dwelling and he works full
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 12 of 28
time, third shift so he asked her to come with some questions. First she wanted to say she
appreciated the detail in the report, and she appreciated hearing from both the Board and the
applicant. In the information, it said that there would be no loudspeaker or order board and she
would like to ask if that also then means no outside sound system.
Lehmann stated the condition in the staff report would only relate to the order board. It does not
relate to outside sound systems.
McFall-Wallerich asked then if the business will provide outdoor seating? Wade replied yes,
there is room for about 12 to 16 chairs up front of the building where the patio is currently that
could be used for outdoor seating.
McFall-Wallerich reiterated she was concerned about outdoor sound systems for her family
member who's been gainfully employed third shift for 10 years but has a different sleep cycle
than normal business hours.
Hazell asked if there's zoning rules about sound systems in that zone. Russett is unsure of the
exact standards related to outdoor sound, but it's not something that would be prohibited. There
are other examples of commercial uses that have outdoor music associated with their
businesses. There is a noise ordinance which any sound would have to comply with. Dulek
added the ordinance states they cannot interfere with the neighbors enjoyment, such as if there
was a loud party. Lehmann noted this is an unusual case, because often provisions are stricter
by single-family residential zones but here the single family home is in a commercial zone so it
is a bit unique, which may impact some of the standards that may apply.
Chrischilles asked if they could add that as a condition to not allow any outdoor sound of any
kind music. Lehmann replied that the Board is able to add conditions as they see fit to ensure
that the special exception doesn't affect surrounding properties.
Chrischilles asked if the relative living in the house has any other objections other than the
possibility of noise. McFall-Wallerich replied he doesn't, he appreciates that it's a heavy traffic
area and is supportive of commercial development in the area but the unique situation of his
employment and ability to sleep during the day to in preparation for his work shift. McFall-
Wallerich added that HyVee has piped music outside their entrance and it's certainly not a
problem. There are times when HyVee can sometimes have really jumping promotions, where
they augment the sound system and then her family member usually calls over to HyVee.
Wade asked what time her family member gets home from work in the morning. McFall-
Wallerich said he works midnight to 8am. Wade estimated he probably sleeps from 9 o'clock
until midafternoon. McFall-Wallerich said it is more typical to be from noon until the early
evening. Wade was trying to see if there was a compromise here, it is a coffee shop so having a
little music outside is probably going to be the case. Perhaps there can be certain hours that
they would allow music. This is a coffee shop not a restaurant or a bar, there may be people
outside talking but their decibel levels are not going to be so high. McFall-Wallerich understands
and certainly thinks that compromise is possible. She is not anticipating a coffee shop to be
disruptive but felt the need to attend tonight's meeting and to understand what was proposed.
Hazell asked for clarification from McFall-Wallerich about noise and as to whether she would
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 13 of 28
prefer there be no noise, or would she prefer that it be worked out at a later date with the coffee
shop. McFall-Wallerich said she is not opposed to an outside sound system, just the decibel
level of the outside sound system. She is not clear on what the City noise ordinances are and
she does appreciate that their residential home is now in a commercially zoned area.
Dulek said the City does not have a decibel level requirement in Iowa City, they have what's
called a disorderly house and it's that no person shall allow or continue to allow raucous,
disagreeable noises with an intent and reckless disregard for causing disturbance to the
neighborhood and a disturbance to the neighborhood is beyond the subject property line. So
that's how the City deals with it and those calls are enforced by the police. She acknowledged
during the day is when the family member sleeps but during that time, for the most part, most
folks are up and about and there's a lot more noise just in general that occurs between say six
and seven until 10 or 11 o'clock at night. Similarly, the City has standards when one can start
construction and certainly construction could go on right next door to this property after seven
o'clock in the morning.
Parker asked about the alley improvements and would those improvements go all the way to
Summit. Lehmann said it would not, that would need to occur as redevelopment of adjacent
sites occurs.
Pretorius closed the public hearing.
Chrischilles moved to approve EXC20-0004 to allow a drive-through facility at the
property located at 1120 North Dodge Street, subject to the following seven conditions:
1. Substantially comply with attached site plan dated November 3, 2020 which will
include but is not limited to obtaining a permit stormwater drainage easement from the
adjacent property owner according to the City Stormwater Management Code;
2. Prior to site plan approval, obtain a temporary use of right-of-way permit with the City
along the west side of St. Mathias alley for the length of the drive-through lane, as
specified by the City Engineer and approved by the City Attorney's Office;
3. Plant at least one new tree onsite for every tree removed, the location and species of
which must be approved by the City Forester prior to site plan approval;
4. Improve St. Mathias alley abutting the property to the east and south, and any
sidewalk crossings, as determined by the City Engineer prior to site plan approval.
Improvements must be accepted by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy which will include but is not limited to obtaining a temporary construction
easement from the adjacent property owner;
5. Provide for screening to the east and/or separation between the drive-through lane
and St. Mathias alley, as determined by the City Engineer and approved by the Director
of Neighborhood and Development Services prior to site plan approval. These must be
accepted by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy;
6. No loudspeaker or order board for the drive-through use may be installed; and
7. The drive-through must remain pick-up only.
Hazell seconded
Pretorius noted it seems the applicants are in favor of the seven conditions which she thinks is
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 14 of 28
important, she understands there being a residential use zoned commercial is unique and that's
a good and bad thing, as family members using the house right now need to utilize it for their
enjoyment and living there, but it being zoned commercial will someday make the property
worth a certain amount because it can be sold and developed commercially. Additionally she
understands the noise situation, but at the same time coffee shops, restaurants, in this current
COVID situation are moving dining outdoors and making outdoors more agreeable and music is
important so she is not in favor of limiting it or getting rid of it completely.
Parker asked about the condition to not allow them to have a pickup window, what would be the
process for the applicant to come back and get that added in the future. Lehmann said the
condition is to not allow a loudspeaker or order board and that the drive-through must remain
pickup only. Dulek said an applicant can apply for another special exception to overturn that in
the future.
Chrischilles stated regarding agenda item EXC20-0004 he concurs with the findings set forth in
the staff report of this meeting date, December 9, 2020 with the amended conditions presented
by staff, and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied as amended by staff
during the presentation unless amended or opposed by another board member. He
recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report for the approval of this
proposal. Hazell seconded the findings.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0.
Pretorius 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.
Chrischilles moved to approve EXC20-0005 to allow multifamily use in a community
commercial zone for the property located at 1120 North Dodge Street, subject to the
following seven conditions:
1. Substantially comply with attached site plan dated November 3, 2020 which will
include but is not limited to obtaining a permit stormwater drainage easement from the
adjacent property owner according to the City Stormwater Management Code;
2. Prior to site plan approval, obtain a temporary use of right-of-way permit with the City
along the west side of St. Mathias alley for the length of the drive-through lane, as
specified by the City Engineer and approved by the City Attorney's Office;
3. Plant at least one new tree onsite for every tree removed, the location and species of
which must be approved by the City Forester prior to site plan approval;
4. Improve St. Mathias alley abutting the property to the east and south, and any
sidewalk crossings, as determined by the City Engineer prior to site plan approval.
Improvements must be accepted by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy which will include but is not limited to obtaining a temporary construction
easement from the adjacent property owner;
5. Provide for screening to the east and/or separation between the drive-through lane
and St. Mathias alley, as determined by the City Engineer and approved by the Director
of Neighborhood and Development Services prior to site plan approval. These must be
accepted by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy;
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 15 of 28
6. No loudspeaker or order board for the drive-through use may be installed; and
7. The drive-through must remain pick-up only.
Hazell seconded
Chrischilles stated regarding agenda item EXC20-0005 he concurs with the findings set forth in
the staff report of this meeting date, December 9, 2020 with the amended conditions presented
by staff, and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied as amended by staff
during the presentation unless amended or opposed by another board member. He
recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report for the approval of this
proposal. Parker seconded the findings.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0.
Pretorius 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.
Chrischilles moved to approve EXC20-0006 to allow waivers from zoning standards for
the reuse of existing building in a commercial zone for the property located at 1120 North
Dodge Street, subject to the following seven conditions:
1. Substantially comply with attached site plan dated November 3, 2020 which will
include but is not limited to obtaining a permit stormwater drainage easement from the
adjacent property owner according to the City Stormwater Management Code;
2. Prior to site plan approval, obtain a temporary use of right-of-way permit with the City
along the west side of St. Mathias alley for the length of the drive-through lane, as
specified by the City Engineer and approved by the City Attorney's Office;
3. Plant at least one new tree onsite for every tree removed, the location and species of
which must be approved by the City Forester prior to site plan approval;
4. Improve St. Mathias alley abutting the property to the east and south, and any
sidewalk crossings, as determined by the City Engineer prior to site plan approval.
Improvements must be accepted by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy which will include but is not limited to obtaining a temporary construction
easement from the adjacent property owner;
5. Provide for screening to the east and/or separation between the drive-through lane
and St. Mathias alley, as determined by the City Engineer and approved by the Director
of Neighborhood and Development Services prior to site plan approval. These must be
accepted by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy;
6. No loudspeaker or order board for the drive-through use may be installed; and
7. The drive-through must remain pick-up only.
Hazell seconded
Chrischilles stated regarding agenda item EXC20-0006 he concurs with the findings set forth in
the staff report of this meeting date, December 9, 2020 with the amended conditions presented
by staff, and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied as amended by staff
during the presentation unless amended or opposed by another board member. He
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 16 of 28
recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report for the approval of this
proposal. Parker seconded the findings.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0.
Pretorius 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 EXC20-0007:
An application submitted by Neumann Monson Architects requesting a special exception to
allow a 60 percent parking reduction for a mixed-use renovation of existing structures and a new
multi -family construction at 109, 111, 113-115, 117-119, 121, and 127 East College Street.
Pretorius opened the public hearing.
Lehmann stated this project affects several properties on the ped mall and showed an aerial
photo of the area. The area is zoned Central Business District (CB -10) and is pretty much all
surrounded by CB -10 with some public/institutional uses and some residential uses.
Regarding background on this project, Newman Monson Architects submitted an application for
a special exception requesting a 60% reduction in parking spaces for these properties. The
purpose is to allow for the renovation of existing mixed-use buildings on the ped mall. It would
also involve the demolition of rear additions to some of those buildings to make room for a new
11 story multifamily building. Lehmann added this project is part of a larger ongoing discussion
that's been trying to get local historic landmark status to protect these properties on the ped
mall. Therefore there is also a current local historic landmark zoning overlay rezoning, REZ20-
02, that is required for the application which Lehmann will discuss when he gets to the criteria.
That rezoning has been heard by both the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning and
Zoning Commission in May of this year. Council has had two readings on it and are on their final
reading. The applicant has requested the final reading be postponed until some of these other
related applications like this special exception go through.
Lehmann next discussed the general background for downtown parking standards. There are
both minimum and maximum parking standards downtown, the purpose of the minimum
standards is to ensure that off street parking can accommodate most of the parking demand
generated by a use and also to prevent spillover parking into adjacent residential areas. For
maximum parking, the goal is to foster compact pedestrian -oriented areas. In the Downtown
District, only household living, like multifamily units in this case, and hospitality uses, like hotels
which are not part of this project, require onsite parking in the Downtown District. So any
parking demand generated by this use for the reduction is coming from those residential uses.
Downtown parking primarily is viewed as a district wide circumstance and is primarily provided
in municipally owned parking facilities. In this case, the parking reduction is requested for
unique circumstances. Based on that standard, potentially historic buildings may request a
parking reduction of up to 50% and historic designated properties or those listed on the Historic
Register can request parking reduced up to 100%. In the proposed project, there are 102
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 17 of 28
dwelling units which require 106 parking spaces. A 60% parking reduction from that is 42
parking spaces which would be required on site. Lehmann noted the site plan shows more than
that in its project documents with 50 spaces onsite, but they requested a lower amount to
provide some flexibility if things change so they won't have to come back.
Lehmann showed images of the area again, the ped mall, the existing buildings are to the north
and the new building is behind them to the south, and showed the additions that would be
demolished as part of it. The new building would be 11 stories. Lehmann noted there are
several renderings in the staff report to give an idea of what kind of impact it might have on the
streetscape.
Lehmann next showed the parking plan, where parking is provided on the first two levels of the
building, one of which is partially below ground and the other of which would be at grade, both
accessed from the alley. There would be 25 spaces per level. The alley exits east onto a stub of
South Dubuque Street behind the hotel, where it goes out to a signal -controlled intersection with
East Burlington Street. The alley also exits west onto South Clinton Street, though staff has
some concerns about that exit since it is mid -block and there's not great visibility. Lehmann
stated there have been some conversations about converting part of the alley to a one way
street either to the entrance of the ramp or all the way through. At this point, there are no
recommendations from staff, it is just something that they're working through with the applicant.
Lehmann next showed the pedestrian access that is provided between the existing buildings
and the new building, and then there's also pedestrian access from the pedestrian mall itself.
The role of the Board of Adjustment is to either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
application based on the facts presented. To approve the special exception the Board must find
that it meets all applicable approval criteria which includes both specific standards pertaining to
the waivers requested and general standards for all special exceptions.
The specific standard is a parking reduction for unique circumstances found at 14 -5A -4-F6,
which states where it can be demonstrated that a specific use will reduce the ability to use or
occupy historic property in a manner that will preserve or protect its historic aesthetic or cultural
attributes, the Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception to reduce the required parking
or stacking spaces by up to 100% for properties designated as a local historic landmark.
Lehmann reiterated in this case Council is considering a local historic landmark designation,
which would allow up to 100% parking reduction for this property. The exception being
requested is for 60% to preserve a local historic landmark. The project includes renovation of
the historic structures in addition to the new construction, so it's not just tearing down the back
of some of the buildings and leaving them as is, they're also renovating the historic property.
Currently the historic properties could be demolished and redeveloped without the protection of
a historic overlay to preserve the buildings in the future. In addition, the applicant is requesting
tax increment financing (TIF) from the City. Lehmann explained TIF basically means that
property taxes are frozen at current levels and taxes generated from new development on the
site above its current levels go towards paying an economic development incentive. As part of
that, they have to do a gap analysis for the City to show that the TIF is reasonable, and that
there is actually a gap which needs to be filled versus the amount of financing that they currently
have access to. In this case the gap analysis shows that they need the TIF to fill a financing
gap, which means that if project costs are increased, that gap would increase too such as
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 18 of 28
through increased parking requirements. In addition, the renovation will invest in the historic
properties and will help preserve their important historic and aesthetic attributes. Staff
recommends the condition that the local historic landmark designation must be approved for the
requested parking reduction, since that is required for this expection to be even requested.
Next is the general criteria. First, the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or
endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. As mentioned earlier, there are
approximately 50 spaces provided which is approximately 0.49 parking spaces per dwelling unit.
That proposed amount is similar to some other recent downtown projects, as listed in the staff
report (a lot of them seem to be between 0.4 and 0.5 spaces per unit). Generally reduced
parking decreases the number of vehicular trips to the site and increases other means such as
walking or biking and also helps support transit. Proximity to employment and services also
generally decreases parking demand. In addition, tenants would have to consider this reduced
onsite parking as they make decisions about where they live so for that reason, staff believes
that the project will likely attract tenants who don't require as much onsite parking because there
is no guarantee of parking. Regarding the broader downtown parking district, there are three
public parking ramps with approximately 2100 spaces in a three-minute walk of the project.
There's more that are slightly farther than that but still within walking distance. The three
immediate ones would be obviously the most desirable parking spaces for residents. Lehmann
noted that prior to the pandemic, these ramps were near capacity between 10am and 2pm, and
monthly permits have long wait lists and are first offered to businesses rather than residents. So
there's a good chance that at least for these public parking ramps, residents wouldn't be able to
get parking spaces for quite some time. That doesn't speak to the to the broader downtown
parking situation necessarily, but it does speak to the immediate situation. However, overall staff
doesn't believe that the parking reduction will be detrimental to endanger the public health,
safety, comfort, or general welfare.
Second, the specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of
property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in
the neighborhood. Lehmann reiterated downtown parking is generally provided in public
facilities, but staff does not believe that excess demand for parking will impact neighbors
because there's generally enough existing parking infrastructure throughout the City. However,
downtown parking availability may tighten if there are residents who are going for those
immediate ramps next to them, they might have to wait. Staff feels increased pedestrian traffic
around the proposed use will likely improve commercial viability of nearby properties so overall,
staff finds the parking reduction won't injure the use or enjoyment of other property in the
immediate vicinity and won't impact property values.
Third is establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding property. First, the downtown is largely
developed, and recent redevelopment projects show demand for future investment downtown.
There may be some impacts that are temporary, such as the closure of the alley or portions of
the ped mall as it's constructed, but staff doesn't anticipate any long-term impacts. The parking
reduction specifically will also not impede normal development on other properties.
Fourth, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities are being provided.
Generally, staff finds that the alley provides adequate vehicular access to the proposed use and
the ped mall provides adequate pedestrian access. In addition, staff will ensure that adequate
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 19 of 28
utilities, drainage and other necessary facilities will be provided through the site plan review and
building permit processes. Regarding the tax increment financing (TIF) that is being requested
to fill the project's financing gap, the TIF dollars will be rebated over a 15 year period but are not
limited to infrastructure improvements, they will likely be used to help with debt payments.
Fifth, adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to
minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Lehmann reiterated that both parking level
entrances are on the alley at grade with access to public streets provided to the east at the
terminus of South Dubuque Street which intersects East Burlington at a traffic light or west to
South Clinton Street at a mid -block location. Staff anticipates most traffic would go east because
it's a signal control intersection and around six cars can queue at the signal with additional
space in the alley. Depending on final characteristics of the site, traffic signal timing at the South
Dubuque and East Burlington Street intersection may have to be tweaked to make sure that that
cars can get out and that there's not too much stacking impacting the alley, but staff doesn't
believe that needs to be a condition of this parking special exception. Overall staff believes that
adequate measures are being taken to minimize traffic congestion.
Sixth, except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being
considered, it will in all respects conform to existing standards. Staff will ensure that all
applicable standards and regulations are being met again through the site plan review and
building permit processes. If TIF dollars are used as proposed, additional requirements will also
need to be met as part of project which includes standards for affordable housing, where at
least 15% of units must be affordable or they must pay a fee in lieu of those units and they
would have to meet at least a LEED silver standards (Lehmann noted he believes they're
proposing to meet LEED Gold standards based on their current submittals) and they'd have to
provide some minimum public improvements, such as for these historic properties and other
public benefits. Those will be met through the TIF review, assuming that TIF is used for the
project, which staff believes is the case.
Finally, the proposed exception must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as
amended. Lehmann stated the Comprehensive Plan shows this area as general commercial,
which is to be expected for the downtown, in the Future Land Use Map with a goal to preserve
the historic mainstreet character of the downtown while encouraging appropriate infill to
enhance the economic viability and residential diversity of the area. Lehmann added this is also
part of the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan and objectives in that mirror what's in
the Comprehensive Plan such as protecting the historic character and key historic buildings,
promoting quality infill and redevelopment, and the development program for the downtown
includes residential options, including new construction and rehab. Lehmann noted this block is
not specifically highlighted in the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan but projects with
limited onsite parking are generally supported for the Downtown Parking Districts because
parking is to be considered at a parking district level rather than a site by site or project by
project level. Therefore, staff finds that reducing parking to promote preservation and provide
infill development is consistent with these Plans.
Staff recommends approval of EXC20-0007, to reduce the minimum parking requirements by
60% for the properties located at 109, 111 113-115, 117-119, 121 and 127 East College Street,
subject to the following condition:
1. City Council adopt the Historic District Overlay as considered in REZ20-02, to designate
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 20 of 28
these properties as a local historic landmark.
Lehmann noted staff received one public comment, which was included in the agenda packet.
The correspondent owns 3400 square feet of empty office space nearby and noted potential
tenants have declined to lease space due to a lack of parking and long waitlist for parking
permits in the nearby public ramps as discussed. They also note that the City needs to provide
parking to keep downtown office tenants and that exemptions can harm existing owners.
Parker asked if the City adopts the historic plan with 100% exemption, is that another vote by
the Board or is that just automatic. Lehmann replied City Council does not consider this parking
reduction, what City Council is considering right now is the historic district overlay, which
assuming that is passed will affect what can be built in the zone and what the review process is
for the zone. Again, the Historic Preservation Commission has already seen the plans as have
the Planning and Zoning Commission. At this point the applicant has requested a 60% parking
reduction as part of the special exception, so if the applicant wanted to come back later and say
they want 100% parking reduction that would need to be a different special exception.
Chrischilles asked regarding the historic landmark status, what protection does that provides
those properties. Lehmann explained that any redevelopment would have to go through
Historic Preservation Commission review. Russett added the historic overlay protects these
buildings from demolition. Any proposal to demolish or change any exterior elements of the
buildings like the facade, doors, windows, siding, etc. would have to go to the Historic
Preservation Commission for review. Chrischilles asked if someone proposed to rezone the
area and it passed, would the historic overlay carry over to subsequent owners of those
properties. Russett confirmed it would. Chrischilles asked if the owners are required to
maintain those properties in accordance with whatever the desires are of the Historic
Preservation Committee. Russett stated any proposed modifications to the exterior, current
owners or future owners, would have to go through a historic review process.
Chrischilles asked if the City can put an overlay status or historical status on these buildings,
regardless of the owner's wishes, or do the owners have to agree to it. Russett stated in this
case it was a voluntary landmark designation and the rezoning was filed by the property owner.
However, the Historic Preservation Commission has the ability to move forward any local
landmark rezoning requests to Council and if the property owner disagreed with that, they could
object and it would require a super majority of Council members to agree to the rezoning.
Chrischilles noted it seems as though the City Council or City in general, is in favor of granting
some sort of historic status to those facades and he is wondering if the same thing can be
achieved without this project. Russett replied yes, in theory, if the applicant didn't pursue the
local landmark designation, at a future date, another entity like the Historic Preservation
Commission may want to pursue a local landmark designation for these properties. Chrischilles
noted in the staff report one of the points made was currently the buildings have no protection
from demolition and obviously the City doesn't want the buildings demolished or significantly
altered, and he is just wondering if that can be achieved without the apartment building being
added and the subsequent issues that it raises in terms of parking. Russett said while yes, the
historic overlay could be achieved without the new project, there's no guarantee that without the
project and the landmark designation, that these buildings will be protected. Chrischilles noted
it was said the City could impart a landmark designation regardless of owner's approval and
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 21 of 28
then it would be up to the owners to object. Russett confirmed it could be done but that's not
something the City or Commission is currently proposing. They currently have a property owner
that's voluntarily open to landmarking the properties and in order to make the project work, there
needs to be some development potential.
Chrischilles noted he realizes the issue in front of the Board is not necessarily whether these
buildings get historical status but getting to what they are supposed to be looking at, he would
like to know a little more about what staff has proposed for overflow parking that may result from
the 11 story apartment building other than saying they're not worried about it because the
people that move in here are going to know in advance that they shouldn't have cars and they
probably won't move in if they don't if they have a car. Are there any other alternatives that were
considered for overflow, considering long term parking in the downtown ramps are full with long
waiting lists and there is no off street parking in the immediate area of that project.
Lehmann said he is unaware of any plans for future parking ramps or any type of parking
supplying downtown Iowa City. From staff's perspective, the developer needs to know their
market and how that relates to parking. In this case, if there is overflow, it is the responsibility of
the tenant to find parking but it shouldn't directly impact neighboring properties because the on
street parking isn't long term. So the tenants would need to find parking somewhere in the city
and if they couldn't, then that would affect who move into the place.
Chrischilles noted if prospective tenants don't want to live there because there is no long-term
plan for parking, or any idea how to accommodate the parking, it might increase vacancies in
that building. That ties into that correspondence letter received from the office owner which can't
find tenants because there is no long-term parking. Since the developer is likely going to be
asking for TIF money, what happens if the vacancy rate is such that the project isn't viable long
term and the TIF situation is negative for the City.
Hazell asked if the Chauncy put in all the parking they needed, or did they get a reduction and
what has been the impact. Lehmann noted he did not look specifically at the Chauncy, he
looked at other downtown housing projects that the applicant has done and the number of
parking spaces provided. In some cases, where they had offsite parking available upon request,
30% to 40% of units have requested parking space.
Hazell asked about the parking ramps being at capacity from 10 to 2 and how long has that
been at that capacity. Lehmann replied based on input from transit staff, it's that ramps are
generally full during peak hours, but that it has decreased dramatically due to the pandemic. As
a result, the City has released more parking passes in the last year, but they are anticipating
that demand will go back to pre -pandemic levels.
Hazell stated maybe it's not possible to answer if some of these new developments have put
heavier pressure on those parking spaces because of the pandemic. He noted however for
many years it has felt like the ramps are full during peak times so definitely a case to be made
that the City should provide more but the Board is not in the position to tell the City to do that.
Parker added there's probably too many commuters coming in during the day. Perhaps there
will be enough people that want to live downtown.
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 22 of 28
Lehmann noted that transit staff also spoke about was the City has some capacity in other
ramps where occasionally businesses will request parking spaces and they will be offered
spaces in a ramp that's further away with capacity, but usually the business is not interested
due to that distance and they just want something that's closer to them.
Chrischilles asked whether the staff report stated there were no long-term parking vacancies or
available permit at the present time. Lehmann replied that for those three nearest ramps
specifically, there are not permits available. This does not account for all downtown ramps.
There are still hourly parking spaces. The City has to balance hourly spaces with monthly
spaces depending on anticipated demand being between long term and short term parking.
Chrischilles noted as a matter of historical perspective, he was on the Board when it voted on 7
South Linn and the original proposal was for a 14 story building but the Board determined that
because of a lack of permit parking available, it should only be 7 stories. The applicant had no
parking included in the project, they were seeking 100% reduction in parking requirement, there
was some availability in the Tower Place parking ramp but not enough to satisfy a 14 -story
building. They also used the example of 40% of occupants requesting parking based on
dwelling units, but Chrischilles believes that underestimates the calculation and it would seem
more accurate if it was based on number of bedrooms and not units. This particular project is
186 bedrooms, which times 0.4 is 74 spaces so 50 spaces is grossly inadequate.
Pretorius said they will discuss this more when they talk amongst the Board but she is assuming
from a builders perspective or developers perspective, they would love to provide as much
parking as possible but when it turns the project upside down and they're not going to be
making a profit, the project can't move forward. She is assuming the project is probably maxed
out in the parking it can in fact achieve without being in the red at the end of the day. She
acknowledged it is an assumption, and the correspondence received notes this is an issue that
currently exists regarding parking downtown, so is this project going to suffer from that as well.
Kevin Monson (Newman Monson Architects) is representing Tailwind Group and to give a little
history of this project. This started in August 2017 when the building called the Crescent Block
Building, probably better known as The Union, was put on auction and for the first time in close
to 100 years was changing ownership and the Tailwind Group headquartered in Mankato,
Minnesota, bought the building on auction. Since that time, they've been planning the project
with many different groups throughout the community, as well as the City, going through the
approval processes, which has been difficult because of its many moving parts. Monson stated
it has taken a lot of time and a lot of people's input. He stated the idea of creating landmark
status for the buildings on College Street was not the City's idea, it was Tailwinds and they
brought it to the City. They would like to landmark these buildings on the ped mall so that they
could be preserved in perpetuity. Monson noted that on the downtown ped mall, some of these
buildings have not been occupied for some time because they were not viable. They were too
large, they didn't have elevator access, and developers could not figure out how to put them
back into a usable state because they couldn't generate enough funds on their own through the
individual buildings. Therefore the idea of buying multiple parcels to save the entire block was
proposed, which is much more advantageous to the community and the City rather than to just
save one building and let the rest be torn down or destroyed. If they can maintain that entire
historic block, they can achieve a goal of the City and Historic Preservation Commission.
Monson pointed out that the Economic Development Committee of the City Council at four
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 23 of 28
o'clock today approved the TIF agreement to go to the full City Council and so it will go through
the entire City Council as soon as the City Attorney's Office has finished their documentation
and Tailwind has reviewed and approved that document. Monson also noted they've gone
through Historic Preservation Commission multiple times and this development has been
approved with the proposed addition by the Historic Preservation Commission who had to
approve the rezoning of the property and also approve the entire project with the landmark
status and with the new building. Monson stated the new building is the engine that drives this
project, without that engine, the historic preservation will not happen and there's not funds to
make it work. Monson added they will be going for LEED Gold, the City TIF requirements
require LEED Silver level but this will be the greenest apartment building they have seen in Iowa
City, it will be the highest performing energy building. He acknowledged that costs money, but
the whole idea is sustainability, making a walking community and increasing the density of
downtown. People who live downtown in the heart of the City don't need to drive and that's the
beauty of this project, not everybody needs or wants to drive. People in the future may not even
want a car nor live by the standards that everybody has to have a car, times are changing and
many cities are thinking about that. Cities have built all of these parking garages and with the
reduced demand in the future, whether that's 10 years or 15, what are they going to do with
these parking structures. This project is an investment in the community to create the most
sustainable project, improving the walkability and the attractiveness of downtown. Monson
acknowledged no one envisioned what downtown could be until Plaza Towers was built and no
one anticipated that downtown residences would be popular not only with students, but with the
adult population. This building is not just for students, there will be a diversity of sizes because
there will be a mix of owners, as some of the other buildings downtown already have. It's not
just students, it's professionals and young people too.
Monson also noted that because they are going LEED Gold, they will have points deducted if
they provide more parking, it is a negative when talking about LEED or sustainability. So that
would detract from the ability to achieve the LEED Gold. Monson also acknowledged the closest
three ramps are very busy but the Harrison Street parking structure, which was designed a few
years ago, has very few people and is almost empty and certainly that is a very short walk from
this project. Typically, people that want to live downtown want to live there because they enjoy
the nightlife and the amenities of downtown, there are great grocery stores and one of the
amenities being added is the Riverside Theatre. For individuals that want to have a car, they
can walk to the Harrison Street parking facility, he is sure the City has all kinds of permits
available in that parking structure, because it's not highly used. Additionally, there's a lot of
parking downtown. The negative stories are from the shoppers because they want something
convenient in and out but the long-term people, they can walk a little bit if they want a permit.
Monson reiterated it's a big project, it's gone through lots of different approvals, the reason the
City Council has not finalized the final reading of the landmark status is because if the TIF
doesn't pass, the project is dead. If the Board votes against the project for a parking reduction
tonight, the project is dead. They didn't want to get the cart too far in front of the horse because
the owners need a viable project and they could not support the landmark status as the project
is the engine to drive it.
Chrischilles asked what improvements are on the docket for these historical buildings. Monson
noted all of the final plans have been reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation
Commission, so these are what's moving forward. The City also has the building plans for all of
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 24 of 28
these projects, not only the historic, but the tower as they are going through the permitting
process right now. The improvements to the historic buildings will require internal work that's
needed to make them viable, there will be elevators added, new mechanical electrical systems
being added, and new roofs. The buildings needed a deep overhaul, especially the Crescent
Block Building, which has been empty on the upper floors for decades.
Chrischilles asked if those are going to be apartments. Monson replied that the Riverside
Theater is taking the entire top floor and a portion of the second floor. Revival is also taking a
portion of the second floor and then there are four studio apartments on what used to be the
upper floor of the Union bar. They didn't want a bar on the second floor, obviously, below a
theater or above a theater, so a lot of thought has gone into those users.
Chrischilles asked how much they were asking for in the TIF proposal. Monson replied have to
wait until the final TIF development agreement is published by the City and he hasn't seen that
final agreement. The City has been negotiating with Tailwinds and he is not part of negotiations.
