Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-03-09 Public hearingNOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 9th day of March, 2015, in Emma J. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider: 1. An ordinance amending Title 14-56 'Sign Regulations' for Central Business Zones. 2. A resolution on a Comprehensive Plan amendment for the three blocks south of Iowa Ave, east of Gilbert St, west of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St. Copies of the proposed ordinances and resolutions are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK CIN OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE CITY OF IOWA C 1 TY MEMORANDUM =- Date: March 3, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator�7 Re: Proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for the three blocks south of Iowa Ave, east of Gilbert St, west of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St Introduction On the March 9 agenda is a public hearing for a proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for the three blocks south of Iowa Ave, east of Gilbert St, west of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St. These three blocks are a subset of a larger Comprehensive Plan amendment proposed to the Planning and Zoning Commission for two areas which were identified in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan (see attached graphic) as needing further study. It is our practice to forward staff reports which were reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission - I have extracted portions of the reports which deal with these three blocks to the extent possible. While some information in the staff reports pertains to the larger Comprehensive Plan amendment areas, we will be focusing on these three blocks at the March 9 public hearing. The Planning and Zoning Commission acted on these three blocks separately, and deferred action on the remaining areas. Staff began the Comprehensive Plan process last fall by holding a public open house to facilitate discussion. Property owners, residents and businesses in the affected areas were invited by letter to the open house; in addition, staff issued a media release and placed a notice on the City website to invite the general public. The open house was well attended. A webpage was created to facilitate input — a majority of written input was received via this webpage, including input from those who attended the open house. A summary of input received is attached. The Comprehensive Plan by itself does not have regulatory authority. It is important however in setting the stage and expectations for any future rezoning actions. History/Background The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies two areas, one located generally north of Burlington St and east of Gilbert St, the other north of Iowa Ave and west of Dubuque St, as areas that were not included in the Downtown Master Plan or the Central District Plan, but rather recommends further study of the development potential for these areas. Both of these areas are a part of the Downtown Planning District from the 1997 Comprehensive Plan. Staff has recommended the three blocks (south of Iowa Ave, east of Gilbert St, west of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St) be added to the Downtown District section of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, and that the land use be identified as `Civic / Mixed -Use.' In summary, the rationale behind this recommendation is that the three blocks are more consistent with a downtown planning context in that: March 4, 2015 Page 2 • The three blocks include a mix of uses that serve the larger community including City Hall, Police and Fire stations, the Robert A Lee Recreation Center, Chauncey Swan parking facility and surface parking areas that serve downtown employees • The three blocks are the site of numerous events including athletic and recreation events, meetings at City Hall and the Recreation Center, and the Farmer's Market amongst others • The three blocks are served by a 5 -lane arterial street (Burlington St / Highway 1) and a 4 -lane arterial street (Gilbert St), and begin one block from the pedestrian plaza • The three blocks are already a part of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District • Much of the public input received emphasized a desire for more diverse housing types downtown and opportunities for mixed-use development, which could be offered in these three blocks • One of the City's goals since at least 1997 has been to encourage more residential and mixed-use development in the downtown area. These three blocks are an opportunity to provide a location for mixed-use development which can add to the vitality of downtown in a location which is not a part of a residential neighborhood. The 1997 Comprehensive Plan states: The logic of promoting higher density residential development in the Downtown Planning District rests in the concept that people who live in and near downtown will walk to work (or classes in the case of University students), will patronize downtown businesses, will add to after-hours vitality, and create a sense of safety downtown. Higher density development in the downtown also reduces pressure on the less dense older neighborhoods surrounding downtown. Building Height and Historic Preservation The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan contains a building height map showing general guidelines for appropriate building heights for these districts. One of the things staff produced after the initial Planning and Zoning Commission discussion was a building height map (see Exhibit C) to guide any future rezoning applications in these three blocks. Consistent with the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, staff produced a map that reflected taller buildings on corner properties along Gilbert St, with mid -rise heights along much of the remainder of the block faces. The Downtown District section of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan states: • New development should be located on sites that do not contain historic buildings; • Active uses, such as ground floor retail (and not blank walls) should front onto the street frontages and around City Plaza; • Upper floors should contain office, commercial, and residential uses; • Buildings should be built to the property line; • Corner locations should be reserved for taller buildings; March 4, 2015 Page 3 • The taller buildings on the corners should have a lower base consistent with [any] historic buildings to make them 'feel' contextual with the rest of downtown, while also limiting the perceived heights of towers. Along the Iowa Ave frontage, staff proposed 2-4 stories of building height, combined with identifying the Unitarian Church property as a potential `Key Historic Building.' This designation is consistent with other historic preservation -eligible properties in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. During the course of this comprehensive plan amendment, the Planning and Zoning Commission sought input from the Historic Preservation Commission, which recommended that the Unitarian Church be identified as a historic preservation -eligible property in the Master Plan, which Staff has done on Exhibit C. This designation in a Comprehensive Plan document does not require preservation, but rather would guide P&Z and the Council in considering a subsequent historic designation rezoning application, which is a legislative process outside of the confines of the Comprehensive Plan. The Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan contains policies intended to promote the preservation of historic buildings. The Plan states that development incentives (such as density bonuses) and policy options that encourage preservation should be implemented. The current zoning code allows for a density bonus for the adaptive reuse of historic structures in the CB -5 and CB -2 zones, which allows for additional square footage in buildings developed on the vacant portions of the property. It does not, however, allow for this bonus in the CB -10 zone, nor does it allow for the type of historic preservation density transfer to a separate development project, as allowed in the Riverfront Crossings zones. It would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to amend the Zoning Code for Central Business (CB) zones to allow for transfer of density rights for historic buildings, similar to the Riverfront Crossings zones. Given that the City owns a majority of these three blocks, it may have role in providing sites for development transfer. Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District These three blocks are already part of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District. This parking district allows for a reduction in required on-site parking provided: • The property is located in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District; • The project must not result in the demolition of a property that is designated as an Iowa City Historic Landmark, registered on the National Register of Historic Places, or individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places; and • The project must qualify for bonus height, bonus floor area, or other development assistance or financial incentive from the City for included uses, elements or features that further housing, economic development, or other goals of the Comprehensive Plan including the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Staff cannot require that a property take advantage of being in this parking district for a reduction in required parking. It is, however, another tool/carrot the City has to encourage historic preservation and achieve other public goals. March 4, 2015 Page 4 Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation and its Impact The Planning and Zoning Commission failed to recommend approval on this Comprehensive Plan amendment on a vote of 1-5. This was after a motion to defer failed on a 3-3 vote. Minutes from the Commission's meetings on this item are attached. City Code Section 14 -8D -3G requires that the City Council consider a resolution on proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments, and that if the proposed amendment is counter to the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, a % majority (6 of 7) of the City Council is required for the amendment to be approved. Unlike rezoning actions, a 'consultation' with the Commission is not required for Comprehensive Plan amendments. If this proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is not approved, the current Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map will continue to apply. Public Input The public input received during the Planning and Zoning Commission process is attached in the minutes from the meetings. It is safe to say the Commission received input both for and against the proposal; and that some of the concern with the proposal was not solely related to the idea of allowing mixed-use development on these three blocks, it was more related with the scale and density of any subsequent development on these three blocks. Impact of adding these areas to the Downtown District of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan The impact of adding these three blocks to the Downtown District of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan and identifying them as 'Civic / Mixed -Use' on the land use plan is that any future rezoning applications would be considered under the policies of the Downtown District, and proposed mixed-use development would be consistent with the plan. Because we do not yet have a Form Based Code for Downtown, other elements of the plan such as identifying 'retail storefronts' have not been done for these three blocks. If/when a Form Based Code is developed for downtown, these three blocks would be included in the analysis for Form Based Code criteria and regulations. Until such time, current zoning designations would apply as in the rest of downtown. Recommendation 1. Staff recommends the three municipal blocks bounded by Iowa Ave, Gilbert St, Burlington St, and Van Buren St be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan, and that the land use be identified as 'Civic / Mixed -Use.' 2. Staff recommends the Downtown District Addition Proposed Height map (Exhibit C) be added to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan as an addendum, to provide guidance for any future rezoning applications for these three blocks. 3. Staff recommends that the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and Land Use Map be amended consistent with this amendment. downtown district rf . r' ri 22f'l�f-; t-T•Jt j Proposed �tta� 1 addition to ' — Downtown fr r a Downtown 1 District 1 II � 11 1 { 'r` South Downtown \ _ \ University j� r—r====�J I1I I j ll—_ ��J f� 1 I • �� District �I // 1� I 1 i� Central Crossings \ 1 1,if 1 Gilbert j j District I If - 1 I West `\ �\ Park District 11 .41 1 If _ 1 I 1 I I Riverfront \\ 11 %r11 1 I 7 —tL---r' 11 1-1 •--- Or --1 I - �, t 11 / •__� I \ Jr.' 1 South I j 1`°•y 1 \ j- j Gilbert j 1 t_______�� �� 01 1 I To: Iowa City Council Members From: Nate and Samantha Kaeding 1100 North Dubuque St. Iowa City, IA As both Iowa City residents and owners of multiple business located within the Downtown District, we wholeheartedly endorse and support City Staff's recommendation to add the three civic blocks of interest to Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, which will allow for mixed-use development in this area. Two years ago our young family of five made the measured decision to move back to the area after having spent nine years in Southern California. We chose Iowa City, in part, because we believe in the importance of an authentic and vibrant urban environment. Not only does Downtown Iowa City have the current arts, fitness, retail, and culinary offerings that we became accustomed to while living in a larger city, we were also encouraged by, and attracted to, the greater vision of what our Downtown can grow to become. Projects like The Chauncy are significant steps towards bringing that vision to life. It will undoubtedly attract others to live, work, and visit Downtown. Moreover, the added density to the area will be a great boost to existing retail and restaurant businesses in the Downtown District. We appreciate the complex nature of these decisions, but in order to progress our city and ensure that generations to come treasure our town like we do now, it's imperative that smart and innovative development is allowed to occur. Thank you for your service to our community. Respectfully, Nate and Samantha Kaeding Marian Karr From: Bob Long <blong@meta-comm.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 7:40 PM To: Council Subject: The Chauncey Dear Council Members, I am writing to let you know my strong support, both personally and as President of MetaCommunications, of adding the 3 civic blocks to Downtown and Riverfront Crossing Master Plan. I know the city staff recommendation is in support of moving this forward and I am in agreement with them. MetaCommunications is fully committed to Downtown Iowa City. Since we moved to our location at 201 East Washington last August, we have well exceeded our goals of adding additional high paid employees. As we look towards the future, we will need to expand to other locations in the Downtown area. With that said, it is of the utmost importance that we have buildings available that are "high tech" with environmentally sound utilities, state of the art amenities and high speed fiber -optics. The Chauncey and the other new buildings are important to Iowa City's growth. I travel regularly throughout the country and I know for certain Iowa City, with it's local talent, would be able to attract and retain other high tech companies downtown, in addition to MetaCommunications. Additionally, the local CoLabs and startup accelerators are nurturing similar companies as we speak. As companies graduate, they will need a place to go with similar high quality office space in architecturally interesting buildings with a culture of technology, such as ours at 201 Washington. Call it an atmosphere, mood, or perception, Iowa City must continue to move forward and build on it's achievements if it wishes to retain these kinds of growing startups. The addition of the Music building and Museum downtown is a great step forward by the University of Iowa. Now it's time we step up and allow the building of the commercial infrastructure to support more professionals and residents downtown. As citizens, we should be excited that we have developers willing to commit to building such facilities right here downtown. So many Iowa cities never have this opportunity. We have hired a full-time recruiter to accelerate our hiring, and having a mixed use development such as The Chauncey and the proposed relocation of New Pi is appealing to the type of employees we are looking for both locally & nationally. Please feel free to contact me. Thank you for the great service you do for Iowa City. :17 Robert Long, President & CEO MetaCommunications, Inc. 201 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 T: (319) 337-8599 ext 180 ( C: (319) 621-22011 IN blong777 www.metacommunications.com Marian Karr From: NorthsideNA<northsideneighborhoodic@gmail. com> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 6:17 PM To: Council Subject: RE Comp Plan amendment - expansion of the Downtown District Attachments: RE Expansion of Downtown District.pdf The attached letter signed by 21 neighbors is for the March 9th Council meeting. Thank you. Sarah Clark February 27, 2015 Honorable Members, City Council sent to council 0 iowa-city.org City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA Dear City Council, At its meeting on February 5, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered two Comprehensive Plan amendments recommended by Staff: 1. Staff recommends the three blocks of the Civic District bounded by Iowa Ave., Gilbert St., Burlington St., and Van Buren St. be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan as an addendum 2. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed addendum to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. The motion to approve Staffs recommendation failed 5 to 1. By their vote, the Planning and Zoning Commission asserted the Comprehensive Plan's land use goals regarding the Downtown's orderly eastern and northern expansion within the Downtown Planning District. The foundation of that policy is quite simple: as the Downtown expands to the east and north, building heights should be no greater than the Downtown's characteristic building height of 2 to 6 - stories. Otherwise, buildings at the periphery of Downtown would be taller than the vast majority of buildings in the Downtown itself. Over the years, City Council has affirmed the Comprehensive Plan's goals on Downtown expansion. In the Downtown Planning District's north side, the Comprehensive Plan's call for "appropriate transitions" have been supported by the following measures: • University buildings north of Iowa Ave. consistent with the Downtown's characteristic building heights • Establishment in 2013 of the Jefferson Street Historic District • Commercial zones such as Central Business CB -5 and CB -2 orderly stepping down in density north of Jefferson Street The Comprehensive Plan's call for "appropriate transitions" on the Downtown Planning District's east side has been and remains more challenging. Its transition zone between the Downtown and the historic College Green neighborhood is less than two blocks, much narrower than on the north side. In 2005, City Council approved Central Business CB -5 zoning for the Unitarian Universalist and MidAmerican properties, affirming that buildings east of Gilbert St. would be no taller than characteristic building heights in the Downtown. These two properties fall within the 3 -block area that is now under consideration by City Council. However, as the 500 -block of Washington Street attests, zoning efforts to smoothly step down the density east of Van Buren Street have not always been successful. If a super majority of City Council approves Staffs recommendation to add the three municipal blocks to the Downtown District (thereby narrowing the transition zone to less than one -block), you will be overturning not only the Comprehensive Plan's long -held goal of "appropriate transitions" within the Downtown Planning District, but also the intent of the zoning classification Central Business CB -5, established to implement that goal. As stated in the Zoning Code, Central Business CB -5 is intended "to allow for the orderly expansion of the Central Business District in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan". We urge you to once again reaffirm the Comprehensive Plan by supporting the Planning and Zoning Commission's 5-1 decision, and opposing Staffs recommendations. Sincerely, Jennifer Baum (814 Dewey) Sarah Clark (509 Brown) Cathy Cole and Michael Feiss (603 Brown) Sharon DeGraw and Thomas Lally (519 Brown) Susan Futrell and Will Jennings (311 Fairchild) Gina Hausknecht (420 Fairchild) Cecile and Ruedi Kuenzli (705 S. Summit) Lucie Laurian (918 E. Washington) John Macatee and Jane Lyons (15 White Oak PI) Elizabeth Moon (423 Ronalds) Judith Pascoe (317 Fairchild) Jeff Porter and Claire Sponsler (413 N. Gilbert) Leslie Schwalm (819 E. Market) Nialle Sylvan (1722 Morningside Dr) Chris Welu-Reynolds (619 Brown) Marian Karr From: Joan Severson <joan@digitalartefacts.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 10:52 PM To: Council Cc: Joan Severson Subject: City Council Agenda Item: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Dear City Council Members, It is with great enthusiasm that I write this letter of support for the proposed addition of the 3 civic blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, which would allow for mixed-use development. Digital Artefacts has benefited greatly from the vibrant and beautiful 201 East Washington Street development. Our clients have been very impressed by the design and location of our office suite. The proximity to a variety of restaurants, galleries, theaters, and hotels has been great for visiting clients as well as our employees. Our company is comprised of engineers, computer scientists, and multimedia designers. We love the energy and community of downtown Iowa City, and believe that the proposed plan will inspire local and national technology companies to see Iowa City as we do; a place where we can build and grow great software companies. Sincerely, Joan Severson President I Co-founder Digital Artefacts 201 East Washington St Suite 1302 Iowa City Marian Karr From: Jill Fishbaugh <jill. fish baugh@rocketmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 9:06 PM To: Council Cc: Justin Fishbaugh Subject: Iowa City Comprehensive Plan March 4, 2015 Dear Iowa City Council Members: We are writing to endorse the recommendation to add three civic blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan that would allow for mixed-use development in this area. As students at the University of Iowa in the late 1970s and early 1980s, we recognized the positive impact that urban renewal had on downtown Iowa City. We chose to make Iowa City our home in large part because of the attraction the downtown area presented in arts, activities, shopping, and dining. Seven years ago we had the opportunity to move downtown to Plaza Towers and the experience has been nothing short of fantastic. Now the majority of our destinations are within easy walking distance, including work. We have access to several grocery stores, a large variety of high-quality restaurants, many shopping, educational, and entertainment venues such as the Englert and Film Scene theaters, as well as the public library and recreation center, all in close proximity to our home. Soon we will be able to enjoy the University of Iowa's new music building and art museum. All of these opportunities are possible due to the city's progressive downtown vision that allowed projects such as the Plaza Towers and Park 201 to be built. Expanding downtown to include a new three -block development area would not only help preserve historic areas, but also give others the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of living and working downtown. More high- density, mixed-use space will continue the tradition of forward-looking urban planning that makes downtown Iowa City a vibrant and desirable place to live, work, and visit. Thank you for your consideration and for your service to our community. Jill and Justin Fishbaugh 221 E. College Street Apt. 1103 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Marian Karr From: Bruce Haupert <brucehaupert22@gmail. com> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 2:38 PM To: Council Subject: Public Hearing -Mar 9, 2015 -Comprehensive Plan Amendment involving Civic Ctr, Chauncey, and Rec Center blocks Dear Dedicated Council Members: First, many thanks to you all for your sacrifices made to represent the citizens of this fantastic City. Your efforts help make it so. Second, Melanie & I deeply support the Staffs recommendation to add the 3 blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossing Master Plan to become elligible for critical mixed use development. More than 30 years ago, I (Bruce) attended a lecture by one of the world's most respected architects. It was his opinion that urban sprawl should be limited, and that this could be accomplished most efficiently by constructing new buildings as deep as they are tall. His theory (to permit the maximum use of our finite land) is more likely with the above referenced Amendment. Besides, it is logical since it is contiguous to the CBD and adjacent to the "center" of our City which houses similar constuction. Finally, in our humble opinions, the tasteful "high rises" which now pepper our CBD have transformed the vibrancy of Iowa City and have largely made it the wonderful space it is today. Finally, in case anyone is concerned, we still have ownership interest in Iowa City real estate though we live in the County. Many thanks. Bruce & Melanie Haupert 3692 Forest Gate Dr. NE Iowa City, IA 52240 Marian Karr From: John -Iowa Chop House <jburchert@theiowachophouse.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 2:58 PM To: Council Subject: Support of Downtown & RiverFront Crossing To: Iowa City Council Members From: John Burchert I am writing you today to express my full support behind the Downtown and Riverfront Crossing Master Plan, specifically adding the three civic blocks bound by Gilbert St, Van Buren St, and Burlington St to the downtown district for mixed-use development. As a local developer and entrepreneur, I believe it is important for our community to come together in support of this amendment. Originally from Illinois, I moved to Iowa in 1997 and immediately recognized the potential to build here, and to grow. In 2003 1 co-found TMone and in this very community, was enabled to grow that business to three locations and over 1500 employees in ten years. It was this community that made that vision come to the forefront. Moving forward, it's my belief this city will continue to flourish as local businessmen and entrepreneurs continue to reinvest the fruits of their labors back into the local economy. Adding these civic blocks for mixed-use is another step furthering the advancement of Iowa City, promoting growth and reinvestment. Best, John B. Burchert Iowa Chop House www.ThelowaChopHouse.com Marian Karr From: Andy Stoll <andy@stoll.net> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 3:02 PM To: Council Subject: Proposal on Civic Blocks Members of the City Council I am writing to support the staff s recommendation to add the 3 civic blocks to Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan to allow for mixed-use development in this area. I encourage you to approve the staff s recommendation as I believe it will continue to diversify the economy, attract new businesses and residents to downtown, and have a very positive effect on the future of downtown Iowa City. I am a downtown Iowa City resident and applaud the city council led development that has happened, particularly in the past 15 or so years, around more modern and higher ends housing, that reaches beyond the traditional college student audience, to attract a more diverse group of people to downtown and expand the spectrum of downtown housing across a wide range of prices. I travel about 60% of my time, and visit the most vibrant cities across the nation. I find myself drawn to cities like Portland, Austin, Boulder and Omaha because they have dense, heavily mixed-use downtowns, where all the amenities that I want/need can be found in a few walking blocks. I can see Iowa City trending towards an even more rich and dense urban core of this type, which many "3rd place options" (we're off to a great start with things like FilmScene, Plaza Tower, PedMall Renovations, Park@201, the street cafes) that is appealing to both young professional and empty nesters (not to mentioned many college students), which are the types of people I believe we need more of downtown and who will add diversity, energy and money to downtown's economy. I believe approving this measure will be the next best step in securing that future for our downtown. Please do reach out if I can provide any more insight. Thank you for your service! Andy Iowa City Resident andy@stoll.net ............................................................... ............................................................... Andy Stoll media producer and social entrepreneur ++++++++++++++++++++++ andyAstoll.net US phone: (+1) 319.855.0895 (NEW) twitter/facebook/linkedin/skype/google: andystoll www.andystoll.net ++++++++++++++++++++++ around -the -world travel stories: www.noboundaries.olg travel related tweets: @noboundariesorg March 4, 2015 To: City Council From: Helen Burford, Iowa City Resident Members of the Council: As an active participant in the community and long-time observer of Iowa City's history, I am writing to ask for your careful consideration of the over 20 years of planning and neighborhood participation in these goals when reviewing the request to change the Comprehensive plan to include the "Civic Zone" to be added to the Downtown District and under the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Beginning with the Near Southside Redevelopment Plan in 1992, adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 1997, rezoning in 2005, 2006 and Title 14 in the zoning code, the City has made an effort to implement the Comprehensive Plan and address the need for "proper transitions between the intensity of downtown development and surrounding residential neighborhoods." In January of 2013, the Council when approving the Riverfront Master Plan which furthered the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan also approved construction of a building on land owned by the City in the "Civic Zone" that challenged the concept of a "proper transition" for land that adjoins the Central Business District. In May of the same year, the Comprehensive Plan was updated to clarify the Central District boundaries. As an observer, it appears that the City is focused on changing the zoning for the property owned by the City and the surrounding area to have the potential of collecting property tax or revenue from the higher density development without regard to respecting "proper transitions." Twenty years of planning is being challenged in two years or less. Respectfully, I ask the Council to not approve the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the "Civic" or three block municipal area to be added to the Downtown District. Marian Karr From: Doug Freeman <dfreeman@theadigroup.net> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 11:42 AM To: Council Subject: City Council Comprehensive Plan Amendment To: Iowa City Council Members From: Douglas and Pamela Freeman 201 @ Park 201 E. Washington Street Unit 703 Iowa City, Iowa We endorse and strongly urge your support to add the three civic blocks to Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, which will allow for mixed-use development in this area. We believe the City Staff's recommendation continues the wonderful vision and the kind of community that makes Iowa City such a uniquely special environment recognized not only within our state, but globally. Pam and I made a decision to make Iowa City our second home; and specifically Downtown Iowa City. As I tell friends, in less than two hours from Des Moines, I can turn off on Dubuque Street towards Downtown Iowa City and immediately feel the sense of a community dedicated to history, culture, literature, performing arts, athletics, and a thriving lifestyle amongst the young and the old. As an "old" University of Iowa alum, I congratulate both the University of Iowa and the Iowa City Community for recognizing your collaborative approach to creating a world renown community. This amendment, in our opinion, continues moving that vision forward in such a positive way. Finally, I believe Mixed Use Development continues to be the evolution of the vision established by our Iowa City forefathers. My Great Grandfather was Iowa City's Postmaster and my Great Uncle and Godfather was an attorney in Iowa City — so the importance to me of ensuring this Comprehensive Plan Amendment passes will allow the lifestyle for generations of all people both today and in the future to be enhanced. Sincerely, Douglas and Pamela Freeman Douglas P. Freeman President & CEO AM Group Phone: 515-334-2200 Fax: 515-334-2222 dfreemanna .theadi iiroumnet AMA image. ideas. information. Marian Karr From: Loewenberg, Gerhard <g-loewenberg@uiowa.edu> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 10:38 AM To: Council Subject: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment To: Iowa City Council Members From: Gerhard and Ina Loewenberg We have lived in Iowa City for 46 years and have seen it develop into an ever more vibrant, interesting, attractive community. Beginning with the urban renewal of the 1970s and 1980s, fueled by the expansion of the University, stimulated by an increasingly varied population, Iowa City has become one of the nation's most desirable urban locations. For most of our lives we lived in the suburbs but the appeal of the downtown area persuaded us to move to the center of the city almost six years ago and we have found the advantages of living downtown even greater than we might have anticipated. Within walking distance of all the stores, the libraries, the university, the Senior Center and—soon—the music building and the museum, we are surrounded by everything that we need and enjoy about Iowa City. We have vastly reduced our "carbon footprint" by eliminating our many daily back -and -forth commutes by car. Urbanization is among other things environmentally sound. We believe that the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for the three blocks south of Iowa Avenue and East of Gilbert Street will open new opportunities for the further development of Iowa City in the directions that have proven so desirable in recent decades. The amendment is consistent with what has made Iowa City's development in the last half century so extraordinarily successful. Marian Karr From: Ethan Diehl <ethanthepainter@gmail. com> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 9:35 AM To: Council Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update Dear City Council Members, We strongly support the addition of 3 civic blocks to the downtown district of the master plan. I grew up in Iowa City. Amanda moved to Iowa City from Los Angeles in August, 2014. We are young professionals, who love living, and working, downtown. Smart planning and development transformed downtown into the vibrant place we call home today. We support the continued transformation. Thank you, Ethan Diehl and Amanda Ward 201 East Washington Street #702 Iowa City, IA { March 2, 2015 Dear City Council, Enclosed for your review are excerpts with highlighted text from planning documents, staff reports, meeting minutes and news articles pertaining to Downtown expansion within the Downtown Planning District. In chronological order, the documents include: 1. Near Southside Redevelopment Plan (1992) 2. 