Chrischilles asked if a third level of parking was somehow incorporated into the building how
much that might increase the gap. Monson replied it would be impossible to design, they
couldn't circulate to the third level without destroying buildings, they were very fortunate that
they could sandwich in two levels of parking. He added an internal parking ramp system is very
inefficient and extremely expensive with the cost of a parking space in a large parking ramp at
like $25,000 a space whereas if it's a small ramp, they go up to about $50,000 to $75,000 just
for one parking space so it becomes very quickly cost prohibitive.
Chrischilles asked if there any possible way of gathering data that shows in similar projects that
are already built how many people actually own cars. Can they show whether 40% or 50% of
people request parking. Lehmann replied data may be available for the larger picture of parking
availability throughout the downtown, such as the number of spaces and how that's changed
over time, and also the number of spaces provided per unit or per bedroom in downtown
developments. However, that information may not show the individual demand for parking or the
30% to 40% as self-reported by Newman Monson. Staff does not have good access to that
information. Chrischilles asked if staff could survey apartment complexes and ask them what
their reservation requests are. Lehmann noted to answer that question, the City would have to
send surveys to complexes which would then need to survey their residents to fully understand
who is parking where. When Monson mentioned the Harrison Street ramp, that's the ramp
where the City has offered parking spaces but businesses decided it was too far away.
Chrischilles asked if there is any idea how many vacancies are in the Harrison Street ramp,
long-term permits. Lehmann said he can't give an exact number but that some people were
placed at the Harrison Street ramp even though it was not the ideal choice of businesses who
had requested parking. If the Board chose to defer this item, he could get those numbers.
Dulek added if they do defer, make sure to defer before closing the public hearing, because a
public hearing will need to be continued as well.
Monson said he feels Tailwind would support the use of the downtown parking structures, the
three closest, for commercial tenants and would not support apartment use of those structures
and he doesn't support it. He feels the city does a good job of being selective on who they sell
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 25 of 28
permits to in those structures because it's vital to some of the office users and downtown
apartment users do not need to have a parking spot next door. Also the downtown hotels have
to also utilize the parking spaces in the public ramps because they do not provide parking in
their structures because again that is not feasible in their cost structure. The Graduate Hotel
and The Hotel Vetro use the Dubuque Street parking structure and The Chauncey uses the
Chauncey parking structure. The new hotels on South Clinton Street also use the ground
transportation parking ramp and all of that parking is provided by the City and is important for
their vitality but to support an apartment dwelling unit, if they need parking, there's plenty of
parking to get and they don't have to sit on a waiting list to get it.
Pretorius noted she really like that Monson brought up the Gold LEED and thinks that really sets
the precedence and it'd be nice if other builders and developers would also follow those same
steps when building in Iowa City. She thinks it's something to applaud. Regarding the vehicle
situation and cars going electric or fully autonomous in the future, do they hold up a
development based on how things have been based on 50 years of expectations. It is
interesting to applaud a building for wanting to be green and energy efficient, but then to say at
the same time they need all these parking spots for vehicles that produce emissions, it's an
interesting catch 22 scenario. She understands the compromise of bringing some vitality back to
these businesses and keeping the look of the building. Additionally, with TIF funds, it has its
pluses and minuses, but the 15% affordable housing quota that comes with it is something the
City wants, more affordable housing. So maybe parking is an issue in some ramps, but there is
availability in other ramps such as the Harrison Street ramp and the Capital Street garage. The
City has done a good job of metering on -street parking to make sure it is for people who are just
visiting businesses for an hour at a time and using the ramps for longer term parking. Pretorius
also applauds somebody who's willing to take on this project, because it is hard to make it
financially feasible. But when's the next time that something like this is going to come along and
the next opportunity for this building to be rehabbed or be historically preserved to some degree
and to continue the growth in downtown Iowa City.
Monson noted the direction of the Economic Development Committee is to request that a fee in
lieu of providing low income housing in this project. So the project will provide $1.8 million
dollars to the low income housing fund for the City because that's what the City Economic
Development Committee requested they do, rather than to provide housing within the project.
Chrischilles asked if developers have any concern about too much density or too many
apartments in the downtown area with the Pentacrest Gardens project coming up. Monson
replied it is still unclear if the Pentacrest Gardens project will go ahead, and certainly
apartments that are closer in add to the vitality of downtown and are more advantageous than
those even across Burlington Street, so this project has appeal because they need activity in the
downtown to create and be an engine for the businesses, because right now they're hurting.
The more people they add downtown of all different ages, the better off downtown will be and
it's the way to preserve downtown. The other thing, they don't want mega bars added, The
Union Bar wasn't probably the best downtown business for many reasons and part of this
project is right sizing those buildings so that there is hopefully a better situation for all ages.
Chrischilles moved to defer this item and requested the actual number of permits and
locations available in City parking downtown.
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 26 of 28
Chrischilles noted he would like to have data on the actual number of permits available in City
parking downtown, including the Harrison Street ramp, and he feels this is a project with many
interconnecting parts and to have five days to come to a decision isn't long enough for him
Parker stated the density is what the downtown landscape desires and needs and also 10 years
from now it could look so different. The winds of generational changes are blowing and nobody
wants to get a driver's license anymore and then in 10 years Tesla's going to be called from a
smartphone app and nobody will actually own the car.
There was no second on Chrischilles motion to defer.
Pretorius closed the public hearing.
Parker moved to approved EXC20-0007, to reduce the minimum parking requirements by
60% for the properties located at 109, 111 113-115, 117-119, 121 and 127 East College
Street, subject to the following condition:
1. City Council adopt the Historic District Overlay as considered in REZ20-02, to
designate these properties as a local historic landmark.
Hazell seconded.
Chrischilles stated the general issue before them is do they feel that reducing the parking 60%
is going to cause parking problems or other types of problems subsequent to that. Regarding
findings of fact this project could be injurious to other downtown merchants, as mentioned in the
correspondence from the person who had empty office space that he can't rent.
Hazell agreed that is a good point but thinks there are two sides, there's the potential injury of
use of property based on lack of parking, and this may add to that, but on the other side, they're
bringing people who will live downtown, who have wallets and are going to spend money, and
are therefore going to bring positive impacts and improve the experience or use of those other
buildings. Additionally, as they grow towards density, parking becomes less needed and more
businesses and people will want to live there. Iowa City is unique in that it has a thriving
downtown one can live in. He lives on the north side and had only one vehicle for a long time,
and honestly, it sat in his driveway sometimes for weeks without using it because they could
access everything they needed, shopping, restaurants, the library and he's somebody that's a
20 minute walk from this proposed location. There is a new breed of people that are coming to
the area that are not going to demand parking and won't put pressure on those parking spots.
This project is a benefit that is going to bring economic benefit with both the renovations and the
spenders will contribute to the environment and properties around it. The improvement to the
front of a large amount of the ped mall will also add attraction for other businesses to come.
Chrischilles appreciated Hazell's point and noted maybe he's being short sighted because
everybody views it from their own perspective, and he is viewing it from his perspective, which
tends to be more automobile based, there is always the question of where he will park his car.
Parker noted public transportation was not even mentioned in the brief.
Hazell noted part of the problem with public transportation is, at least in Iowa City, it's that
everything comes downtown and leaves downtown, and if there's not that great of a
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 27 of 28
transportation system to try to get to other locations. Parker stated the argument was not made
that public transportation eases the burden on parking structures in the downtown.
Chrischilles noted the other concern he had was whether it meets the City's Comprehensive
Plan and that the issue there is the mentioned contextual infill. He doesn't really see an 11 -
story modern apartment complex behind a row of historical buildings as contextual infill.
Parker noted however these buildings were once mega bars and the square footage for each
one was like 9000 square feet and no record store or clothing store can accommodate that kind
of space or leasing requirement anymore. They're trying to make it smaller to be more feasible
for downtown locations to actually rent on a monthly basis.
Chrischilles stated he is just saying that the 11 -story modern apartment building doesn't really
add to the historic character of downtown.
Hazell noted that from his perspective that the fact that the Historic Preservation Commission
has reviewed it and approved it shows they have voiced their opinion on that and he feels best
to defer to them on historic appropriateness of this building.
Pretorius stated regarding the parking her one thought is if the Board tries to do anything they
don't really know what the implications are on the entire project. Monson stated in his report it
isn't feasible to achieve any more parking financially and also it starts to take away from the
green energy efficiency LEED certification for this building.
Parker stated regarding agenda item EXC20-0007 he concurs with the findings set forth in the
staff report of this meeting date, December 9, 2020 with the recommended conditions presented
by staff, and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied unless amended or
opposed by another board member. He recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the
staff report for the approval of this proposal. Hazell seconded the findings.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-1 (Chrischilles dissenting).
Pretorius 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.
CONSIDER THE NOVEMBER 18, 2020 MINUTES:
Chrischilles moved to approve the minutes of November 18, 2020. Hazell seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0.
ADJOURNMENT:
Hazell moved to adjourn this meeting, Parker seconded, a vote was taken and all approved.
Board of Adjustment
December 9, 2020
Page 28 of 28
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020
NAME
TERM
EXP.
1/8
2/12
4/8
5/13
5/27
6/10
7/15
10/14
11/18
12/9
CHRISCHILLES, GENE
12/31/2022
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COX, ERNIE
12/31/2020
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
O/E
HAZELL, ZEPHAN
12/31/2021
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
PARKER, BRYCE
12/31/2024
0/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PRETORIUS, AMY
12/31/2023
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Key: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
-- -- = Not a Member
Item Number: 4.c.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Historic Preservation Commission: January 28
1
MINUTES APPROVED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
January 28, 2021
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carl Brown, Kevin Boyd, Helen Burford, Sharon DeGraw, Cecile
Kuenzli, Lyndi Kiple, Quentin Pitzen, Jordan Sellergren, Austin Wu
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: None
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical
due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff, and the public
presented by COVI D-19.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (becomes effective only after separate Council action)
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the electronic meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. utilizing
Zoom.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PRIORITIES AND ANNUAL WORK
PLAN
The Commission discussed the draft work plan included in the packet.
Under short term goals in the first section, Burford said that she suggested creating a social
heritage map of Iowa City to show where the different ethnic groups settled. Boyd said that he
thought it was important to also include the location of other sites important to racial equity.
Boyd asked if the City Council has responded to the Commission's request. Russett said that
they received the minutes but have not had any discussion on it. Bristow said that a more well-
developed proposal might work better at eliciting a response.
In the section on climate action, Bristow said the interest in the topic of demolitions had come up
because Staff was trying to calculate and quantify the waste generated from the demolition of
325 East Washington Street. Burford said that she had two ideas: that the Commission get
permission to take the National Preservation briefs and categorize them on how they can
contribute to climate action, and to consider sponsoring a housing building evaluation of energy
efficiency for landmarks and National Register/Local Historic Districts in order to promote
window and structural conservation (tuck pointing, siding, insulation, gutters) as well as
adaptations (solar panels). Bristow said they were thinking of updating some of their sections in
i
the handbook with similar points of information on sustainability. Boyd said that it would be
helpful to put a link on the Preservation Commission's page or the City's website that provided
resources to help guide folks if they are considering renovations or repairs. Kuenzli asked if it
would be possible to make conference programs and talks on preservation available to the
community at large. Boyd said that providing and directing the community to these types of
resources could be a short-term goal.
Sellergren said that it would be a good idea to include itemized information for all of the
guidelines for alterations in the handbook, as well as turn that into a website with resources
(tabs and links) for each guideline. Bristow said that updating the handbook generally takes
more than one year, depending on the level of updates needed, but having a webpage about
historic preservation and sustainability would be a good start. DeGraw asked if this is something
that they would want to make a post on Facebook about.
Boyd said that Wu, per his notes, referenced the city of Cedar Rapids' standard 60 day hold on
demolitions if a lot is over 50 years old. Boyd said that the Commission should figure out how
they want to weigh in and add to those discussions in regard to climate action and what they
value as a Community. Boyd said that Wu asked about ideas to help prevent demolition by
neglect.
Bristow said that some of this discussion started because she had found articles about a
community in Oregon that has reduced their landfill waste by requiring the deconstruction and
salvaging of valuable materials in places built before 1920 prior to demolition. She said that
there is a similar practice in a neighborhood in St. Louis which has led to a reduction in landfills,
saving more buildings and materials, and teaching skilled labor. Kuenzli said that these articles
would be a good addition to their website. Sellergren said that this is also a very good economic
opportunity and asked if it would be a city run program and city employed. Bristow said that she
didn't know for sure, and Boyd mentioned that they could work with the Climate Action
Commission. Burford said this would be a great opportunity to reach out to Friends of Historic
Preservation.
Boyd said that Wu mentioned in his notes about their guidebook and its relation to solar panels,
and Boyd said that they could include that under their short-term goals as they think about
sustainability as a whole.
In the section on strengthening community engagement and intergovernmental relations,
Burford asked if there was any way to restore the university housing program. Bristow said she
thinks the budget for this fiscal year was different from past years and is not sure of their status
at this moment. Kuenzli asked if the Commission is notified when someone takes out a
demolition permit that might be in an area worth preserving. Bristow said that she wasn't sure if
that communication still happens and Kuenzli recommended that that could be another one of
their short-term goals.
Burford said that she came up with a long-term goal for community engagement and
government, which was to establish an emergency plan for natural disasters and climate
change. Boyd said he thinks that is a good goal to have. Russett asked if this is a plan more for
the Commission and Staff or for property owners. Boyd said that it would be more for
Commission and Staff on how to help the property owners in dealing with the disaster.
Kuenzli asked about recruiting for the three new Commission positions. She suggested finding
someone who is an architect, a real estate attorney, or someone has some professional
experience, and mentioned Kevin and Pat Hannick. Bristow said Pitzen and Burford's terms are
almost up, but since it is their first term they could apply to be on the Commission again. She
3
said that it is important to fill the empty positions they have now because it is a bit difficult to get
a quorum. Kiple said that she will be leaving this summer, but that it might be worthwhile to work
with the apartment companies to let their tenants know about the opportunity to apply. Brown
asked how often they reach out to districts that they don't have a representative for. Bristow said
that they have done a big mailing in the past on top of their annual letter to property owners, but
not much else. Boyd said that part of their goal should be to think about and reach out to other
audiences.
In terms of mobility, Burford said that they should bring forward walkable neighborhoods and
preserving the revitalization of Longfellow and Horace Mann Schools. She said that this is
extremely important for families as well as historic preservation. To add to the walkability factor,
DeGraw said that she thinks there is around an average of $6,000 savings a year for people
who can avoid having a car.
The Poor Farm was mentioned and Bristow said that a potential transit route in that direction
was discussed in March, but she is not sure what the result of that meeting was. Russett said
that they are still in the middle of that study, so nothing has been finalized yet.
Sellergren said that the changing of Dodge and Governor Street, south of Burlington, to two-way
streets has led to a greater appreciation of the houses and ambience to the neighborhood.
Kuenzli asked if the Historic Preservation fund is going to be reduced or completely eliminated
from the city budget. Bristow said that there were some concerns that their budget might be
reduced by $10,00, but that is not the case and they are still moving forward with a budget of
$40,000 for the next fiscal year, beginning on July 1st. She said that there has been some
question about whether funds can continue to be carried over if they are already earmarked for
a project and under contract, but she does not know the result yet. Kuenzli asked how people
find out about that fund, and Bristow said that information about it is included in the annual letter
and Bristow also mentions it to all owners when discussing eligible projects on eligible
properties.
Kuenzli asked how eminent the Lucas Farms Kirkwood Historic or Conservation District project
is. Boyd said nothing has happened yet and they just need to be ready to partner with
neighborhoods who are ready to do it. Bristow said that it would be a huge project.
On the topic of fostering healthy neighborhoods and affordable housing, Burford said that she is
a big proponent of form -based zoning, and that this would be a tremendous accomplishment for
the Commission to promote and accomplish. Russett said that this is already on the planning
staffs' work program and that they are working on some smaller updates at this point, but it is a
long-term goal for the department. Boyd said that the Commission is interested in helping to
expedite the project. Brown asked for a summary on what a form -based code is, and Russett
said that form -based codes focus less on building use and more on the interaction between the
building and the street. Burford said that the City of Cincinnati follows form -based zoning, so
that is a good visual to look at. Wu said that a discussion could be had about a form -based code
being paired with the elimination of parking minimums or increased leniency of land use.
Russett agreed with Wu's points and said that they want to totally open up their parking
standards and take another look at them.
For the discussion on an inclusive and resilient economy throughout the city, Boyd said that the
local landmarks on College Street have successfully passed. Bristow said that they have a
strong need for more preservation contractors and craftspeople and wondered if there is a way
for contractors to also function as teachers so that they can have apprentices who can provide
labor and learn along the way. She said that this could potentially be subsidized through some
4
kind of city program, and have wide-ranging benefits. Pitzen said that it is quite a responsibility
to apprentice somebody and that pulling it off might be difficult, but it would be a good thing.
Kuenzli said that there is a similar structured program in Dubuque (the Heart Program). Boyd
said he thinks this is a good idea and they could put it down as a long-term goal.
Boyd said that the Cochrane-Sharpless-Dennis house at 410/412 North Clinton Street is now a
landmark.
COMMISSION INFORMATION
None.
ADJOURNMENT
Brown moved to adjourn the meeting. Kuenzli seconded. Meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Lauren Rails.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020-2021
TERM
3/12
4/09
51114
6/11
7/09
8/13
9/10
10/08
11/12
12/10
01/14
01/28
NAME
EXP.
AGRAN,
6/30/20
X
X
X
X
THOMAS
BOYD, KEVIN
6/30/23
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
BROWN,
6/30/23
__
__
__
__
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
CARL
BURFORD,
6/30/21
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
HELEN
CLORE,
6/30/20
X
X
X
X
--
--
--
--
--
--
GOSIA
DEGRAW,
6/30/22
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
SHARON
KUENZLI,
6/30/22
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
CECILE
KIPLE, LYNDI
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
PITZEN,
6/30/21
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
QUENTIN
SELLERGREN,
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
JORDAN
W U, AUSTIN
6/30/23
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Item Number: 4.d.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Historic Preservation Commission: February 11
MINUTES APPROVED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
February 11, 2021
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd, Carl Brown, Helen Burford, Sharon DeGraw, Cecile
Kuenzli, Lyndi Kiple, Quentin Pitzen, Jordan Sellergren
MEMBERS ABSENT: Austin Wu
STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow
OTHERS PRESENT: Maeve Clark
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical
due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff, and the public
presented by COVID-19.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (becomes effective only after separate Council action)
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the electronic meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. utilizing
Zoom.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
DISCUSSION OF REVISED HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PRIORITIES AND ANNUAL
WORK PLAN:
Boyd asked if anyone wanted to make any edits to the plan. Kuenzli asked who would be
reviewing the plan and if it would be helpful to specify what the Tate Arms and the Iowa
Federation Home were (and what they represented) for those not from the Iowa City area. Boyd
said that they could add a dependent clause stating that these two sites are important to Iowa
City's civil rights heritage.
Kuenzli said that she did not see the revival of the University Project included under short term
goals in the revised plan. Bristow said she was not sure that the Historic Preservation
Commission would be involved in that discussion. Kuenzli said that it would fit into their purview
because these types of homes are often in neighborhoods greater than 50 years old. Bristow
said she could add in promoting the continuation or growth of the University Program as a short
term goal.
MOTION: Kuenzli moved to approve the Annual Work Plan as revised. DeGraw seconded.
The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
REVIEW DRAFT CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT ANNUAL REPORT:
Bristow said she hopes that the motion made will include the ability to be revised by Chair and
Staff. She said that this is a state form that identifies the work that the City has done such as the
31 National Register properties that were altered, properties that were reviewed for local
landmark status, local landmarks and properties in conservation districts that were changed,
etc. She said that they did not really pass any ordinances through City Council this year (2020)
that impacted historic preservation. She said that the Commission had created an ambitious
work plan for 2020, but did not make much progress over the years, and she included their
future work plan as well.
Bristow said that they have seen a decrease in Neighborhood and Developmental Services
reviews as well as a decrease in building permits in 2020. She said that there has been an
increase in historic preservation inquiries about specific projects and properties, especially in
the first half of the year, most likely due to people being stuck in their homes during the
pandemic. She said that they also talked about the applications and their Preservation Fund,
how many projects they approved, what Staff and the Commission does for the community, etc.
Bristow also said that they like to talk about the Historic Preservation Awards, video and
slideshow presentations they did, and the particular issues, challenges, and successes that the
Commission encounters. Boyd asked if there were other key sections the Commission needs to
pay special attention to. Bristow said that the State also allows them to submit a portfolio of
images if the Commission desires.
MOTION: Brown moved to approve the Certified Local Government Annual Report as
finalized by Staff and Chair. Burford seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF:
Certificate of No Material Effect — Chair and Staff Review
1029 Bowery — Clark Street Conservation District
Bristow said that 1029 Bowery is a key property in this conservation district. She said that they
built a breezeway addition back in 2007, have a garage, a fence, and they are going to put a
pool in behind the fence. She said that a pool requires a fence permit, so the owners must
submit a fence application, which comes to the Historic Preservation Commission. She said that
they did not have to build a new fence since they will be using the existing metal fence.
Kuenzli asked if the pool would be visible from Bowery Street. Bristow said they have
landscaping in their plan that will make it not as visible. Kuenzli asked about the dimensions of
the pool. Bristow said that it will be a 13'x 33' in -ground pool, but reviewing the pool does not
fall under the purview of the Historic Preservation Commission (just the fencing application).
Minor Review — Staff Review
737 Grant Street — Lonafellow Historic District
Bristow said that this property has a new owner who has done a lot of nice work on the house
such as repairing all of the stucco, repairing the attic window, and replacing a modern
greenhouse window with a double -hung window. She said that this project is simple roof
replacement.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JANUARY 14,2021:
MOTION: Pitzen moved to approve the minutes from the January 14, 2021 meeting.
Sellergren seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
2
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Annual Historic Preservation Awards Sub -Committee
Bristow said that they need a sub -committee to figure out what the awards are and what they
will do. She said the committee will meet to pick the winners, potentially present the awards,
help write scripts, take photographs, assist with publicity, etc. Boyd, Kuenzli, DeGraw, and
Sellergren volunteered. Boyd said that they might also reach out to the Friends of Historic
Preservation for help, and Maeve Clark, a representative of Friends, said that she will report that
to their board. Kuenzli said that she would also be willing to help Sellergren with the
photography if needed.
Boyd encouraged the Commission to reach out with suggestions about potential nominees.
Bristow said that often have a lot of painting projects, which is something nice to award.
Sellergren asked if there would be any value in giving out a cheeky award for the worst
demolition, just to draw attention to the losses. Boyd said that he has thought about that before
but thinks they should have more discussion about how that could be perceived by the
community.
COMMISSION INFORMATION:
Boyd said the State Hearing for the Iowa City Downtown District nomination will be help the
morning of February 1V1. He said that the nomination will then have to move to the National
Parks Service before it becomes official. Bristow said that the State might have edits before it
can be submitted to the National Parks Service.
ADJOURNMENT:
DeGraw moved to adjourn the meeting. Brown seconded. Meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m
Minutes submitted by Lauren Rails.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020-2021
NAME
TERM
EXP.
4/09
5//14
6/11
7/09
8/13
9/10
10/08
11/12
12/10
01/14
01/28
02/11
AGRAN,
6/30/20
X
X
X
--
THOMAS
BOYD, KEVIN
6/30/23
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
BROWN,
6/30/23
__
__
--
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
CARL
BURFORD,
6/30/21
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
HELEN
CLORE,
6/30/20
X
X
X
--
GOSIA
DEGRAW,
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
SHARON
KUENZLI,
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CECILE
KIPLE, LYNDI
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
PITZEN,
6/30/21
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
QUENTIN
SELLERGREN,
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
JORDAN
WU, AUSTIN
6/30/23
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Item Number: 4.e.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Housing & Community Development Commission: February 18
CITY OF IOWA CITY
W� MEMORANDUM
Date: February 24, 2021
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Brianna Thul, Community Development Planner
Re: Recommendation from Housing and Community Development Commission
At their February 18, 2021 meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission
made the following recommendation to the City Council:
By a vote of 8-0, HCDC recommends that Padron draft a letter to Council to recommend
delaying utility shut offs at least until Iowa Finance Authority funds are made available for
housing assistance payments to those in need.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0.
Corresponding letter attached.
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
Maria Padron
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319)930-9528
marialorena.padron@gmail.com
February 21, 2021
City Council
410 E Washington St,
Iowa City, IA 52240
RE: UTILITIES SHUTOFF MORATORIUM
Honorable Members of the City Council,
The Housing and Community Development Commission would like to recommend that the City of Iowa City enacts
a Utilities Shutoff Moratorium effective immediately.
We are still living a social, economic and health crisis caused by COVID-19. The HCDC is extremely concerned
about Iowa City residents' access to water. Access to water and sanitation is a human right. Back in 2010, the United
Nations General Assembly recognized the right of every human being to have access to enough water for personal
and domestic uses. The water must be safe and affordable. This issue affects women and girls in particular, who
must have access to clean and safe water to manage menstruation and maternity.
We believe the City of Iowa City must do whatever it can to help and protect its residents during this pandemic.
Thank you for your consideration,
Maria Padron
Chair
Housing and Community Development Commission
CC: Matt Drabek (Vice Chair)
Peggy Aguilar
Megan Alter
Lyn Dee Hook Kealey
Theresa Lewis
Nasr Mohammed
Peter Nkumu
Kyle Vogel
Page 1 of 1
MINUTES
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
FEBRUARY18, 2021 — 6:30 PM
ELECTRONIC MEETING
FINAL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Aguilar, Megan Alter, Matt Drabek, Lyn Dee Hook Kealey,
Theresa Lewis, Nasr Mohammed, Peter Nkumu, Maria Padron, Kyle
Vogel
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Erika Kubly, Brianna Thul
OTHERS PRESENT: Lucy Barker, Sara Barron, Crissy Canganelli, Charlie Eastham, Roger
Goedken, Brenda Hagmeier, Wisal Hussein, Kevin (unknown last name),
Frederick Newell, Amanda Nichols, Christine Ralston, Shirley Tramble
CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
Pardon called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 21, 2021:
Aguilar moved to approve the minutes of January 21, 2021. Drabek seconded and a vote was taken and
the motion passed 9-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Sara Barron (Executive Director of Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) wanted to let the
Commission know about some important updates that will have a dramatic impact on housing in Iowa City
and Johnson County. At the end of 2020, Congress passed a $900 billion COVID relief package and $25
billion of that was allocated toward housing and utility costs. The state of Iowa will allocate to households
$195 million for back rent and future rent as well as for back utilities. Based on Johnson County's
participation in previous COVID funding that's been available, Barron is estimating the Johnson County
residents will receive between $20 million and $25 million in rent and utility assistance. Barron
acknowledged this is a big deal because there are far too many households that are behind on their basic
needs and bills and they're struggling to survive the pandemic financially, as well as health wise. Barron
said they are seeing this as a crisis and are mobilizing a community wide response to help every eligible
household to apply for this money. The Affordable Housing Coalition is working with partners from Center
for Worker Justice, United Way, Project Better Together, Shelter House, Community, and Johnson
County Social Services to set up a program that will offer in person and phone and email assistance to
every household that wants to apply. Their goal is to reach every single eligible household in Johnson
County, which is ambitious and needed. Barron stated they will be looking for more assistance from the
City of Iowa City to mobilize and help publicize this to residents, they will also be able to assist landlords
who can apply for the assistance in cooperation with their tenants. Barron stated they're really excited to
be able to offer that service to everyone and more information about that will be coming soon. They
expect that the state of Iowa will begin releasing that money in March and open applications then so they
want to be ready with their assistance program as well. Barron added that one thing that this means is
that for a long time Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition and some of their partners have been
talking with the cities who are the utility providers of water, sewer and other basic needs and have asked
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 2 of 13
for all different types of help with utility costs in the past. Now for the first time, they have a whole lot of
money available to help pay past utility bills, so once again are asking the cities to have a water shutoff
moratorium, because they have learned that some residents in Coralville and North Liberty have had their
water shut off by the city because of their inability to pay. Barron added they understand that the City of
Iowa City is preparing to move forward on its plan to send all of the past due accounts to collections and
resume shutoffs as well so it is urgent that the cities extend some more grace to residents and keep their
water on so that they can get these back bills paid and the way to maximize the amount of federal
assistance that they're able to receive is to allow residents to accumulate these back bills so that they can
get them paid by the federal program. If people get put on payment plans or they try to pay it themselves,
they won't be able to get this assistance. Barron is asking for the Commission to weigh in on the City's
decision making about this and ensure that the water shutoff moratorium stays in place until they are able
to help every eligible household apply for and receive this assistance. Barron can answer any questions
about this program and encourages them to go to Iowa HousingRecovery.com where there is some
information about who will be eligible to apply and what that application process will look like including the
documentation that will be required.
Alter asked if there was a timeline of when the money would be expected to start coming to the residents
who need it. Barron replied right now the State is waiting for some guidance from the Department of
Treasury, which is administering the whole housing funding, and they're waiting to get that guidance until
they release the money, but they are saying March and Barron is optimistically hoping that that will mean
early March. Barron noted from the last time they did a similar program, once people were able to submit
a completed and successful application, they were able to turn that money around and direct payments to
landlords and utility providers in pretty short order. Utility providers, including the cities, are able to
register right now with their information so that as soon as the program is up and running, they're already
plugged into the system and can receive the payments.
Barron reiterated what they really need is just for the City to leave the water on and then they'll do the
work of helping people to apply and make sure that everyone is able make those payments quickly to the
landlords and utility providers.
Padron noted that March is quickly approaching, and this is probably going to happen before the next
Commission meeting so maybe they should write a letter to Council regarding these and get it sent before
the next meeting.
UESTION AND ANSWER SESSION FOR FY22 CDBG/HOME/EMERGING A2A PROGRAMS:
Padron stated the next agenda item is question and answer session for the fiscal year 2022 applications,
the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) and
Emerging Aid to Agencies (A2A) Programs. The application for these programs can be found at
icgov.org/actionplan. At this meeting, HCDC will host a question and answer session with applicants and
applicants are encouraged to send a representative to answer any questions for CDBG and HOME
applications. The ranking sheets are found in the applicant guide, the emerging agency applications do
not have ranking sheets. Padron noted no action will be taken in this meeting, HCDC funding
recommendations will be made next meeting currently scheduled for March 11.
Padron stated this question and answer session was created as a way to get more information after
HCDC reads through the applications and something is not clear, this is the session to ask those
questions. So instead of reading the application and not understanding the program and therefore just
giving it 0 points, this session is an opportunity to talk with the agencies and ask questions and
understand what they're intending to do with funding.
Padron stated another thing that she would like to say is when she is ranking applications, one of the
things that she focuses on is if she sees agencies that are trying to offer services that are already in the
community services and are duplicates. Iowa City is a wonderful city, and the number of nonprofit
organizations keeps growing which can be wonderful there isn't enough money for everyone maybe they
2
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 3 of 13
can try to help organizations and guide them to talk with other organizations may have a similar program
and partner with them. Also are there other grants this agency can apply for.
Alter noted certainly it is really exciting to see new agencies emerge but they want to make sure that
there's space provided for new agencies to come into being, but additionally, something to think about is
the potential for sustainability and is this an agency that can be at some point turned into a legacy.
The Commission began with the Emerging Aid to Agency applications and first is the Sudanese and
American Community Services. Padron noted first the applicant sent a letter to clarify that even though
their letterhead says they are located in Coralville, their address is now in Iowa City.
Lewis asked about the budget for this organization, the budget submitted was the project budget, which
was already part of the application process, but it would also be helpful for them to submit an
organizational budget to be reviewed as part of the proposal.
Wisal Hussein (President, Sudanese and American Community Services) said she can supply an
organization budget to the Commission.
Mohammed had a question about the current address for the organization. Hussein said the current
address is 1041 Arthur Street, but because the place is really tight, they are doing some events in another
places in Iowa City and also in Coralville. The registered agent address for the organization is in
Coralville because that is where he lives, this organization serves Iowa City and events are held in Iowa
City.
Vogel asked what has the association done as far as looking for other sources for both the iPads and the
laptops aside from just Amazon, has the association looked at other bulk rates. Have they looked at the
University of Iowa's surplus or other websites. Hussein said they can try to find better prices and provide
those. Vogel asked how they determined the need of 21, and the need of 15. Hussein explained it is
according to the student population they have, the members they serve. She noted this is actually less
than what they actually need but they are trying to find the people who are in real need and start with
them. Some families are a big family and they have a low income, and they can have one iPad for
everyone and do not need for each to have their own.
Vogel asked what the goal of the iPads versus a laptop or Chromebook. Hussein explained they need
these for the community center because all the services are online. They've had to drop a lot of activities
because they cannot get together in one place. They are trying to do their Arabic classes and English
learning and do have some Zumba classes online. Vogel again asked why iPads specifically. Hussein
stated because they have some Arabic classes for kids, and they don't want them working on laptops so
they are going to provide them with the iPad.
Padron had the same question as Vogel because it wasn't clear why !Pads and not laptops. She is
unsure if schools are providing iPads or laptops for the kids, but the schools are providing those things for
kids so there may be an overlap here. Also it wasn't also clear to her if these iPads or laptops are going to
be in the facility and people cannot take them home. Therefore, they will just need one laptop to provide
some classes in the facility and then the people taking the classes at home would have to have their own
computers. Hussein said they would actually be borrowing the laptops and taking them home.
Vogel asked with regards to the tablet, are they tied to Apple because there's other tablets like the
Amazon Fire tablets which are $92 versus $319 for an iPad so he is curious what the focus is of an iPad
and a full laptop versus a Chromebook and a Fire tablet. Maybe when they send in that operating budget
for the association, they can also send some new numbers on possible other options for what they're
looking for tech. Hussein agreed they could do that.
Mohammed also noticed that on the application they reported having 600 members but when they break
down the income they report only 500. Hussein explained that the 600 persons is family number and the
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 4 of 13
members are adults 18 and over only. When she put 500 total members those are with the median
income like from zero to 30% and 200 are from 31 % to 50%. Some people are not working at all, they
have some elder people who don't work and don't have any income so they will be counted in the zero to
30%.
Kubly did add that for this organization, if they are awarded funding, they would have two reports to do
every six months through the fiscal year and so they could choose whether they do it recorded individuals
or households and clear up that discrepancy and staff can work with them to figure out that amount.
Kealey noted she appreciates the application and just want to state her support in them coming forward
and submitting this proposal and to thank staff for helping them if there's some other wording that needs
to be a little bit different.
Padron agreed and noted the Commission loves to see like new organizations coming forward and
understands sometimes these questions can get really hard and may be difficult to answer but this is tax
money, and they are trying to represent the City and also help all the agencies, which is a difficult job.
Next application is the Center for Worker Justice.
Lewis asked if this is a new position that they're requesting or funding to support an existing position?
Charlie Eastham (Treasurer and Board Member, Center for Worker Justice) stated they are not creating a
new staff position and they have been engaged in wage theft recovery work since the Center's inception
seven years ago so this application is to support that continuing work and to expand some educational
efforts and to be able to devote more staff time to doing wage theft, investigation and recovery.
Drabek asked if the Center for Worker Justice applied with HCDC before in any capacity, but not just the
wage theft campaign, but in any other capacity. Eastham stated they have, as noted in the application,
they have applied for funding on a couple of other projects but this is the first time they applied for support
for our wage theft recovery work. Drabek noted he was thinking the Center for Worker Justice
organization was older than seven years and perhaps should be a legacy agency. Eastham said they are
certainly interested in in becoming a legacy agency at an appropriate time when the Commission would
support that.
Vogel noted the estimate for the labor breakdown for this next year would be about 209 hours with these
funds and what increase is that from what they are doing now, will be doubling the amount of time being
spent or is it a 10% increase, 20% increase. Eastham said he would view this as an increase in their
percent of staff time that they will be able to devote to wage theft recovery work, as well as educating
workers so they can engage in their own wage recovery. He said it is hard to quantify exactly what the
labor increase will be as wage theft recovery depends a lot upon what workers bring to them from a
variety of avenues and that has increased somewhat episodic so they are not looking to increase the staff
position, as he said before, rather they are trying to increase the time that the staff has to do this work as
opposed to other work which may be something that other funders are more interested in contributing to.
Aguilar asked if they are doing anything with the Catholic Worker House in terms of wage theft recovery.
Eastham stated he is not familiar with all the recovery cases that the staff has worked on over the last
year or two so they may have done some cooperation with the Catholic Worker House and he just don't
know about it.
Alter asked if there is any issue with the fact that the Executive Director for the Center for Worker Justice
is also a sitting City Council Member because to be on this Commission they have to work through
conflict of interest in terms of what kinds of boards they serve on and if that board is applying for money.
4
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 5 of 13
Eastham stated the Center has received funds in the past as well as COVID funds with no issues. The
executive director that is a City Council member that doesn't participate in the process for applying for
funds and the day that the Council votes on this Commissions recommendation, she would not vote.
Kubly confirmed the council member would recuse themself from the approval of the award. Also, this is
local funds and CDBG funds has very specific requirements related to conflict of interest and that's why
staff asks those questions of the Commission, but local funds can be a little more flexible. Staff will always
check with the City legal department.
Vogel noted this is the Center for Justice for Eastern Iowa so how do they know that the funds that were
the local funds that Iowa City is giving is only focusing out of that overall budget on wage theft issues in
Iowa City or only serving employees that are Iowa City residents. Eastham confirmed they do know
where the workers who come to them with wage issues reside and work and a number of those workers
do reside in Iowa City, or work in Iowa City, and that's why they're approaching Iowa City for financial
support for this work. Eastham is quite confident he wouldn't be here applying for this money if he
thought that they were engaged primarily in wage theft recovery for workers that the vast majority of them
lived and work outside of Iowa City.
Vogel asked if Eastham could have just basic numbers he could provide the Commission in the next
couple of weeks of Iowa City residents or Iowa City employers that the Center for Worker Justice has
dealt with and give them a general idea of the number served in the last 12 months by the wage recovery
program through the Center for Worker Justice. Eastham replied he could ask the staff and the director
to see what they can do about that, he knows they are not maintaining that data in table form so it would
probably be going back and looking at individual records. Vogel appreciated that as it is part of the
scoring sheet is how many people are they affecting in Iowa City.
Mohammed noted he was just curious about learning more about the wage theft and could Eastham
provide them with one brief incident about the wage theft and the effort to mitigate it. Eastham gave the
example of a woman approached them who was working in a restaurant, cleaning the restaurant after it
closed, this was a franchise restaurant, and the franchise owner stop paying her for some of the hours
she was working. The Center for Worker Justice did the usual procedures to do an investigation, talk to
the employee, get their records as they have maintained them or not, and then approach the employer
with the information that they've been provided with, listen to their story, and then reconcile the two if
there is a discrepancy. If the employer doesn't have a justification for not paying the employee for the
hours they work, then they tell the employer that they owe this employee this much money because they
work these number of hours for this wage. If the employer agrees that they've made a mistake and they
pay the back wages, then that's the end of the case. If they don't, the Center for Worker Justice will
assemble a group of people, allies mostly, and go to the employer at their workplace and publicly state
that they owe this employee this much money for this much work. If that results in a in a change of heart
by the employer, that's fine, if it doesn't, then they'll take more public actions, including picketing the place
of employment. In this case, because the restaurant closed after the employee had worked there and
after the Center for Worker Justice got involved, they worked with the franchise owner to get the front of
the local owner to pay the back wages. There are other situations where the relationships between
employer and employee are more complicated or different and require more effort, but the overall
approach is the same, get the information, do an investigation, approach the employer about what they
find and tell them they need to pay back money and if that doesn't work, then take more public action.
The advantage of the Center for Worker Justice doing this work is they can call upon a group of allies to
show employers that there are people in the community that are concerned about how they're treating
their employees.
Vogel noted The Gazette had a good article just last week about wage theft and it's not something he'd
really thought of as a major issue before he'd seen this application and started learning more about it. It is
both depressing and impressive how much is going on and it is a very important issue.
Padron noted Aguliar mentioned another organization, but she thought the Center for Worker Justice was
the only one working on this. Eastham pointed out the Iowa Policy Project conducted a study in 2012 and
5
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 6 of 13
found in their findings there were some $600 million a year of wages being stolen from Iowa workers and
also if there are other organizations that are doing wage type recovery work, they would be happy to work
with them.
Padron stated the next application is from the Dream City and they provided their application and their
budget.
Lewis asked if this a new position for the organization or are they applying for funds to supplement the
funds for other initiatives that may not be fully funded from other entities.
Thul noted the contact for Dream City must have dropped off the call so staff can follow up with them to
get the answers to the Commission's questions.
Padron asked if this is an established organization, or if they were planning on becoming one with this
funding.
Next application was the Corridor Community Action Network.
Alter stated she loves the idea and sees that there's a need in the community for this type of a clothing
bank but had a couple of questions logistically because it's been done thus far on a limited scale, and if
they are wanting to scale it up do they have a physical space secured or located.
Amanda Nichols (Director, Corridor Community Action Network) stated they currently have just a physical
space for storage that they're sharing access to with other organizations, they do not have a specific
physical place picked out for this larger project because it's hard to secure a location before having the
funding. They do have some leads that seem like they would reasonably work for them and that was
where she budgeted the rental costs.
Alter noted they currently are working somewhat through a referral service, like through word of mouth,
and through different agency partnerships for clients but it sounds like they're actually trying to advocate
for ultimately a retail -like place similar to the food pantry that is in Pepperwood. Nichols confirmed they
are looking for like a walk-in system very similar to how the food bank functions now, but they would also
definitely continue the partnerships that they already with other organizations as well.
Alter asked how they are securing they donations or supplying items since it is a pretty big jump from 114
people up to roughly 800 which as they said in the application would be a low estimate, based on what
they're seeing in need. How are they securing those donations and how do they see sustaining that.
Nichols explained that so far with the limited space that they have all of the donations have been from
individuals but have actually been getting to a point where they're having to turn them down because they
don't have enough space. She honestly doesn't see there being a supply issue with used clothing in Iowa
City, as mentioned in the application it is considered one of the high impact contributors to the landfill.
Once they have more space to be able to efficiently organize more clothing, they definitely would be
looking into other sources as well, possibly talking to the university dorms for when students leave and
partnerships with thrift stores and things like that.
Lewis asked Nichols to talk more about the marketing because on the lower east side there is already
Stuff, Goodwill and a variety of other places that people can take and donate their clothing so how do
they intend to attract people to donate their clothing to this organization. Nichols noted with Stuff Etc. and
Kidworks are very picky on what they will accept, their standards are a lot higher than what people would
expect. Additionally, having pickup services is not something that is offered by other organizations and
they would be able to have people go out and pick up from dorms or other places.
Nkumu noted if this organization will be donating clothing for free to those who need it do they think they
will be competing with Goodwill who's already doing kind of same thing with their items so cheap so
people can purchase from them and then also at the same time help the folks that work there. If because
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 7 of 13
of this new organization, more people may not be shopping at Goodwill because they can get clothes for
free from this organization. Nichols is not concerned about competition and encroaching others as there
is such a need in this community. Nichols stated they feel there's a high enough demand that competition
is not a concern.
Nkumu asked if at any point they are going to go into furniture or other household items. Nichols replied
no, because those are already taken care of with other organizations and Corridor Community Action
Network's ultimate goal is to help improve the quality of life in the community in the most effective ways
possible and if there are existing organizations that are working on issues, then the most effective way to
do that is to network those organizations and amplify and support each other. They only take on their
own independent projects, when there's a need that has not already been fulfilled by another
organization.
Lewis noted there is a need for donations for prom gowns, tuxedos or suits for proms for kids who are in
foster care. Nichols stated they work with Families to Families, another organization they amplify, and
they provide clothing for foster children. Nichols stated they do a lot of fundraising, they've had a lot of
community nights with local organizations like Chomp and Hudson's and that's how they got things like
winter boots and a lot of winter clothing donations. And if they didn't have the size of boots needed for a
family in donations they were able to use the funds that were donated to purchase boots for specific
people.
Vogel asked for a budget showing what they are currently are bringing in donations and other sources of
funds. He a little concerned about sustainability, being able to pay rent, insurance, utilities in a retail
location in Iowa City and is curious what other funds they have to help cover those additional costs.
Nichols stated they also currently have an application in for the Human Rights Commission Social Justice
Grant for funding for a mobile clothing closet, which has less concern about sustainability because with
the mobile concept the main cost is just that one time purchase of that truck and then fuel, insurance and
maintenance. They also have somebody who is doing volunteer marketing work and they will be taking a
percentage of the existing budget that they have and putting that into doing some more marketing work
through web banners, and the Facebook and Instagram platforms that they already have. Nichols stated
she can provide the organizational budget, they don't have any real operating costs at this time because
the work is done by all volunteers at this point and they are working out of their homes so there aren't any
overhead costs, and the storage sheds they have are already paid for the entire year.
Vogel asked if they have been putting money into reserves for future growth, or just running at a net zero.
Nichols confirmed they do have some money sitting in the bank and are accumulating money regularly
through fundraising efforts and then using it as needed to address various needs.
Alter asked what the target stand up date would be if they were able to secure this money. Nichols said it
would be after they have access to the money, which would be next fiscal year, so after July 1, 2021.
September would be definitely realistic, especially if they know before that they are getting the funds.
Alter asked about serving clients and how they are dealing with COVID and new possible variants, and
that the costs of laundering all of those items might be an operating cost that they'll have to consider.
Drabek added also they need to know that there is the possibility of partial funding, as most agencies the
Commission funds through this process don't get 100% of what they asked for it. Nichols appreciates
knowing that as this grant process is very new to her. While she would really like to have that physical
location where they're open certain hours and people can just come, there is also a big benefit to the
mobile closet idea, particularly being able to get to communities that may have transportation issues and
things like that. They have talked about possibly trying to coordinate routes with the mobile libraries and
the mobile health clinics. So if this were to be a situation where this Commission felt that they wanted to
help fulfill this need, but don't feel that the physical retail type location is something that they're able to
support at this time, maybe they'd willing to support something more sustainable or a lower budget like a
7
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 8 of 13
mobile closet and then all they would have to purchase is a truck and get it situated to be able to have
clothing racks in it.
Padron agreed that's a great idea and that project would be also great to apply for the Climate Action
Grant because clothing is such a big issue and so much ends up in the landfill so this would be a way to
really contribute to climate change.
Mohammad asked how they determine the recipient's eligibility; do they need income verification. Nichols
stated they prefer not to do that but if it was required to receive the grant, then they could create a client
intake form.
Padron stated those are the four applications for the emerging agency grants, she noted it is a difficult
process for everyone, they want to fund every everyone and will do their best. She thanked the applicants
for coming and explaining their projects.
Returning to the Dream City application Vogel asked if staff could reach out and ask them exactly what
the funds were being used for, is it labor because the breakdown said volunteer labor and not paid skilled
or paid unskilled, so he was confused by what they're wanting to use the $15,000 request for.
Lewis also wants to know if this is an existing or new initiative.
Mohammed asked how they divide the funds among their projects, they have performing, fine arts, health
and wellness, youth leadership and family and they are not breaking down how this the funds could be
divided among this project.
Padron moved to the CDBG and HOME applications. The first one is Unlimited Abilities.
Vogel first wanted to disclose he made staff aware a couple days ago that Unlimited Abilities has tenants
in two properties that his company manages for two separate client owners on the residential side. Thul
checked with legal and there is not a direct conflict of interest for Vogel to be part of that discussion since
it doesn't affect his relationship with the tenant.
Lewis asked for more information on their fiscal model and where else funding comes from other than
City grants for the property acquisitions.
Shirley Tramble (Executive Director, Unlimited Abilities) replied that the remainder of their funding comes
from fundraising and also last year they received some funding, a loan from The Housing Trust Fund.
Vogel asked if they have some potential properties already selected, either a house or a couple duplexes.
Tramble said that is what they are looking for but they don't have anything as of yet. They are about to
close on their project funded from last year grants, but for this project, they don't have anything selected
yet.
Lewis noted another organization who had applied, withdrew their application because the need and
demand for housing that they had thought would be there was not there probably due to COVID and
individuals not reaching out and the market being very different. Is Unlimited Abilities seeing any
concerns with purchasing properties and difficulties in filling them with tenants. Tramble replied no,
actually while most agencies closed during the pandemic, Unlimited Abilities were one of the only
agencies that remained open and still have a huge demand.
Padron moved onto the next application, Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County.
Vogel asked if the purchase or lease of furnishings, equipment or other personal property needed is
eligible for a public facilities project. Thul replied it is allowable, there are specific things that can be
purchased with public facilities funds like certain fixed equipment.
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 9 of 13
Vogel asked if the Commission get copies of the leases for both of the locations because Neighborhood
Centers of Johnson County is renting those locations and one of the buildings is owned by Iowa City and
the other is the group that owns Pheasant Ridge. Kubly said they have long term leases, the one with the
City is a 50 -year lease that was signed in 1989 and then the other was signed 1996 and was a 100 -year
lease. Vogel is curious to see the leases and as to why some of this stuff would be the tenant's
responsibility, like windows and structural portions of the building, or heating and cooling needs,
traditionally would be the landlord's responsibility. He is trying to find out where these responsibilities lie
between the tenant and the owner.
Kubly noted these are not traditional leases, but she will send out copies for them to review. They are not
necessarily renting the building, and it is more of a ground lease. The City has done several NCJC
projects with CDBG funding over the years and Kubly does not think it is an issue. This is something staff
would check before entering an agreement.
Thul noted no one from Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County was on the call so she could follow up
with them on this question.
Alter asked if no knowing the answers to these questions should impede their ability to award funds.
Vogel replied he has a hard time without knowing that this is truly this organization's responsibility
authorizing funds from the City to pay what possibly could not be their responsibility.
Kubly noted they have done several projects with Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County through
CDBG funding over the years and there hasn't been an issue.
Padron understands but agrees with Vogel that if it's the responsibility of the of the owner, why would the
organization pay for the repairs, or could apply to use these funds for something else in their programs
and then ask the owner of the building to repair what's not in good condition.
Staff will reach out to Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County.
Padron moved onto the next applications; both are from The Shelter House. The first is the public
facilities.
Drabek wanted to know how big of a risk partial funding would be here, can this project go forward if the
funding is less than $225,000.
Crissy Canganelli (Executive Director, Shelter House) stated they didn't mean to imply that with less than
full funding, they wouldn't be able to complete the project, just that it does change the timeline and
creates a challenge because they do need to expend the ESG (Emergency Solutions Grant) funds by the
end of the year.
Lewis noted the cost of the project, versus the number of individuals that are affected, is just a little high
based on some of the other projects that they're considering but acknowledged it is the highest risk
population in this community, and they deserve to have all of the conveniences that they deserve while
they're with Shelter House. Canganelli did noted it's a capital investment and averaging about 850 unique
individuals in a year that capital investment over an extended period of time, the life of the project, is tens
of thousands of people served. If they look at a different factor and just look at nights of shelter, they are
averaging anywhere from 22,000 to 25,000 nights of shelter each year, so that's just a different metric of
breaking out with a cost per service unit is, but it is of a very significant cost. As they tried to explain in
the project application, they're going to need at the very least to replace the components in the existing
system, which is also a very substantial cost, and will end up in the same cycle of breaking down within
10 years and then not servicing the needs of the organization and other uses on that building. Just as
with the recent cold spell last week they had to have the folks come out and repair two more heat pumps
9
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 10 of 13
as they froze up and they didn't have heat in the men's dorm again. It is a chronic problem but she does
understand it is a very significant cost.
Vogel asked when this work is done, will it end up having any impact on the actual ability to provide
services or will most of this work be able to be done just on the mechanical side of things and not affect
actual ability for people to stay in the shelter. Canganelli said they've been told by the mechanical
engineers that there should not be substantial interruption to the operations, especially if they can have
this project completed before the winter months.
Mohammed asked how they dealt with the loss of heat, did they have to move the tenants out.
Canganelli replied they just had to be prioritized getting the repair service to come in and replace the
components. People just had to use extra blankets and they maximized the different spaces in the
building and moved people into the areas that still had heat. It can be a challenge, but they've not had to
close down the shelter, they've been able to work through it, it's just not very comfortable and makes it a
challenging work environment for everyone.
Kealey just wanted to thank Shelter House for everything that they do because she works on the burn unit
and this is the time of the year where they get frostbite cases and during this last cold spell they have had
crazy amounts of frostbite and it would be much worse if there wasn't the emergency shelter service.
Padron moved onto the Shelter House Rental Housing Rehabilitation application.
Vogel noted he was a bit shocked because Mutual Insurance seems to imply that the total construction
was going to be $194,000 but they're only reimbursing $90,000. Canganelli stated that at the time of
application that was their best guess estimate as they don't have the final response from the insurance
provider and the $90,000 came out of the report from the fire marshal and the fire department. As they
get more information they can certainly update the financial part of the application.
Vogel noted it seemed like the house was a total loss so why would they not reimburse the total cost, are
they pushing back on it minus the deductible. Canganelli said she believes they interested and
committed to working with them but maybe don't feel that the house is a total loss. When they do get a
final response they will need to decide if it is cost effective to actually go through the process of tearing
portions of the house down while trying to retain and rehab portions versus just tearing the house down to
the ground.
Vogel asked if they will know within the next 30 days, because obviously the more they're willing to put
towards the insurance costs, the less Shelter House has to ask for in regards to this application. The
Commission has to make their funding recommending in a month. Canganelli feels they will have
updated information within a month and will be able understand what the costs will be in rebuilding to
ensure that they're rebuilding to a level where the tenants can age in place.
Lewis had a question about the population served, is it serving individuals with mental health with
disabilities because then that affects the priority tiers. Canganelli explained the Fairweather Lodge
program is permanent supportive housing and entirely dedicated for single adults that have a diagnosed
serious persistent mental illness. Oftentimes, folks have co-occurring disorders such as underlying
substance abuse issues, intellectual disabilities, but the diagnoses are almost exclusively schizophrenia,
bipolar disorder, serious depression, and then combinations of those other underlying health issues.
Canganelli also wanted to give a shout out to The Housing Fellowship as they helped them find a rental
so that the tenants that were at the Amhurst house are back together and functioning again at a familial
unit.
Alter asked when staff needs the Commission's scores submitted. Kubly stated staff can put together a
spreadsheet pretty quick but if Commissioners want to review it before the meeting then they will need to
set an earlier deadline. Padron stated it does help to see other's scores ahead of the time to know what
10
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 11 of 13
they might want to question at the meeting. Perhaps everyone's scores should be in by March 5 and then
staff can put together the spreadsheet and distribute for review prior to the March 11 meeting.
Lewis confirmed they do not rank the emerging agency applications, just the CDBG and HOME ones.
Padron noted regarding the emerging agency applications, are they going to consider a minimum award
of $5,000 as they've done in the past. A lot of the agencies asked for $15,000 but not all can get the
$15,000 so they'd recommend that they only get $5,000.
Vogel asked if they don't award the entire $30,000 is there a second round of applications that open up.
Kubly stated if they don't award the full $30,000, the money would go into the legacy agency pot and just
increase that amount a little bit.
Vogel also asked if this seemed like a small amount of organizations to apply or is this normal, this seems
like a great opportunity for a lot of up and coming groups to at least try to get involved in the pot. Padron
said they usually get maybe five agency requests, and some agencies have said they don't apply
because they don't want to collect information about income, or gender or race and the City will ask for
that information. That is something that they might want to consider talking about maybe later in the year.
It can also be problematic because some of the legacy agencies cannot provide that information and the
funding system has to be equal for everybody.
Kubly noted regarding the Corridor Community Action Network application since it is local this funding is
more flexible than the CDBG/HOME.
IOWA CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS UPDATES:
Padron stated they have two commissioners assigned each month to the Council meetings. They
discussed this last month and everyone thought it would be a good idea to keep doing this. They have
February and March covered. Aguilar and Kealey volunteered to do April meetings.
Drabek had the February 2 meeting, he read the minutes from the meeting and aside from what appeared
to be some minor zoning matters there were not any issues flagged as relevant for this Commission.
Alter listened to the February 16 meeting two days ago and as Sarah Baron spoke earlier to this
Commission, there was the really significant update for housing about $195 million coming to the state of
Iowa and the need for the City Council to keep the water turned on for residents in arrears until they can
obtain this funding to pay their bills.
Thul commented that the Iowa City was not listed on the call for advocacy sent out by the Johnson
County Affordable Housing Coalition, and that it addressed utility shut off issues in Coralville and North
Liberty not Iowa City.
Alter stated that Sara Barron indicated it is something Iowa City is looking or intending to do.
As discussed earlier the HCDC will write a letter in support of that to Council.
Lewis motioned to have Padron draft a letter to Council to recommend delaying utility shut offs at
least until Iowa Finance Authority funds are made available for housing assistance payments to
those in need. Seconded by Alter.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0 (Nkumu not present for the vote).
HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION:
11
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 12 of 13
Thul noted in the packet was the letter from HUD about the CAPER submitted and the accomplishments
that were acknowledged.
There was an article about the CDBG-CV economic development funds that were approved, those went
to fund 27 small businesses and 22 of those were owned by women or people of color.
The CHDO set aside funds are open now for applications.
It's black history month so please follow the City on Facebook as they've posted some really good local
content along with a couple videos - one was about a historic landmark and they also did a community
connection with Dream City.
Kubly noted they did have their first meeting of the Affordable Housing Steering Committee, it was more
of an introduction meeting but that has started up and Nkumu is participating and will can keep this
Commission updated.
Padron asked if on this committee they are considering what is affordable housing, because in one of the
latest documents from a few years ago it stated a rent of $900 was considered affordable. Alter said they
can discuss that at another meeting, it's on a rolling scale and depends on situations.
ADJOURNMENT:
Kealey moved to adjourn. Aguilar seconded the motion and a vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0.
12
Housing and Community Development Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 13 of 13
Housing and Community
Development Commission
Name
Terms Exp.
7/16
8120
9117
10/15
11/19
1/21
2/18
Aguilar, Peggy
6/30/22
O/E
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
Alter, Megan
6/30/21
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Drabek, Matt
6/30/22
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
Kealey, Lyn Dee Hook
6/30/22
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
Lewis, Thersea
6/30/23
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Mohammed, Nsar
6/30/23
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Nkumu, Peter
6/30/22
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Pardon, Maria
6/30/21
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
Vogel, Kyle
6/30/23
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
Attendance Record 2020-2021
Resigned from Commission
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Vacant
13
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Human Rights Commission: January 26
Item Number: 4.f.
Approved Minutes
Human Rights Commission
January 26, 2021
(Electronic) Formal Regular Meeting Zoom Meeting Platform
Members Present: Ashley Lindley, Roger Lusala, Jessica Andino, Mark Pries, Jason Glass, Bijou
Maliabo, Adil Adams.
Members Not Present: Noemi Ford, Maria Bruno.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Others Present: Sara Barron.
(Electronic Meeting Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical due to
concerns for the health and safety of commission members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 5:34 PM.
Approval of the November 24, 2020 meeting minutes: Motion by Lusala with minor edits, seconded by
Pries. Motion passed 7-0.
2021 Election of Officers: Lindley moved, and Lusala seconded to elect Andino Chair of the Commission
for 2021. Motion passed 7-0. Pries moved, and Lusala seconded to elect Glass as Vice Chair of the
Commission. Motion passed 7-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Sara Barron reminded Commissioners of the
opportunity to discuss housing programs and funding opportunities in the area with the Johnson
County Affordable Housing Coalition with two programs they are sponsoring.
FUNDING REQUEST: CENTER FOR FAMILIES SERVICES GLOBAL NETWORK: Because the requested amount
exceeds the budget amount allocated for this fund, staff will reach out to the organization and ask
them to resubmit for the meeting date of February 23, 2021. The request was for Zoom
programs and events to educate the public on racial equity and injustice.
FUNDING REQUEST: JOHNSON COUNTY UNITED NATIONS ASSOCIATION: This was a request for $500.00 to offset
the cost of Night of 1000 Dinners in celebration of International Women's Day. The event will be held on
Wednesday, March 10, 2021. Motion by Pries, seconded by Lusala. Motion passed 7-0.
BLACK HISTORY MONTH PROCLAMATION: Lusala will accept the proclamation at the City Council February 2,
2021 meeting date.
COMMISSION STATEMENT ON BLACK LIVES MATTER: Staff will plan on including the statement in
the February 23, 2021 for Commissioners to further discuss implementation.
UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION RIGHTS OF THE CHILD: Staff will reach out to the Johnson County United
Nations Association to see if there is a possibility to collaborate on an upcoming program or event on this
topic.
SOCIAL JUSTICE & RACIAL EQUITY GRANT UPDATES FY2021: There were 29 submissions. The Commission
decided to review submissions for the FY21 SJRE grants at their February meeting date. Staff will deliver the
grants and rubrics to Commissioners and alert organizations that the review of submissions will occur on the
February 23, 2021 date. Commissioners will send their completed rankings to staff by Tuesday, February 16.
HOUSING SUBCOMMITTEE: No update but members will plan to listen to the Johnson County Affordable
Housing Coalition program on housing in this area.
ANTI -RACISM SUBCOMMITTEE UPDATE: No update but will meet to discuss Black History Month programs.
They also noted the success of their White Privilege film screening held in December.
HEALTH EQUITY SUBCOMMITTEE: Maliabo joined this subcommittee. This subcommittee plans on working to
increase educational efforts on the COVID -19 vaccine. Basically, advocating for getting vaccinated.
REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: Lindley spoke on her participation in the Humanize My Hoodie Alley event
and possibly holding an event on their work for Commissioners or for the public. She also did an interview
with KCRG on the Social Justice and Racial Equity grants for FY21, she plans to be active in the MLK Day
Celebrations for 2021.
Pries participated in the MLK car parade. He is also involved with the Iowa Interfaith Coalition Racism Task
Force based out of Des Moines and the Southeastern Senate where they talk and discuss the Lutheran
response to the death of George Floyd. He is also participating with the Good Lutheran Church of Texas and
they are studying a book on "Be the Bridge: Pursuing God's Heart for Racial Reconciliation" by Latasha
Morrison. He also encouraged other Commissioners to take the Harvard Implicit Bias test.
Glass was invited to attend the Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation meeting of February 4 and encourages other
Commissioners to join as well.
Andino mentioned a working group she is a part of that wrote a letter to the Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation
Commission to assist in any way possible in helping them fulfill their goals. She was also recently appointed by
City Manager Geoff Fruin to serve on the Iowa City Affordable Housing Steering Committee.
Lusala was part of a COVID-19 study. He recently found out he received the placebo but was given his first
vaccine shot last Tuesday.
Adam was able to participate in the Sudanese Community Center Annual Meeting.
Maliabo is currently taking a course on 10 Skills to Agile Leadership.
STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS: Staff mentioned two upcoming trainings with Dr. Eddie Moore, Jr. Staff also went
over the schedule for Black History Month for City programs and events.
MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 6:31 PM.
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2021
(Meetins Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP•
1/26
2/23
3/23
4/27
5/25
6/22
6/27
8/24
9/28
10/26
11/23
12/28
Adil Adams
2021
X
Jessica Andino
2021
X
Noemi Ford
2021
E
Jason Glass
2022
X
Ashley Lindley
2021
X
Roger Lusala
2023
X
Bijou Maliabo
2023
X
Mark Pries
2022
X
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
-- = Not a Member
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Human Rights Commission: February 23
Item Number: 4.g.