1997 Comprehensive Plan 3. Re -zoning on the Eastside (2005) 4. Re -zoning on the Southside (2006) S. Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (January 2013) 6. Iowa City 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update (May 2013) 7. Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Development Standards (2014) Sincerely, r Near Southside Redevelopment Phin Introduction In the last three decades a lot of time, money, and energy has been invested in the revitalization of downtown Iowa City. Careful attention has been given to appropriate uses, the design of new structures, the design of the streetscape, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, and transit service. As a result of this effort, Iowa City has one of the more vital and attractive downtowns in the Midwest. An opportunity now exists to enhance our investment in downtown through redevelopment of the_area south of Burlington Street. This area provides a site for commercial/office development to complement the downtown and an opportunity to create a downtown neighborhood of high intensity development next to the employment, educational and shopping center of the city. Office development and the new higher density neighborhood- will provide a consistent and present market for the downtown. There will be more people (and, as a consequence, greater vitality) and more traffic in the redevelopment area; there will be congestion. However, the livability of the residential blocks should not be sacrificed. A livable neighborhood can.be attained with attention to design, public amenities, and a proper balance of parking and dwelling unit density. The following sections provide a brief overview of the -redevelopment area, a description of the specific properties projected for redevelopment, and a discussion of various issues related to revitalization of this area. Rationale for Land Use Plan The objective of this Plan is to foster redevelopment of the Near Southside while maintaining an economically healthy retail core in downtown Iowa City. To achieve this objective, an infusion of people - employees and residents - is recommended in the Near Southside. The downtown trade area is active and healthy because of the close proximity of the University campus. The student, faculty and staff, augmented by the employees of numerous other downtown businesses and offices, provide immediate support to the retail businesses located in the downtown area. It is important the Near Southside be developed with uses that encourage concentrations of persons working and living near the downtown. Such uses include professional offices, business, and personal service establishments, and --. . high density residential development. The location of high-density residential development in the Near Southside has the ancillary benefit of preserving esiab-1 she3lower`density^areas north end east of downtown that may be l: subject to pressures for conversion to high-density multi -family use. The success of Iowa City's downtown has much to do with its walkability. This compact area was established for convenient accessibility to pedestrians. Few "dead spaces" exist between retail stores to break up shopping patterns. The success of the Near Southside will also relate to the ease of pedestrian access. To protect and enhance shopping convenience and pedestrian _accessibility, it is important that redevelopment and the extension of retail opportumties_not __.. create dead spaces. This concept is critical in.considering the linkage between. the downtown and the area south of Burlington Street. Burlington Street is among, the highest traffic volume streets in Iowa City. The discontinuity.:n_ pedestrian flows created by Burlington Street _will not enhance shopping_ convenience and may inhibit integration north and south of the street_ To accomplish the objective of this plan will require attention to design features and public improvements in the streetscape which are sensitive to pedestrian convenience. A block -by -block analysis has been done to determine the redevelopment possibilities in this area, propose changes in the Zoning Ordinance, and suggest ways to address the issues of parking, open space, pedestrian accessibility, traffic circulation, historic preservation, and amenities. RESOLUTION NO. 92-42 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE NEAR SOUTHSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHEREAS, cities may adopt plans directing the future growth of their community to provide for the public health, safety and general welfare., and I WHEREAS, the City Council of Iowa City has determined that redevelopment of a 20 -block area south of Burlington Street known as the Near Southside is in the best interest of the community and will promote the general welfare; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council have concluded that redevelopment of the Near Southside for a mix of high-density residential, commercial and office uses will complement the investment Iowa City has made in the _Downtown and will generally enhance the community; and WHEREAS, this conclusion has been reached after due deliberation and numerous opportunities for public input. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: to adopt the Near Southside Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan as a policy for the development of the area generally south of Burlington Street, west of Gilbert Street, east of Madison Street and north of the Iowa Interstate Railway main line and to implement redevelopment of the Near Southside according to the Action Plan set forth therein. It was moved by Amh,j,co and seconded by Horowitz the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: y Ambrisco y_ Courtney _y_ Horowitz _ Kubby _ Larson McDonald Novick Passed and approved this 3rd day of March 1992. MAYOR Appro b ATTEST: CIT LERK City At ney's Office //Zy 9z nearss.res [flN) UR13FlN USr PflTlff-RN MIs � STRFlT[GI�S 47 Define the City's adopted growth area boundary. • Focus urban growth; use the City's extraterritorial review powers to discourage suburban sprawl. • Establish wherever possible green space at the edge of the urban growth boundary. Contain industrial development in industrial parks on the edge of the community. • Identify appropriate areas for industrial growth, provide city services, zone accordingly. Focus commercial development in defined commercial cen,( ters, including small scale neighborhood commercial cen- ters. • Identify appropriate commercial nodes; zone accordingly to focus commercial development. • Discourage linear strip commercial development that en- courages sprawl. Maintain a strong, accessible downtown that is pedestrian oriented and a cultural, commercial and residential center. • Encourage continued investment in downtown to assure its place as the community cultural and commercial center. • Work with the business community on strategies to keep downtown commercially viable. Promote growth downtown consistent with the Near Southside Development Plan. Protect the historical and natural environment within the city. • Develop guidelines to help the development community deal appropriately with natural areas and open spaces. • Use City projects to demonstrate appropriate relationships between development and environmentally sensitive areas. • Continue implementation of the Iowa City Historic Preser- vation Plan. Foster strong community neighborhoods with a mix of hous- ing, churches, schools, recreation facilities, commercial ar- eas, and historic landmarks. • Pian and promote the development of model neighborhoods that are compact, pedestrian -oriented, contain a mix of housing, with neighborhood focal points and commercial centers. • Promote a mix of housing styles within neighborhoods, including compatible infill development through neighbor- hood conservation districts and other measures; and zone parcels in advance of development. • Implement zoning which integrates multi -family buildings I 0R ('III as transitions between neighborhood commercial zones and Il, III lower density single family areas. • Work with appropriate organizations to ensure that schools, Rchurches, ` /O, J0OO: parks, and neighborhood commercial centers are �y centralized within residential areas ratherthan on the fringes of the community. HOW /)D Wf GST RMI)and neighborhood commercial centers by identifying and zoning parcels in advance of development. DOWNTOWN NNNING )11 I-BIE-1 71 Description of the Downtown Planning District The Downtown Planning District is bounded on the west by the Iowa River, on the north and east by the Northside and Court Hill neighborhoods, and on the south by the Iowa Interstate Railroad. It contains the oldest part of Iowa City originally platted in 1839, The University of Iowa east campus, and the central business district. There is no property included in the vacant land inventory within the downtown planning district. However, a number of prop- erties in the downtown planning district may be appropriate for redevelopment. Unique Features of the Downtown Planning District The dominant feature of this planning district is downtown Iowa City. Iowa City is fortunate to have an active and vital downtown. The success of downtown as an activity center is due in part to the urban renewal effort of the 1970s and '80s. It is also due to the presence of The University of Iowa academic campus in its midst. Students, faculty and visitors to the campus enable downtown businesses to thrive. The presence of the campus also presents challenges for the downtown in terms of the types of businesses that can achieve success, and in terms of parking availability in the general area. In addition, many of the physical amenities con- structed during urban renewal are aging and in need of upgrading. To address these and other issues, a public/private effort includ- /'l ing the City, downtown business and property owners, The Uni- versity of Iowa, and other interested citizens, is being undertaken to ensure the continued vitality of downtown. Immediately outside of downtown are two areas which are af- fected by the downtown. One is the Near Southside noted above, and the other is the Northside Marketplace. Future planning and redevelopment of the Near Southside has been addressed in the Near Southside Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan and in the Near Southside Design Plan. The Northside Marketplace is a small commercial area on the near northside, separated from the down- town by University campus buildings. Business and property own- ers in the area are organized into a loosely knit group to address the needs of this commercial area. Improvements to the public right-of-way, the future of City parking facilities on the Northside and the continued vitality of commercial enterprises in this area are topics which warrant investigation in the future. Mercy Hospi- tal is a significant institution on the east end of this area, and will have a role in defining the character of the Northside Marketplace. Higher density housing in and around the downtown is an issue to be addressed in this district. The logic of promoting higher density residential development in the Downtown Planning District rests in the concept that people who live in and near downtown will walk to work (or classes in the case of University students), will patron- ize downtown businesses, will add to after hours vitality, and cre- ate a sense of safety in the downtown. Higher density develop- ment in the downtown also reduces pressure on the less dense older neighborhoods surrounding downtown. However, some downtown merchants and business owners feel the residential population burdens the parking system in the district to the detri- ment of the businesses. This issue will need to be debated and resolved, setting a clear policy for housing, parking and redevel- opment in the Downtown Planning District. Because Iowa City is a relatively small and compact city, less dense residential development can be found adjacent to the down- -` { town. As the community grows and the downtown prospers, care 1 should be taken in providing proper transitions between the inten- sity of downtown development and surrounding residential neigh- borhoods. Given the built-up nature of the Downtown Planning District, there are few environmental concerns in this district. Limited flooding on the lower reaches of Ralston Creek, between Johnson Street and Gilbert Street, still occurs despite the detention structures on the upper reaches of both branches of the creek. With redevelop- ment, properties prone to flooding are being set aside for no velopment, or new development is being elevated above the 100 year flood level. A significant environmental feature bordering the Downtown Planning District is the Iowa River. Enhancing access to the river and the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle trail along the river are on-going efforts of the City and The University of Iowa. 0OWNTOWN P -M NNING DISTRICT 73 IOWNIOWN Open Space Because the Downtown Planning District is fully developed and - largely commercial, the Neighborhood Open Space Plan applies I_ NNNIN G to only the Near Southside portion of this area. The Near Southside Open Space District extends all the way to Highway 6 and has a — — deficit of 4.4 acres. Harrison Hill Park provides .3 acres of the I) I S E I needed open space. Other public open space in the Downtown Planning District is provided in the City Plaza pedestrian mall; and along the Iowa River, particularly on the University campus. The design plan for the Near Southside includes a concept for a greenway to. the Iowa River, and a civic complex that includes an ice-rink/plaza built in conjunction with a parking facility south of the Johnson County Courthouse. As areas redevelop, open space and greenways will be considered in redevelopment plans. Neighborhood Associations There are no designated neighborhood associations within the downtown planning district. Schools One public high school, the Community Education Center (CEC), is located in the Downtown Planning District. There are no exist- ing or planned elementary schools. Highlights of the Downtown Planning District An on-going strategy which addresses the vitality of the downtown through such issues as parking, the business mix, safety and the appearance of downtown should con- tinue. 2. The future of the Northside Marketplace warrants further evaluation. 3. Higher density housing issues in and near the downtown need to be resolved and a clear policy formulated. 4. Limited flooding along Ralston Creek continues to be a problem for some properties. 5. Some public open spaces exist, but additional areas can be considered with redevelopment in parts of the Down- town Planning District. 14-2C-1: ESTABLISHMENT AND INTENT OF COMMERCIAL ZONES: The full names, short names, and map symbols of the established commercial zones are listed below. When this title refers to the commercial zones, it is referring to the zones listed below: A. Mixed Use Zone (MU): The purpose of the mixed use zone (MU) is to provide a transition from commercial and employment centers to less intensive residential zones. The MU zone permits a mix of uses, including lower scale retail and office uses, and a variety of residential uses. This mix of uses requires special consideration of building and site design. B. Commercial Office Zone (CO -1): The purpose of the commercial office zone (CO -1) is to provide specific areas where office functions, compatible businesses, apartments and certain public and semipublic uses may be developed in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The CO -1 zone can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or industrial areas. C. Neighborhood Commercial Zone (CN -1): The purpose of the neighborhood commercial zone (CN -1) is to promote a unified grouping of small scale retail sales and personal service uses in a neighborhood shopping area; encourage neighborhood shopping areas that are conveniently located and that primarily serve nearby residential neighborhoods; promote pedestrian oriented development at an intensity level that is compatible with surrounding residential areas; and promote principles of site design, building articulation, scale and proportion that are typical of traditional main street design. Allowed uses are restricted in size to promote smaller, neighborhood serving businesses and to limit adverse impacts on nearby residential areas. CN - 1 zones are generally located with direct access to an arterial street. D. Highway Commercial Zone (CH -1): The purpose of the highway commercial zone (CH -1) is to permit development of service uses relating to expressways or along arterial roadways. At certain access points, food, lodging, motor vehicle service and fuel can be made conveniently available to the thoroughfare user. E. Intensive Commercial Zone (CI -1): The purpose of the intensive commercial zone (CI -1) is to provide areas for those sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor display and storage of merchandise, by repair and sales of large equipment or motor vehicles, by outdoor commercial amusement and recreational activities or by activities or operations conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. The types of retail trade in this zone are limited in order to provide opportunities for more land intensive commercial operations and also to prevent conflicts between retail and industrial truck traffic. Special attention must be directed toward buffering the negative aspects of allowed uses from adjacent residential zones. F. Community Commercial Zone (CC -2): The purpose of the community commercial zone (CC -2) is to provide for major business districts to serve a significant segment of the total community population. In addition to a variety of retail goods and services, these centers