-:® CITY OF IOWA CITY
9T&MEMORANDUM
Date: March 24, 2021
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Stefanie Bowers, Human Rights Coordinator
Re: Recommendation from the Human Rights Commission
At their February 23, 2021 meeting the Human Rights Commission made the following
recommendation to the City Council:
To provide the following organizations with the noted funding amount for the
Social Justice and Racial Equity Grants for FY21.
Open Heartland $14,749.00
University of Iowa Labor Center $20,000.00
Sankofa Outreach Connection $15,000.00
Food Pantry at Iowa $6,075.00
Bike Library $4,000.00
Johnson County Affordable Housing
Coalition $15,000.00
Additional action (check one)
No further action needed
X Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
S:RECform.doc
Approved Minutes
Human Rights Commission
February 23, 2021
(Electronic) Formal Regular Meeting Zoom Meeting Platform
Members Present: Ashley Lindley, Roger Lusala, Jessica Andino, Mark Pries, Jason Glass,
Bijou Maliabo, Adil Adams, Noemi Ford.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Others Present: Sara Barron, Jamillah Witt, Dustin Liston.
(Electronic Meeting Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or
impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of commission members, staff
and the public presented by COVID-19.
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:34 PM.
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL: Yes, to provide the following organizations with the noted
funding amount for the Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant FY21.
Open Heartland $14,749.00
University of Iowa Labor Center $20,000.00
Sankofa Outreach Connection $15,000.00
Food Pantry at Iowa $6,075.00
Bike Library $4,000.00
Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition $15,000.00
APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 26, 2021 MEETING MINUTES: Motion by Lindley, seconded by
Maliabo. Motion passed 5-0. (Pries, Adams, Ford not present).
PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None.
CONVERSATION WITH POLICE CHIEF LISTON: The Chief gave a brief overview of his background in work in EI
Paso, Texas. He noted that in Texas the Civil Rights Offices are handled at the State level and not at the local.
He said the department does a great job but is not perfect. They are getting better at hearing all voices. He
thought the HRC's statement on BLM is important and everyone should have a voice.
Glass asked his thoughts on the resolution that the City Council passed in June of 2020? The Chief thinks that
the preliminary plan is a good step in a long journey forward and it is a never-ending journey. Since he has been
in law enforcement, he has seen many changes over the years.
Andino asked what he plans in terms of working with the Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission (TRC)? He
said that the TRC will need to have conversations on. He does not want people to feel intimated or negatively
impacted in those conversations if representatives from the department were present.
Lusala asked what are some of the priorities and how can the HRC help? The Chief's first priority is
communication. He does not have all the ideas, but the community does. We all have the same priorities and
goals and that is to have a safe and vibrant community.
Lusala mentioned the senseless killing of a young person in recent week and the effects not only on the family
of the person killed but also the family of the person accused of killing him. He wants to make sure the police
are involved in the community to help those kids who need guidance. To make our city a better city.
The Chief agrees it is a senseless and tragic event and that it does affect others and not just the victim but the
entire community. He wants to prevent versus respond and get people involved in social services before they
make these life changing decisions.
Maliabo asked in the African community it helps when police build those relationships so that people know
who they are and are not scared. Is this something the Chief plans on personally doing? The Chief Liston agrees
that former Chief Matherly did a fantastic job at that and he plans on following that lead. The police need to
make sure they are building those relationships. There are going to be times when something happens and
without those relationships you will not gain peoples trust in calling the police or even afraid of the police. He
lived in a border community for over 20 years and the Police there had to continually fight that thought that
they were enforcing immigration.
Pries recalled a program entitled Officer Friendly where officers went into the schools and got to meet the
students usually at the elementary level. The Chief noted that in Texas it was a closer relationship with the
school district but that he will work with the school district here but again he does not want to make people
feel uncomfortable and so that is what they need to work on changing the image. Any outreach with the school
district would be with the school district's permission and invitation.
Glass asked the Chief, now that he has been on the job for a month or two what has been your expectations of
the officers? The Chief reported that it is support and morale. The department has taken a blow and after a
popular chief had left. Everyone on the department recognizes that changes need to me made and that they
are supported by them and he will hold them accountable for their actions.
Maliabo asked if the Chief is willing to come to speak to community groups or would you send someone else
from the department? The Chief will come speak to groups.
CONVERSATION WITH JAMILLAH WITT: Jamillah works as the Johnson County Access to Justice Coordinator.
She is present in the court house Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The position was started to assist African
Americans in navigating the judicial system. For example, if a civil protective order needs to be filed against
someone. She assists a client in filling out the paperwork. She also does education and trainings for
organization on Domestic Violence (DV) 101, and Iowa Law regarding domestic violence within the African
American Community.
Calls to DV programs have increased across the country overthe last year and not everyone knows of the
civil option to obtain a protective order. More community resources about what she does helps spread the
word of her services. Currently the paperwork is only in English this has created some barriers but she is
using Language Line to assist those whose first language is not English.
FUNDING REQUEST: CENTER FOR FAMILIES SERVICES GLOBAL NETWORK: Lusala does not understand the
request. It went from $40,000 last month to $2000 for this latest request but the proposal has not changed
only the amount of funding requested. Glass noted the requested amount, $2000, is pretty much all the
funding for the fiscal year. To date, the only other funding request that has been approved was for $500 for
the Johnson County United Nations Association's Night of 1000 Dinners. Lusala finds the request to be very
vague and is not comfortable approving it because he is not sure what will take place at the event. Lindley
2
agrees and finds the request a pretty hefty amount of change. Lusala asked staff to reach out the requester
to let them know that the social justice and racial equity grant maybe a better purview for their proposal.
HOUSING SUBCOMMITTEE: This subcommitee has not met but they plan to meet to have a better
discussion on what they really want to look at as it relates to housing.
ANTIRACISM SUBCOMMITTEE: They plan on doing a project based on the implicit bias test offered by
Havard. The plan is to work with other organizations and to collaborate to reach more allies. They hope to
work with the local LULAC and One Iowa. They also plan on doing another White Privilege film screening.
HEALTH EQUITY: They are working on doing a local leaders series and working with Johnson County Public
Health to campaign on the safety of the COVID vaccine. This includes promoting in different languages.
Staff can coordinate with Communications to get it shared on multiple social media venues throughout the
City. They are trying to be creative in advertised because there are some in the community who are weary
of getting the vaccination or who have received inaccurate information on it.
COMMISSION STATEMENT ON BLACK LIVES MATTER: Glass noted they had spoken about this last
month at their meeting. He proposes that Commission members look over the statement and some
of the things each member has done on their own that align with the statement or that support it. That list can
be compiled and sent to staff. Once completed it will show the public that they are holding themselves
accountable and provide them with some updates.
UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION RIGHTS OF THE CHILD: Staff will reach out to the Johnson County United
Nations Association to see if there is a possibility to collaborate on an upcoming program or event on this
topic. Andino was approached by a colleague at the College of Public Health about doing a photovoice and
so that may be an avenue to assist with this project. Commissioners Lindley, Maliabo, and Andino are a part
of the planning committee for this project.
SOCIAL JUSTICE & RACIAL EQUITY GRANT UPDATES FY2021: Andino first went over the requirements and
timeline for the grant. There were 29 submissions and the Commission went with the first six highest
ranking organizations based upon Commissioners individual scores. Because the grant is limited to $75,000
the Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition will not receive the full amount of their request. Instead
of $25,000 they will receive $15,000. The motion was made by Glass and seconded by Lusala. Motion
passed 6-0. The Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition will submit an updated proposal based on the
$15,000 to the Commission by their next meeting date for their approval.
Open Heartland $14,749.00
University of Iowa Labor Center $20,000.00
Sankofa Outreach Connection $15,000.00
Food Pantry at Iowa $6,075.00
Bike Library $4,000.00
Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition $15,000.00
CORRESPONDENCE: Staff will invite representatives from the Johnson County League of Women Voters to
speak at the Commission's next meeting to further discuss how they and the Commission can work
together.
3
REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: Andino has recently been appointed to the Iowa City Affordable
Housing Committee. She also is the new representative for the Eastside Neighborhood Association.
Lusala accepted the Black History Proclamation on behalf of the Commission at the Council's
February 2 meeting date. Maliabo was recently appointed President for the Center for Worker Justice
and encouraged Commissioners to participate in the Night of 1000 Dinners.
STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS: Staff reported on the vacancy on the Human Rights Commission and that
applications are due April 13 by SPM.
MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 7:41PM.
Organization
Amount Past Recipient
Year
Amount
Average
Rank
Adil
Ashley
Bijou
Jason
Jessica Maria
Roger
Open Heartland
$14,749.00 No
3.86
1
2
1
14
5
4
1
University of Iowa Labor Center
$20,000.00 Yes
FY19
$15,200.00
7.71
2
8
3
3
4
25
11
Sankofa Outreach Connection
$15,000.00 Yes
FY17
$13,500.00
7.86
3
15
13
5
12
6
4
Food Pantry at Iowa
$6,075.00 No
8.00
4
18
6
1
14
9
8
Bike Library
$4,000.00 Yes
FY17
$3,250.00
8.43
5
17
8
15
8
3
8
Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition
$25,000.00 Yes
FY17
$2,500.00
8.57
6
11
4
4
20
2
19
University of Iowa Liberal Arts Beyond Bars
$6,575.00 No
8.71
7
3
10
20
1
11
16
Multicultural Development Center of Iowa
$6,000.00 No
9.00
8
21
2
11
7
8
14
Antelope Lending Library
$15,405.00 Yes
FY20
$6,644.00
9.14
9
3
9
16
11
20
5
Domestic Violence Intervention Program
$2,430.00 No
9.86
10
20
19
2
9
5
14
IC Compassion
$25,000.00 No
10.00
11
24
10
8
6
17
5
Sudanese Community Center
$25,000.00 Yes
FY20
$13,520.00
10.57
12
1
24
9
16
23
1
National Alliance on Mental Illness Johnson County
$25,000.00 No
12.00
13
9
13
7
17
13
25
Refugee and Immigrant Association
$8,000.00 Yes
FY19
$12,000.00
12.00
13
7
6
29
15
14
13
Sylvan Learning Center
$16,000.00 No
12.57
15
18
13
17
10
7
23
Successful Living
$25,000.00 Yes
FY20
$25,000.00
13.00
16
5
13
13
26
22
12
4Cs Community Coordinated Child Care
$16,850.00 No
13.14
17
12
17
28
2
12
21
Johnson County Interfaith Coalition
$24,990.00 No
13.14
17
28
18
6
19
16
5
Corridor Community Action Network
$24,692.38 No
14.00
19
27
5
21
18
10
17
Little Creations Academy
$10,089.00 Yes
FY20
$7,360.00
14.86
20
26
10
23
3
21
21
PromptPress
$3,400.00 No
15.71
21
29
20
27
13
1
20
Free Lunch Program
$8,000.00 No
16.00
22
21
21
10
22
28
10
Iowa City Coralville Boxing Club
$25,000.00 No
16.00
22
5
21
18
25
15
28
Shelter House
$13,388.44 No
FY18
$10,600.00
16.00
22
14
26
24
21
24
3
Interdance
$7,500.00 No
18.57
25
25
25
12
23
19
26
Rotary Club of Iowa City (Noon)
$10,000.00 No
18.71
26
16
27
22
24
18
24
Willowwind School
$25,000.00 No
19.29
27
13
21
19
28
27
27
Physicians for Social Responsibility (Iowa)
$8,000.00 No
19.29
27
9
28
25
29
26
18
Divine Media Group
$15,000.00 No
23.29
29
23
29
26
27
29
29
FY19
$5,000.00
99.00
30
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
0 #N/A
FY20
$15,500.00
99.00
30
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
0 #N/A
Amount Available
$75,000.00
Total Amount Requested from all Organizations
$431,143.82
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2021
(Meeting Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP.
1/26
2/23
3/23
4/27
5/25
6/22
6/27
8/24
9/28
10/26
11/23
12/28
Adil Adams
2021
X
X
Jessica Andino
2021
X
X
Noemi Ford
2021
E
X
Jason Glass
2022
X
X
Ashley Lindley
2021
X
X
Roger Lusala
2023
X
X
Bijou Maliabo
2023
X
X
Mark Pries
2022
X
X
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
Late Handouts
Native American Land Acknowledgement
Iowa City Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission
PURPOSE
The Iowa City community owes its existence to the many peoples who have given of themselves to make
this moment possible. Some were brought here against their will, some were drawn to leave their distant
homes in hope of a better life, and some have lived on this land for more generations than can be
counted. Acknowledgement of this truth is critical to our work toward reconciliation across all barriers of
difference and injustice, and we begin this effort with our Native American Land Acknowledgement. With
this as a starting point, the Iowa City Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission (ICTRC) will continue to
consider the legacies of violence, displacement, migration, and settlement that, while bringing us
together today, marginalize and exclude the many who were the original stewards of these lands. We
encourage the community and City of Iowa City to join in uncovering this truth through the use of a
Native American Land Acknowledgement at all public events.
ICTRC LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
"We meet today in commitment and dedication to the community of Iowa City, which now occupies the
homelands of several Native American Peoples. We acknowledge the following Nations as all having
ancestral connections to the land in the state of Iowa: the Chippewa, Iowa, Kickapoo, Menominee, Miami,
Missouri, Omaha, Osage, Otoe, Ottawa, Ponca, Potawatomi, Sac and Fox, Sioux, Winnebago, and the
Three Affiliated Tribes. We also acknowledge the history of treaties and forced removal which have, by
dispossessing Native Nations of their traditional territories, allowed our community to flourish. This
commission will continue to acknowledge these facts as we work toward community reconciliation and
restorative justice."
LEARN MORE
Native Governance Center Guide to Indigenous Land Acknowledgement
US Department of Arts and Culture: Honor Native Land Virtual Resources and Guide
Special thanks to the University of Iowa Native American Council for their work and guidance.
Proposed Statement Regarding Atlanta Shootings
The Iowa City Human Rights Commission stands in solidarity with our Asian American, Asian,
Pacific Islander, and Pan Asian community members. The shootings in Atlanta were acts of
race and gender-based violence that support an ongoing trend of increased discrimination and
violence toward the APPI community throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The commission
condemns these acts of violence and the hateful rhetoric that fuels them.
As human rights advocates, we choose to center the victims and those impacted by these acts
of violence in our conversations while we continue our work to dismantle systems of oppression.
Soon Chung Park, Hyun Jung Grant, Suncha Kim, Yong Ae Yue, Delaina Ashley Yaun, Paul
Andre Michels, Xiaojie Tan, and Daoyou Feng were beloved family members, friends, and
community members. Their voices -- and their lives -- mattered.
We stand as allies to those in our own community who are struggling with feelings of fear and
grief during this time. We would like to remind community members who have experienced
discrimination that the Department of Equity and Human Rights accepts both formal complaints
of discrimination in the areas of employment, credit, education, or public accommodation, as
well as accepting reports of concerns of discimination in these and other areas.
Lastly, we encourage allies in our community to leverage their privilege to speak out against
injustice, amplify minority voices, and support the vast amount of human rights work being done
in Iowa City. Together, we can create lasting and meaningful change.
In solidarity,
City of Iowa City Human Rights Commission
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Library Board of Trustees: February 25
Item Number: 4.h.
Qw4t IOWA CITY
I�A'w PUBLIC LIBRARY
123 S. Linn St. • Iowa City, IA 52240
319-356-5200 • icpl.org
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Minutes of the Electronic Regular Meeting
February 25, 2021
FINAL
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code Section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or
impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of board members, staff, and the
public presented by COVID-19.
Members Present: Wesley Beary, John Beasley, Kellee Forkenbrock (in at 5:07 p.m.), Derek
Johnk, Carol Kirsch, Robin Paetzold, Tom Rocklin, Hannah Shultz, Monique Washington (in at ?
p.m. after closed session began).
Members Absent: None.
Staff Present: Elsworth Carman, Mara Cole, Karen Corbin, Bond Drager, Melody Dworak, Alyssa
Hanson, Sam Helmick, Anne Mangano, Patty McCarthy, Jason Paulios, Brent Palmer, Angie
Pilkington, Amanda Ray,
Call Meeting to Order. President Beary called the meeting to order at 5:01 p.m. A quorum was
present.
Public Discussion. None.
Items for Discussion/Action.
Director's Evaluation Committee. Beary stated the Director's Evaluation Committee (Carol
Kirsch, Tom Rocklin, and Hannah Shultz) requested time before the closed session in order to
report the evaluation process and information gathered. Shultz stated last year's survey of staff
and Trustees was reviewed as a baseline for this year's survey of same. Carman submitted a self-
evaluation. Committee members met with the leadership team. On the staff survey, staff were
invited to request personal meetings with the Committee. Six staff met with the committee. The
Committee evaluated all of the information and met with Carman. (Forkenbrock entered the
meeting at 5:07 p.m.) Rocklin said the survey used open ended questions. The frequency of
comments was counted and reported to Carman. No names or exact quotes were shared.
Shultz stated a memo outlining the process will be written for future reference. Johnk expressed
appreciation for the information. In response to Paetzold's question, Rocklin said names of
survey responders were not collected.
Carman requested his evaluation be conducted in a closed session. Rocklin made a motion to
adjourn to executive session pursuant to Section 21.5(1)(i) of the Iowa Code to evaluate the
professional competency of an individual whose appointment, hiring, performance or discharge
is being considered when necessary to prevent needless and irreparable injury to that
individual's reputation and that individual requests a closed session. Shultz seconded. Paetzold
stated a roll call vote is needed. Motion passed 8/0 by roll call vote: Beary: Aye. Kirsch: Aye.
Paetzold: Aye. Johnk: Aye. Forkenbrock: Aye. Rocklin: Aye. Beasley: Aye. Shultz: Aye. Beary
explained he will move staff to an online Zoom waiting room until the end of the closed session,
and he will record the closed session which began at 5:08pm.
At 6:04 p.m., Beary reconvened the open meeting. Kirsch motion to submit the Director's
Evaluation report with minor revisions. Rocklin seconded. There was no discussion. Motion
passed 9/0.
Kirsch motion to approve a 3.5 percent salary raise for the Director. Washington seconded.
There was no discussion. Motion passed 9/0.
Policy Review: 812 Hours of Service.
Mangano stated the routine review updates the policy to reflect the City Council, in consultation
with the AFSCME union, adoption of Juneteenth (June 19) as a city holiday. The President's Day
holiday will be replaced by Juneteenth with the holiday on Friday, June 18 because Juneteenth is
on a Saturday. Shultz made a motion to adopt the changes to Policy 812. Forkenbrock
seconded. There was no discussion. Motion passed 9/0.
Reopening Guidelines.
As requested at the January meeting, Carman consulted with Johnson County Public Health, the
City Attorney's office, and peer public libraries about Phase 4 of the reopening plan. Carman
described ICPL's approach as being on the conservative side with considerations edging up
against Phase 4. Johnk asked for clarification about which positivity rate, the 7 day or 14 day, is
referenced. Carman said 14 -day. Kirsch asked about the process for determining building
capacity as well as whether chairs would be available. Carman said furniture has been moved
with some tidy areas and other less tidy areas which will be cordoned off due to very limited
storage space. A lot of dialogue is occurring and consultation to determine capacity. The entry
door counters will be attached to monitors to show capacity. Questions remain about individual
zone capacities. Other library directors have been helpful in relaying that capacity has rarely
been met as the public has been respectful of requests to quickly visit to browse or pick up
items on hold. The Welcome Desk will remain in the lobby to help orient people to the new
expectations of short visits. A tentative date has been set for Phase 4 to start as long as the data
allows and to give staff time to adjust and receive training in the new phase. It will be the first
time some have interacted in person with patrons for a year. Johnk asked about whether staff
vaccinations are in the state's Phase 1 B or 1C. Carman said 1C. Beary thanked Carman and staff
for providing the additional information especially related to peer libraries for context.
Set calendar for FY22.
Mangano stated the annual review of scheduling for weekend holidays follows past practice.
Johnk made a motion to approve the calendar for FY2022. Schultz seconded. There was no
discussion. Motion passed 9/0.
Appoint Nominating Committee.
Beary pulled names of those not serving on the Director's Evaluation Committee "from a hat" to
appoint Johnk, Beasley, and Paetzold. Beasley served last year and will be able to explain the
process of developing the slate of officers to be presented at the April meeting. Beary thanked
the appointees for serving.
Staff Reports.
Director's Report. Carman stated the transition to Phase 4 could be in late March, around March
23 to allow time to meet staff training needs. Carman said the City and AFSCME union reached a
tentative agreement on a new contract which will be presented at the first March City Council
meeting. Terri Byers, AFSCME local President, could be asked to present details at the March or
April meeting. Johnk asked whether the end of mailing patron items should be linked to Phase
4. Carman responded that it is linked to the current phase due to its budget impact. Patrons
have been notified of the coming change since mid-February and presented with options
including At Home service which has increased by 10 patrons. Carman said people are excited to
hear that the bookmobile is also being reactivated as a hold pickup option. Rocklin asked that
Carman's report next month include the city budget timeline. Beary expressed appreciation to
Carman for including staff anniversary milestones in his written report and thanked Pilkington
and Paulios for their years of service because they are on the call, in addition to all who are not
but reached significant milestones.
Departmental Reports.
Children's. Pilkington stated the Winter Reading Program went very well with participation
numbers comparable to past years. In response to Kirsch's comment that craft kits take a lot of
work and might be missed when the building reopens in Phase 4, Pilkington said the idea is to
keep the kits in lieu of in person programming including through the summer. Washington was
grateful to receive a Read WOKE bag. Pilkington said 100 were given out over the weekend with
60 additional requested. There is quite a bit of staff involvement to get them done. Carman said
Pilkington and the Children's team have done an impressivejob translating programs into other
service offerings such as the kits.
Collection Services. Beary said it is helpful to understand the process involved in the Diversity
Audit. Kirsch said it was another very labor intensive, interesting, and impressive project.
Mangano said the team is now in the jFiction section. In response to Rocklin's question,
Mangano said a vendor might provide the information in the future. Johnk asked whether the
goal is to be representative of our community or pursue equitable representation. Mangano
stated it is both and seeking community input about what patrons want in the collection is
important in order to try to define equitable representation for ICPL.
IT. Beary expressed thanks for the detailed report on website pageviews.
Development Office Report. McCarthy stated that there will be a new fundraising partnership
with FilmScene every Friday in March with $5 of each Kernels for Kindness purchase to be
donated to the ICPL Friends Foundation. Washington said that seems like a good way to raise
funds and help FilmScene and the library at the same time.
Miscellaneous. Beary acknowledged the nice recognition from the Census Bureau.
President's Report. Beary thanked the Director's Evaluation Committee members for their work.
Beary said his term as well as those of Beasley and Washington will expire on June 30. He
encouraged everyone to reach out and talk about board service to potential applicants to help
maintain the goals for a diverse group and maintain gender balance as required by state law. He
thanked Beasley and Washington for their years of service.
Announcements from Members. None.
Committee Reports.
Foundation Members. Kirsch reported a meeting last week focused on upcoming fundraising
opportunities and recruitment of new board members. Shultz said a new logo is being
developed and the group met Victoria Hernandez, new Teen Librarian, and heard about her
plans.
Director's Evaluation Committee.
Communications. Census thank you was mentioned earlier.
Consent Agenda. Shultz made a motion to approve the consent agenda. Kirsch seconded.
There was no discussion. The motion carried 9/0.
Set Agenda Order for March Meeting. Four policy reviews. Two department reports. Rocklin's
request for budget schedule information
Adjournment. Beary closed the meeting at 6:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Patty McCarthy and Amanda Ray
Board or Commission: ICPL Board of Trustees
ATTENDANCE RECORD
12 Month
Name
Term
Expiration
9/10/20
9/24/20
10/08/20
10/22/20
11/5/20
11/19/20
12/17/20
1/28/21
2/25/21
3/25/21
Wesley Beary
6/30/21
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
John Beasley
6/30/21
X
X
X
o
o
X
X
X
X
X
Kellee
Forkenbrock
6/30/23
X
X
o
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
Derek Johnk
6/30/25
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
Carol Kirsch
6/30/23
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Robin Paetzold
6/30/23
x
X
X
X
x
x
X
x
X
X
Tom Rocklin
6/30/25
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
x
x
X
Hannah Shultz
6/30/25
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
x
Monique
Washington
6/30/21
O/E
X
O
X
O
X
X
X
X
O
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
Item Number: 41
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Park & Recreation Commission: February 10
IOWA CITY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION APPROVED
MINUTES FEBRUARY 10, 2021
ZOOM PLATFORM
Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical due to
concerns for the health and safety of council members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
Members Present: Stephen Bird, Alex Hachtman, Chris Odinet, Ben Russell, Melissa Serenda, Angie
Smith, Brianna Wills
Members Absent: Boniface Penandjo Lemoupa
Staff Present: Tyler Baird, Brad Barker
Others Present: None
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Bird called the meeting to order at 5 p.m.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action):
None
OTHER FORMAL ACTION:
Moved by Hachtman, seconded by Odinet to approve the January 13, 2021 minutes as written.
Motion passed 7-0 (Penandio Lemoupa absentZ
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None
INTRODUCTION OF COMPREHENSIVE RECREATION MASTER PLAN — BRAD BARKER
Barker announced that the Parks and Recreation Department issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for
professional consulting services to aide in developing a Comprehensive Recreation Master Plan. This
document will serve as a ten-year plan for recreation facilities, amenities and programming for the Iowa
City Parks and Recreation Department. He noted that this document will serve as a companion to the 2016
master plan and will build on the vision that was established focusing on the recreation side. This master
plan will not include facilities such as playgrounds, trails, splash pads, shelters, restrooms or natural areas.
Those facilities were addressed in the 2016 master plan. He expressed the importance of public feedback
in the process of creating this plan. He said that a recreation needs assessment will be available to the public
to assist in determining what the community would like to see for the future of recreation in this community.
Staff will select a consultant that can connect with participants who are currently participating in programs
and using Iowa City recreation facilities, and, perhaps more importantly, connect with those in the
community who are not.
Barker summarized the four topics that the master plan will specifically address in Phase 1.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
February 10, 2021
Page 2 of 7
Aquatic Facilities:
o Analyze the community demand for aquatics and find out if the three aquatic facilities are
meeting the needs of the community.
o Assess the lifecycle and efficiency of current pool operations, including the pool shell and
mechanical systems.
o Determine community preferences for the future of City Park Pool.
o Review opportunities for carbon emission reductions.
o Review and update the ADA transition plan.
Recreation Centers:
o Analyze the programs and services the community would like prioritized within these
facilities.
o Evaluate whether the operation hours of facilities are meeting demand.
o Measure the demand for a new recreation center and where the preferred location would
be and the impacts this change would have on the use of current facilities.
o Review opportunities for carbon emission reductions.
o Review and update the ADA transition plan.
• Athletic Fields
o Inventory the type and size of current fields/courts available to the community.
o Assess if the current inventory aligns with the future needs of each sport.
o Use guidance from current CII' plans to prioritize improvements to meet community needs.
• Recreation Programs:
o Assess community support for current recreation goals derived from the 2016 Park Master
Plan:
■ Every child learns to swim
■ Every child learns basic outdoor skills
■ Programs and services integrate STEAM concepts into play
o Determine the type of programs the public would like prioritized and the preferred method
of delivery (length, format, cost, etc.)
o Evaluate preferences for the type of events the public would like to see within the
community.
o Determine if there are other recreation opportunities that should be offered that do not
already have a presence within the community.
o Measure how the public currently receives information versus how they'd prefer to receive
information on programs, events and facilities/amenities.
Barker noted that the RFP allows for the proposal of additional contracting services should the community
show a high demand for an additional recreation center or a new pool, for example. The contractor will
need to show the ability to offer design development, produce construction documents and participate in
the bidding and negotiation process and offer construction administration.
Barker shared that the budget for this master planning process is $90,0004130,000. The deadline for
response is March 19. Staff will then move forward with interviews of contractors.
Barker also noted that staff will ask two Parks & Recreation Commission members to serve on the steering
committee.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
February 10, 2021
Page 3 of 7
Wills shared that when a person finds out that she is on the Commission, the first question they ask is when
City Park Pool will be updated with amenities such as slides etc. She said that some thought that when the
pool was closed for the pandemic that it was not going to reopen. She asked at what point is it determined
that it is no longer feasible to spend money on the existing pool. Barker responded that there has not been
a lot of money spent on City Park Pool and that is functions very well. He said that there are no issues with
cracks in the foundation or leaks like you would find with many pools of this age. He noted that staff
receives comments as well from those that don't want any amenities added to City Park Pool.
Bird noted his concern that when looking at a ten -year -plan, the funding may be hard to come by, like that
of the new City Park playground having to be scaled down due to budget limits. He expressed that
partnerships for funding may be another avenue that needs to be pursued and hopes the consultant chosen
will have expertise in pursuing different avenues for funding.
Serenda asked if there were any concerns about the timing of soliciting information from the public
considering the pandemic and how it will influence their recreation needs, whether it be in a good way or a
bad way. Barker agreed that this is a concern of staff as well and is interested in how a consulting firm is
going to address this when collecting information. He also agrees that people will have a new way of
looking at recreation further stating that the effects of the pandemic are going to be felt for years to come.
Bird added that soliciting public opinion will be challenging and there will be a need for creative ideas to
reach all residents including the underserved population. Wills asked if staff have considered reaching out
through the school districts Peachjar, an electronic communication system. Barker replied that staff will be
reaching out to the school district and that the department has used Peachjar on a regular basis for
communicating with students and their families.
UPDATE ON DEPARTMENT AFFLIATE GROUPS AND PARTNERSHIPS — BRAD BARKER
Barker provided a brief update on the various groups that the department works with and defined what the
department considers an affiliate and what is considered a partnership. In short, he explained that an
affiliate is a group that provides a service that has mission and goals that align with the department. Affiliate
group relationships allow the department to branch out and expand on programs while lending their
expertise that department staff cannot offer at the same level. Barker went on to share information on the
various affiliate groups that the department works with as well as the numbers they serve. Those are as
follows:
Iowa City Girls Softball (ICGS): ICGS serve approximately 250-300 girls per season between the ages
of kindergarten through 12'x' grade. Parks and Recreation provide use of the ball diamonds as well as
prepping and maintaining facilities at Napoleon Park. Staff also assists the club in scheduling practices,
games, and tournaments. The City also provides them with storage and concession space. While the club is
not charged for their use of Napoleon facilities, they do collect registration fees and may provide periodic
donations to the City for facility improvements.
Iowa City Boys Baseball (ICBB): ICBB serves approximately 400-500 youth between 5 and 14 years old.
This is a very similar relationship to that with ICGS. ICBB uses fields at City Park. Staff prepares and
maintains those fields and the facility spaces that include storage and concessions. They also assist with
facility improvements through periodic donations.
Iowa City Eels: Iowa City Eels is a swim club that uses Mercer Park Aquatic Center for practices and swim
meets. During a regular year they have about 50 youth participants. They also serve 10-12 master
swimmers (adult swimmers) that participate in their club. The department provides the swimming pool,
cohosts swim meets and has a joint purchase of equipment agreement with the Eels. Iowa City Eels pay a
relatively small monthly fee to the department to assist with staff costs as the department provides
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
February 10, 2021
Page 4 of 7
lifeguarding for them. Iowa City Eels also provide cost benefits for shared use items such as lane lines,
clocks, and other facility improvements.
Iowa City Kickers Soccer Club: Kickers serve approximately 1500 youth during their spring season and
about 1300 during their fall season. The Kickers club regularly serve kids from kindergarten to high school
age as well as preschool age and adult soccer leagues. The department again provides the fields, field prep
and maintenance, storage and concessions space. Kickers, in turn, assist with the cost of complex
improvements through donations.
Iowa Citv Bruisers: The Bruisers are a roller derby group that use the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center
gymnasium. The Bruisers serve approximately 40 kids ages 5 to 14 years. The department provides facility
space at no charge and they in turn assist with park cleanup through volunteer projects. They also help in
maintaining the department roller skates as Recreation offers a free roller skating program every weekend.
When the department hosts an outdoor skating event, the Bruisers assist in changing wheels on the skates
for outside skating and back again to wheels meant for indoor use.
Backyard Abundance: This group assists in maintaining the departments edible garden spaces within the
parks as well as those located outside of the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center. Backyard Abundance staff
offer classes to the community about design management and the establishment of landscapes. The
department provides a bit of financial assistance annually so that Backyard Abundance can co -host events
and offer classes in cooperation with the Recreation Department.
Take a Kid Outdoors (TAKO): TAKO provides outdoor experiences for children and families and the
Recreation Department provides some financial assistance to help with an outdoor program each year.
City High: The department has a joint agreement (otherwise known as a 28E agreement) with City High
School. While this consisted of prepping and maintaining ball fields by Parks and Recreation staff, the
school athletic department has recently assumed that responsibility and has exclusive use of that field. City
High also uses Mercer Pool for swim practices and meets and Kickers Soccer Complex for cross country
meets.
Iowa Snorts Foundation/Corporate Games: This program was started in Des Moines and recently added
the Cedar Rapids and Iowa City metro areas as well. This program offers employees of local businesses the
opportunity to participate in Olympic -style athletics. Last year there 31 teams participated from Cedar
Rapids and Iowa City. The Parks and Recreation Department provides a full-time staff member (Jeff Sears,
Adult Sports Program Supervisor) who serves as liaison between the Iowa Sports Foundation and the City
of Iowa City and Cedar Rapids. The department receives $10,000 annually to cover staff cost.
Other department affiliate groups include The Camera Club, Old Capitol Chorus, Iowa City Community
Theatre, Iowa City Pickleball League and the Got Strength Olympic Weightlifting Club. These groups
provide some financial support to the department in exchange for free facility use.
The department also partners with approximately 20-25 other organizations that are not considered
affiliates. These are groups that we assist in reserving space as well as provide space prep and maintenance
throughout the year. Staff member, Jeff Sears assists with most of those rentals.
REPORTS ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF:
Recreation Division Superintendent — Brad Barker:
• Gymnasium Use at Mercer/Scanlon: Barker reminded commission members that at the January
meeting the department had just started the process of opening Scanlon Gym for basketball,
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
February 10, 2021
Page 5 of 7
pickleball, Tot -Time and as a place for walking on a reservation basis only. Opening the gym has
been well received with Tot -Time being the most popular. The department initially offered the
space twice a week for Tot -Time and has since expanded that to five days a week. Tot Time is a
drop-in program for children 1-6 years old. The department provides mats, riding toys, slides and
other activities for the kids, with all items being sanitized between each reservation.
• Open Swim Opportunities: Barker announced the department begin planning to offer open swim
times at Mercer and in so doing will expand the pool hours. This will begin in mid-March and
will be on a reservation basis only. A cap of approximately 25 people in the pool at one time will
be set to assure plenty of space for social distancing.
Spring & Summer Program Planning: Barker and programming staff are currently making plans
for spring. Programs offered will, for the most part, include outdoor activities and will cap at 10
or less participants. Barker will have more information on these programs for the Commission at
their March meeting. He hopes to have details about summer programming at that time as well.
Staff is working towards opening City Park Pool this summer as well as planning a modified
version of the summer camp program.
Party in the Park & Pop-up Park Events: Staff plans to continue the Party in the Park program. In
addition, staff will offer a new series that will include pop-up park events. The department has a
mobile event trailer where equipment can be stored and easily moved from place to place. These
programs will be offered in parks that are not scheduled to host Party in the Park. The pop-up
programs will be less structured and will include games and other pop-up activities. There will
not be music at the pop-up events, however, music will continue to be a part of the Party in the
Park events.
Winter Programming: Barker and other department staff hosted a sledding party at Happy Hollow
Park recently with approximately 40-50 kids and adults participating. Other activities, in addition
to sledding, included snow shoeing, strider bikes on skis, a winter craft activity and hot chocolate
was served. Staff had planned a dog sweater party to be held at Thornberry Dog Park this
Saturday, February 13, however, due to the extremely cold temperatures forecasted, this event has
been rescheduled for March 6.
Proeram Safety: Barker reminded staff to include safety precautions, (sanitation and social
distancing procedures) in their program planning to assure that all who attend feel safe in
participating. Bird announced that he was recently informed that the University of Iowa is
cancelling all youth programs for the summer of 2021. He added that he is in support of Iowa
City Recreation offering programs while including safety precautions with the hope of returning
to normal.
Parks Division Superintendent — Tyler Baird:
Snow Removal: Baird pointed out that since the last commission meeting there has been a lot of
snowfall and specifically that there has been snow every Saturday since that meeting. He
commended staff who have stepped up to come in on the weekends to clean snow. He noted that
there is scheduled staff working on weekends, but with the amount of snow fall it has been
necessary to supplement with additional staff. This staff is paid overtime for those additional
hours worked. The department has received many positive comments from the public. Baird
noted that staff have cleaned an additional 7.5 miles of trails this year, or approximately 1/2 mile
extra per each staff member.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
February 10, 2021
Page 6 of 7
Tree Projects: Tree removal is complete in the Normandy drive area where staff removed dead
and dying trees. Staff will return to replant trees when possible. Baird also reported that many ash
trees have been removed at Court Hill. When looking from overhead, it is obvious that many the
trees were dying from the top. Staff is working with several rotary clubs in the area to plan a tree
replanting project which will allow for approximately 50 plus trees planted daily. There are
benches planned for Court Hill park as well. Staff is working to keep the education factor going
out to various areas in the community prior to trees being removed.
• Athletic Facilities: Staff is working to spruce up the restrooms at ball field locations, although the
current temperatures have proven to be a challenge when attempting to heat them up enough to
continue the work. Painting and other updates will continue once the weather allows.
• Administration: Staff is beginning the seasonal hiring process. Josh Worrell, Assistant Parks
Superintendent, is currently scheduling interviews. Staff is pleased with the number of
applications received and with the number of those applicants having worked for Parks in past
seasons.
Odinet asked if the recommendation to rename Creekside Park in honor of James Allen McPherson
was passed by Council. Tammy Neumann explained that the January minutes needed to be approved
prior to it being presented to Council. With the minutes having been approved this evening, the item
will go to the Clerk's office to add to an upcoming agenda.
Hachtman asked where snow is hauled to once it is removed from an area. Baird explained that the
Streets Department does most of the hauling of snow from the downtown area and that it is hauled to
an area near the City transportation and equipment buildings. Due to the large amount of snow this
year, some has also been hauled to an area near Scott Park on the east side of Iowa City. Within the
parks, snow is pushed as far as it can be in an attempt to get it out of the way.
CHAIRS REPORT — STEVE BIRD:
Bird noted that last month there were a couple of comments about how nice it is to have those extra 7.5
miles of trails plowed. Keeping that in mind, he encouraged staff to budget the extra funds to keep this
process going. He shared that he lives near City Park and he sees people using the trails at all hours of the
day, even after dark. He noted that the City Park trail ties in well with the University's system. Bird
would like to see this practice continue as there has been a lot of positive feedback. Other commissioners
agreed.
COMMISSION TIME/SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Hachtman said he would second what Bird said about the additional trails being cleaned of snow. He lives
near Terry Trueblood Recreation Area and he too sees many people using those trails at all hours of the
day.
Bird reiterated his appreciation to the Parks team. Baird will share these comments of appreciation with
Parks staff.
Serenda also expressed her appreciation of snow removal on the Sycamore Greenway Trail.
ADJOURNMENT:
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
February 10, 2021
Page 7 of 7
Moved by Hachtman, seconded by Serenda, to adiourn the meeting at 5:57 p.m. Motion passed 7-0
(Penandio Lemoupa absent).
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
NAME
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
N
N
N
N
N
00
~
~
"T
~
00
V,
M
O
TERM
M
0�0
EXPIRES
Steve Bird
12/31/21
X
NM
NM
X
NM
NM
X
LQ
X
NM
X
X
Alex
12/31/20
X
NM
NM
X
NM
NM
X
LQ
X
NM
X
X
Hachtman
Christopher
12/31/24
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
X
X
Odinet
Boniface
12/31/23
O
NM
NM
O
NM
NM
O
LQ
X
NM
X
O
Penandjo
Lemou a
Ben Russell
12/31/21
X
NM
NM
X
NM
NM
X
LQ
X
NM
X
X
Melissa
12/31/23
X
NM
NM
X
NM
NM
X
LQ
X
NM
X
X
Serenda
Angie Smith
12/31/21
X
NM
NM
X
NM
NM
X
LQ
X
NM
X
X
Jamie
12/31/20
X
NM
NM
X
NM
NM
X
LQ
X
NM
Venzon
Brianna
12/31/22
X
NM
NM
X
NM
NM
X
LQ
X
NM
X
Wills
Blake Winter
12/31/22
X
NM
NM
O/E
NM
NM
O/E
LQ
KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum
* = Not a member now
Item Number: 4.j.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Planning & Zoning Commission: January 21
r
^ p CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 12, 2021
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner
Re: Recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission
At its January 21, 2021 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission have the following
recommendations to the City Council:
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ20-0014, an application to
designate 2525 Highlander Place as an Iowa City Historic Landmark and rezone from Highway
Commercial (CH -1) to CH -1 with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/CH-1).
Additional action (check one)
X No further action needed
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JANUARY 21, 2021 —7:00 PM
ELECTRONIC FORMAL MEETING
FINAL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Mark
Signs, Billie Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Nolte
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible or impractical
due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff and the public
presented by COVID-19.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ20-0014, an application to
designate 2525 Highlander Place as an Iowa City Historic Landmark and rezone from Highway
Commercial (CH -1) to CH -1 with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/CH-1).
CALL TO ORDER:
Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
CASE NO. REZ20-0014:
Applicant: Highland Hotel, LLC
Location: 2525 Highlander Place
An application for a rezoning from Highway Commercial (CH -1) to CH -1 with a Historic District
Overlay (OHD/CH-1) to designate the property as an Iowa City Historic Landmark.
Russett began the staff report showing a map of an area of the property noting it's located at the
northeast corner North Dodge Street or Highway 1 and off 1-80. The property is currently zoned
Highway Commercial, and the overlay proposed would maintain that Highway Commercial
designation with a Historic Overlay.
Regarding background for this property, The Highlander Supper Club was built in 1967 and the
convention center was added a few years later in 1973, although it was built later it was still built
to the original design that was developed in the late 60s. The City recently received an
application from the property owner to designate this property as a landmark. Russett showed a
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2021
Page 2 of 6
few pictures of how the property looks today noting the main entrance, the entrance to the
supper club, the west entry with some of the remaining columns that still exist there, the hotel
rooms, and the courtyard and pool area. Russett showed an aerial photo from 1975 and a
photograph of the pool area in 1975 along with a brochure from 1975 that shows the thin
columns and the entry with the heavy canopy which is the original part of the design.
Russett stated again the property is zoned Highway Commercial and the request is to designate
this as a Historic District Overlay and with that designation any exterior modifications have to be
reviewed by either the City Historic Preservation Planner or the Historic Preservation
Commission. She noted when the Commission is reviewing these Historic Overlays the main
criteria to note is whether or not the request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. This
property is in the North Corridor District, which currently does not have an adopted district plan.
However, Russett noted the Comprehensive Plan includes several goals related to economic
development and business retention and retaining and expanding existing businesses and to
also encouraging the efficient use of resources. In this case, this is a business that has been in
existence for several years and there's a new owner who wishes to improve the property.
There's already City services at the site and in addition to that, there are Historic Preservation
goals related to identifying and preserving historic resources in the community.
Russett noted the Historic Preservation Commission reviewed this application last Thursday
(January 14) and unanimously recommended approval of the landmark designation. Next steps
are after the P & Z Commission's discussion and recommendation tonight, this will go to
City Council in February for consideration.
Staff recommends approval of REZ20-0014, an application to designate 2525 Highlander Place
as an Iowa City Historic Landmark and rezone from Highway Commercial (CH -1) to CH -1 with a
Historic District Overlay (OHD/CH-1).
Hensch asked if the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Commission was unanimous
and Russett confirmed it was.
Craig asked if this is approved, does the owner have any obligation to return some of those
original features or is it just the way it is in time right now. Russett explained the owner wouldn't
be obligated to make any changes, but if they do make any changes to the exterior, it will be
subject to historic review.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Kevin Boyd (Historic Preservation Commission) explained he is now the chair of Historic
Preservation Commission but generally someone from the Commission likes to speak on behalf
of applicants who are pursuing landmark status or other status that the Commissioner has
approved. Boyd was asked to speak tonight as Bob McGurk was his grandfather and he and
Boyd's grandmother were among the original owners of the Highlander. His parents met there,
and his uncle managed the Highlander with Boyd's grandmother after his grandfather died 1984.
Boyd assured he has no financial ties to this property, nor does anyone in his family, at this point.
Boyd noted he has heard the stories for years from folks, how they waited tables there in college,
parents got married there, had our first date there, got engaged there, met Hayden Fry at the
supper club, etc. Boyd stated just this winter he got a text from an acquaintance he went to high
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2021
Page 3 of 6
school with who was excited to take his kids swimming there just like he had as a kid. For his
entire life people would discover the familial relationship and tell him what the Highlander meant
to them. For Boyd it is where he learned what it meant to own a business. He remembers asking
his grandma if she got a parking spot right up front since she owned the place and she replied in
a way that a grandmother can firmly, but with love, that she parks in the back so the customers
can have the best spots. Boyd noted owning the Highlander meant home football weekends
were work weekends for his parents, meaning his folks will leave before he would wake up and
come home after he'd gone to sleep. He did note many dignitaries came through and he
remembers his parents telling them what it was like to meet President Ford or the other folks who
came through. Boyd recalled so many memories there, a special lunch with his grandma, pizza
making in the kitchen for his Cub Scouts, birthday parties poolside and the pool bar menu even
had a grilled cheese named after him, the Kevin Special.
Boyd was not entirely surprised this application came along, but it did require him to shift his
thinking just as other nominations have required them to shift their sense of history to more
recent times. He does believe it meets the minimum qualifications that are needed to be a
landmark, and it also preserves a place that feels like part of the community's history. While the
history of the Highlander is a little closer to home for him it also preserves that sense for others
who may have had their first job there, or those special dates, weddings, football clubs, proms,
etc. Boyd stated he sees that same entrepreneurial spirit in Angela Harrington and her family
that he saw in his grandparents and his family. Boyd showed a paperweight, a glass dome of a
bunch of pennies for 1973 the year the hotel and convention center was complete, that
paperweight sat on his grandfather's desk and he looks at it and encourages the Planning &
Zoning Commission to support this local landmark status, the history this place represents and
the owner's desire to use preservation as part of the economic success of this property.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Craig moved to recommend approval of REZ20-0014, an application to designate 2525
Highlander Place as an Iowa City Historic Landmark and rezone from Highway
Commercial (CH -1) to CH -1 with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/CH-1).
Signs seconded the motion.
Hensch noted the unanimous recommendation of Historic Preservation Commission is pretty
powerful to him. He also remembers what a big deal it was to go to events at the Highlander on
New Year's Eve and other things so he certainly does believe it's a landmark in the Iowa City
area. He knows the supper club days are gone, but that was pretty neat time, and he is
supporting this application.
Signs agreed and stated he is in support of the application, it is an icon in the Iowa City area, and
he is anxious to see that they're bringing it back to life. He is also glad they changed the name
back to the Highlander, because it does have a lot of history and they can leverage that quite
well.
Craig noted she came to Iowa City in 1970 as a freshman in college and had no money so never
went out to eat or did anything fancy but in her sophomore year she went to the Highlander for
some event and after that it was like for all special events, you got to go to the Highlander. So
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2021
Page 4 of 6
there are lots of memories for many, many people there and she is really pleased that they're
doing this and it's not just the building that's preserved, it's the history and the stories that go
along with it so she is totally supportive of this application.
Signs thanked Boyd for sharing his personal story.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 7, 2021:
Townsend moved to approve the meeting minutes of January 21, 2021.
Signs seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Russett noted the City Council met on Tuesday during their work session to discuss the
affordable housing annexation policy, which was mentioned during the Carson Farms annexation
discussion and caused some Council members to not support that the annexation. There was no
direction given by Council for staff to make any changes to the affordable housing annexation
policy and there were many that wanted it to remain as is. They requested that as the City moves
forward with developing an affordable housing plan that the committee discuss changes.
Hensch stated he noticed there is no district plan for the North Corridor and there's a couple
other districts that are have no plans or are quite aged so is there a plan in place to create those
plans or update those plans. Russett replied right now they are working on an update to the
Southwest District Plan and their next goal after that is to reevaluate the Comprehensive Plan in
its entirety and at that time they'll come back to the Districts and evaluate if that is the structure
that they want to maintain or not. Hensch noted as part of that discussion, in the Riverfront
Crossings there are so many subdistricts and maybe part of the discussion can be to maybe
condense the number of subdistricts. Russett started that actually might come a little bit sooner,
they are actually working on some changes to that Riverfront Crossings Code, most of the
changes are not substantive but more structural to make the Code easier to use.
Signs noted he has been asked to serve on the steering committee as the City prepares the next
five-year Affordable Housing Action Plan representing both realtors, and the P&Z Commission.
Craig stated she signed up for one of the sessions on information about affordable housing but
hasn't receive a zoom link. Russett said that she should receive one, but that it is not a City
event. It's put on by the Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition.
ADJOURNMENT:
Townsend moved to adjourn.
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 21, 2021
Page 5 of 6
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020-2021
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
7/16
8/6
8/20
10/1
10/15
11/5
12/3
12/17
117
1121
CRAIG, SUSAN
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
DYER, CAROLYN
O/E
O/E
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
ELLIOTT, MAGGIE
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
X
X
X
X
X
HENSCH, MIKE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
MARTIN, PHOEBE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
NOLTE, MARK
-- --
-- --
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
SIGNS, MARK
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
TOWNSEND, BILLIE
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
Item Number: 4.k.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
April 6, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Planning & Zoning Commission: February 18
r
�'f:qw=
r CITY OF IOWA CITY
,Z- MEMORANDUM
Date: March 19, 2021
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner
Re: Recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission
At its February 18, 2021 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission have the following
recommendations to the City Council:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of ANN20-0002 and REZ20-0012, a
voluntary annexation of approximately 3.61 acres of property located at 1360 Melrose Avenue in
University Heights and rezoning of approximately 6.12 acres from University Heights
commercial (C) & institutional public (P2) to medium density multi -family residential with a
planned development overlay (OPD/RM-20/P-2) subject to the following conditions:
1. No building permit shall be issued for any of the subject property until the City Council
approves a final plat subdividing the subject property to conform to the zoning boundaries
established by the zoning ordinance.
2. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, installation of an eastbound left turn lane on
Melrose Avenue at the proposed access subject to review and approval of specifications by the
City Engineer.
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends City Council consider affordable housing in the
context of the height bonus and also look at the signalization of Fin kbine/Melrose.
By a vote of 0-7 the motion to approve REZ20-0016 failed, a proposal to rezone approximately
48.75 acres of land located south of N. Scott Blvd. and west of N. 1st Ave. from Interim
Development — Single Family Residential (ID -RS) zone to Low Density Single Family with a
Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) zone.
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
MINUTES FINAL
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 18, 2021 —7:00 PM
ELECTRONIC FORMAL MEETING
MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Mark
Nolte, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Ray Heitner, Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: David Kieft, Ben Logsdon, Jon Marner, Brent Schipper, Jennifer
Ross, Alan Gunderson, Jerry Zimmermann, Hannah Rapson, Edie
Thomas, Michael Welch, Jacob Wolfgang, Andrew Alden, Asha
Bhandary, Casey Kohrt, Adam Parker, Ken Gayley, Jason Napoli,
Edie Thomas, Katherine Beydler, Sue Forde, Jane Bradbury, Laura
Routh, Nick Bowman, Adam Weis, David Deardorff, Kristen
Morrow, Arturs Kalnins, Kumar Narayanan, William Synan, Eric
Miller, Paige Hall, Hannah Rapson, Mary Winder, Mary Murphy,
Veronica Tessler, Glenda Buenger, Beth Rapson, Jesse Thomas
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible or impractical
due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff and the public
presented by COVID-19.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of ANN20-0002 and REZ20-0012, a
voluntary annexation of approximately 3.61 acres of property located at 1360 Melrose Avenue in
University Heights and rezoning of approximately 6.12 acres from University Heights commercial
(C) & institutional public (P2) to medium density multi -family residential with a planned
development overlay (OPD/RM-20/P-2) subject to the following conditions:
1. No building permit shall be issued for any of the subject property until the City Council
approves a final plat subdividing the subject property to conform to the zoning boundaries
established by the zoning ordinance.
2. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, installation of an eastbound left turn lane on
Melrose Avenue at the proposed access subject to review and approval of specifications by the
City Engineer.
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends City Council consider affordable housing in the
context of the height bonus and also look at the signalization of Finkbine/Melrose.
By a vote of 0-7 the motion to approve REZ20-0016 failed, a proposal to rezone approximately
48.75 acres of land located south of N. Scott Blvd. and west of N. 1 stAve. from Interim
Development — Single Family Residential (ID -RS) zone to Low Density Single Family with a
Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) zone.
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 2 of 40
CALL TO ORDER:
Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
CASE NO. ANN20-0002 AND REZ20-0012:
Applicant: MMS Consultants on behalf of the University of Iowa
Location: 1360 Melrose Avenue
An application submitted for an annexation of 3.61 acres of land currently in the City of University
Heights and a rezoning of 6.12 acres of land from University Heights Commercial (C) and
Institutional Public (P-2) to Institutional Public (P-2) and Medium Density Multi -Family Residential
(RM -20) with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-20/P-2).
Russett began the staff report with a couple aerial images that showed the location of the
property and the different boundaries of the proposed annexation versus the rezoning. The
proposed annexation is for the 3.61 acre area that is currently within the City of University
Heights the rezoning extends into the City of Iowa City about six acres. Russett next showed the
zoning map, this property is currently zoned commercial within the City of University Heights and
its zoned public within the City of Iowa City to the south where there's a fire station, with some
single-family zoning designations to the southwest and some multifamily further to the southwest.
In terms of background this property is owned by the University of Iowa and the University plans
to maintain ownership of the land but will be entering into a long-term lease with a private
developer. The proposal is to shift the boundary lines of Iowa City and University Heights to
avoid a development that straddles two jurisdictions. Russett also noted concurrent with the
annexation and rezoning the City of University Heights is reviewing a severance application.
Russett stated the applicant did hold virtual good neighbor meeting in September. Russett next
showed some photographs of the subject property, pointing out some of the sensitive areas and
then what the site looks like with the proposed development. It will have frontage off Finkbine
Commuter Drive and Melrose Avenue and is a proposed block -scale building with the vast
majority of the parking provided in the rear and access from Melrose Avenue.
First Russett discussed the annexation and the criteria used when looking at annexations. The
first criteria is that the area falls within the long range planning boundary. Russett noted most of
the applications that they review are located in the fringe area in unincorporated Johnson County
but this proposed annexation is located within the core of the community and is a request to
transfer a portion of University Heights to the City of Iowa City. The second criteria is that
development in the area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need without imposing
an undue burden on the City. Russett noted currently this property is bordered by Iowa City to
the north, west and southwest and it's contiguous with current development. The property has
access to public sanitary sewer and water which will not need to be upgraded for this project and
the site is also served by public transit. Russett noted Melrose Avenue does have traffic
congestion in the am peak hours so they did ask that the applicant to prepare a traffic study and
she will share information on that during the rezoning conversation, but for the proposed
development the additional congestion from the proposed development will be contained on site.
Lastly, staff finds that the affordable housing annexation policy, which was adopted by Council
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 3 of 40
does not apply for this annexation. That policy was meant for greenfield annexations and this
annexation here is to avoid a development which straddles two jurisdictions and the way that is
accomplished is through an annexation and a severance. Russett stated the final criteria is that
control of the development is in the City's best interest and she explained again this is adjacent
to the City's existing boundaries and the City already provides public services in this area.
Russett next moved on to the rezoning, again the current zoning for the property is University
Heights Commercial and then P2 which is the City's zoning designation for land that is owned by
state and federal governments and in this case it's considered a State entity since it's the
University of Iowa. The proposed zoning is to a medium density - multifamily zone with the plan
development overlay and the P2 zoning designation will also stay since the University will
maintain ownership. Russett also noted this is a multi -family zoning designation that allows up to
24 dwelling units per acre. Staff is recommending that the area be re -platted to create a lot that
conforms with the proposed zoning boundaries. Russett stated there are several criteria they
look at for planned development overlay rezoning, the first is related to compatibility with
adjacent development in terms of land use, mass and scale, open space and traffic. In terms of
density, the proposed density for this development is 18 dwelling units per acre, which is below
the 24 dwelling units per acre allowed in the proposed zone. The proposal is for 116 multifamily
units and is targeted to seniors for an active adult type development. In terms of mass and
scale, this is a block scale building around 700 feet in length, it is four stories, which is 63 feet in
height, and the applicant is requesting a waiver from the 35 foot height maximum designated for
this zoning district. There is single family to the east, and the applicant has proposed to minimize
the impact of a new building on the existing residential by providing a landscaped buffer and also
separating the building from the existing property line by over 100 feet. In terms of general
layout, open space and traffic circulation the proposed building fronts Finkbine Commuter Drive,
which is a private street, and Melrose Avenue and there are 228 parking spaces with potential for
up to 263 parking spaces shown on the plans, which is more than the required 211 parking
spaces required and again the vast majority of the parking is behind the building. The applicant
had submitted a minor modification to allow seven parking spaces in front of the building and that
was approved by staff earlier this week. In terms of open space, the applicant is proposing patio
space seating and some gathering areas of around 7300 square feet of open space which is
much larger than the required 2500 square feet of open space. Russett reiterated the access is
from Melrose Avenue so the parking lot in the back is not connected to Finkbine Commuter Drive
and the only traffic that will access Finkbine Commuter Drive are deliveries and visitors to the to
the building.
The next criteria is related to the development not overburdening existing streets and utilities. As
Russett previously mentioned in the discussion of the annexation this property is already served
by sanitary sewer and water and city transit. Russett reiterated the City did request that the
applicant prepare a traffic study as part of this rezoning and some of the key findings in that
traffic study are that the current southbound movements at Finkbine Commuter Drive and
Melrose Avenue operate at a level of service F (failing) during the peak hours, and that is also
true for eastbound left turn movements at Finkbine Commuter Drive and Melrose Avenue so a
signal is currently warranted at Finkbine Commuter Drive and Melrose Avenue, however staff is
not recommending signalization at this location as part of this rezoning but would likely require it
as part of any future rezonings. The rationale behind that is the intersection is already failing and
the access to the site is from Melrose Avenue and the proposed development will not increase
traffic on Finkbine Commuter Drive. The future southbound movements out of the site are
anticipated to operate a level of service F on opening day during am peak hours but all of the
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 4 of 40
queuing from those vehicles will be maintained onsite on the private property. Staff is
recommending a condition that requires installation of an eastbound left turn lane on Melrose
Avenue at the proposed access to the site.
The next criteria is that the development will not adversely affect views, light, air and property
values. Russett stated the proposed development is larger in scale then surrounding properties
but light and air will be maintained through buffering and distance separation. Additionally,
typical University development does not require City review, it is only required in this case
because of the long term lease with the private developer, so the rezoning would not have any
more impact than a conventional University development would that is not subject to City zoning
regulations.
The next criteria is that the combination of land uses and building types in any variation from
underlining zoning requirements will be in the public interest. Russett explained the applicant is
requesting waiver from the 35 -foot height maximum and requesting a building that 63 feet in
height. Height maximums may be modified through the OPD rezoning process as long it results
in sufficient light and air circulation for each building and adequate accessible open space.
Russett acknowledged the plans do show shared open space, as well as private within the
building.
In terms of compliance with a Comprehensive Plan, Russett noted there is not an adopted
Northwest District Plan but the proposal does meet several of the goals of the IC 2030
Comprehensive Plan relating to compact and efficient development that's connected to existing
neighborhoods, a diversity of housing options, and supporting infill development and
redevelopment in areas where there are services and infrastructure.
Russett noted there are some sensitive areas on the site as well as a grove of trees but since the
grove is less than two acres in size it is not considered a woodland and is not subject to the
woodland retention requirements of the sensitive areas ordinance. There are some protected
slopes but none of which would be impacted by the proposed development. The proposal does
show that 62% of critical slopes would be impacted which exceeds the 35% allowable and will
require review by the Commission and Council. Russett showed a map outlining the sensitive
areas which are concentrated in the northeast corner of the property, she also showed the
protected slopes which are outside of the construction limits.
Regarding next steps, following the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation there
are several steps that need to take place for both the annexation and the rezoning and the
applicants and staff has been coordinating closely with the City of University Heights on that.
Eventually when the annexation and the severance are approved by both jurisdictions the
annexation will need to go to the State Development Review Board for final approval prior to the
City Council adopting the rezoning.
Staff recommends approval of ANN20-0002 and REZ20-0012, a voluntary annexation of
approximately 3.61 acres of property located at 1360 Melrose Avenue in University Heights and
rezoning of approximately 6.12 acres from University Heights commercial (C) & institutional
public (P2) to medium density multi -family residential with a planned development overlay
(OPD/RM-20/P-2) subject to the following conditions:
1. No building permit shall be issued for any of the subject property until the City Council
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 5 of 40
approves a final plat subdividing the subject property to conform to the zoning boundaries
established by the zoning ordinance.
2. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, installation of an eastbound left turn lane on
Melrose Avenue at the proposed access subject to review and approval of specifications by
the City Engineer.
Hensch stated he had four questions for staff, first did University Heights comment on this
development item. Russet replied there hasn't been. Hensch next noted on the elevations it
looks like on the proposed buildings the fourth fours have a step back. Russett stated she
believes a portion of it might be, especially where the balconies are located, and perhaps the
architect on the call can address that when the applicant presents. Russett did bring up on
screen an aerial view of the proposed building and where the balconies are there are some
variations and the facade.
Hensch next asked about stormwater or detention areas on the property as it looks like there's a
lot of impervious surfaces there. Russett acknowledged there is a lot of impervious surfaces but
the proposal probably will reduce the amount of impervious service on the site. Hensch's final
question is regarding signalization at the intersection. If that intersection is failing is that under
the purview of University Heights or Iowa City and either way is it on one of the City's capital
improvement plans. Russett stated within the City of Iowa City it's not in the capital improvement
plans since Finkbine Commuter Drive is a private drive owned by the University, the University is
well aware of the issues and she believes they are looking at ways to address some of those
issues.
Craig asked about property taxes and how does that work when the University still owns the
land, are they just taxed on the buildings. Russett is unsure of the answer on that, she did
mention the City is working on a 28E agreement with the City of University Heights related to tax
sharing. Hench stated there have been examples of taxing the structures, even though is on
leased public zoned land, so he believes that's how it should be done here as well.
Townsend asked if the University owns the land and the contractor owns the building, at the end
of the lease what happens to the structure. Hektoen explained that would be a matter of private
negotiations between those parties.
Signs asked regarding the traffic signalization issue, did the traffic study indicate that there was a
need at Finkbine or a need at the driveway to the all the parking for this project or both for a
signal. Russett said it would be at Finkbine and Melrose. Signs asked if they are not
recommending that as a requirement for this development due to the fact that it is only failing for
one hour per day. Russett explained because this intersection is already failing, regardless of
the development and also the proposed development is accessed from Melrose and the parking
lot does not connect with Finkbine so the amount of traffic that the development is going to put
onto Finkbine is very limited.
Signs also has some concern about the request for the extra height. Generally when they have
such requests there is a kind of a quid pro quo, it having the senior living that in this situation.