may typically feature a number of large traffic generators requiring access from major thoroughfares. While these centers are usually characterized by indoor operations, uses may have limited outdoor activities; provided, that outdoor operations are screened or buffered to remain compatible with surrounding uses. Central Business Service Zone (CB -2): The central business service zoneC(CB-2)_is intended to allow for the orderly expansion of the central business district of Iowa City, to serve as a transition between the intense land uses located in the central business district and adjoining areas, to enhance the pedestrian orientation of central area of the city,_and to provide suitable, peripheral locations for auto oriented commercial and service uses. This zone is intended to accommodate mixed land uses but at a lower intensity than permitted in the other central business zones. H. Central Business Support Zone (CB -5): The purpose of the central business support zone (CB - 5) -,is to allow for the orderiv ex ansion,of the central business district in accordance with the comprehensive plan, to serve as a transition between the intense land uses located in the central business district and adOn= areas: and to enhance the pedestrian orientation of the ,,Jz, central area of thee� This zone is intended to accommodate mixed land uses, but at a lower intensity than permitted in the CB -10 district: The mixture of land uses permitted in this zone requires special consideration of building and site design. To control traffic and provide for the most efficient use of land and parking facilities, special consideration of the amount and location of parking areas is also required. To encourage developments that contain features providing a public benefit, a bonus in floor area ratio or dwelling unit density may be granted. (Ord. 05-4186, i 12-15-2005) Central Business Zone (CB -10): The purpose of the central business zone (CB -10) is to be the high density, compact, pedestrian oriented shopping, office, service and entertainment area in Iowa City. Development and redevelopment in this zone should occur in compact groupings, in order to intensify the density of usable commercial spaces, while increasing the availability of open spaces, plazas or pedestrianways. This zone is intended to accommodate a wide range of retail, service, office and residential uses. Auto oriented uses are not permitted, except as specifically provided. Consolidated off street loading and service facilities should be provided wherever practical with access provided from public service alleys or courts. Private, off street parking is strictly regulated in order to preserve valuable land for active building uses and to maintain a pedestrian oriented streetscape. To support a healthy and vibrant commercial core, development of mixed use buildings with residential uses located above storefront commercial uses is encouraged. (Ord. 08-4326, 12-22-2008) To: Planning & Zoning Commission Item: REZ05-00014: East CB -2 Areas GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Contact Person: Phone: STAFF REPORT Prepared by: Karen Howard, Associate Planner Date: July 15, 2005 City of Iowa City Karen Howard, Associate Planner 356-5251 Requested Action: Rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) to Central Business Support Zone (CB -5), Mixed Use (MU), High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44), and Public (P) Purpose: Location and Existing Land Use: Elimination of CB -2 from City Zoning Ordinance All properties are currently zoned CB -2. See legal description for exact location. The addresses and businesses listed below are intended for information purposes only and are subject to change over time. STREET ADDRESS BUSINESS NAME USE TYPE Proposed Zoning 10 S. Gilbert Street Unitarian Universalist Society religious institution CB -5 422 Iowa Ave. United Action For Youth - United Way general office CB -5 430-490 Iowa Ave. Legal Services Corps of Iowa general office/multi-family residential CB -5 Edward Jones Investments general office/multi-family residential CB -5 500 Iowa Ave. U of I Community Credit Union personal service-oriented retail C13-5 505 Iowa Ave. residential multi -family residential CB -5 507 Iowa Ave. residential multi -family residential CB -5 511 Iowa Ave. Jeffrey Fields Law Office general office CB -5 Wieland/Bri hton Therapy Assoc. medical office CB -5 Eastern Orthodox Christian Chapel religious institution CB -5 Ra hael - Books & Gifts sales -oriented retail CB -5 513 Iowa Ave. residential multi -family residential CB -5 517 Iowa Ave. residential multi -family residential CB -5 523 Iowa Ave. offices qeneral offices CB -5 15 N. Van Buren St. dentist office medical office CB -5 18 S. Van Buren St. residential multi -family residential CB -5 20 S. Van Buren St. Boland -Duarte Counseling Services general office CB -5 22 S. Van Buren I. I New Pioneer Co-op sales -oriented retail CB -5 505.E. Washington St. Houser Clinic- physicians, architects medical office IMU 511 E. Washington St. Donald W. Robinson Builder Inc. general office IMU architects general office IMU 517 E. Washington St. Golden Haug Bed & Breakfast hospitality-oriented retail IMU 520 E. Washington St. Haunted Bookshop sales-oriented retail IMU Pierce King Architect general office MU 521 E. Washington St Red Avocado eating & drinking establishment MU 505 E. College St. Community Mental Health general office MU 506 E. College St. Blank & McCune Real Estate Co._general office MU Photoworld sales-oriented retail MU 507 E. College St. Community Employee Assistance ICommunity Mental Health general office general office MU MU 504 E. Burlington St. L&M Mighty Shop quick vehicle servicing CB-5 510 E. Burlington St. Hoffman-Waters Realtors general office/multi-family residential CB-5 522 E. Burlington St. residential multi-familV residential CB-5 214 S. Van Buren St. Community Mental Health general office CB-5 220 S. Van Buren St. Community Mental Health eneral office CB-5 425-429 E. Burlington St. Hanson's Automotive lauto repair RM-44 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Various multi -family and office uses, R/O zone; Multi -family apartment, RM -44 zone South: Burlington Street, various multi -family residential buildings, RM -44 East: Single- and multi -family residential, RNC -20 and RM -12 zones; College Green Park West: State Historical Society, City Hall, Chauncey Swan Parking Ramp, Robert A. Lee Recreation Center, all Public Comprehensive Plan: This area is located primarily in the Downtown Planning District, with small portions on the east and south edge located in the Central Planning District The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map denotes the area as appropriate for "Mixed Use". File Date: July 14, 2005 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In the proposed Zoning Code, the CB -2 Zone has been deleted in order to reduce the number of zoning classifications within the code and thus simplify the ordinance. If this zone is eliminated areas that are currently zoned CB -2 will need to be rezoned to another appropriate zoning classification. There are three general areas of the City that are zoned CB -2: • North CB -2 Areas: An area north of downtown roughly bounded by Dubuque and Linn Streets on the west, the alley between Jefferson and Market Streets on the south, Gilbert Street on the east, and the alley between Davenport and Bloomington Streets on the north. The block bounded by Dubuque, Market, Linn and Jefferson Streets was recently rezoned from CB -2 to CB -5. (See the attached map labeled "North CB -2 areas.") • East CB -2 Areas: An area east of downtown roughly bounded by Van Buren Street on the west, the alley between Jefferson Street and Iowa Avenue on the north, a line running parallel to and approximately 80 feet to the west of Johnson St, and Burlington Street on the south, but also including property at the southwest comer of the intersection of Burlington Street and Van Buren Street. (See the attached map labeled "East CB -2 areas"). • South CB -2 Areas: Various disconnected, smaller parcels located generally south of Burlington Street and north of Prentiss Street (See attached map labeled "South CB -2 areas"). This rezoning application addresses the second of the three areas listed above, the east CB -2 areas, as illustrated on the attached location map. This area is surrounded by a variety of residential and office uses on three sides and by municipal property with office uses, a recreation center, and civic parking lots to the west. Municipal and University properties (publicly owned land) form a ring around the north and east portions of downtown that partially separates this CB -2 area from the downtown commercial core. The location of this area near downtown and surrounding uses (Mercy Hospital, the University, and medium- and high-density residential housing) produce a high traffic volume for this area, both vehicular and pedestrian. Vehicle traffic is heaviest on Burlington Street and Iowa Avenue. Van Buren Street is less -heavily traveled. ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Plan: This area's proximity to the University and Downtown make it appropriate for any number of commercial and residential uses, hence the designation of `Mixed Use" on the Land Use Map. This area is an older developed part of the City, characterized by small parcels with a mix of land uses. It has good access to City services and infrastructure, but off-street parking is limited. The Plan states that "because Iowa City is a relatively small and compact city, less dense residential development can be found adjacent to the downtown. As the community grows and the downtown prospers, care should be taken in providing proper transitions between the intensity of downtown development and surrounding residential neighborhoods." Proposed Rezoning: There are a number of zoning designations that could replace the CB -2 designation. When considering the best fit for particular properties, staff looked at the surrounding zoning, the existing land uses in the area, and how a particular zoning might affect the surrounding neighborhood. Another important consideration is whether a new zoning designation would create nonconformities and how that might affect future development or redevelopment of property. The attached map entitled East CB -2 Areas, indicates staffs recommended zoning pattern for this area. The reasoning behind the proposed zoning is described below and is illustrated on the attached me Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone: The CB -5 is of This zone is intended to accommodate a higher density of commercial uses than would be allowed in the CB -2 Zone, but less than what is allowed in the CB -10 Zone. The floor area ratio (FAR) allowed in the CB -5 Zone is 3, but may be increased through bonus density provisions up to 7. Buildings can be up to 75 in height. CB -5 would allow for a density and scale similar to that found downtown and on University property. The mixture of land uses permitted in this zone requires special consideration of building and site design. CB -5 zoning is proposed for the CB -2 properties that front on Iowa Avenue and on Van Buren Street between Iowa Avenue and Washington Street. It is also proposed for the smaller parcels shown on the map that are surrounding by publicly -owned property (Unitarian Church property, Mid -American utility substation facility) and for the parcels that front along the north side of Burlington Street (as shown on the attached location map). The mix of larger scale offices, the Community Credit Union, and various institutional uses along Iowa Avenue are of a scale that is compatible with the downtown. As a prominent boulevard leading to downtown Iowa City and the Pentacrest, Iowa Avenue is an important corridor. The higher density uses allowed and the pedestrian -oriented site development standards that are a part of the CB -5 Ir zone would be appropriate for uses along this street. The New Pioneer Cooperative is located on the corner of Washington and Van Buren, but also owns additional property to the north along Iowa and Van Buren Streets. Rezoning this property to CB -5 would allow for future expansion of this use and create some potential for redevelopment within this block. Another potential zoning designation for this area is Mixed Use (MU). However, the bank would become nonconforming due to its size and there would be limited expansion potential for the grocery. store if this area was zoned MU. The CB -5 zone also allows gas stations,.while the MU Zone does not. A CB -5 designation would allow the Mighty Shop on the corner of Burlington and Van Buren to remain a conforming use. Burlington Street is a state highway and an entryway to downtown Iowa City, so higher -intensity uses are appropriate for this corridor. There is the potential for a rather rapid transition between more intense CB -5 land uses in this area and the residential neighborhoods to the east, especially at the mid -block transition points between Van Buren and Johnson Streets: The adjacent RNC -20 Zone along Iowa Avenue allows medium density multi -family uses and many properties have been developed to the maximum density allowed :'Ffhis zone. Of greater concern are the properties located further south along Johnson Street I between Washington Street and College Streets. This area has a mix of single family and multi- family properties that surround College Green Park. Creating a suitable transition between CB -5 zone and the low density multi -family zone (RM -12) may be more problematic. For this reason, staff is recommending that the CB -2 properties located south of Washington Street and north of the alley behind properties that front on the south side of College, be rezoned to Mixed Use (MU) as further described below. Mixed Use (MU): The purpose of the Mixed Use (MU) Zone is to provide a transition from intensive. commercial and employment centers to less intensive residential districts and to stabilize the residential areas located in these transitional areas. In the CB -2 area along Washington Street and College Street quite a number of older residential structures have been converted to successful mix of offices and small retail establishments. These uses provide a gradual transition between the higher intensity of the downtown and the lower density residential neighborhood surrounding College Green Park. The MU zone would acknowledge and keep the current establishments conforming and would allow development and redevelopment of property in the area to occur, but at a lower scale and intensity than would the CB -5 Zone. The Mixed Use Zone allows a wide variety of commercial and residential uses: offices, retail, restaurants, guest houses, theaters, single family, duplexes, multi - fa mily, ultifamily, etc, similar to the mix in the area today. High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44) Zone: The purpose of the High Density Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM -44) is to establish areas for the development of high density, multi -family dwellings and group living quarters. Properties zoned RM -44 should be located with good access to all City services and facilities, including public transportation services. Vehicular access and parking should be designed carefully to ensure efficient traffic and pedestrian circulation on adjacent streets. Due to the high density permitted in this zone, careful attention to site design is expected to ensure that buildings are compatible with surrounding land uses and that a quality living environment will be maintained over time. RM -44 zoning is proposed for the property located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Burlington and Van Buren Streets. East of Gilbert Street, land uses on Burlington Street transition from intense downtown development toward lower -density residential uses. Much of the area near the parcel in question is zoned RM -44, and displays a range of multi -family apartment buildings and converted homes that help transition between the intensity of the downtown area and lower density properties further east. The Gilbert Street corridor is developed with multi -family structures in many places near these parcels, as well. To the north, the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center is a large structure that compares visually with the apartment structure to the south. The subject parcel is currently an auto repair shop, which would become nonconforming regardless of how this property was rezoned. The auto repair establishment could continue to operate as a nonconforming use for as long as the property owner wishes. However, if the property were ever to redevelop, high density residential development would be appropriate and compatible with surrounding uses and zoning. Therefore, staff believes that RM -44 is the appropriate zoning for this parcel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that all the CB -2 -zoned properties located south of Jefferson Street, east of Gilbert Street and north of Court Street be rezoned to Central Business Support (CB -5), Mixed Use (MU), and RM -44, as illustrated on the attached location map. Approved by: '/'1-7 Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development a. a li■ ■ML#PWFAdjo a so 2b 4 MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 21, 2005 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Beth Koppes, Don Anciaux, Bob Brooks, Dean Shannon, Ann Freerks, Terry Smith MEMBERS EXCUSED: Wally Plahutnik STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Mitch Behr, Karen Howard OTHERS PRESENT: Charles Eastham, Nila Houg, Dennis Nowotny, Greg Rockow, Stephen Trefz, John Logan, A. Pagliai, Debby Harapat, Sally Jablonski, Richard Vest RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, (Plahutnik absent) SUB05-00011, a preliminary plat of Resubdivision of North Airport Development, a 40.79 -acre, 11 -lot commercial subdivision located north of the Iowa City Airport along Ruppert Road. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, (Plahutnik absent) SUB05-00016, a final plat of Olde Town Village, a 49 -lot, 33.3 -acre residential subdivision located south of Rochester Avenue, east of Scott Boulevard and north of Lower West Branch Road subject to Staff approval of construction drawings and legal papers prior to Council consideration. Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0 (Smith abstained, Plahutnik absent) VAC05-00006, vacation of alleys in Peninsula Neighborhood First Addition. CALL TO ORDER: Brooks called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING ITEMS: Howard said a number of factors were considered by staff when trying to determine what would be the most appropriate zoning designations for the areas of the city currently zoned CB -2. In the proposed zoning code the CB -2 Zone is proposed to be eliminated which means that any areas currently zoned CB -2 will have to be rezoned to something else appropriate. The factors considered were: 1) the mix of land uses in that exist today in the CB -2 areas; 2) the zones and land uses that surround the CB -2 areas; 3) the intensity of development and mix of land uses allowed in each of the proposed zones; 4) the intensity of development in existence today and the mix and intensity of development that is envisioned in the future for these areas. Staff used the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan for guidance. The intent is to acknowledge the existing land uses in those areas today and try to establish appropriate zoning that would Planning and Zoning Commission July 21, 2005 Page 2 of 18 accommodate the desired uses of property over time in a manner that would be compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods. Howard said there are a number of zoning districts proposed in the rezoning applications; staff has met with a number of the property owners since the initial information meeting that was held several months ago to explain what the various zones mean for future development or redevelopment of property in these areas. Howard gave a brief explanation of each zoning district being considered: Central Business Support Zone (CB -5): allows for the orderly expansion of the downtown Central Business District. Accommodates a mix of commercial mixes at a slightly lower intensity than what would be allowed downtown. The zoning code includes special building and site design standards due to the intensity of development allowed and the intended pedestrian orientation of the zone. Residential uses are only allowed on the upper floors of buildings, commercial uses required to be built on the ground level. CN -1 Zone, Neighborhood Commercial Zone. Intended to promote small scale retail sales and personal service uses in a neighborhood shopping area conveniently located to nearby residential areas. Intended to promote pedestrian -oriented development at an intensity level that is compatible with residential uses. Uses allowed include retail office, restaurants, bars personal service uses, theatres, other small commercial recreational uses, daycares and schools. Mixed Use Zone (MU), which is renamed in the proposed code from Residential Office Zone. This zone has been revised in the proposed code to allow a wider variety of commercial uses and residential uses in a manner that is compatible with surrounding residential neighborhoods. This zone can be used to provide a transition from commercial and employment centers to less intensive residential zones. It is unique in that it allows residential or commercial uses on the ground floor of buildings, so is truly a mixed use zone. With a few exceptions, the uses allowed are similar to the CN -1 Zone. High -Density Multi -Family Zone (RM -44). Intended for high density apartments close to city services and employment centers. Planned High -Density Multi -Family Zone (PRM). Intended for high density apartments in proximity to the downtown and the University. Allows slightly higher level of residential density than the RM -44 zone. i frREZ05-00014, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning om Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone, Mixed Use (MU) Zone, High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44) Zone, and Public (P) for all j property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Jefferson Street and east of Gilbert Street. Smith recused himself stating a potential conflict of interest through his employment. Howard used an overhead map and power point presentation to identify the proposed zones within the CB -2 East area and Staffs rationale for each proposed zoning designation. CB -5 zoned areas would be contiguous to downtown and higher density/intensity public uses, was along major arterial streets, zoning would acknowledge and keep conforming the existing larger office uses such as the bank and allow New Pioneer Coop to expand in the future. Gas stations would be allowed in CB -5 zone. Planning and Zoning Commission July 21, 2005 Page 3 of 18 Mixed Use zoned areas would be contiguous to a lower intensity residential area close to College Green Park. Current uses in this area are lower intensity office, mixed residential and retail. M/U Zone would acknowledge existing uses and keep them conforming. Regarding the property along Burlington Street where Hanson's Auto Body currently has their business. None of the proposed zones would allow auto repair so Hanson's would become a non -conforming use. The proposal is to rezone this property RM -44 similar to the surrounding zoning. Hanson's would be grandfathered in as a legal nonconforming use, and could continue as auto repair indefinitely or could be sold in the future to continue as an auto -body repair shop or to be redeveloped as a use allowed in the RM -44 Zone. If the property were ever re- developed, staff felt RM -44 zoning would be the best fit for that particular property as it is currently surrounded by RM -44 zoning. Howard stated that a number of property owners had discussed and were concerned about the potential change in the allowed density of residential development between the proposed zoning and the current density allowed in the CB -2 Zone. Staff has given consideration to this issue and feel it would be appropriate to increase the residential density from what was currently proposed in the draft Code (1 dwelling unit per 2725 -square feet) to 1 dwelling unit per 1800 - square feet which would be equivalent to what is allowed in the Medium -Density Multi -Family Residential zone. Public discussion was opened. Charles Eastham, President of the Board of the Trustees of the Unitarian Universalist Society of Iowa City, asked if the proposed changes would take effect whether or not the proposed Code revisions were adopted by Council or not? Miklo said Staff had contemplated them based on the CB -2 zone going away. In the event that the CB -2 zone was retained in the new code, Staff thought it would be on case-by-case basis that the Commission and Council would decide if some of the areas would be more appropriately zoned something else even if the CB -2 zone were not eliminated. Howard said these rezonings would be deferred until the draft of the Zoning Code was forwarded to the City Council, so they could be considered by Council at the same time. None of the rezonings would occur before the new Zoning Code was adopted. Eastham asked Staff to outline the effect of changing the zoning designation of the property at 10 South Gilbert Street from CB -2 to CB -5 if the Society were to decide to remodel or to rebuild on their current property. What would be the effect if the Society were to decide to sell their property. Howard said the CB -5 zone was a higher density zone and higher intensity commercial zone than a CB -2 zone. The CB -5 zone allowed religious institutions. The effect for their existing use would basically be the same as it was today. If the Society decided to sell their property the CB -5 zone would allow slightly more development. Factors such as the size of the property might constrain its value more than the zoning would. Miklo said given the size of the property it would be difficulty to achieve the maximum allowed by either the CB -2 or CB -5. Nila Haug, 517 E. Washington Street, owner properties in the 500 block of Washington Street. Houg said she was counting on selling her properties for her retirement after she was finished residing there. She had had a market analysis of the properties done, based on the present zoning and the potential use of the properties they were valued in excess of 2 million dollars. If the density of the units and the number of people allowed per unit was reduced per the proposed new zoning code, it would decrease the value of her properties by more than one-half. Haug said she felt that was unfair and it appeared to her that someone was trying to artificially control the supply and demand of available units in the downtown area for the benefit of a Planning and Zoning Commission July 21, 2005 Page 4 of 18 wealthy developer at the expense of smaller people who would like to develop their properties. She did not like to have the possibilities taken away by the proposed rezoning. Howard said residential density was controlled not only by the densities in the Zoning Code but also by the size of the property and how much room there was for parking. There were a lot of factors that went into how much density could actually be achieved on a piece of property. Haug said she was within 300 -feet of a parking ramp so her parking requirements could be reduced by one-half according to the current zoning code. Miklo said that would be possible only if it were approved by the Board of Adjustment, it was not a given. Dennis Novotny, 511 Washington Street, said he was taken aback by the staff memorandum regarding the allowed residential density in the MU zone. It appeared that Staff was attempting to look at some of the issues with respect to the lower density that they were proposing. He felt the densities should be looked at. Novotny said he felt there was a disjointed discussion in the memorandum between paragraph 3 compared to paragraph 4 with respect to the zones and allowed density in each zone. It would be a drastic reduction in density dropping the CB -2 properties to M/U and from the allowed 5 persons per unit to 3 persons per unit. He felt it should be at least as dense as the eastern half (RNC -20 zone) of Iowa City was, not 3 persons per unit. He felt the proposed graph of allowed densities was a disjointed curve and not a smooth transitionandit needed to be straightened out more. Miklo said the density in the RNC -20 and RM -20 was the same as was being proposed for the Mixed Use zone of multi -family of one unit per 1800 -square feet. For comparison, the RM -12 Zone was one unit per 2,725 -square feet. Greg Rockow, said he drove these streets every day. When he had moved to Iowa City in 1975, downtown Iowa City had been Iowa Avenue on the north, Clinton Avenue on the west, Gilbert Street on the east and Burlington Street on the south. The proposed Zoning Code was grandfathering in certain uses and acknowledging uses, Rockow asked if anyone had ever considered just expanding the downtown all the way to Governor Street from Market Street and letting the people that. had the money develop it. There were already existing properties with bedrooms above the commercial and offices uses there now. Expand the downtown. Rockow said he felt they would again be in the same situation in 3 or 4 years because someone wanted a different zoning or wanted to put commercial in a residential zone, Rockow asked if anyone had given any serious consideration to letting the town grow, to letting the central business district (CBD) grow. There were tons of people who wanted to get into the CBD in some way, shape or form. It was very restricted as to what could be done with a little piece of zoning here and a little piece of different zoning there. He suggested opening it up and letting the people with money come in and buy it up. Rockow said it would not happen overnight, it would be a long process. No one had ever talked about expanding. The discussions had always been about going piece by piece, lot by lot, block by block. Miklo said a number of years ago the Comprehensive Plan had included a study of the downtown and what was appropriate with regard to expanding the central business district. The u area south of Burlington Street was studied as a suitable area for the expansion of the downtown in the future. The areas to the east and north were desi nated for more contro ed rowth because of the historic districts in those areas and the mix of existing residential in those j areas. Planning and Zoning Commission July 21, 2005 Page 5 of 18 Stephen Trefz, representing three properties owners in the area of College and Van Buren Streets; also the Executive Director of the Community Mental Health Center (CMHC), a not -for - profit agency that owns 4 buildings on the corner of College and Van Buren Streets. Trefz read a letter from Mark Holtkamp, co-owner of a property at 506 E. College Street. In his fetter Holtkamp said • He felt the rezoning would decrease the value of their property by limiting any possible redevelopment due to allowable density of the new code designation. • He did not understand the criteria used to determine which properties were selected to be "up zoned" to CB -5 instead of Mixed Use. • He requested the Commission to keep the CB -2 zone and consider rezoning areas further from downtown Mixed Use. • Alternatively, he requested to have their property rezoned to CB -5. Trefz also read a letter he had written. Main points of his letter included: • the CMHC opposed the rezoning as a property owner for a number of reasons • the CMHC was confused by the implementation of the new rezoning • felt they would be book -ended by properties proposed to be rezoned to CB -5 • the CMHC preferred to keep their properties zoned as CB -2, but if the change was to be made, to have all the properties along Van Buren rezoned to CB -5 zone Public discussion was closed. Motion: Anciaux made a motion to defer REZ05-00014, an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone, Mixed Use (MU) Zone, High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44) Zone, and Public (P) for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Jefferson Street and east of Gilbert Street. Koppes seconded the motion. Anciaux said he thought the citizens who had spoken were voicing their preference to be rezoned to CB -5. He requested Staff to provide some reasons why areas had been designated for rezoning to M/U instead of CB -5. Freerks said she felt it was pretty complicated. They were looking at transition, the neighbors all the way down the block had to be looked at as well as the historic properties which sometimes complicated matters in terms of redevelopment. She felt the Commission needed to look carefully at the rezonings. She agreed it was in pieces and parts, but did not feel that the rezoning could be done on a big scale. She didn't feel rezoning everything to CB -5 would fit with the Comprehensive Plan and what the Commission had in mind for the community. The Community had looked at the Comprehensive Plan carefully in creating it the current zoning. Brooks said he felt there had been some good input and rather broad statements. He was troubled by Holtcamp's statement regarding the number of allowed occupants would be decreased and therefore rental permits would become non-compliant after passing of the proposed Code. Howard said in the proposed zoning code, all existing rental permit occupancies would be grandfathered; the occupancy would be allowed that was on the rental permit now; no existing rental units would be affected by the decrease in the allowed occupancy in the new code. Brooks said he'd like to see the Commission take all the comments and put forth good detailed answers so there would be a good clear understanding of what was going on and why it was being proposed. Planning and Zoning Commission July 21, 2005 Page 6 of 18 Shannon said he'd like the see the Commission work through the proposed rezoning(s) because he did not want to see the property owners lose their equity in their property. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. REZ05-00015, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone, Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) Zone and Mixed Use (MU) Zone for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Davenport Street and north of Jefferson Street. Howard used an overhead map and power point presentation to identify the proposed zones within the North CB -2 area referred to in the Comprehensive Plan as the North Market Place and Staffs,rationale for each proposed zoning designation. This area is a fairly well established small commercial area that contained a variety of restaurants, small retail shops, gift and antique shops, offices, a City public parking lot, and grocery store. Staff had proposed the CN -1 zoning because the area was currently functioning as a successful neighborhood commercial area. The CN -1 zone would allow all uses that were currently in existence to remain as conforming uses and would allow properties to redevelop in the future and change uses over time to a variety of commercial. The CN -1 zone would also allow residential above commercial uses. Howard again referred to the memo regarding allowed residential density and stated that staff feels it would be appropriate to change the allowed density in the proposed Zoning Code back to 1 unit per 1800 -square feet in the CN- 1Zone. Howard stated that there has been some consternation on the part of property- owners when they compared the maximum allowed intensity in the CB -2 Zone, with its 100 -foot height limit and maximum residential density of 1 dwelling unit per 875 square feet, to the proposed - rezoning to CN -1 or MU. She pointed out that these areas have been zoned CB -2 for many, many years. The constraining factor in many areas close to downtown was not necessarily the zoning but the nature of the properties themselves. The properties were platted and developed at a time before there were parking requirements in the Code, very few of the properties had any off-street parking, so they were grandfathered in at their current intensity of commercial use without any off-street parking provided. However, if someone were to tear down a building in the current CB -2 area, they would be required to put in the parking that was required. It would be the same parking that was required in all the commercial areas except the downtown area because the City provided the majority of short-term parking downtown. New buildings would have to have commercial on the ground floor with residential above with parking for both the commercial and residential uses. In other words the amount of parking required prevents a property owner from achieving the maximum density allowed in the CB -2 Zone. There are no 100 -foot tall buildings in the CB -2 Zone even though the zoning allows it. The scale of the existing development, size of the buildings, and the mix of uses more closely matches what is allowed in the CN -1 Zone. The Mixed Use zone is similar to the CN -1 zoning in that it allowed similar types of uses. In addition, the M/U zone allows residential uses on the ground floor of buildings. The M/U zone would make the existing auto repair / gasoline station nonconforming, but it would be allowed to continue legally for as long as the property owner wished to operate the business. Smith asked if the auto repair / gasoline station was conforming under the current CB -2 zoning. Howard said she was not sure with regard to all the requirements that the City had for gasoline stations and fire codes, etc. because it had been developed so long ago. If the current owner �� MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 4, 2005 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beth Koppes, Terry Smith, Bob Brooks, Dean Shannon, Ann Freerks MEMBERS EXCUSED: Wally Plahutnik, Don Anciaux STAFF PRESENT: Mitch Behr, Karen Howard, Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: John Kammermeyer, A. Pagliai, Dennis Nowotny, Mark Holtcamp, Dan Black, Jason Bradly, Nila Houg, Suzanne Bradly, Peter Yolte, Jill Smith, Cecile Kuenzli, Bill Gilpin, Jeff Salisbury, Charlotte Walker RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, (Anciaux and Plahutnik absent) SUB05-00017, a final plat for Brookwood Pointe First Addition, a 23 -lot, approximately 29.26 -acre residential development located on South Sycamore Street, subject to staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to City Council consideration. CALL TO ORDER: Brooks called the meeting to order at 7:34 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING ITEMS: Brooks said the eight rezoning items on the agenda had been discussed at the previous Commission meeting and were being brought back for further discussion and public input. None of the rezoning items would be voted on at this meeting. At the 8/18/05 meeting they would be voted on. The proposed Zoning Code re -write would also be voted on at that meeting. Items REZ05-00014, REZ05-00015 and REZO5-00016 were similar in that they dealt with rezoning requests that were necessary because of the pending Zoning Code. In the interest of time they would be presented together and public comment received as it might be very similar between the three areas. REZ05-00014, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone, Mixed Use (MU) Zone, High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44) Zone, and Public (P) for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Jefferson Street and east of Gilbert Street. REZOS-00015, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone, Neighborhood Commercial (CN- B) Zone and Mixed Use (MU) Zone for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Davenport Street and north of Jefferson Street. REZ05-00016, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone and Planned High Density Multi - Family Residential (PRM) Zone for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Burlington Street and west of Linn Street. Howard said since most of the audience members in attendance had also been at the previous Commission meeting she would not re -present the entire staff report but would instead address the questions that had arisen at the previous hearing from the public and from the Commission. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 4, 2005 Page 2 1) How did the Nlixed Use (MU) zone compare with the Neighborhood Commercial zone with regard to the land uses and the scale of development that would be allowed? Staff had received a letter signed by a number of property owners along Bloomington Street indicating their preference for CN -1 zoning over MU zoning. CN -1 zoning was intended to be more retail oriented; it allowed a few extra uses that the MU zone did not; it would allow gas stations so Mr. Logan's gas station would remain a conforming use if zoned CN -1. The MU zone would allow both residential and commercial uses. Residential would be allowed on the first floor of any building so a totally residential multi -family building would be an allowed use versus in any of the other commercial zones residential could only be on the upper floors of a building and a commercial use(s) had to be on the first floor. With respect to scale, both zones had similar standards with regard to how tall a building could be; the bulk requirements were very similar. 2) Would CN -1 zoning be appropriate in the area along Bloomington Street rather than the MU zoning? Staff would support either a MU zoning or CN -1 zoning in this area. It was felt that the scale would be appropriate to the area surrounding it. The lower density commercial office zone and the neighborhood to the north were similar uses. If a large majority of the neighborhood property owners preferred the CNA zoning versus the MU zoning, either designation in Staffs view would be appropriate. 3) Limit on the size of restaurants in the MU zone and would it affect existing restaurants and how large they could be. Staff had checked the occupancy loads for all restaurants in the North Market Place area. All occupancy loads were less than what would be allowed in the CNA zone. Pagliais had the largest occupancy load at 113 persons, most other restaurants had an occupancy load of less than 50. With restaurants, occupancy was determined by the number of res trooms they had, number of exits, size of seating area, etc. 4) Would the change from CB -2 to MU or CN -1 affect the scale of development that could be achieved on a property? Staff had done a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) analysis of the density that could be achieved. They had considered the parking requirements, the tree requirements and things that would take.up space on the lot and had tried to maximize the amount of parking that could be achieved. Since the Pagliais' current parking lot was one of the larger undeveloped lots in the area, Staff had used it as a test case. Staff had . laid out the maximum parking lot including underground parking and compared the result. A building that was three stories tall could be built in any of the three zones, it would have 8700 square feet of ground floor commercial and two floors of residential above. It would need underground parking to meet the required amount of parking. However, under CB -2 zoning one more apartment could be achieved while still meeting the required amount of parking. With the CB -2 zoning, a taller building could be built and minimize the commercial on the ground floor. (Commercial required.more parking per square foot, restaurants required the most parking at one parking space for every 150 -square feet.) The taller building did not take into account the cost to build a structure of that height, generally buildings over 3 -floors in height were more expensive to build. The taller- building would be achievable if the market ever got to the point where the cost of constructing a taller building with underground parking justified the cost in that particular area of town. Parking requirements were determined by the number of bedrooms. In order to maximize the number of apartments and the number of people who could live in the taller building, building three bedroom apartments would be necessary. Staff felt the CB -5 zoning would be appropriate only if the City was at a point where they wanted to extend the downtown north to that part of town and provide public parking such as was provided in the current downtown area. Staff felt that the taller building would not be a pedestrian friendly area if the design were repeated all the way down the street. Public discussion was opened. John Kammermeyer, 404 E. Bloomington Street, said his property was not involved directly in the areas being discussed but felt strongly enough to make comments. He felt a major problem with the proposed zoning ordinance was the significant downzoning conflicts it created here and there. There were two types of downzoning, where the zone was being changed to a less intensive usage being allowed. There Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 4, 2005 Page 3 was a great deal of functional downzoning potential where the name of the zone was not changed but rules and regulations were. For instance, reducing density limits in a zone so less commercial or residential units or building square footage would be allowed, or density or number of permitted renters in a given building was reduced. Secondly, reducing the height of buildings allowed in a given zone. Thirdly, further restricting parking lots or buildings or where they could be placed on a lot. Finally actually eliminating a usage or making it non -conforming in a zone where it was presently conforming. Kammermeyer said either type of downzoning took away property rights that had been in existence for decades. It also reduced the property value for the owner who had been paying property taxes on the higher value for the property for decades. Either type of downzoning potentially adversely impacted the economics and retirement plans of the property owner, the result could be the same if their IRA or 401 K were suddenly reduced. The new proposed Zoning Ordinance added 200 to 250 new pages to the Ordinance, referred to design standards over 500 times and further restricted what property owners could do with their property. Less regulation not more bureaucracy was needed. Kammermeyer said most citizens he knew privately around town and had talked to had no real good idea of what the new regulations were being proposed. In his opinion the City government should be looking out for and paying attention to the needs and wishes of the majority of the citizens. As an overview, he did not feel the proposed Zoning Ordinance did that. Kammermeyer said the new Zoning Ordinance potentially created economic injustice for citizens; was too complex and detailed and tried to dictate aesthetics; needed to be greatly pared down and streamlined; and every effort made to not downzone any citizen's property either directly or functionally. He also wished to bring to attention the injustice that was potentially being imposed on several long standing business people with properties near his office in the CB -2 business zone. He did not see any good reason for abolishing the CB -2 zone which had been in place for at least 25 years. If it was to be eliminated none of the existing old areas should be downzoned to create financial hardship for the property owners. Mr. Pagliai owned % block of undeveloped land currently in the CB -2 zone, if it were rezoned to CN -1 then the density regulation would be reduced and the property value reduced by up to 1/3. The MU zoning should not even be considered. He felt the potential reduction was unfair and unjust and would treat a long standing local businessman in a shabby manner. The gas station and garage John Logan had purchased last year had been a conforming use for approximately 50 years and had been an immense help for people on the north side, for Kammermeyer's patients and staff, and the patients at Mercy Hospital and their families, friends and visitors. The original proposed MU zoning would make Russ' gas station and garage non -conforming while the Handi-Mart just three blocks away would be upzoned to CB -5. Again this would hurt a local businessman. Economically it was unfair and unjust. Kammermeyer said '/4 of the CB -2 zone along Market and Linn Streets was proposed to be upzoned to CB -5. If that was done, he felt very strongly the only fair and just thing to be done for the local business men involved would be to upzone the entire CB -2 zone to CB -5 or leave the CB -2 zone as it was. A. Pagliai, asked if he built a new building would the proposed MU zoning limit his restaurant seating capacity to 125 people. Howard said that was correct, in a MU or CN -1 zone the occupancy load for a restaurant was 125 people. When Staff had done the FAR analysis they had included a larger restaurant (3,000 -square foot) on the first floor which required the most parking. The .larger the restaurant the more parking that was required and the fewer apartments that could be built above. Howard said it would depend on which use he wished to maximize, parking would have to be distributed amongst the uses. Restaurants and commercial required more parking than residential. Smith asked what was the current occupancy limit on restaurants in the CB -2 zone. Howard said there was no occupancy limit, it was controlled by how much parking could be provided on the lot. Dennis Nowotny, 517 E. Washington, said he basically fully agreed with Kammermeyer's arguments. The CB -2 area seemed as if it was being chopped up into six different pieces, he didn't feel that was simplifying. With respect to the memorandum dated 7/28/05 regarding the abutting issue, he didn't feel there was a problem with CB -5 abutting RM -12 or RNC -12. Staff had apparently said that CB -5 abutting RNC -12 on Bloomington Street was ok. He had property on Bloomington Street and agreed it would be ok. Nowotny said he felt there were no issues/problems with respect to differing zones abutting each other. He and his wife owned property at 517 E. Washington Street, which was literally 100 feet closer to Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 4, 2005 Page 4 the Chauncey Swan parking ramp than any other commercial entity that was uptown, yet they were being kept away from the parking. A barrier was being established and he didn't understand why they were being separated from the parking ramp. Mark Holtcamp, 506 E. College Street, said he agreed with everything that had been said so far regarding any downzoning. His company felt the same way, everyone should be CB -5 across the board instead' of upzoning some spots and downzoning others. There was plenty of parking in the parking ramp that was not being used for the areas being rezoned. If the area would be rezoned to CB -5 he felt the city would see some development and use would be gotten out of Chauncey Swan parking ramp. He owned a residential property that was next to a proposed CB -5 upzoning. He had no problem with that change and felt the abutting issue was non-existent. Holtcamp said he felt more development could be spurred by rezoning all the area to CB -5. Dan Black, Iowa State Bank, representing AMC Properties located at 127 N. Gilbert and 323 — 327 Market Street. Black said he'd attended the previous Commission meeting but had been hesitant to speak because he found it a confusing type of issue. They had pulled information from the internet on the proposed Zoning Code which made many references to other parts of the Code or other articles or sub - articles and it was easy to miss something. Black said the proposed Code was pretty confusing and he didn't know if it was really simplifying. anything at all. Black said if they had their druthers they'd prefer to remain zoned CB -2 or go to the CB -5, which was adjacent to their property. In the memorandums, it seemed part of the reason for rezoning from CB -2 to CN -1 was because no development had occurred in that area in years, perhaps argued due to parking requirements. Black said for the area he represented, the reason there had been no development was due to the age of the owners, however they were in a transition period from older owners to youngef owners. He felt the younger owners would have a much larger appetite for redevelopment than the older owners. It was important to keep their options open and let economics determine the. development of that ground as opposed to zoning. If the economics of the development and the economics of an owner dictated that they could go underground with parking and do that type of development then they should have the opportunity to do so. Black said he hoped they were looking and thinking far enough ahead to get to see some of the changes, to grow the community and to grow the tax base. He hoped as a community they were looking at this with the opportunities of redevelopment in mind. If they didn't have the availability or the options to do some of these types of things it would obviously never happen. What would drive some of the commercial development and redevelopment would be the density of the apartments 'and their availability as the commercial development would not be able to carry it alone. A commercial only building would not work very well unless the economics of it could be supported with some of the apartments above it. Jason Bradley, 505 E. Washington, said he represented the young property owners. He agreed with the comments made by the previous speakers. He had spoken with his fellow property owners and their general consensus had been to leave the CB -2 zoning as it was or upzone everything to CB -5. The term simplification kept coming up but he didn't see the proposed changes as simplifying at all. They should be considering only CB -2 or CB -5 zoning. Nila Houg, 517 E. Washington, said she agreed with the comments of all the previous speakers and wished to reiterate the comments she'd made at the previous Commission meeting. Staff had mentioned several times at the previous meeting regarding the necessity of parking and if they were going to redevelop their properties then they probably would not be able to provide the required parking due to the lot sizes. It had also been mentioned by Staff that if it were possible why had the properties not been redeveloped yet. Houg said they had not been able to redevelop their properties before now. She had worked a lot, they had all worked in, lived in, planned including parking requirements and built up equity in their properties, not to make a fast buck but to enhance their investments. Now that they had the inherent equity the City employees wanted to take it away from them. The young people who were purchasing the properties were doing so for the purpose of going on and being able to do something with their properties. If that was taken away by the downzoning, by the size requirements and the number of people allowed in the units it would ruin their retirements. Houg said as far as she knew all the neighbors in the affected areas were against the downzoning. They had maintained their properties in an excellent manner, they had been good neighbors and an asset to the community and they deserved to be treated fairly. They were asking the Commission to vote against the downzoning. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 4, 2005 Page 5 Kammermeyer, said he had a copy of the petition that had been submitted to Staff and wished to reiterate that the property owners had stated several times in the petition that their preference if rezoned was to be rezoned to CB -5. He also wanted to make the point that the proposed Zoning Ordinance was incredibly complicated and did not simplify anything at all. He had had a lawyer review the document who'd given his opinion that it would be an extremely good legal document because it was very involved and intricate. For the average citizen the new draft would be very difficult to figure out what they could and could not do with their property. Howard said Mr. Black had made some good points, it was confusing and hard to determine with any zoning designation what was allowed on your property in any city. When a person wished to redevelop, all requirements on a piece of property needed to be assessed. With respect to the issue of parking, all most all the properties currently built in 'this' area were non -conforming because they did not have any parking at all. The properties that were there now, including the property mentioned by Black, were non- conforming. If the existing building(s) were tom down it would be questionable whether they could even achieve the size of the building they had today. If the building(s) was torn down and the property redeveloped then the parking requirements would kick in. If persons kept their same property and continued the same use, the parking requirements gave ghost parking which encouraged persons to continue to use existing resources and existing building. For example, if Pagliais' restaurant were torn down what could probably be achieved on that lot would be a smaller restaurant. Because of the lot size, with a CB -2, CN -1 or MU zoning it made no difference for the potential for redevelopment because of the requirements for cars that the City currently had that hadn't been in existence when the buildings had originally been built. Hoag said Howard had just made an excellent argument for upzoning to CB -5, there were no parking requirements. In her particular situation, they were within 100 feet of the parking ramp. She didn't feel that it was being taken into consideration that if there were contiguous properties side by side, they would not be torn down and redeveloped one -by -one. The property owner would tear down all the existing structures and redevelop the whole thing. The parking requirements would change from a simple lot, if upzoned to CB -5 then parking didn't have to be worried about. Freerks said parking was not free, someone had to pay for it. The Chauncey Swan parking lot was almost full in terms of permits, she thought some had been transferred to the new ramp. She requested Staff to provide further information regarding the number of available spaces in the City's ramps. She encouraged property owners not just to consider themselves but to consider their neighbors as well. Bradley said he'd spoken with Chris O'Brien who'd said the Chauncey Swan parking lot was "grossly underutilized." He was not sure who O'Brien was or what his duties were but had been directed to O'Brien when he'd been looking for more parking for use with his building. Howard said Freerks' point regarding if all the properties were redeveloped would the Chauncey Swan Parking Ramp be able to provide parking for all the properties was a question that needed further investigation. For the area new Market Street there were no public parking lots in the area other than the 52 public spaces on the north side of Market Street. Howard said in the future if it got to the point where the market was there for a CB -5 level of development and the City could provide a public parking ramp such as was provided downtown, it would be appropriate to upzone these areas to CB -5. The concern regarding the north side was that the parking was considerably congested due to all the uses by the neighborhoods. Suzanne Bradley, 505 E. Washington, asked if any weight was given to the fact that the areas being discussed were highly pedestrian bicyclist friendly Freerks said when considering appropriate zoning, the Commission looked at those issues and more. Ideally pedestrian friendly was not tall buildings with huge parking lots going down an entire street. Howard said a CB -5 zone did not require parking for commercial space but it did require parking for apartments/residential. Miklo said in the CB -5 zone south of downtown, developers paid a fee when ever they built which went toward building public parking so that there would be public parking available. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 4, 2005 Page 6 Hoag said there was a big flat parking lot attached to the City Hall that could accommodate building a parking garage. Public discussion was closed. Freerks requested Staff to provide a clarification regarding parking availability around town in the public ramps. Smith said his view was if property owners came to Staff and the Commission and were looking to develop their property and develop it in a manner for a business that would require a rezoning, they would consider the rezoning request based on all the criteria that the Commission normally did. As long as they were able to provide for all the specific criteria, the Commission would strongly consider the request. He was seeing a lot of existing property owners at this meeting who were lobbying for that and for a rezoning to CB -5 or for no zoning change. He felt strongly with their convictions. If what was driving the change from CB -2 was simplification of the Code or elimination from the Code, he was not sure they were gaining significant value and should look at inclusion within the Code. If they wished to simplify the Code perhaps there were other areas that could be simplified. He would support maintaining the CB -2 or upgrading to CB -5. Shannon said he had been listening for direction at the meeting and had heard some. He would like to hear something positive about how the whole area could be made CB=5 rather than just the negatives or leave it zoned CB -2. Freerks said she was not interested in CB -5 because of the parking issues. She was trying to think of the type of community they were trying to build and what they wanted to have there. Right now t (� working pn trying timet the downtown extended south of Burlington Street a ToroTlots there had 1 edevelopment_potential. She didn't see CB -5 covering the whole area being discussed tonight, she didn't feel it was appropriate to have CB -5 next to the neighborhood areas. Freerks said she would need to consider the requested parking information before she could consider if CN -1 or staying at CB -2 would be appropriate. Brooks said he pretty much agreed with Freerks' comments. He was not in favor of CB -5 but felt they needed to look at CB -2 and possibly consider leaving it as a zone. Clarification of the parking issues was also needed as the public and the Commission had been given mixed information regarding what was available and what was not. Motion: Shannon made a motion to defer REZ05-00014, an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (GB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone, Mixed Use (MU) Zone, High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44) Zone, and Public (P) for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Jefferson Street and east of Gilbert Street and defer REZ05-00015, an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone, Neighborhood Commercial (CN - 1) Zone and Mixed Use (MU) Zone for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Davenport Street and north of Jefferson Street. and defer REZ05-00016, an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone and Planned High Density Multi - Family Residential (PRM) Zone for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Burlington Street and west of Linn Street. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. REZO5-00010, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Medium Density Single -Family (RS -8) to Planned Development Housing Overlay — Medium Density Single -Family (OPDH-8) for property located on Longfellow Place within the Longfellow Manor Subdivision. Miklo said some of the reasons this rezoning was being proposed was because the proposed Zoning Ordinance would remove the possibility of duplexes being built on interior lots which were not at the intersection of two streets in the RS -8 zone. Duplexes would still be allowed on corner lots, any existing Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 9 REZONING ITEMS: REZ05-00014, consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) Zone, Mixed Use (MU) Zone, High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44) Zone, and Public (P) for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Jefferson Street and east of Gilbert Street. Motion: Koppes made a motion to approve REZ05-00014, as depicted on the map. Plahutnik seconded the motion. Freerks said right now she felt these were the best zones for these areas for the future as she saw it. The Commission was not political, she was looking at it in terms of planning and what she saw as being the best thing for the city in those areas. In the future there could be the possibility that some of those areas could be rezoned, when and what that might be she was not sure. She felt very comfortable with the zones, as currently proposed and what the future held for them. She would support the motion. Plahutnik said currently this area was almost self -zoned, there was not a single building that had been built to the maximum limits of CB -2. The area itself had kind of accepted and built up at lower densities and lower heights than CB -2 allowed. If at some point in the future it became economically viable to build to the densities of CB -5, then there would be the time for rezoning. He would vote in favor of the motion. Freerks said she felt this was a wonderful area, it did well as it was. Change was necessary sometimes, but it was a really beautiful, vibrant part of Iowa City as it was right now too. Shannon said it was a nice area. He was having a hard time following why the Commission felt the need to change something that seemed to be doing quite well for the case of simplification. If it was a good area, why did the Commission wish to tweak it. Brooks said he supported the proposed changes. He'd been convinced that because of the lot sizes and the requirements of CB -2 zone, the vision that some people had for development would never be reality, -1' because there just wasn't the space for parking and the other amenities that were required. What the Commission was proposing as a transition zone between areas to the East and the downtown was reasonable. He would vote to support the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Shannon voting in the negative.) REZO5-00015, consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) ,Zone, Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) Zone and Mixed Use (MU) Zone for all property currently zoned CB -2 located south of Davenport Street and north of Jefferson Street. Howard said at the Commission's last meeting, the Commission had requested a different map indicating that the northern portion along Bloomington Street be included with the CN -1 designation. The newly drawn map had been distributed to the public and to the Commissioners at this meeting. Plahutnik recused himself citing a possible conflict of interest due to his employer owning property in this area. Motion: Koppes made a motion to approve REZO5-00015 as depicted in the 'new' map distributed 8/18/05 and to zone the area to the North as CN -1 rather than MU. Freerks seconded the motion. Motion withdrawn by Koppes, second withdrawn by Freerks. Motion: Koppes made a motion to defer the vote on REZO5-00015 to the 9/1/05 meeting. The motion to defer passed on a vote of 4-0. Behr said for the public's information, at the 911/05 meeting there would be no additional public discussion on REZ05-00015, it would just be for consideration before the Commission. STAFF REPORT To: Planning & Zoning Commission Prepared by: Sunil Terdalkar Item: REZ06-00015 Date: July 20, 2006 314 & 328 Clinton Street GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Hieronymus Square Associates 328 South Clinton Street Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 338-1294 Contact Person: Kevin Digmann 711 S. Gilbert Street Iowa City, IA 52740 Phone: (319) 631-0548 Requested Action: Rezoning from CB -5 to CB -10 Purpose: Development of a mixed-use residential/commercial building Location: Clinton Street south of Burlington Street Size: Approximately 1.12 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Commercial and Surface Parking — CB -5 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Undeveloped, Surface Parking — CB -10 South: Undeveloped, Commercial — CB -5 East: Public/Commercial — P/CB-5 West: Commercial — CB -5 Comprehensive Plan: General Commercial — Near Southside Plan Neighborhood Open Space District N/A File Date: June 16, 2006 45 Day Limitation Period: August 1, 2006 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicant, Hieronymus Square Associates, is requesting approval for rezoning a 1.12 -acre property from Central Business Support Zone (CB -5) to Central Business Zone (CB -10) zone. The property is located east of Clinton Street, south of Burlington Street. The area was zoned CB -2 between 1983 and 1992. It was rezoned to CB -5 in 1992 to implement the Near Southside Redevelopment Plan. ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Plan: In 1992 the City adopted the Near Southside Neighborhood Redevelopment Pian (NS Plan) as a guide for the redevelopment of the area generally bounded by Burlington Street on the north, Gilbert Street on the east, Madison Street on the west and the Iowa Interstate Railway on the south (see attached Near Southside Map). The objective of the NS Plan is to foster redevelopment of the Near Southside while maintaining an economically healthy core in the downtown. To achieve this objective the NS Plan identifies the area between Court Street and Burlington Street as suitable for office and commercial development complemented with upper story residential uses. The NS Plan encourages higher -density residential development in the area south of Court Street. The plan to, expand downtow_ n to the s_outt also_ I I supports the policy of preserving the historic neighborhoods to the north and east of the central_ .�� ', business district by providing a location for growth away from thPSR, r,A��hti�"h���� The plan further identifies the need for addressing the issues of parking, open space, pedestrian accessibility, traffic circulation, historic preservation and amenities. Convenient pedestrian accessibility has been crucial to the success and vitality of downtown. One of the goals of the redevelopment plan is to protect and enhance the shopping convenience and pedestrian � I t ....m��,p1_ •d-:,:..