Russett explained that unlike in Riverfront Crossings where a bonus height does require some
sort of public benefit, it is not required in this area for the OPD rezoning process. The
opportunity to request a waiver and certain conditions are met for this zone.
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 6 of 40
Martin asked if there were any other iterations of this project, for instance with underground
parking or development of a building keeping the sensitive slopes in mind or is this the only
iteration that's been talked about. Russett said there's been some minor changes but nothing
major like underground parking and such.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
David Kieft (University of Iowa Business Manager and Director of University Real Estate
Planning and Development) noted he has some brief prepared remarks and then is happy to
answer questions regarding the tax issues and what happens at the end of the ground lease and
all of those sorts of questions. He noted adjacent to this subject property is the University owned
golf course and new clubhouse that just opened so this is a unique and special project for the
University that started several years ago. The University razed the old University Athletic Club
and pool facility and in the University's long term master plans it does not show a need for this
land for a University or hospital use, but still views this site as it is adjacent to the neighboring
University Finkbine golf course as an important gateway into campus, including the healthcare
campus. A few years ago, the University issued an RFP to select a third party developer to
design and construct a development on University land through a long term 40 plus year ground
lease that would be a unique and attractive neighbor to the golf course and the community. This
process led to the selection of Built to Suit and Focus Development and Newbury Living as the
development team. Kieft stated the University has been very active working with the developers
on the site layout, architecture massing and connectivity of the development to the golf course
and the newly constructed clubhouse and restaurant. They also stressed upon the developers to
need to be sensitive to the surrounding residential neighborhood. Kieft stated the team has done
a great job in meeting with the neighbors in groups and one-on-one settings to listen to and
address any concerns. With regards to the taxes, this property is currently fully off the tax rolls
and a tax-exempt University/State property. This development will be similar to what they did a
few years ago on Mormon Trek where they had a third party developer construct what is now
known as Aspire, the graduate student housing, where the tax statements show the assessed
value of both the land and the improvements (the building), as separate line items and in this
case the University will own the underlying ground and that part portion will be tax exempt but
the value of the improvement will become taxable. Kieft went on to say they've had great
discussions and similar meetings with University Heights, their mayor and Council, and their
legal counsel about the severance and annexation and they have agreed to allow all this
property to be annexed into Iowa City, so someone's bedroom isn't in one jurisdiction and their
living room or kitchen being in another jurisdiction. Kieft stated the 28 -year agreement will
proportionally divide and share in that those taxes that are collected on the value of the
improvements. As far as what happens at the end of the ground lease, usually these ground
leases are written for the average lifespan or age of a typical building and then the property at
the end of the 40 years would revert back to the University.
Ben Logsdon (Built to Suit & Focus Development) stated they've been working with the
University on site design and architecture design for the last 18 months. They started with
University Heights and that then became discussions into moving the property line so that the
site is fully in Iowa City. Logsdon noted it has been a lot of collaboration, the building sitting on
the site and the architecture has really been shaped with a lot of discussion with the University
team with the goal to create a building and a site design that really complements the clubhouse
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 7 of 40
and has some pedestrian connectivity to the clubhouse across the street, while trying to not
impact the neighbors to the east. The building will sit towards the western side of the site and
extending north along Finkbine Commuter Drive. The plan was really done through a series of
meetings and to meet the goals of the University and trying to be a good neighbor to those
around. Logsdon acknowledged the step back that Hensch asked about in the building, they do
have a step back in the building. Regarding the sensitive slopes Jon Marner from MMS can talk
a little more about the slopes on the north side of the site, but they did actually make adjustments
to the orientation to building where the most of the sensitive slopes on the site lie, and actually
shorten the building and make the building a little bit smaller by lowering the finished floor at that
end of the building to try to minimize the impact to some of those sensitive slopes. Additionally
they do have parking under the building as that was another question, about half of it is under the
building. Once they build there will be less impervious surface on the site then there is now.
Logsdon also mentioned they held a good neighbor meeting in September and did meet with
several of the neighbors. Some of the concerns were regarding the slope and stormwater, and
the development as it stands now, that parking lot all slopes towards Melrose and some of that
water during heavy rains ends up on Melrose creating some flooding issues. They've designed
the site so that it actually slopes more to the north and it's contained in the parking lot. The net
result will be less flooding issues out on Melrose.
Jon Marner (MMS Consultants) discussed the aspects of the site, particularly the issues with the
different grades. On the west side of the site, the building the way it's oriented will fit in the
existing grades and will allow for the west side of the parking lot, where the visitor parking is, to
be elevated. On the east side, where there are those critical or the steeper slopes the entire site
drops down to a lower elevation, about a 12 -foot elevation change between that front and the
garage entry parking lot. As they continue to move to the north and northeast, the site continues
to drop an additional 8 to 10 feet by the rear parking entrance at the back of the site. Regarding
the sensitive slopes and impact to those critical slopes and steep slopes in those areas, they've
avoided the protected slopes with this design and given the site constraints they've tried to
design it such that they're limiting as much as possible the impact of those sensitive areas in the
northeast corner. Additionally the ground that the University owns to the north and east are
heavily wooded areas and heavily steep, critical, and protected slopes. So while this
development is impacting a higher amount within this specific boundary for this OPD there's a
large amount of wooded areas and sensitive slopes to the north and the east that are not going
to be impacted so in the broader context it's a minimal impact over the entire region. Marner also
wanted to reiterate that the parking and the impervious area will actually be less with this
development than on the existing site. They have also reduced the parking count a little bit more
in an effort to add additional green space to the site.
Hensch stated he understands that there's going to actually be a reduction in impervious
surfaces but is a little concerned that there's not a storm water plan. The Commission frequently
hears about those water issues from neighbors and he wants to make sure they don't create any
issues. Marner stated the stormwater will be handled onsite and the western portion the building
will drain into the storm sewer and then get collected and conveyed to the north where there's a
box culvert that goes underneath Finkbine Commuter Drive. All the drainage generally is going
to that same location and ties into an intake system and then would outlet into an existing storm
center that's already in place for the west side of the building. The east side of the building
currently that entire parking lot drains to the south and the east towards Melrose so they would
be taking that drainage and capturing within the parking lot within a storm sewer system and
taking all that stormwater runoff back towards the north again into that same ravine. All the water
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 8 of 40
is going away from any neighbors and that will be shown on the final site plan
Signs asked if these will be rental units and not ownership occupied. Logsdon confirmed that the
target audience for these rentals are for 55 plus so it's an active adult age -oriented apartment
complex, but he added it will not be age restricted. Newbury Living operates Melrose Meadows
down the street and so they're going to share some services and some activities.
Signs asked for an estimate of the total rentable square footage.
Brent Schipper (ASK Studio Architecture) stated he does not have the total square footage but
estimates approximately 1000 square feet per unit, so a ballpark would be 116,000 square feet
of rentable space.
Martin noted Marner mentioned that the wooded areas to the north and to the east would not be
impacted and how do they know that will that those won't be impacted. Marner stated further
north there's a lot more protected slopes and those are specifically regulated by the sensitive
areas ordinance and they cannot impact them, so it would greatly inhibit the ability to do as much
development.
Martin asked with this space they are talking about four stories and is that four stories
continuously flat or are they utilizing the other slopes to go down further. What will the line of
sight look like? Logsdon replied in their initial layout the building was sitting further north and
then they had all the first floor parking essentially at one level but as part of the design process,
they took that level of parking about halfway down the building and lowered the north part of the
building, which creates some issues vertically in the building and the building code, but they did
that so that they could lessen the impact to those slopes to the north. So they have taken some
steps to try to minimize the impact to the slopes to the north and hopefully minimize the visual
impact of the building and try to keep the contour of the natural ground as much as they could
and avoid the slopes.
Martin noted looking at the area that's covered, not just with hard surface but with building as
well, what's the percentage of the current space that will be built upon whether it's building or
parking lot. Marner replied the impervious area, which includes the building and all of the paved
areas post construction will be a reduction of almost 30,000 square feet.
Townsend asked if the land is currently located mostly in University Heights but will all be
annexed into Iowa City what does University Heights get out of this. Kieft said Iowa City and
University Heights will be sharing the tax revenue, that's what the 28E agreement is for. Kieft
noted the University has another agreement where they're going to be doing this. There is land
to the north that is university property with a ravine and further to the north there's what's called
the Swisher Track and it was owned by a family for generations that no one could get their hands
on and it became available about two years ago and the City of University Heights bid on it but
one of the issues they have is that there's no easy pedestrian connection to that area but the
University has a triangle piece of wooded lands to the north along Finkbine Commuter Drive that
they will be gifting to University Heights to be kept in a conservation easement so that they will
actually have access to the other property for construction of a trail and allows them to apply for
some state grants that are specific for creating trails.
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 9 of 40
Jennifer Ross asked where one could find a map of what land the University owns currently
within the Iowa City area. Hensch stated she could contact City Development Staff and they
would be able to guide her in the right direction.
Alan Gunderson wanted to comment on car traffic in the area and noted it's also a pretty thriving
area for pedestrian and even cycling traffic and right now it's a pretty dangerous place for
bicycles to go by. He uses Melrose to go back and forth from work and with his family to places
in the area and with the drive there being shielded it seems like that is likely to get worse over
time, so what are the plans to deal with those changes as it relates to cycling and pedestrian
traffic in an important area in the community. Russett stated there aren't any plans to change the
bicycle and sidewalk infrastructure in that area now but right now there are two access points
onto the property from Melrose and with the proposed development it will be reduced down to
one access so fewer conflict points for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Jerry Zimmermann asked what the price points for the apartments will be. Logsdon said he does
not have the specific information but the rents will be pretty close to market Iowa City rents.
Zimmerman asked what the demographic they're targeting other than 55 and over. Hensch
noted these specific questions can be addressed with the developer, this meeting is an
opportunity to address the Commission.
Hannah Rapson asked how the Commission makes decisions about modifications requested for
height, it was zoned for 35 feet and 63 feet seems quite a bit higher, there was some discussion
about a step back, but not really any firm information there, it seems like just the balconies are
being considered for step back, so she wonders how the City makes decisions when there's
something like a 30 feet additional elevation requests. Russett replied there's a specific criteria
that's part of the OPD rezoning process that in order to get a waiver for height the development
needs to demonstrate that they are still providing adequate accessible light and air circulation
and open space for the future residents of the building.
Edie Thomas stated it was mentioned that the target is for 55 and older and in her experiences
1000 square feet for a couple is not very large and wonders if the Commission has any
requirements on square footage per person and how this project would compare to what would
be expected for two or more people. Craig stated she doesn't know about requirements, but in
the documentation it states the average is 1000, there were many units that were in the 1200 to
1500 square feet size and then there were others that were in the 800 square foot size, so there
were some smaller and some bigger it's not every unit is 1000 square feet. Signs also added
from a market standpoint the bulk of the condominium units that are available in the Iowa City
market run 1000 square feet, or actually a little under, for a two bedroom - one bath apartment
type of unit, so an average size of 1000 square feet for two individuals is probably pretty
average.
Hensch closed the public hearing
Signs moved to recommend approval of ANN20-0002 and REZ20-0012, a voluntary
annexation of approximately 3.61 acres of property located at 1360 Melrose Avenue in
University Heights and rezoning of approximately 6.12 acres from University Heights
commercial (C) & institutional public (P2) to medium density multi -family residential with
a planned development overlay (OPD/RM-20/P-2) subject to the following conditions:
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 10 of 40
1. No building permit shall be issued for any of the subject property until the City Council
approves a final plat subdividing the subject property to conform to the zoning
boundaries established by the zoning ordinance.
2. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, installation of an eastbound left turn
lane on Melrose Avenue at the proposed access subject to review and approval of
specifications by the City Engineer.
Townsend seconded the motion.
Signs stated a couple of the public speakers touched on what the price point would be of these
units and in the documentation the response was around $2 a square foot. By looking at the
descriptions and looking at the actual individual floor plans, he sees units ranging from about 750
square feet to around 2000 square feet and that puts the 750 square foot unit at around $1,500 a
month and the 2000 square foot unit at around $4,000 a month with the average rent throughout
the building at about $2,000 a month, which is high, and they are targeting high end for sure.
Signs said he would expect that adjacent to the University golf course and golf club so it doesn't
surprise him that that's what they're aiming for, and he certainly thinks they can probably get it.
Having said that, he does have a little problem understanding the height bonus here because
they talked about this all the time and usually, especially for what is almost a 40% height bonus
request, in return for something else. Signs stated there is also no requirement for affordable
units in this development or fee -in -lieu to account for affordable units. He is wondering if they
can propose that as a potential trade off here for the height bonus.
Hensch noted the fee -in -lieu is for Riverfront Crossings so they don't have the ability to insert
that here as a as part of the CZA. He did also share some concern about the affordable housing
aspect, just because of their recent experience with the larger annexation request on the west
side that seemed to have failed with Council due to affordable housing issues and that this is not
a current greenfield, and so it is a little bit different.
Signs asked if the Commission has the ability to tack on something like an affordable housing
requirement or fee -in -lieu of for this application.
Hektoen noted for this case the River Crossings affordable housing requirement does not apply,
but in the context of policy and something adopted by resolution if staff's interpretation of the
existing policy that the affordable housing requirement does not apply. Council could disagree
and require affordable housing and impose conditions in that context.
Signs asked if the City's current annexation policy does have a requirement for affordable
housing. Hektoen stated it does but staff's interpretation was it doesn't apply in this jurisdictional
city to city boundary line adjustment. Signs asked if as a Commission they could propose
otherwise. Hektoen said they can make a recommendation to Council that the policy be clarified
or amended in that regard.
Hensch asked if they can make a recommendation that staff exam the application of affordable
housing requirements to this without it being part of the approval motion. Hektoen said they can
make a second subsequent motion if they'd like to but ultimately it would be Council that would
decide yay or nay to the idea.
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 11 of 40
Townsend asked if they are talking about a $4,000 unit how affordable could they make that unit,
because unless they're talking a dollar amount, she thinks they are spinning their wheels with
affordable housing on high end units.
Signs guesses they would do like almost every other developer has done and pay the fee -in -lieu
as opposed to actually building affordable units.
Craig noted they can make some of those smaller units affordable as it's not a bad location for
somebody with low income with public transit right there and the hospital right there.
Townsend noted they are still talking about a $1,500 dollar unit that's not going to be affordable
to a person that can only afford a $500.
Elliott agrees getting something for the additional height through affordable housing is attractive.
Hensch proposes they vote on this motion, and second, and then they could make a motion
asking the Council to look at seeing if affordable housing requirements of annexation would
apply to this, in particular the fee -in -lieu because he agrees with Townsend.
Martin stated before they vote on this motion she wants to discuss the traffic signaling. She feels
very strongly that now is the time to deal with that, and that road and that lane is very tight for
runners and bicyclists, and yes there are two entrances onto Finkbine but even if there is a traffic
signal right there at Melrose and Finkbine it would slow it down for the traffic coming on to
Melrose. She feels this should be addressed now, it makes more sense to have it in place when
the development happens.
Hensch noted that when they did the rezoning for Sand Hill Estates on Sand Road/South Gilbert
Street they didn't include adding the signalization intersection and the first thing City Council did
was require signalization of that intersection so Martin's point is very valid.
Nolte commented he really thinks the way they've approached the architecture and the layout of
the project is really creative, with the two entrances, with the parking on the back and then tried
to be very mindful of the neighbors, it is a thoughtful proposal.
Signs agrees it's a nice looking development, and fits perfectly in that spot, he doesn't have any
objections to that piece he just thinks there's some disconnect between the significant height
bonus and nothing in return, which they always ask for something in return.
Signs and Hensch discussed adding a third recommendation to require signalization at Melrose
and Finkbine.
Craig asked who would be required to do the signal and pay for it. Hensch stated it is not really
any concern of his who pays for it, it just needs to be done. Russett added it would then be a
condition of the rezoning so the developer would be required to pay. Craig doesn't feel that it's
the developer's responsibility at this point. Hensch said it is just a recommendation to the City
Council, they can of course change any of the conditions.
Hektoen stated this conversation is a record for the Council to read but they have to keep in mind
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 12 of 40
the conditions that are imposed are to meet public needs created by the rezoning and the
conversation so far about the traffic is that it's already failing, but maybe because of all of this
conversation, it might make more sense to defer this item to have further conversations about
these issues among the parties.
Signs said he is okay with leaving that recommendation off but can it to a recommendation to
Council to consider it when they look at this proposal. Craig is supportive of that approach.
Hearing no more discussion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
Signs then moved to recommend City Council consider affordable housing in the context
of the height bonus and also look at the signalization of Finkbine/Melrose.
Motion seconded by Townsend.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
CASE NO. REZ20-0016:
Applicant: Axiom Consultants
Location: South of Scott Blvd and West of 1 st Avenue, Adjacent to Hickory Hill Park
An application for a rezoning of approximately 48.75 acres of land from Interim Development
Single -Family (ID -RS) to Low Density Single -Family with a Planned Development Overlay
(OPD/RS-5).
Heitner began the staff report acknowledging with respect to the application, they did have an
error on the staff report and he wanted to clarify that the applicant is Axiom Consultants on
behalf of Joseph Clark and Nelson Development 1 LLC and the owner is a ACT Incorporated.
Heitner showed an aerial image of the subject property as well as the current zoning which is ID -
RS. Heitner also pointed out Hickory Hill Park on the map. Next he showed a view of the most
up-to-date concept plan that was submitted with this rezoning application and noted there's three
kinds of residential components associated with this plan, detached single family residential that
would cover most of the extended Hickory Trail Street, 10 single family dwelling condominium
units, and the third component of the development would have a senior living facility in the
southeast area closer to the First Avenue intersection with Hickory Trail near the Hickory Point
condominiums that currently exist in the northwest corner of that intersection.
Craig asked for clarification on the senior living component, it seems like everyone's building
senior living these days, all us baby boomers are ready for it, but her understanding is that this is
not independent living. Heitner confirmed there would be some assisted living and some
independent living. Craig asked if it's 100 units or 100 rooms, will people have individual units or
just rooms. Heitner replied that's a distinction he was going to make a little bit later, but no it
wouldn't be dwelling units, as they normally characterize as multifamily living quarters, and that's
why they're careful to say bedrooms because the Code has a distinction between what is a
dwelling unit and what constitutes a bedroom. Craig noted there were many comments about
that, and many people did not understand that distinction. Heitner said it is staff's understanding
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 13 of 40
this would be a group living use, which is comprised mostly of individual bedrooms and not
dwelling units where one would have living quarters with individual bathrooms and individual
kitchens.
Heitner reiterated the current zoning is interim development -single family (ID -RS) which is a
placeholder zoning typically seen in areas of the City that are recently incorporated or annexed
into the City and have to be assigned some zoning. Interim zoning is assigned until there's
future interest in developing that property further. In the IR -RS zone the only use that's allowed
by right is plant related agriculture to allow people to keep farming these properties until
redevelopment. Heitner stated the proposed rezoning designation is OPD/RS-5. He explained a
traditional RS -5 zone provides housing for individual households, it's a zone that is seen
throughout large swaths of the City as it's a fairly typical single family residential zoning
designation with larger lot sizes and setbacks and with limited density. Through the OPD
process it allows the developer, or the applicant, some ability to provide a mixture of uses that
wouldn't typically be allowed in the RS -5 zoning designation as long as there's additional criteria
met. Heitner stated with this case a lot of that criteria falling under the multifamily meet family site
development standards in the City Zoning Ordinance.
Heitner showed a few pictures of the subject property with the rolling typography and scattered
woodlands and some natural open spaces. He next discussed the elevations and noted it starts
out at about 780 feet and there's a few elevations higher than that to the north, then sloping
down to about 710 and even some sub 700 elevations sloping downward to the west.
Heitner stated with this being an OPD application there is specific approval criteria that the
application is supposed to meet. The first is the density and design of the planned development
will be compatible with and/or complimentary to adjacent development in terms of land use,
building mass and scale, relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout.
With respect to density it's 1.2 dwelling units per acre and the senior living facility is not included
in this calculation, because it is not technically dwelling units, so that falls well within the
allowable five dwelling units per acre allowed in an OPD/RS-5. The land uses propose are 43
detached single-family residential dwellings and 10 single family condominium style dwelling
units and 135 bedrooms within the senior living facility. Heitner showed the proposed elevations
for the condominium units and the senior living facility. With respect to mass scale and general
layout the OPD is proposing a continuous through street along Hickory Trail instead of a cul-de-
sac. Again the single family homes will dominate the western portion with the senior living facility
closer to First Avenue. Heitner noted one maybe potential bit of structural conflict is the senior
living facility is quite a bit larger than the Hickory Point condominiums building but to soften that
transition there is a considerable amount of landscaping being put in that gap distance in the way
of shade trees, evergreen trees and also a pretty considerable buffer distance with about 185
feet between the senior living facility building and the property line to Hickory Point
condominiums. With respect to open space, there is a requirement of 500 square feet of rear
yard private open space for each of the single-family lots, including the condominium dwelling
units and condo lot 45 will serve as a shared open space area along the Hickory Trail Commons
Drive, the little circular drive that those units will be situated off of. The senior living facility open
space requirement is 10 square feet per bedroom and that will be accommodated on that lot.
There is also a neighborhood open space requirement for the entire site that comes up to about
1.1 acres and the applicant is looking to satisfy that with dedication of 10.6 acres of outlot A to
the City for future use of Hickory Hill Park. Regarding traffic circulation, staff is proposing a
condition that the applicant work with City Engineers to institute any necessary traffic calming
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 14 of 40
devices to slow down traffic on Hickory Trail, this is something that can happen with longer
streets that maybe don't have a grid break up or a block cut off they typically see in more
traditional neighborhoods. Right now, the proposal for a traffic circle in the northern third of
Hickory Trail, as well as two raised crosswalks that would be placed at the trailhead entrances
for the park.
Heitner stated the second approval criteria is the development will not overburden existing
streets and utilities. Public Works has confirmed that city water and sewer are available to the
subject property. Regarding traffic volume, there was a traffic study done for this agenda item
that indicated that even with the proposed development the level of service at both the Scott
Boulevard and Hickory Trail and First Avenue intersections it would not be any worse than level
of service D, which is typically comprised of about 15 to 35 second wait times per vehicle, an
that's an acceptable level under the City's perspective. Heitner explained the level of service
review abbreviations are like a grade or report card with A being absolutely free flowing and F,
being a bit more standstill. With that said no off-site traffic related improvements are being
recommended by staff at this time.
Criteria point number three is with respect to the development not adversely affecting views, light
and air, property values and privacy of neighboring properties, any more than conventional
development. Heitner already spoke to the 185 -foot buffer distance between the senior living
facility and the Hickory Point condominiums property line with a combination of shade and
evergreen trees to soften that transition. There is a range of buffer distances shown to the west
between the rear yards of the proposed single-family homes and the existing park boundary or
the western property line of the subject property. Heitner showed some images of the senior
living facility concept plan and the 185 -foot buffer and the subset of the proposed landscaping on
that lot. He showed the area to the west and that the condominium lot will have a substantial
buffer from the existing property line of about 263 feet. The single-family homes will have a 20
foot setback and most will have a minimum buffer of 55 feet, however some of the middle lots it
will be down to about 35 feet at certain spots and then on the south side of Hickory Trail again
gets down to about 35 feet down there as well.
Criteria point number four is discussing variation from underlining zoning requirements. Heitner
stated there has been a requested height waiver of 40 feet versus the allowable 35 feet in the
RS -5 zone and staff views this as being a reasonable request especially given the separation
that is planned between the senior facility building to the east and as well as the planned single
family residential to the west. Staff is recommending a condition that no building permit be
issued for any subject property until Council approves the final plat, staff will require all of this to
go through platting.
With respect to the Comprehensive Plan Heitner said there's a couple components, there's the
larger Comprehensive Plan that the City uses for guidance and then drilling down on that they
have district plans throughout the City that provide a bit more detail and a bit more direction on
some of these land use decisions. For this area it is the Northeast District Plan which has
several talking points and then this map as well shows a vision for street layout in this area and
land use. The Northeast District Plan calls for two separate cul-de-sacs in this general area with
some single loading of streets and dwelling units. On the southern portion it doesn't show
dwelling units on both sides of the street. In the northern cul-de-sac there's some signal loading
and then closer to the woodlands and a little bit closer to the park there's some double loading
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 15 of 40
throughout the cul-de-sac as well. Heitner explained the intent of the single loading is to use
those preexisting natural areas as a bit of a buffer distance and tried to as much as possible
refrain from having development in those areas. Rather than build out the two cul-de-sacs, the
OPD plan proposes a continuous through street and there is a buffer provided to the existing
park boundary of 35 feet. Staff is recommending a condition that the applicant's property
woodland management plan within the 10.86 acres of Outlot A for neighborhood open space with
the intention of removing any invasive species or any deteriorated limbs or trees.
Staff noted aligning with the larger Comprehensive Plan this OPD plan touched on having an
interconnected street and sidewalks system and piggybacking off of that staff is going to
recommend another condition that the pedestrian connections shown to the interior part trails be
included into the planning process. Heitner noted interconnected street and sidewalks system is
a recurring goal seen within the Comprehensive Plan and is something the Commission has
discussed quite a bit in recent years. Heitner noted another goal is the variety of housing types
between and providing a vast amount of senior housing.
Heitner next discussed sensitive areas and how this OPD plan does limit impact to sensitive
areas, definitely with respect to critical slopes and woodlands. With respect to woodlands, there
is the nice bonus of having 10 plus acres of additional parkland to the City and as well as just
another goal of having development adjacent to existing neighborhoods and not leapfrog
development as there is already a fairly substantial residential development to the east, so in
some ways this would be acting as an infill to that development. Heitner explained what triggers
the plan development process and this sensitive areas review and will go through each of the
sensitive areas that is on this subject property. The first being the wetlands, there are two
wetlands, one is mostly off the subject property, but the little bit on the property does require the
100 -foot buffers. Heitner stated the wetlands and the 100 -foot buffers are not being shown as
being impacted by the construction. Likewise stream corridors will not be impacted by
construction of the homes or the lots, but there would be one impact for the extension of Hickory
Trail, but that is allowed by City Code provided that bridges and roads that cross stream
corridors are designed in a manner to reduce flood carrying capacity stream. Heitner stated there
are a considerable amount of slopes on this property and there are protected slopes, defined as
having a grade of more than 40%. This plan is not showing any impact of those protected
slopes, there is a minimal impact of about 19% to the critical slopes, which is the next steepest
grade of sensitive slope and is between about 25% - 40% grade. Those impacts can be
approved by staff because it is less than 35%. Heitner stated there is some woodland mitigation
to be done with this development but the plan shows preservation of 48% of woodlands. Staff
has asked the applicant to revise this and submit another proposal that the 48% would yield a
tree replacement of 132 trees. Heitner said the plan shows that it would be mostly street trees
throughout Hickory Trail with some trees toward the back behind the southern lots and then also
along a lot 45 as well.
Heitner noted staff has received a generous amount of correspondence for this application, at
last count they had 85 emails in addition to several phone calls on this case. Most of the
correspondence speak to the following three goals that there isn't an alignment with the
Comprehensive Plan with respect to cul-de-sacs and saying the streets aren't enough of a buffer
from the park which Heitner said staff acknowledges it's not a perfect alignment with what's
shown on the map. Correspondence also shared concerns with increased traffic on Scott
Boulevard and First Avenue, particularly during peak hours, particularly because there's already
some heavy traffic on both of those streets and then just general thoughts and concerns about
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 16 of 40
protecting the park view sheds and the tranquil nature of the park.
In terms of next steps, upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission a
public hearing will be scheduled by City Council. Staff plans to have this on the March 16
Council agenda with the public hearing set at the March 2 meeting.
Staff recommends approval of REZ20-0016, a proposal to rezone approximately 48.75 acres of
land located south of N. Scott Blvd. and west of N. 1st Ave. from Interim Development — Single
Family Residential (ID -RS) zone to Low Density Single Family with a Planned Development
Overlay (OPD/RS-5) zone subject to the following conditions:
1. In accordance with the subdivider's agreement at final platting, approval of a Woodland
Management Plan that shall consist of a plan to remove any invasive species within the
Outlot A area, as well as removal of any hazardous trees or limbs. The plan shall be
prepared by a woodland specialist and approved by the City Forrester. Invasive species
removal will be the responsibility of the owner and must be completed prior to transfer of
Outlot A to the City.
2. Provision of trail connections, as shown on the concept plan dated 01/18/2021. The trail
connections should be provided in the same location as shown on the concept plan and
must be constructed before public improvements to the corresponding subdivision are
approved.
3. The final plat shall incorporate traffic calming devices, including but not limited to raised
crosswalks at park entrances, in locations approved by and designed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
4. Where trees are shown on the landscaping plan, installation of right-of-way trees, to be
planted by Owner or its successor, along the proposed Hickory Trial right-of-way. Said
trees shall be planted prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each lot, or, if said
certificate of occupancy is issued during a poor planting season, by May 31 following
issuance of the certificate of occupancy. Right-of-way trees shall be consistent with the
approved landscaping plan that has been reviewed by the City Forrester. Trees shall be
planted generally 30' apart, though the City recognizes that exact locations may vary
depending on driveway locations, signage, and other utility conflicts. Final location and
species of the trees shall be approved on a lot -by -lot basis prior to issuance of a building
permit for each lot.
5. No building permit shall be issued for any of the subject property until the City Council
approves a final plat subdividing the subject property to confirm to the zoning boundaries
established by the zoning ordinance.
Hensch noted there is an apparent discrepancy of the Northeast District Plan and the cul-de-
sacs because since he's been on the Planning & Zoning Commission they have been very
averse to cul-de-sacs because of connectivity issues, so he doesn't regard that as a negative
that they're not there. Hensch did ask about the two streams and floodplains and if there are any
100 -year or 500 -year floodplains associated with those streams. Heitner did not have the answer
to that but likely the applicant can provide an answer.
Hensch next asked about the woodland management plan on that 10 plus acres and if the plan is
that those 10 acres will be turned over to the City for open space. Heitner confirmed that was
the intent if the woodland management plan is accepted by City parks and the intention is to
keep it green space and not someday be converted into an additional parkland for the existing in
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 17 of 40
Hickory Hill park. Hensch asked if it isn't the requirement that the invasive species mitigation be
instigated prior to that transfer the property, he is concerned that gets done before it's transferred
because if it goes to a HOA or something, then it will probably never happen. Heitner confirmed it
is their intention to have that completed before the City takes ownership.
Hensch then asked for Heitner to reiterate the variety of housing types would be in this proposal,
just so it's clear for everybody. Heitner responded that the senior living facility, characterized by
what they call group living, will have 135 bedrooms, and then the single-family portion to the west
and south are 43 units of detached single-family dwelling and then 10 dwelling units of condo
style housing on the lot 45 area to the north off Scott Boulevard.
Hensch commented that the report from the State Archaeologists referenced that the land has
been used for agriculture for much of the 20th century, so according to that report the topsoil has
been pretty badly disturbed found by their sampling and the trees that are present on that area
are not native trees and most of the soil has been disturbed from its natural state by agricultural
tillage and soil contouring activities. He brings this up because he knows there's concern from
people that this is a natural area and by the archaeological report that's simply not true. Heitner
confirmed that's what's in the report and noted there is some concern about some of the tree
quality and in both outlot A and B that the parks staff kind of revered in its initial reviews of this so
that is one of the reasons why the City is looking for that mitigation and woodlands management
plan with outlot A to make sure that what the City would eventually take over would be of a
higher quality tree species.
Hensch noted in the Northeast District Plan it is pretty clear that the intent was for a buffering
requirement for the views from Hickory Hills towards any future development regarding
structures or homes, he asked if there was a particular reason made this for applicant to not
require a concept of burning the back of those properties or using trees or shrubs to help break
up or protect the view from Hickory Hills towards those homes that are abutting. Heitner replied
he is not sure about burning, that might be something that the applicant can address, he did
mention one thing they discussed with the applicant and the City Forester was planting a
combination of evergreen and shade trees within the rear of a lot of those lots that have a
narrower buffer distance at the existing property line. Heitner commented that would be
something he thinks the City would be interested in reviewing at site plan stage, some additional
landscaping in those areas.
Martin asked if they know who is doing the senior living, are the developers going to run. Heitner
stated that is probably a question for the developer but it is his understanding it would be done
through Nelson Development.
Martin also commented on the archaeological survey and is curious to know if when they're
looking at swaths of land like this that are not natural areas, although she would argue because
it's not built on that it is still a natural area, why do they only do archaeological studies and never
an environmental study that looks at the impact of loss of habitat or a decline of biodiversity.
Heitner acknowledged that is a good question, it could be something they itemize under the
sensitive areas ordinance if that's something that the Commission would want to investigate, in
terms of biodiversity loss, it could be something that they looked into on future applications.
Nolte asked about outlot A and when the Parks Department look at that is there value in that
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 18 of 40
parcel because looking at the topography it looked like maybe that's just storm water and a little
wetland area, does it have actual value as a park. Heitner believes it has value, some
recreational value in terms of an ability to incorporate some trails or maybe trail segments. Also
from a preservation aspect, it has some value as well. He does not know specifically what Parks
would have in mind for that outlot, but he knows they have expressed interest.
Elliott asked for clarification on the pros and cons of cul-de-sacs. Heitner replied with speaking
to this plan a pro would be to separate development from existing sensitive areas and having
more development pavement put it down then that is necessary. With this development staff felt
that with respect to woodlands those sensitive areas were very much avoided with this plan with
a through street, so staff felt comfortable giving that recommendation for approval. Heitner noted
with respect to through streets and why those are good, it just gives more points of access for
everyone traveling those streets it reduces vehicle miles traveled by not having duplicative trips.
He added there's benefits to not only vehicular connectivity but pedestrian connectivity as well.
Also in most instances, maybe not in this instance, through streets would also give flexibility to
have connectivity to other streets so there's a lot of pros when it comes to through streets and
promoting connectivity. Again, the pros for a cul-de-sac in this area would be mostly just to try to
avoid having development on top of or maybe even adjacent to sensitive areas, but again, in this
instance staff felt the OPD plan accomplished minimal impact to those sensitive areas and
having a through street was a win-win.
Signs stated it was his understanding that back around the time that the Northeast District Plan
was originally developed cul-de-sacs were the hot thing but over time it seems communities have
discovered that the cons definitely outweigh the pros with access for fire vehicles, street
maintenance vehicles and trash/dump trucks and having access and connectivity without having
to turn around in circles and go back is why cul-de-sacs have gone out of favor. Heitner agreed
the connectivity aspect is important and when the City is setting the foundation for future
neighborhoods it is pretty important to establish a basis for that ability to have numerous points
of access and connectivity for everyone, and there definitely is some truth to there being
challenges with snow removal and fire truck mobility and for the most part, the City likes to
design streets so that they're adaptable to those services. Heitner added in echoing the larger
goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the City prefers to advocate for the ability to have through
streets where possible.
Signs asked if this property has never been a part of Hickory Hill Park and its property that has
never been owned by the City. Heitner believes so but can't say it with 100% certainty that that's
the case.
Hektoen stated that on the City's website there's the complete streets policy and it says the City
of Iowa City intends and expects to realize long term cost savings and improved public health,
reduced fuel consumption, better environmental stewardship and reduce demand for motor
vehicle infrastructure through the implementation of the complete streets policy. Complete
streets contribute to walkable neighborhoods, make the community attractive to new business
and employment, create a sense of community pride and improved quality of life.
Townsend asked for clarification on the applicant requesting a height waiver and there is a
maximum height requirement of 35 feet and the applicant is requesting an allowable height of 40
feet, so the senior living facility would be a three-story structure, compared to the Hickory Point
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 19 of 40
condominium building, which is only two, but then later in the packet is states the proposed
elevation of a senior living facility will be roughly four stories in height, so will it be three or four
stories. Heitner explained the 40 -foot height distance is taken from grade to the mean point of
the roof pitch so effectively it looks like a four-story building, but the actual levels will be three
stories. The applicant can also speak to the mass of the senior living facility.
Craig asked about outlot B, which is a conservation easement, who is responsible for the care of
that area. Heitner stated a conservation easement would be an agreement with the City that no
future development could take place within that area. Hektoen added when the final plat goes
through those kinds of details are ironed out, generally speaking the outlot would be owned and
maintained by an HOA and to the extent that the conservation easement is on private lots, it
would be owned and maintained by those private landowners. The City would have an easement
right to go on there if needed but the expectation would be that the homeowners and the
homeowner's association would maintain that area. Craig recalled a few meetings ago they had
this conversation about the upkeep of wooded areas related to developments and that after the
development, an HOA is responsible only they tend not to take any responsibility, and she
believes that concern was passed along to City Council that they should look at that. She is
concerned here because this is a significant swath of land. Regarding outlot A it between two
housing developments, it's this skinny little piece of land between two housing developments that
are going to have half a million -dollar homes in them and while she is not opposed to
development, she is a little concerned that the staff report has not lent enough weight to the
requirement in the plan to think about the view shed
Nolte asked what year was the Northeast Plan developed as part of the Comprehensive Plan.
Heitner replied 1999. Signs added the City-wide Comprehensive Plan was done in May 2013.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Michael Welch (Axiom Consultants) is representing the applicant but also here tonight are
architects group for the senior living, Jacob Wolfgang representing Nelson Development and
Construction, Joe Clark representing the single family side of the development. Welch will begin
with a brief kind of run through of how they got to this point and answer a couple of the questions
that were brought up and then will let Wolfgang and his architecture team describe the senior
living in a bit more detail and cover questions on that. Welch stated he started working on this
back in the spring of last year and met with City staff in June and presented a concept in July.
They then went through multiple iterations investigating the site, looking at the slope of sensitive
areas and just working through that process. They then came up with the concept that they felt
really comfortable with that met the development needs and balance those Code requirements
and sensitive areas. In December, they held a good neighbor meeting, obviously virtual, and
instead of just doing the surrounding 300 feet, they extended it further, all the way through the
Hickory Trail development up to Tamarack Ridge to the east, they really expanded that circle
because they knew there would be a lot of concerns surrounding Hickory Hill Park and the
neighborhood in general. Additionally, based on their previous developments in the last year or
two they knew that traffic on First Avenue would be a concern as well. Welch stated from the
good neighbor meeting they got some good honest feedback from the residents in the area and
people that use Hickory Hill Park and a lot of that feedback probably was reflected in the
comments that were submitted to the City that are in the packet tonight. From comments they
received at the good neighbor meeting they did increase the buffers between the park and
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 20 of 40
development, they looked at lot sizes and looked at how they were interfacing with the park.
Welch wanted to highlight a couple of those things. One is the traffic calming aspects, they know
that is a concern when they have these long stretches of road without intermediate blocks, so
they put in the traffic circle which will be similar to what's in Tamarack Court. Then they looked
at some other ways to get that those traffic calming measures in there and because they knew
they wanted some connections to Hickory Hill Park, they incorporated those raised pedestrian
crossings at the two locations shown on a concept plan between lots 41 and 26. Regarding the
buffers they originally had a 35 -foot buffer between the back of the lots and the park boundary.
Again, from comments from neighbors they were concerned about the buffer with Hickory Hill
Park so it quickly became apparent that there were areas where they could increase that buffer
just by following the existing tree line. So now looking at the concept plan lots 26 through 38 the
lot lines now stop at the existing tree line. The Parks and Forestry folks said they wanted to
preserve those trees as there are times during the year when those trees really protect those
views from in the park. Welch noted they also look at those buffers at the existing trails in the
park and the distance between where the trails are and where their development would
essentially start. On the south side of the development they have about 200 feet from the rear of
their lots to the existing trail, at the southwest corner the trail cuts close to the corner of the
development, so they pulled that buffer out a little farther and lots 28 and 29 are at about 165
feet from the trail to the back of the lots. On the west side of the development on lots 32-38 they
are about 100 feet off the existing trail that's in Hickory Hill Park today. Adding to these buffers
allows people in the park to enjoy the park and protect those views.
Welch continued with the features of the development, they worked closely with the topography
that's there and the significant changes in elevation. They worked really hard to situate the
senior living in particular to see where that would fit in and again not obstruct views from the
park. The building is three stories, but only three stories on the northern third of the building, the
southern portion of the building as a single -story building and where that sits on the lot eave of
that three-story building will be about the same elevation of the east property line on lot 1. So
when they talk about a three story building and ask for an additional five feet of height for that
building, it's really important to recognize that the building sits at the same elevation as the east
property line and the building essentially sits down in a hole. As one drives down First Avenue, or
on the new Hickory Trail extension, they won't have a massive three story building right at the
street, it's set back and sits down in that hole.
Welch noted regarding other comments and people's concerns he wanted to reiterate that this
property is not part of the park, it's never been part of the park and it's always been private
property. As they looked at how to handle that original outlot A staff and Parks came to them
expressing an interest in outlot A as a buffer and conservation easement. Welch also noted the
very northwest corner or wetland located on outlot A is the one portion of the property that has
had trees on it as they went back and looked at aerial photography from the 1930s. That very
Northwest corner did have trees on it and has been wooden. However, review the photography
does show what the archaeologists found which indicated that the majority of the site was farmed
and disturbed over the years until relatively recently. So when they looked at what to do with
outlot A, there's a wetland complex, and they need to include a 100 foot buffer around the
wetlands, and preserve the woodlands along the stream quarter that goes through there, it is not
land that can be developed or used.
Welch next discussed the senior living building that will be constructed by Nelson Development
and managed by Axiom. It will 135 beds, 32 of those will be memory care and the remaining will
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 21 of 40
be assisted living.
Welch next discussed the plant and tree species and in looking at species and diversity. He
noted a big part of that woodland would have been retention as in a RS -5 zone they have a
requirement for 50% woodland retention and that really does set aside a lot of those areas that
help protect and manage some of that preservation and they do achieve some of that with that
woodland retention. He also mentioned with their woodland retention, to get to the 50% retention
requirement in the Code they will disturb some woodland they're only disturbing 37% of the
woodlands on site and Code requires a 50 -foot buffer their disturbances are really long and
linear along the edges and 15% of the woodlands actually will not be disturbed, so actually more
than 50% of woodlands will be preserved.
Welch addressed concern about floodplains noting there is a very little bit a floodplain right now
on the crossing of the Hickory Trail extension where it crosses the waterway so they will need to
go through Core and DNR permitting for that to see if there is going to be a floodplain there.
Welch stated with regards to the conservation easement he pointed to Tamarack Ridge as an
example very similar to this where they do have conservation easement on the back of individual
lots rather than being an outlot and that conservation easement is passed to the owners on their
deed, it runs with the land, and as they get through platting and final plat they would use a very
similar conservation easement in language and put that responsibility on the homeowners
association.
Jacob Wolfgang (Nelson Development 1) stated they are acquiring the land to develop a senior
living facility and they've developed seven such similar buildings throughout Eastern Iowa and
Des Moines. They will act as developer, owner, general contractor, but the property is
professionally managed by Opus Group from the Twin Cities and they predominantly specialize
in caring for seniors, this will be an assisted living facility with the average age of the residents at
84-85 years old and the average length of stay is around two years. These are folks who no
longer drive, they no longer work, and require a lot of care with day-to-day needs, and there is a
health care component, which is why partnering with a professional management company that
that specializes in senior care is this so important.
Andrew Alden (AG Architecture) discussed the massing of the building and materials for the
senior living facility. He stated the building is specifically designed for this site and the north side
of the building is the three stories but is basically set lower in the site, because the grade, and
then the one-story section, the memory support area is to the south. He stated there are great
site views and good natural light coming in from the south, good views out the north into that
parkland that's going to be undisturbed for those residents in the assisted living portion. The
building itself has a very contemporary feel with lots of natural materials such as stone fiber
cement siding and other familiar residential things like a shingle roof, a pitched roof so it's a both
a little bit contemporary but also very residential in nature, and again is designed specifically for
this site.
Hensch noted Welch answered that outlot B ownership will go to the owners of the particular lots
and if there any common areas that would be the maintenance responsibility of the HOA and
would not be as part of a particular lot. Welch clarified he was referring to outlot B, the
conservation easement, would be for the entire association, but there would also be some of the
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 22 of 40
conservation easement on those other lots and that piece would be transferred via deed to those
owners, and they would each be responsible for maintaining the woodlands. However, the
amount of maintenance would be fairly low and in conversations with the State Forester on other
projects in this situation they really do encourage a limited amount of maintenance in these
woodlands such as if a tree falls over it's perfectly okay to let the tree lay and that creates
habitat. What a homeowner wants to have with the woodland can be discussed with the State
Forester or work with them for a woodland management plan on the individual level.
Hensch stated one part of the Northeast District Plan that stuck with him is the concern of
protecting the view from Hickory Hill Park from structures, particularly of the lots abutting Hickory
Hills. He asked if Welch could address that or if they could see an engineer drawing or
animation showing what it would look like. In the past the Commission has seen shadowing for
some buildings downtown and it is helpful. Welch replied there are probably two real important
pieces to think about when regarding the view when one is in Hickory Hill Park looking out, and
the first is time of year. He was out there a couple weeks ago on that trail just left of their
development could just about see the roof of homes to the east. From down in the south end
one can see Regina and the facilities there this time of year. So whether they have 100 foot
buffer or a 700 foot buffer one will be able to see everything going up that hill. The second piece
is when it is not winter they're really confident that as one walks the existing trails in the park the
view of the backs of those houses that back up to the park will be very limited just because of
there is anywhere from 100 to 200 feet of existing vegetation between the back of the lots that
they're proposing and the trails in the park. Again, they talked with the Forester and Parks about
lots 34 through 38 and that spot where to the west of their development, the park kind of opens
up and is a portion of Hickory Hill Park that is not as fully wooded. There's a narrow band of trees
on the property line, and they talked about making a 15 -foot landscape buffer on the back of
those lots and requiring some additional evergreens and other trees in there to enhance that
thinner spot in the existing woodlands that are there now to kind of fill that out. Hensch stated he
is very interested in extending that landscape buffer and see what that will look like. Welch also
mentioned that right there the tree line is actually right at the property line, and they have that 35 -
foot buffer and are proposing to add some additional trees on that that rear lot line of those lots
to delineate where it is private lots and where the park boundary is.
Martin asked about the conservation easement and lots 2 through 21 essentially are 251 feet
deep but really their lot is only 100 feet deep because the rest of it's a conservation easement.
As a realtor she looks at that and wonders what the resale value effect as a citizen is, what if the
property owner doesn't understand what that conservation easement was, does that devalue the
property as for the homeowner's intents and purposes, they can't do anything with it. Welch
agreed that area becomes unusable for the homeowner for things other than their house and
their lawn. The reason they have the conservation easement where they do is primarily because
they get into steep slopes, slopes over 40%, that are protected slopes not able to be build on.
The steep slopes also make it challenging for general public recreation. Secondly the Parks
Department was not interested in outlot B, so if they would have put it in the wooded area to the
east to the Parks Department was not interested in taking that on. Therefore, the decision that
they came to is it actually adds value to those lots for individual homeowners as they might not
have a big yard, but they have a wooded area that they can use for their own recreation for
birdwatching, for walking through there and again, the covenant that they envision going with that
easement would pretty much spell out what one can and can't do and it's a really protective
Secondly, the other thing they would do if this is approved as part of the part of the platting
process where that conservation easement is, they would set property pins there so there's a
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 23 of 40
physical marker that establishes that line. He reiterated they've done this throughout areas in
Johnson and Linn Counties.
Hektoen stated that at this point that's not part of what's actually being approved tonight, so this
is still all subject of further conversation.
Craig commented about the views and the 100 feet, it sounds like a lot when talking about the
size of a house but a football field is 300 feet if one were standing on the midway line and there
was a house in the end zone it could easily be seen, particularly the area that is more toward
Scott which is higher up and the park really falls down from there. She acknowledged the
houses being that close will be seen anytime of the year. To say someone won't be able to see
this long row houses that are backing up to the park isn't true, she believes they will be seen
even in the summer. Craig stated she would not have problems with this development if those
lots 26 to 44 weren't there. Welch responded with a house 100 feet or 200 feet or 300 feet it is
still going to be seen from that distance so if that's the case the buffer they can provide and the
enhancements they can make at the edge of that woodland will create a buffer to maintain
vegetation that's getting dedicated to the City to be parkland to expand Hickory Hill Park and
make the park larger and from a practical purpose the view of what is seen will be the back of a
house rather than the front of house if they just did single loaded rather than double loaded
streets. Also if they don't put those lots here they will go somewhere else, and from a
development standpoint and the City's Climate Action Plan and those are the types of things
they're encouraging, the city infrastructures are there, they're making a road connection that
makes sense, so there's a lot of benefits. Also having a house with a backyard that faces the
park and is adjacent to the park is a really nice amenity this development will have a housing mix
giving different opportunities to different peoples in different areas.
Signs acknowledged there were quite a few elevations included in the packet of the senior living
facility which was helpful, he wondered if they anticipate what they're showing there is close to
what the final look of the building is going to be realizing the details might change, but the overall
look of the building. Alden stated one of the things they pride themselves in is what they show is
pretty darn close to what is built. He did add as they continue to develop the design and get into
the details, there might be some changes from a constructor ability point of view but overall, this
is the design they are moving forward with and will take through the architectural review board
and the design review board. Signs commented it looks very sharp so if it looks anywhere near
that when it's done it will be a nice building.
Townsend asked in the senior living units, what's with the bathroom facilities, why would they all
have independent bathrooms. Alden state in the memory support area it's a bedroom and
bathroom, perhaps the implication was that they wouldn't have kitchens. Heitner added the
language from the City Code regarding group living quarters does not require private baths.
Asha Bhandary wanted to echo a question Phoebe Martin made in that there really needs to be
an environmental impact study, so they know part of what's so valuable about Hickory Hill Park is
the broader ecosystem that exists there that's supported by this land. Developing that land is
likely going to have a significant impact on the wildlife that is there, people who frequent the park
see a lot of really interesting wildlife and that contribute something to Iowa City that is pretty rare
allows a sense of awe and wonder that one experiences when you encounter the wild such as a
bobcat or some sort of wild raptor. Bhandary feels they would be losing a gem and would be
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 24 of 40
diminishing the value of one of the gems of Iowa City. She has friends that visit from Cambridge
Massachusetts and they run through the park and remark on how very special this is in Iowa City
to have this special internal city park that's so wild and has the biodiversity. So at a minimum, for
an assessment of its value, they need to identify the environment environmental impact, but even
if the environmental impact is found to be permissible, she still thinks it goes against the public
interest to have such a robust development abutting the park because of the spiritual value the
park provides and the prairie area that abuts the proposed development. Bhandary also thinks
it's not clear that the proposal meets several of the general approval criteria, one, three and four
are not thoroughly met when and asks that the public interest be evaluated, both in terms of the
aesthetic value of the park and the usability of the trails but also the spiritual value of the park
and the distinctive value that it contributes to Iowa City, as opposed to other towns. She believes
this development will diminish some of that value and then the value of the ecosystem and the
wildlife that are present there as well. Finally in terms of the question about views there's
probably a conflict between what commercial developers will want in terms of a view for people
living there in this development, of course they want a nice view of the park, but, for people who
are using the park they really don't want to see the development. Even with a barrier with robust
growth she believes they would still lose some of the biodiversity, and in light of climate change
they should really be thinking about how to extend natural spaces. Additionally, this park has
been heavily used during the pandemic, so this is a time when they should be thinking about how
to increase the parks and as a city maybe gain some more property around them, or at least find
ways to use in ways that don't involve roads and development.
Casey Kohrt (Friends of Hickory Hill Park Chair, 435 Randall Street) stated as Chair of the Board
of Friends of Hickory Hill Park the friends are opposed to the rezoning because it does not
adhere to the Comprehensive or Northeast District Plans considering the Northeast District Plan
and Hickory Hill Park had considerable public input during the Northeast District Plan proposal
stage. First avenue, east of Hickory Hill Park, was very controversial and the planning process
was used in a way to reach community consensus, allowing First Avenue to be built while
respecting the park. The Northeast District Plan calls for transferring development away from the
park towards First Avenue and the use of cul-de-sacs and leaving the ravines located on the
Larson tract which is now the ACT tract connected to the park, this was essentially a concession
on the part of the City to facilitate the construction of First Avenue. Kohrt stated the buffer
illustrated in the Northeast District Plan is considerably wider than the rezoning plan proposal
with adjacent lots 26 through 44. The staff report says, the buffer is not dimension in the
Northeast District Plan as a rationale to except what is proposed, the buffer shown in the
Comprehensive Plan is clearly at least 175 to 200 feet wide based on using existing lot lines for
scale. If outlot A ceded to the City, it reduces the buffer and the goal of the buffer is to minimize
the visibility of residential development from the park. The few trees that the developer offers to
plant, instead of a wide buffer will not suffice to achieve this goal. Kohrt stated a guiding principle
of the Northeast District Plan is the use of single loaded streets to reserve areas such as Hickory
Hill Park to create buffers and to provide public access to natural areas. Kohrt stated this
proposed rezoning plan would ignore this guiding principle by cutting the park off from public
view, except in one small area between lots 40 and 41 where steep slopes prevented
development anyway. The land being dedicated to the City in outlot A is undevelopable too with
steep slopes, wetland streams and sensitive areas ordinance and, therefore, is not a concession
on the part of the developer. Outlot B is likewise essentially undevelopable and it's not clear that
the open space that has been dedicated for required neighborhood open space meets the
criteria for being usable as required by the zoning code. Kohrt also noted the staff
recommendation for through streets rather than two cul-de-sacs ignores the Northeast District
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 25 of 40
Plan vision of keeping an open connection between Hickory Hills Park and the proposed outlot B.
The street connection in itself may not be objectionable but there appears to be little effort to
preserve the amount of open space shown in the Northeast District Plan, especially since the
street is double loaded and not single loaded street as called for in the Comprehensive Plan.
Kohrt stated the developer is seeking waivers of zoning requirements to allow a larger senior
living complex in another single-family zone and the Northeast District Plan notes that such
zoning incentives may be necessary to achieve the open space buffer envisioned for Hickory Hill
Park but the developers are seeking zoning incentives from the City but not adhering to the
Comprehensive Plan's vision in exchange. Kohrt continued that the staff reports concedes that
the proposed zoning rezoning request does not comply with Comprehensive Plan stating staff
recognizes that the proposed development is not perfectly matched with the conceptual vision
presented in the northeast district pl Northeast District Plan particularly related to the single
loaded streets. Therefore by ignoring the City's agreement with the community to provide a
meaningful buffer for Hickory Hill Park this rezoning proposal does not even come close to the
vision that was agreed to and adopted in the Northeast District Plan. The Northeast District
Plan's principles are so fundamental, they were also included in the Comprehensive Plan that
was updated in 2013 on pages 46 and 47 stating it will allow transfer of development rights and
plan developments in order to preserve sensitive features or apply development around
desirable parks and open space, to improve overall access and awareness to parks to ensure
that future parks have visibility and access from the street, and to discourage parks that are
surrounded by private property and encourage development of parks with single loaded street
access. Kohrt stated the rezoning request should be denied and the developer and staff should
consider a plan that adheres to the Comprehensive Plan, including the Northeast District Plan.
Adam Parker (Member of Friends of Hickory Hill Park) first encouraged the committee in future
meetings to use closed captioning for those hearing impaired. Parker stated we're in a world
where the world literally stop this year, citizens didn't quite know if they're going to make it to the
next day month or year and one refuge was the wild expanses of a public park called Hickory Hill
Park as it was thought to be the only place safe. Parker noted we are not even out of the woods
yet and here we are chipping away at the essence of a place offering harbor at a time of
tremendous uncertainty past, present and hopefully future. It is said never waste a good crisis,
and who is to advantage from this crisis will be proposed lots 26 or 44 and, which would
dominate the area and have unimpeded access to a public good Hickory Hill Park. Parker stated
these lots are in direct conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan as it mentions discouraging
parks that are surrounded by private property. Six homeowners will benefit from a public utility,
Hickory Hill Park, and if it doesn't matter whether it's the front or back of the house he
discourages this plan from being proposed. Further community insight should be a guiding
principle in this area, for example Hickory Heights the development adjacent to this proposed
development has that was developed a number of years ago has an access point to Hickory Hill
Park that he guarantees the public doesn't know about, because if one were to enter at the
Hickory Heights entrance they would feel like they're trespassing on private property, and this
current proposal would feel the same as the current area designated for public access is a deep
ravine in between two private lots. Parker noted the Northeast District Plan had considerable
public input when drafted as it should, and it even included a picture of how the land could be
appropriately developed to buffer the park by encouraging higher density properties close to First
Avenue and Scott Boulevard and discouraging parks that are surrounded by private property.
Parker stressed the City should be following this plan and encourage the development of parks
with single loaded streets and he advocates for the use of single loaded streets for this
development as it is adjacent to a public good. He advocates to protect Hickory Hill Park and the
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 26 of 40
current plat indicates a 10 -yard buffer which is literally a first and goal going into the end zone
overlooking a large open expanse and residential homeowners being the beneficiary. Parker
reiterated that since the world's dropped one year ago he encourages the Commission to stop
this plan as proposed as it benefits the few at the expense of the many, this rezoning request
should be denied.
Ken Gayley pointed out that behind him is the Hickory Heights development and so would echo
the points just heard that there is a bit of a conflict where, if one wants to build a house that has a
nice view of the park then someone in the park will have a nice view of the house, and
sometimes you might feel like you're walking through someone's backyard when you're just on a
trail. Gayley is interested in a point that was made about the transition between the buildings to
the senior center where there was a large distance with maybe some ideas about the
landscaping, but they didn't really hear a lot about the choices made for the transition from the
senior center to the park and making it a place where the park viewers don't feel like they're in
the backyard of other people's homes. Also Gayley asked if there is any thought about having
affordability as just a few people who are quite wealthy will be getting the nice features of the
park and everyone in Iowa City having to see these houses every time they go to the park.
Jason Napoli (2659 Hickory Trail) lives just right down the street from the park and also serves
as the vice chair for the Friends of Hickory Hill Park and just want to reiterate some of the points
his board colleague made as it relates to the single loaded streets and specifically that lots 26 to
44 goes very much against anything related to single loaded streets. Napoli reiterated in the
words of Mr. Heitner they are going to see single family homes dominate the western portion and
they should try and avoid that at all possible means.
Edie Thomas first wanted to say that she totally agrees with what was said at the beginning that
the park is a gem for Iowa City, it is a spiritual requirement for all of us and to disturb that would
be a very sad day for this community. Thomas stated the traffic on First Avenue is a problem
and not just at peak periods, it's often very difficult to cross that street into the park because of
the traffic and the staff person said earlier that there needs upgrading to the traffic plan there and
if this were to go forward, she would hope that something would happen so that traffic would be
better controlled on First Avenue. She is also a cyclist and on First Avenue there is a large
condo complex with a large retaining wall and it's difficult to see when cars are coming and
going, and that could be problematic. Thomas also noted she is concerned that this violates the
height requirements and that doesn't seem to be a concern for staff and she wonders why have
requirements if any developer can easily get waivers for these things all the time. If this plan was
approved in 1999 then maybe it's time to revisit the plan and actually open that up to the public
for comment and redo the plan but right now they need to stick with the plan. Thomas opposes
this proposal, it's bad for the community, it's bad for the park, it's bad for the wildlife, and just not
a lot of benefit especially when they're just violating their own plan. Thomas noted it was also
brought up about climate and she thinks it's really important and she thought the City had a
Climate Change Plan but no one really talked about how this proposal fits into that. She is very
concerned because that green space that is to be developed was farmed in the summer and it's
in the winter people sled there, people ski there, and people snowshoe there. It may not be part
of the park but it's a vital part of the community and to approve this plan would be in the wrong
direction.
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 27 of 40
Katherine Beydler (1910 Winston Drive) stated her and her husband live very near to Hickory Hill
Park, so first just want to echo all the comments that were made beforehand, and then want to
address a rather flippant question, that was likely meant to be rhetorical but that the developer
offered, is it really different looking at the front or the backs of houses. Beydler stated when the
backs of houses are hundred and more feet further away from where you're standing in the park,
she would say it's actually pretty different. She is also wondering about the range of housing and
would really like to see more information on that before she could support this development. It is
important to discuss what is affordable and what is a range of access for different individuals. Are
homes that backup to the park with 8000 square foot lots actually going to be affordable for
anybody from a middle or lower income. Does Iowa City need more luxury housing, isn't there
already enough high-income housing, and furthermore, how much money is a developer stand to
make because these properties are in direct proximity to a taxpayer funded public resource.
These are all important questions she thinks should be considered before this rezoning can be
approved. Beydler would also hope that the Commission will consider asking the City and
developer to come into a more favorable agreement with adding some park space to Hickory Hill
Park from this developed land that isn't an outlot that seems to be mostly deeply sloped
unusable land. Mr. Heitner was very vague when he said parks, what are they going to do with
it, how many trails would support and what is more usable a buffer between the park and the
development and not a buffer between two developments that could be added to the to this park.
Beydler stated the buffer of 35 feet is ludicrously small and makes no attempt to preserve the
view shed of the park whatsoever and outlot A only helps to buffer the developer's property from
other existing property to make the lots more valuable. Those are all issues that she has with
this development, and hopes that this rezoning will be opposed until the developer can return
with a plan that complies with the Comprehensive and Northeast District Plans.
Sue Forde (3129 Wintergreen Drive) said she used to live across the street from Hickory Hill
Park and agrees with Mr Welch somewhat in that any development in that part near the park is
going to be seen from the park but she any time of the year, winter summer, rooftops can be
seen and it saddens her to think that there'll be more. Forde understands that will continue to be
because it seems like the Scott Boulevard corridor seems to have a lot of private land that
people are willing to sell for development. On another topic, she is unclear about the traffic
calming items that were mentioned, and there doesn't seem to be any addressing the traffic on
First Avenue and every single development that has gone in over the last 20 years on First
Avenue the traffic was always dismissed as trivial and not that bad. Forde stated for those that
live on First Avenue, to try and turn on to or off First Avenue is difficult so dismissing the
increased traffic as not being a factor is insulting to be perfectly honest.
Jane Bradbury wanted to point out if they considered the pesticide use coming from the property
abutting the park and it would be going straight into Ralston Creek. She also wanted to know
why it has to be right there, why with so much other land around Iowa City does this
development have to be right by Hickory Hill Park unless it's just because they want to sell the
houses to people that can afford a million dollar homes, like the house that blocks the view at
Hickory Heights which is assessed at $1,100,000 and obviously would be sold for a lot more than
that if it were on the market and that person who owns it actually owns four lots up there, so it
just seems like it doesn't serve the City of Iowa City and the goal should not be serving the
needs of a few at the expense of many. Bradbury wanted to point out again the view will be
huge houses looming over park and that big house in Hickory Heights overshadows and
dominates the whole view. Bradbury states she goes to that park every day and many people
come to this town, as faculty to interview for jobs, and they try and find special things about Iowa
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 28 of 40
City because it's a cold climate and kind of isolated from a lot but there are exciting places and
Hickory Hill Park is one of the things that draws people here and it's a beautiful resource and it's
irreversible if that land is developed. It will never be a place again where one can wander out in
wilderness and escape the pandemic and the news and politics ever again, one won't have a
place to go to just walk and be at one with the world and grieve and think and imagine and it's
really something that they can never get back, so she hopes the Commission will consider all of
these things.
Laura Routh (828 Dearborn Street) stated she like to push back a little bit on some of the
comments she's heard regarding this particular area as not being natural land and thinks that's a
pretty subjective reading of the report that was included in the staff packet. This land has pretty
extraordinary slopes, it's woodland, it's wetland and she is frustrated and frankly a little alarmed
that staff wasn't able to answer the question about whether or not there was a wetland on the
property, it seems that's a question that should be known before they even consider doing the
level of development that's being proposed. Routh is just not comfortable that they've given real
thought to the impacts of this development proposal on the watershed and the habitat that exists
in the park. She pretty firmly believes that there should be a stormwater plan articulated by the
developer before this is even considered as they have had extraordinary problems with flooding
in this community, and the idea that they're going to just proceed without even talking about that
is madness. She is also pretty concerned about the idea of the pedestrian connections to the
park, it's lovely if one can afford a million -dollar house and then have direct access to the
beautiful park. Routh also noted seems that this would create parking issues in the area and she
wonders if or how that will be addressed. Another point that hasn't been raised is that deer
damage that should be assumed if this development goes forward and the City should certainly
be held accountable because as a taxpayer she is tired of paying for damage caused by
encroaching development. The City had to bring in sharpshooters to kill a whole bunch of deer
and that's great because meat went to the food bank but at the end of the day, they know that
this is going to harm the habitat for animals and cause problems for the development and the
idea that they're going to be able to replace woodland that exists in the area with manicured
trees and have them not be damaged by deer seems ridiculous, The deer are going to have an
impact and that tells something about whether or not this is "natural land". Routh also noted that
one of the slides that staff provided indicated a criterion point that there would be no effect to the
view or the light and air impact of the park and that just seems patently false and staff didn't
really do the developer any favors with what was presented because it's just not complete
enough to address a lot of the questions that have been raised tonight. 35 foot is clearly not an
adequate buffer to protect the park and the through street is really going to create a lot of
pedestrian issues if folks are trying to get across the street or certainly across First Avenue. If
one can cut through between Scott Boulevard and First Avenue she can guarantee people are
going to take it at 40 miles an hour and that's going to create issues. For all the reasons that
have been articulated she thinks that this proposal needs to be sent back to the developer, it
should be rejected by the Planning and Zoning Commission tonight as it's not ready for prime
time and there are a lot of problems.
Nick Bowman began by noting there are still 79 folks on this zoom and at 10:24pm it seems like
it's really showing how many people really care about what's going on and have concerns about
what's going on. He noted a couple people mentioned the traffic and he wanted to talk
specifically about that traffic study because he saw that person out there on their support and
thinks there are at least three reasons why that traffic study led to a substantial under count. The
first is we're in a pandemic and many people just aren't even leaving their houses, so in and of
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 29 of 40
itself that's going to massively reduce the amount of traffic that's going on First Avenue and Scott
Boulevard. Second when that traffic study was done, when he saw that person, it was early
January during K-12 winter break and the university winter break which is when people who are
traveling might have been away or even those people who normally leave their houses were
likely not doing so during that time. The third reason has been alluded to a couple different times
on this conversation, there is a couple hundred people who are going to be living off of Hickory
Trail and there's going to be a couple hundred people moving into the new houses that are being
built on Tamarack and so it's also not accounting for all those people who are going to be coming
down Hickory Trail who are going to be coming down First Avenue, coming down Scott
Boulevard, so he imagines there's probably several times more cars that will be on those road.
He has definitely driven down there a number of times and whether it was making a left from
Hickory Trail on the First Avenue or coming south from the three way to go down Scott
Boulevard to make a right on to First Avenue those are stopped up during peak hours and he
doesn't think that the traffic study got that. Another point is the big plan for senior care and
having 100 and something seniors living there who it'd be great if they can go Hickory Hill Park
but it would be a lot safer for them to cross the street if they were cul-de-sacs there and not a
through street with people who are zipping down a very long uninterrupted road, regardless of
whether or not that road has the traffic signal. Finally many points have been made, but he
wanted to do a different spin on some of the Comprehensive Plan, because he was at a City
Council meeting on for the Tamarack Trail Development and a lot of the Council members were
basically talking about this Northeast District Plan, and this was what the Plan says so they have
to follow it. Now he finds it a little odd that now the Plan still says something, but now they're
going to ignore key parts of the plan on and are already moving forward. He added there's
another reason for the single stack houses on one side to minimize the impact on the park, but
also to the surrounding neighborhoods.
Adam Weis (20 Lincoln) wanted to express his concern with this proposal for most of the reasons
that everyone has been saying, but also, concerning the natural lands. He added that is a tough
phrase to use in Iowa state where over 80% of the natural lands have been converted over the
course of time to agriculture or urban development, so to say that those meadows aren't natural
because they were tilled or cultivated or grazed in any way is true, but from Iowa standards
they're about as natural as they can get since they are not currently row crops. He would want
the Commission to consider that and really prioritize preserving the remaining natural lands even
if it is "natural lands".
David Deardorff stated he lives near Hickory Hill Park and people have made a lot of really good
salient points about what's going on and he shares the same concern that there's this
Comprehensive Plan that's been in existence and the response from staff here has been
whatever comes into conflict to just wave it off, single loaded streets well, that was a nice
thought, cul-de-sacs are just not so trendy anymore, protect the view shed, well 100 or 300 feet
it doesn't matter. Deardorff don't find these as very satisfying answers and other people that are
very passionate about this park agree. The park is a very valuable resource that is natural, and
this is a part of the park that hasn't been developed, it's the last part of the park, so if they want
to retain value in this city structure paid by the public by taxes, they need to protect it. rather than
develop land next and that is really the driving plan of this this Northeast District Plan and it's
been pointed out that outlot A can't be developed so isn't much of a concession to give that up,
and also outlot B cannot be developed so they offloaded that bit to the rather than add to this
buffer space to actually increase the size of the park. These green spaces are so highly valued
as places where one can actually social distance and obviously that's a benefit to the seniors
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 30 of 40
whether or not there's senior housing there. So before Council considers even approving this
there needs to be fundamental changes to this plan, he understands it's private property and
very valuable private property because if its location and proximity to a natural resource and the
City is a stewardship of this land and they need to consider what's done to it before pushing this
on to the next phase.
Kristen Morrow (1112 Second Avenue) stated first she wanted to echo Ms. Martin's comments
regarding the need for environmental assessments when considering these developments in the
future and not just archaeological surveys. Going forward, especially in light of climate change
and about diversity crisis, Morrow feels that that is extremely imperative and is shocked to hear
that that is not already a standard operating procedure. Second, she wanted to share a lot of the
same sentiments as others and say that she agrees very passionately and emotionally with
everyone's concerns about the vision, as well as the disruption to the habitat quarter. Morrow
stated she goes to Hickory Hill Park to hike and when she hiked past that very, very large house
that is right up against the prairie area on the northern part of the park she thinks what an
absolute shame that that was ever approved, and wonders if today's planners would look at that
kind of decision differently and try to place higher value on these kinds of public lands. Finally,
she wanted to say that she is heartened to see all of the participants that have stuck with this
meeting thus far and is glad to see that there is such a range of ages of people that are enjoying
the space, but as a millennial she thinks that the interest in having public lands is a central part of
a community and is only going to be increasing its desire within her generation and younger
generations.
Arturs Kalnins (44 Evergreen Place) stated he comes from Latvia where his parents were born,
he was born in Pennsylvania, and now lives just off of Hickory Trail. He has been in Iowa for
three and a half years and when he first looked into moving here to take a job at the university
his family spent about a week here walking through all the neighborhoods and by complete
chance he came upon Hickory Hill Park and was absolutely amazed at just the splendor and the
beauty, it was really a very spirit of spiritual place and this park will withstand such a
development, but it will be degraded. Kalnins goes to the park, three, four or five times a week
and it's a very spiritual place where one can enjoy some real tranquility and this is going to ruin
that the tranquility, particularly from the eastern part of the park, the northeastern part of the
park, the prairie areas. Having these fields developed and it's clear having these homes there
will greatly change the park and not only in terms of vision but in terms of sound too. In the
summer it's people mowing their lawns and in the winter it's the snow blowers, that's just a part
of suburbia, and that's going to be audible in the park this all those homes on lots 26 through 40.
So in addition to the visual aspects there's going to be real aspect of the noise that's going to be
generated and will degrade the tranquility of this park. He thinks back to what some of the other
folks have said and they are not doing anything positive for this park by accepting this proposal.
As Mr. Nolte and Ms. Craig said earlier nothing, and I will say just want to get back to something
you know, Mr mark novelty and Susan Craig earlier about outlot A, that part of the park that is
the prairies, he has often kind of wondered about that dense area just kind of north of those
prairies, outlot A, it can't see how they could even get a trail through there, so from a
preservation point he's glad it's not being destroyed, it's wetlands, but the idea that anybody
could possibly use that as a part of enjoying the park is just not credible, it is completely
unusable land. Kalnins reiterated the park will be degraded by this and the developer's best
argument seems to be well they're not going to degrade it all that much. Kalnins believes they
should demand that something positive be done for the park and this proposal does nothing
positive for the park.
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 31 of 40
Kumar Narayanan stated he wanted to add a couple additional points, first he grew up in Seattle
and watched the entire northern part of Seattle get paved over and developments go in so they
have to ask themselves what type of city do they want 30-40 years from now and is this
development along those lines. He believes the plan that was laid out was a plan for growth, but
the proposal doesn't seem to match that plan. The second point is that the park is below much
of this development, so the things that happen in this development will end up in the park,
whether that's pesticides or water running off the pavement, that needs to be factored in and not
just an environmental review, but in a in a hydrology review, as the park floods pretty heavily and
this development will severely impact not just what happens in the park, but all throughout the
Ralston Creek watershed. Finally, regarding the traffic, the traffic plans for today don't count for
the traffic plans tomorrow and that nursing home is going to require significant deliveries, it's
going to require a lot of different infrastructure, and all that is going to be audible and visible and
present in the park.
William Synan stated he has lived here for 27 years, before the extension of First Avenue was
even done and wanted to state a couple of things. He really believes this is not following the
Comprehensive Plan at all and it is going to be a massive building and be on the most elevated
part of that property so everybody's going to see it and it's no confluent with the neighborhood.
Synan noted ACT owns plenty of land on the north side of Scott Boulevard and that building
would be more appropriate there. As far as the traffic exiting Hickory Trail from the west out to
First Avenue that is going to be a real problem, he urges the Commissioners go over there and
try to exit Hickory Trail onto First Avenue and see what it's like. First Avenue curves around the
northern edge of the condominium building and it's a blind spot and right now with three-way
traffic, because the only people who come out from there are the people in the condo building,
the traffic is very minimum, but once it is converted it to four way it's going to be a nightmare and
it's not going to be safe. So those are his concerns, this should be a primarily low-density single-
family homes and the Comprehensive Plan has been ignored. Please do the right thing for the
people.
Eric Miller noted he really appreciates everything that's been said about the impact on a species,
both animal and plant, and just wants to reiterate the need for environmental impact statements
before projects like this go into effect. He also wanted to say that the trees at the north end of
outlot A are significantly greater quality and have greater age than trees in other parts of the area
that's going to be developed, so he appreciates them recognizing that. He also wanted to point
something out to people, he spoke with someone who's in the local environmental community
here who can't speak for themselves because of potential conflicts of interest, but this person
informed him recently that the area that's being developed is, in their words "within an
endangered species high priority zone and endangered rusty patch bumblebees have been
found within 1300 feet of this property" so Miller wanted that added to the comments. He also
noted he is part of the Friends of Hickory Hill Park Board.
Paige Hall (518 North Van Buren Street) said she has never been to one of these meetings
before but is in school studying environmental science and just listening to this is so
disheartening to see the plan not being followed as it was put in place. Her hope is that at least
the single loaded street point would be followed because as so many people said before the
houses are going to be visible from the park. Hall also noted the prairie is her favorite spot, and
is a lot of people's favorite spot, to just go and sit in the summer with all the insects and the birds
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 32 of 40
and the flowers and her concern is that they're not going to have that anymore. She already
doesn't like to go to the other prairie that has the giant house from Hickory Heights on it and now
this other big prairie is going to be obstructed by housing. She just wanted to echo that again it's
very telling that there are still so many people on this call that are opposing the current plan.
Hannah Rapson (1415 East Davenport Street) wanted to reiterate the concerns about the lack of
consideration for cul-de-sacs and whether or not they fit the City plans they do create safer
streets and better neighborhoods for the people living in them. She also would share the
concern over the number of trees that would be removed in this plan, after the City losing 1000
trees during the derecho, trees, not only provide view sheds they also help with noise pollution in
the park, one can already hear the interstate and removing more of these trees will increase the
noise pollution in the park. She also just wants to put in a suggestion that when the City
considers through streets and sidewalks, many of the neighborhoods that border the park have
trails and natural entrances to the park and natural entrances to the park should be considered in
the plan and preserved as a greater priority over through streets or through sidewalks.
Mary Winder stated she grew up in Iowa City but now live in Kansas but agree with the woman
earlier who said that Hickory Hill Park is a gem. Winder stated when they go back and visit Iowa
City at the top of her list of things to do is take a walk at Hickory Hill Park and she feels like a 35 -
foot buffer between the backyards and the park is way too short of a distance. Winder also
noted as far as cul -del -sacs go she grew up on a cul-de-sac and her adult daughter now lives
and raised her family on a cul-de-sac and it's a wonderful type of street to raise a family as
there's not very much traffic and a close neighborhood so she is a little confused about why the
City prefers a long street where people will speed through from one big street to another big
street as opposed to these more private cul-de-sacs where people can live. Winder encourages
the Commission to ask the developer to revise the plan and follow the Comprehensive Plan and
the Northeast District Plan. She understands that development has to happen, but if it has to
happen, it needs to follow the guidelines that have been set up. She emphasized they need to
think through this very carefully, because once it's developed it's too late.
Mary Murphy (890 Park Place) first wanted to say that she thinks there is far more support for
Hickory Hill Park than is showing up tonight because they required people to register to attend
the meeting and holding it late at night is probably discouraging quite a bit of the supporters and
that doesn't include those people that didn't even know about this meeting. Murphy noted from
the parks master plan, Hickory Hill Park is characterized as a Go Wild Park, which means nature
preservation is the focus of this park, so she is disappointed that there was no environmental
analysis done and agrees with most of the comments that were made tonight in support of
Hickory Hill Park. She also wanted to make a comment that Iowa City needs to take a very long-
term view of its parks, right now Iowa City has about the average number of acres per capita as
the comparable cities that Iowa City compares itself to, however, Iowa City is planning on making
itself more dense and it's planning on moving to form -based zoning from traditional zoning which
is going to only encourage density over time, so there will be fewer and fewer acres per capita of
parkland. Murphy noted this is important because children in particular have so few
opportunities to enjoy wild areas anymore, and while she wouldn't characterize Hickory Hill Park
as extremely wild by any means, it seems particularly important to preserve its character as a
wild park. Finally she would also say in taking a long-term view Iowa City is under some midterm
pressure to raise revenue because of some of the changes in the tax code over the years, but
she doesn't think that means that a development should be approved quickly when clearly based
on the comments tonight people are asking, and almost begging, Iowa City to take a harder look
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 33 of 40
at this development.
Jane Bradbury spoke again to agree that a lot of people didn't even know about this meeting
coming up because it was sort of sudden and the weather has been really bad , so people are
talking less than usual, partly because of the pandemic and also the weather. The Friends of
Hickory Hill Park did a fabulous job putting signs up in the park, but when it's negative 14
degrees no one is out there, so it's sort of a strange time to have a meeting about a park people
use mostly in the warmer months. Bradbury noted another point they didn't mention is that it's
really the only park that one can get to with a bus in Iowa City that that is all natural and has hills.
All of the other parks in town are completely flat. Bradbury also wanted to mention monarchs and
things like that that will be impacted by a development next to the park negatively. Finally, she
mentioned the affordability before, but she knows a lot of people who've always wanted to live on
that side of town, who have never been able to afford it, and these are middle to upper class
normal working class teachers and such who've never been able to afford it, so it seems like it
could be better use of the land to put in housing that wasn't looming over the park and maybe
housing that has garden plots for the public to use or just anything that's less against the best
interest of the whole town at large, not just Hickory Hill Park users, but the whole town, is
negatively impacted by this.
Veronica Tessler (705 Sixth Avenue) stated she lives right across from Creekside Park, which
they hope will soon be renamed Pulitzer Prize winner, James Allen MacPherson. She compelled
to speak because she just learned about this tonight, a few hours ago, and she was recently at
the park with some friends for a socially distance walk, but since the weather's been really bad
for a couple of weeks there are likely many supporters who would be really interested in this
conversation who might not have heard about this. Therefore, she urges the Commissioners to
consider the impact beyond just the voices tonight and see that this really is a time where many
have been consumed by the pandemic and have turned to the park for solace so she would hope
that the Commission would look at the long-term view in making decisions about public land.
Glenda Buenger (South Lucas Street) commented they have gotten a lot of great input tonight
with many thoughtful and astute comments about hydrology and about environmental impacts
and about keeping what natural areas we have left for wildlife, and she would mostly say that she
agrees with these people, they love their park and should be protecting it, not developing next to
it.
Beth Rapson (715 North Johnson Street) has lived in Iowa City for 27 years and has been
accessing Hickory Hill Park largely through Oakland Cemetery and wants to express, as others
have, her frustration with the City when there has been a considerable amount of money and
time and thought put into a master plan and it gets so readily dismissed to raise capital for taxes.
She understands the pressure to develop more sources of tax income, but it seems like the park
is such an integral part of the value of the City and it offers something in the way that cities like
Minneapolis with so many large green spaces that the citizens can enjoy and become models for
how to build cities that are attractive to people. She feels it is important to give due time and
respect to that master plan for the promises that were made to the citizens of Iowa City when
that First Avenue was extended. She hopes the Commission will send this proposal back to the
developer.
Jesse Thomas (65 South Governor Street) stated like many he grew up here and is a huge fan of
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 34 of 40
the park. While he has decided to spend his life here, he has travel extensively and would say
the City has just barely dipping their toes into traffic calming technologies and he would just like
to see a stronger stance against having more roads and doing the things they've done in the
past. He stated it really ruins his day to come out of Hickory Hill Park and see that previous
development and if this Commission can help avoid future generations from seeing this
development come about that is what he would want.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Signs moved to recommend approval of REZ20-0016, a proposal to rezone approximately
48.75 acres of land located south of N. Scott Blvd. and west of N. 1st Ave. from Interim
Development — Single Family Residential (ID -RS) zone to Low Density Single Family with a
Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) zone subject to the following conditions:
1. In accordance with the subdivider's agreement at final platting, approval of a
Woodland
Management Plan that shall consist of a plan to remove any invasive species within the
Outlot A area, as well as removal of any hazardous trees or limbs. The plan shall be
prepared by a woodland specialist and approved by the City Forrester. Invasive species
removal will be the responsibility of the owner and must be completed prior to transfer of
Outlot A to the City.
2. Provision of trail connections, as shown on the concept plan dated 01/18/2021. The
trail connections should be provided in the same location as shown on the concept plan
and must be constructed before public improvements to the corresponding subdivision
are approved.
3. The final plat shall incorporate traffic calming devices, including but not limited to
raised crosswalks at park entrances, in locations approved by and designed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
4. Where trees are shown on the landscaping plan, installation of right-of-way trees, to
be planted by Owner or its successor, along the proposed Hickory Trial right-of-way.
Said trees shall be planted prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each lot, or,
if said certificate of occupancy is issued during a poor planting season, by May 31
following issuance of the certificate of occupancy. Right-of-way trees shall be consistent
with the approved landscaping plan that has been reviewed by the City Forrester. Trees
shall be planted generally 30' apart, though the City recognizes that exact locations may
vary depending on driveway locations, signage, and other utility conflicts. Final location
and species of the trees shall be approved on a lot -by -lot basis prior to issuance of a
building permit for each lot.
5. No building permit shall be issued for any of the subject property until the City
Council approves a final plat subdividing the subject property to confirm to the zoning
boundaries established by the zoning ordinance.
Townsend seconded the motion.
Hensch began the Commission discussion by acknowledging he is very sympathetic to the
concerns about the view and thinks it's a reasonable thing to ask for a landscape buffer to be
extended or to just go to a front -loaded street on the area nearest adjacent to Hickory Hill Park.
Overall he thinks the development plan is pretty good but the concerns are legitimate so he's
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 35 of 40
trying to find a middle ground between those two very contrasting needs.
Martin commented to her it's interesting that they've heard a couple of people bring up the First
Avenue extension, that happened when she was younger, but she is trom Iowa City and when
she was approached to join Planning and Zoning that was one of the reasons she decided to join
and because she wanted to have that voice. She also found interesting people talking about the
pandemic and using the park during this time which when she's been thinking about this project
and looking at the swath of land and how forested and she is really concerned with the decline of
biodiversity and what happens with wildlife when they are disrupted. It is interesting because in
Iowa City they have two main types of mice and the ticks that live on deer, when the deer are
disrupted and they're losing their habitat, the deer are affected by deforestation, but mice are not,
and then the white footed mouse carries the tick which carries Lyme disease. Also interesting is
we're also in the middle of this pandemic that an aspect of diseases and whatnot coming from
animals, she knows it seems a little farfetched however she feels they really need to be taking a
very close look at the bigger picture of how important these buffers are these and the land
surrounding these parks and how very fortunate they are to have Hickory Hill Park. Martin did
acknowledge this is private land and they can do what they want to do with it, but because of this
rezoning, as stewards of this community through the Planning and Zoning Commission, it is their
responsibility to really help developers really look at this and think how are to benefit the greater
of the community. Having a senior development is great, she doesn't know that market at all and
if the City needs another senior development, probably do, but is that need enough for this type
of development. It gives her pause and thinks they all should be pausing and really looking at
what's the best, smartest use of this particular swath of land that's been a natural habitat for
years. Someone brought up the pesticide runoff which is a very valid thought and one of her
concerns in terms of the looking at these maps is the runoff from the creek of the waterway in
terms of another habitat being disrupted. Martin also noted there was a comment made about
flooding not affecting the houses, but they also have to be really compassionate to the protection
of the rest of the environment. Martin stated right now as this stands, she could not support this
application.
Craig stated she also can't support this as she feels that not enough consideration has been
given to the plans that are in place. Craig noted she wasn't part of the development of that
Northeast District Plan but she certainly was around in the City then and knows a lot of emotion
was involved with it, and it was hard fought principles that you can hear when people who were
part of it, talk about it and they feel quite betrayed now as they perceive why have a plan if you're
not going to stick to it and Craig feels that way too. She will not support this because it is against
the plan. Her main concern are those views and when someone stands in that prairie and looks
up on that ridge it is depressing to envision a row of the backside of houses and others thought
of it before and thought to have that language put in the plan for that reason. She will not
support this, even with an amendment, they have to come back with something different.
Townsend stated she has heard several people talk about these huge multi storied houses that
are being built. Now, if the contractors came back with affordable housing units, small units,
would these same concerns be there. This is private property and someone is going to do
something with it, so if we're telling the contractors come back with something different, what is
something we are not opposed to having there.
Craig doesn't think that there are people in the community who are opposed to having anything
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 36 of 40
there, but as she said to the developer, if he took lots 26 through 44 away which means then the
large single-family houses would be on the far side of a street and creates a buffer she can live
with. The condominiums and what's going on down at the other end of that bluff above the
prairies is fine. What's in the Northeast District Plan is to only to build houses facing the park not
backing up to the park with a street in between and that makes a natural buffer. So there are
ways to do it and if they come back with another plan that is more acceptable there will still be
people who talk against it because they don't want the land to be developed, but it will be
developed, it's a prime piece of property and it does not belong to the City.
Martin agreed and said a development needs to be done thoughtfully and thinks that it is very
important that there is more credence given to the overreaching effects of diminishing those
habitats.
Signs stated first of all the Commission can't change the rules, they must follow the guidelines
that the City Council has set forth. The next step is the City Council and they can change the
rules and so that's going to be an opportunity for those who do or don't agree with this
Commission's vote tonight to have another voice. Signs added even if this doesn't go through
tonight these issues all still remain and you need to you need to take action on them. Signs
noted that maybe 5% of the same people here tonight were here a couple years ago when the
Commission discuss Tamarack Trail, a property right across the street on Scott Boulevard that
backs up to two natural areas, one being a conservation reserve, and it's a double loaded street
with just a long through street and 95% of the people here tonight weren't here there to complain
about that development because the reality is people don't complain about anything until it
effects them. A lot of people have referred to the 1999 Northeast Neighborhood Plan and that
was written 21-22 years ago and a lot has changed in 22 years. The Comprehensive Plan
specifically states things that are different that are in the 1999 plan, but we kind of forgot about
that in the conversation. It specifically discourages cul-de-sacs, it specifically encourages
conservation and designing and compacting homes into a narrow part of a property to preserve
as much of the land as possible, which quite frankly these developers have done a really good
job. So people can point to the 1999 plan, but he can point to something in the 2013 plan that is
contrary. Signs moved on to the bigger question of this piece of land. It is not this property
owner's responsibility to add to or change or preserve anything with Hickory Hill Park, yes, it's a
beautiful park, no one denies that it's an absolutely beautiful park and wonderful asset, but it's
not this property owners' responsibility. Several people made the comment, why do they have to
build here, why can't they build someplace else, well because they own the land and, quite
frankly, they may pay $2.3 million for that piece of land, which is another reason they have to
maximize what they can put on that land, because otherwise they go broke. Signs said the
bigger question is about whether an Iowa City should grow or not and to be honest he would like
to see Iowa City get some of those projects that are happening in North Liberty and Tiffin and
Coralville but, in general, Iowa City needs more housing. Iowa City has a tremendous shortage
of housing and as a realtor, he can assert that as an affordable housing advocate there is a
tremendous need. In general there is an anti -development tone in the community, which is why
the developers are moving to these other towns, because they don't they don't get this
resistance. Signs respectfully disagrees with a couple of his colleagues and questions whether
the developer came back with single loaded streets and took out some houses and stuff like that,
he is pretty sure the view shed from the park is going to be the same, whether there's a house on
the other side of the street or on this side of the street. In either scenario you're going to see
those houses from the park. Signs really questions if they turn this developer down tonight
they're going to be able to come back with something that can satisfy many people given they
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 37 of 40
paid $2.3 million for a piece of land. Signs also acknowledged some comments about not
knowing about the meeting and not thinking it was a good time and complaining about the late
time but they do that because they respect the need for public input and will sit here as long as it
takes. These Planning and Zoning meetings are the first and third Thursdays of every single
month unless there's nothing to talk about and the agendas are on the website the Friday
afternoon prior to the Thursday meeting. The City also does as good a job to make these things
public and specially reaches out to individuals and neighborhood leaders. In this case there was
a good neighborhood meeting that happened and people attended so somebody knew this was
going on. He encourages everyone to get involved with City Government and don't just get
involved in the projects that impact them.
Hensch commented they have a responsibility to ask if the applications comply with the district
plan for the particular area and is it consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. They are following
the rules that have been set out to follow and then what is the public good. Hensch did want to
comment also on people questioning the need for memory care and senior assisted living in Iowa
City as there's a huge demand for that. There's people who want to stay in Iowa City and don't
want to have to go to West Branch or Solon or something for those types of services, they want
to stay here. He just wanted to acknowledge that because health care is an area he has a lot of
interest in and knowledge about. Also to follow up on something Signs said, Commission
members all remember the number of meetings we had for the Forest View development and the
standing room only for multiple meetings in the Council Chambers and he is always curious of
the people who didn't comment on things that are fairly similar like wooded areas and changes of
the landscape. He doesn't want to use the word Nimby but that comes to mind. He is not
criticizing anyone but just wants everybody to know that the Commission members are all here
because we believe in public service, we're all working in good faith and we're doing what we
think is right and what's the public good for Iowa City and he gets slightly offended when people
insult our integrity.
Hensch stated he generally supports the application, he has concerns because he thinks the
front -loaded streets is a legitimate issue from the Northeast District Plan. He will never support
cul-de-sacs for all kinds of reasons and is concerned about the view shed as that's just very
respectful for the park. He feels this application is close, he just wouldn't support it tonight, but
doesn't think it's fair to the developers to not tell them what they can do to improve the
application.
Elliott stated she echoes that and thinks the front -loaded streets or the single -loaded street would
be a great help to this if they can somehow figure out how to do that. She feels if that area was
front loaded even though they are still going to be able to see the houses she thinks it will make
a big psychological difference if there's a street there.
Craig stated she lives by the south part of the park, at the Bloomington and Davenport dead end
and there's a street there and there's all kinds of houses that can be seen from the park but
they're on the other side of the street and it's like okay that's where people live and this is the
park, it is a psychological difference.
Nolte agreed and said that is where he's at today, in keeping with the plan and the front -loaded
streets and they do owe it to the developer to explain what we're looking for because if they
come back with that then we can't keep moving the goalposts all the time, so if there are other
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 38 of 40
concerns that people have other than the front -loaded street, they need to put those on the table
now. Nolte acknowledged it is their job is to keep with the plan and that may make the math hard
for the developer by taking lots away but we owe it to the community. Nolte stated in full
disclosure he was at those meetings in 1999 and didn't want any development out there. He has
been going to Hickory Hill Park since he was in college in the 90s, but he also understands the
need to grow and if this plan just had the front -loaded or the single -loaded streets, he would
support it.
Signs added one of the things they have a habit of doing is coming at these things, after the facts
are present, is if as a community we feel that that piece of land is so important to the integrity of
Hickory Hill Park, we should have bought as a community or went to City Council and said we
need to save this piece of land. He noted we tend to come at things at the tail end when
someone else's bought it, and then we want to direct what they do with the land and he has a
real problem with that from a privacy property rights standpoint. So he encourages all
environment lovers if you have areas that you think need to be preserved, then figure out a way
to buy it and preserved it because he is always the one to say if you don't own the land, you don't
control them, it's as simple as that, it's real estate 101. So not just talking about Hickory Hill
Park, but if there are any areas you need to be thinking ahead as a community on what you want
to preserve.
Hensch wanted to also add in an earlier application that people may remember, there was a
senior facility proposed on the west side of Iowa City but the folks from Walnut Ridge was
concerned about their view and the project was defeated and they withdrew their application.
That project was then built and is operating in Coralville and it could have been in Iowa City
A vote was taken and the motion failed 0-7.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 21, 2021:
Townsend moved to approve the meeting minutes of January 21, 2021.
Martin seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Russett gave an update on the rezoning and preliminary plat near Camp Cardinal Boulevard and
Kennedy Parkway, it was approved at Council this week. Also the rezoning at 700 South
Dubuque Street, the student housing project was approved at Council, and the commercial plat
at Southgate and South Gilbert Street was final plated and approved this week at Council.
Hensch thanked all the members of the Commission for dedicating four and a half hours of their
life to this, it's a thankless task that people don't really appreciate the difficulty of it until they do it.
He appreciates each and every one of them, even if they don't always agree he's never
questioned their motivation so again thanked them all for their public service. He also
acknowledged all the public that came tonight and spoke or just listened because public
Planning and Zoning Commission
February 18, 2021
Page 39 of 40
participation is the only way to influence policy.
ADJOURNMENT:
Craig moved to adjourn.
Townsend seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020-2021
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
7/16
8/6
8/20
10/1
10/15
11/5
12/3
12/17
1/7
1/21
2/18
CRAIG, SUSAN
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
X
DYER, CAROLYN
O/E
O/E
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- --
- --
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
ELLIOTT, MAGGIE
-- --
-- --
-- --
-- -- I
-- --
X
X
X
X
X
X
HENSCH, MIKE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
MARTIN, PHOEBE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
NOLTE, MARK
-- --
-- --
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
X
SIGNS, MARK I
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
TOWNSEND, BILLIE I
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member