�toni„ Street PI GO.A.:._. SO - creating adnate linkage between the a downtown and the area south „of Burlington Street is also critical, To achieve this goal the plan recommends attention to various aspects of development "Including public improvements in the streetscape and careful attention to building and site design to avoid the creation of "dead spaces" in the streetscape. The City began to implement the NS Plan by adopting the CB -5 zone and applying it to the area generally between Court and Burlington Street in 1992. The relationship between the CB -10 zone north of Burlington Street and the CB -5 zone south of Burlington Street was intended to create a hierarchy of taller buildings and greater intensity of development in the downtown core to the north with a step down in height and intensity to the south. The CB -10 zone allows a floor area ratio (FAR) of 10 while the CB -5 zone has a floor area ratio of 3 with the potential FAR of up to 7 if the developer provides amenities and public benefits as part of the project. The CB -10 zone itself does not have a maximum height limit; however, the Airport Overlay Zone results in a height limit of approximately 12 to 14 stories depending on the ground elevation of the property. The CB -5 zone has a height limit of 75 feet or approximately 6 stories. The CB -10 does not require parking for either commercial or residential development, while the CB -5 zone requires parking spaces for residential development. Concerns about parking are discussed in more detail below. The proposed CB -10 zone conflicts with the current Near Southside policy of providing a step down in height and intensity of development. Staff has identified issues and questions that should be considered if this substantial change in policy and zoning is to be approved as outlined below: Are there public interest considerations that would support a change in policy and therefore a change in zoning? Although the current CB -10 zone allows an FAR of 10 - in reality most of the downtown properties are developed with a floor area ratio of 2 (that is, a 2 story building covering most of a property). There are a few exceptions including the Iowa State Bank . Building and the Sheraton Hotel, which are built to an FAR of approximately 5, and the Jefferson Building and the Vogel House, which have an FAR of about 6. The recently constructed Plaza Towers has an FAR of approximately 4.75. Since its construction some citizens have raised concerns about large areas of downtown being redeveloped at such intensity, even though it is far less than allowed by the current CB -10 zoning. The downtown core itself does contain historic buildings and buildings that display the storefront features necessary for a successful and vibrant center. This raises a policy question as to whether redevelopment of p 6&-ff R-W-V-ZM--0 15 Mmmrymu"varslon 2.d.c J much of the downtown to the height and intensity allowed by the current CB -10 zone would be _ appropriate. In contrast to the downtown core the current CB -5 area south of Burlington Street, as well as the north side of Burlington Street which is already zoned CB -10, contain few buildings that have the characteristics envisioned for the downtown. In light of these conditions would it be appropriate to i encourage a greater intensity of redevelopment�placing CB -10 zoning south_ of Burlington Streetand thus take redevelopment pressure off of the downtown core where the desirable buildings and streetscape traits are already in place? Should consideration being given toY, reducing the allowed FAR and/or placing a maximum building height in the downtown core? Another consideration regarding rezoning areas from CB -5 to CB -10 would be the potential benefit of diversifying the mix of housing stock downtown. The residential development that has occurred in the CB -5 zone has been in 3 to 4 story buildings and appears to be marketed primarily as student housing. The success of Plaza Towers demonstrates that there is a market for high-rise residential development downtown. Development of mixed-use buildings with a variety of residential sizes including larger condominiums, as proposed by the application, would help to further diversify the housing stock and land uses in downtown. This would help support the commercial development envisioned for the downtown and the Near Southside by the Comprehensive Plan. The current CB -5 zone south of Burlington Street would allow mixed use buildings but the height limit prevents buildings taller than 6 stories and thus buildings with the views desired for the high-rise condominium market. Rezoning areas to CB -10 may encourage this type of housing or specific plans demonstrating that the applicant will build the desired type of mixed use buildings could be required as a condition of rezoning If a change in policy is supported by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, which areas should be considered for rezoning to CB -10? The City will be receiving additional requests to rezone areas south of Burlington Street to CB -10. As discussed above the original CB -5 zone was intended to encourage the expansion of downtown between Burlington and Court Street from Gilbert Street west to include the properties on the west side of Clinton Street. The CB -5 zone also extends south along the west side of Gilbert Street (see attached Near Southside map). If the CB -10 zone is expanded there is some logic to limiting it to the area north of Court Street and not extending it south along Gilbert Street. The area between the west side of Clinton Street and Gilbert Street north of Court Street is immediately adjacent to downtown. The City is planning median improvements to Burlington Street that will help direct pedestrian traffic and improve the aesthetics of the corridor. This will help to bridge the two sides of Burlington Street and provide a logic extension of downtown. Are there conditions that should be applied to any areas rezoned to CB -10 to address the parking and urban design issues identified in the NS Plan? The Near Southside Plan also discusses the need for a proper balance of parking and dwelling unit density. To address parking issues the City adopted the Near Southside Parking Facility District. Within the CB -5 zone development is required to pay a fee for 75% of the required parking spaces for residential units. The fee is to be used to support the creation of public parking facilities. Currently the fee is $6,119 per parking space and represents less than 1/3 the cost of building a structured parking space. Because the CB -10 zone requires no residential parking, the fee would not normally apply to areas rezoned to CB -10. To assure adequate parking is provided and to treat development equitably with CB -5 properties that have paid or will pay the fee, staff recommends that as a condition of rezoning, any CB -5 properties located south of Burlington Street that are changed to CB -10, be required to pay the parking impact fee as if they were in the CB -5 zone. To provide further detail to guide implementation of the NS Plan the City adopted the Near Southside Design Plan in 1995. The Design Plan's vision for the Downtown Extension -area states: "Redevelopment efforts architecturally mirror the existing Downtown area. New structures pcdlStaH ReportsVez06-00015 hieronymus version 2.doc S in this district and along Burlington Street reflect the scale, proportion, fagade repetition, setbacks, materials, roof lines, color, signage, awnings, and equipment screening elements of the adjacent Downtown.... This character can be further enhanced through implementation of design guidelines and review process to address each of these design elements within the Downtown Extension." To implement this goal the zoning code requires Site Development Standards for the CB -5 and CB -10 zones. Particular attention is focused on street -level building facades in order to prevent fortress -like facades, monotonous streetscapes, and to enhance public safety by providing opportunities for surveillance of the street from the interior of buildings. The code also requires a 10 -foot setback from the right-of-way line for the first story of buildings that abut Burlington Street. Building columns supporting upper stories may be located within this 10 -foot setback, provided that an adequate pedestrian passageway is maintained. This is to provide more space for pedestrian movement, and the placement of amenities within and adjacent to the right-of-way to provide a buffer between vehicular traffic and pedestrians along Burlington Street. The applicant has submitted a concept plan showing how they plan to comply with the requirements of the code. The Commission should consider whether the proposed design meets the City's vision: whether it is acceptable as presented or whether the Commission would like to recommend revisions. Traffic Implications: Burlington Street, an arterial street, is one of the highest volume streets in Iowa City. Based on the arterial street access control policy, this property will have restricted access on Burlington Street. The NS Plan recommends implementation of a traffic circulation pattern and control measures that emphasize pedestrian movement—accessibility and safety— over automobiles. These measures include maintaining two-lane streets with minimum lane widths, on -street parking, and maintaining minimum curb -radii. The plan recognizes that maintaining traffic -carrying efficiency of Burlington Street is necessary while providing a convenient pedestrian corridor from the Near Southside Neighborhood to the downtown area. The concept plan submitted by the applicant indicates that a vehicular entrance using the existing east -west alley from Clinton Street will provide access to an approximately 100 space below grade parking area. This alley will be connected to the mid -block north -south alley to connect with Court Street and Burlington Street. The access point on Burlington Street is a right turn 'Exit Only'. The Transportation Planning Division finds that the proposed traffic circulation plan including the limited access to Burlington Street is acceptable. As discussed above the City is planning a landscaped median in Burlington Street to provide for safer pedestrian and vehicular traffic in this area. There are also plans to reconstruct the Clinton Street leg of this intersection to improve the alignment of turning lanes. Infrastructure Needs: To accommodate further development in this vicinity sanitary sewer upgrades are necessary. These improvements are required whether or not this proposed rezoning and development are approved and the City will be installing them. W Summary: The requested rezoning requires a change in the current polite of creatin<l a stems down from a more intensely developed downtown (CB -10) a downtown extension i betweenBurlington and Court Streets. Staff believes that there is some merit to encouraging__ more intense development alo2q both sides of Burlin toy n Street to_provide a no rtuf@y for mmix"'-ed use,developmentlncluding high-rise residential uses_ The market for_such develoRrpent_ would be better developed here rather than m the cote of downtown where a desirabJe..miX.sc.ak i and streetscepe are already in place and should bep1eseryed. The Commission must first i consider these policy'questions before considering the details of the proposed rezoning. If the Commission decides to recommend a change in policy, it should then consider the details of the proposed Hieronymus Square and whether conditions regarding building design and parking requirements should be included in the rezoning approval. pcc)SW Repa s4az0S-0W%5 hlero"us version 2.dm 5 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that REZ06-00015 an application submitted by Hieronymus Square Associates for a rezoning of 1.12 acre of property located at 314 & 328 South Clinton Street from Central Business Support (CB -5) zone to Central Business (CB -10) zone be deferred pending policy discussions and a decision regarding the Near Southside Redevelopment Plan. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Near Southside Map 3. Central Business District and Surroundings Map 4. Application materials. Approved by: Robert Miklo, S nior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development pcd\Slaff ReportsVez06-00015 hieronymus version Z.doe MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL JULY 20, 2006 APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Bob Brooks, Beth Koppes, Terry Smith, Dean Shannon MEMBERS EXCUSED: Wally Plahutnik STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: John Hieronymus, Cal Lewis, Kevin Digmann, Pam Michaud RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent), SUB06-00011, a final plat of Hollywood Manor, Part 9, a 4.84 -acre, 12 -lot residential subdivision located at the ends of Wetherby Drive and Tofting Circle subject to Staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to consideration by Council. CALL TO ORDER: Brooks called the meeting to order at 7:33 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING ITEM: REZ06-00015, discussion of an application submitted by Hieronymus Square Associates for a rezoning of 1.12 -acres of property located at 314 & 328 South Clinton Street from Central Business Support (CB -5) zone to Central Business (CB -10) zone. said m 1992 the area generally between Burlington and Court Street was �rgx �answn o owntown in the Nea 4ythside Plan The Ne_,a_r duesi __pr redevel Sdfoment i idaPlan and 1995 Near Southside Design Plan arg_part of the Comprehensive Plan Tfiev were adopted to guide development south of Surlingt& Street. The plans emphasize commercial development between Burlington and Court Streets, and residential development between Court Street and the railroad track. The plan acknowledges that given the market there would be some residential development between Court and Burlington Streets. The plans also address the issues of parking, open space, pedestrian access, traffic circulation, historic preservation and amenities. The plans encourage that the character of the downtown be transferred south of Burlington -Street . and recognize that improvements to Burhng-ton Street will be necessary g order to bndgp_the two sides of the street. Miklo said in a related matter, -the City Council is currently considering a median landscaping `improvement plan to Burlington Street. n to the CB -5 south of Burfinj et. The CB -10 zone allows for a floor area ratio trHrq or iv; mere is nu building eig limit in the C6-10 zone. The airportoverlay restricts most of the downtown buildings to between 12 and 14 stories. The CB -5 zone allows a base FAR of 3 and a height maximum of 75 -feet in the commercial zone which would allow for six -floors of commercial development with the potential for some residential development. The CB -5 zone also contains a bonus provision allowing for increase in FAR for projects that contain public amenities or benefit such as affordable housing and open space. The applicant's proposal was to rezone the area at the intersection of Clinton and Burlington Streets to CB -10. The transfer of the CB -10 zone to the south side of Burlington Street would be in conflict with the current policy of having the step down and the transition in intensity and building height. The City would consciously need to Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 2 change the existing policy to allow this zoning to occur. Staff felt there was some merit to re-examining this Dolicv which was adopted 14 -years ago. Considerations included: - -- :- z011llly r Staff examined the CB -10 area closely in the downtown and noted that the current FAR of 10 had not been achieved anywhere in the downtown area. Most downtown properties had a FAR of 2 or less. Exceptions Included the Iowa State Bank Building & the Sheraton Hotel (FAR of approximately 5); Jefferson Building (FAR of approximately 6), Vogal House, Whiteway Building (FAR of approximately 6) and the Plaza Towers (FAR of approximately 4.75). Staff felt that raised the question as to whether a FAR of 10 twice the sizg of -- most of the largest buildings currently n downtown, would be appropnate Staff felt d might not be • VVDUID Ir De epp para Iv ----- ---- The area between Burlington and Court Street and further south of Court Street did not display the same character as the core of downtown in terms of streetscape and scale of buildings. There was quite of bit of under- and undeveloped properties, empty areas and parking lot areas south of Burlington Street; Staff felt it _ Rnrlinnrnn 'ill 1116 g ise develpRment into that area instead of in the downtown core area. Staff felt if might be -r to consider overlays or other controls in the CB -10 zone so that 1t would not develop at such a y. Such a change would take considerable study. In the interim staff felt CB -10 zoning on • �If the policy was changed, which areas south of Burlington St. should be considered for rezoning to CB -10? The City had already received additional requests for CB -10 zoning south of Burlington Street. It was Staffs feeling that there needed to be a logical extension with parameters. Instead of the City rezoning the entire area it would be an option to wait for property owners to make a request for rezoning and make a case-by- case determination in relationship to any new policy that might be adopted. • Are there conditions that should be applied to any areas rezoned to CB -10 to address the parking and urban design issues identified by the Near Southside Plan and Near Southside Design Plan? The Near Southside Plan discussed parking at length; to address the concern of the potential for parking for housing to displace or compete with commercial development the City had implemented the Near Southside Parking Facility District. The District allowed properties in the CB -5 to provide residential parking on site but they were also required to pay a fee for 75% of the required parking spaces for residential units. The thought was that Council had utilized the 75% requirement to act as a disincentive for residential development and encourage commercial development. Staff felt that if the CB -10 zone were expanded, the parking impact fee should be applied in some form. Miklo said some credence should be given to the Near Southside Design plan which discussed the character of downtown in terms of scale, building material, signage, color, etc. to provide guidance for the development south of Burlington Street and to ensure that the new development would be in character with the downtown. Staff felt there might be some conditions that the Commission might wish to consider in terms of design of the developments as they came through the process. A review of the Commission's role had been requested at the informal meeting. Currently the CB -10 zone did not automatically require a design review through the Staff Design Review Committee; it was only required if an applicant applied for tax abatement or TIF. There were some zoning code requirements in terms of articulation of the building that the Building Official would review as part of the building permit. If a majority of the Commission were concerned about larger issues referred to in the Near Southside Plan, those concerns could be addressed in a Conditional Zoning Agreement. • Traffic Implications The Traffic Planners had looked at the proposed design very closely and felt that the proposed circulation system was appropriate. Jeff Davidson would be in attendance at the next informal meeting to address the Commission's concerns regarding proposed improvements to Burlington & Clinton Streets and Court Street. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 3 . Infrastructure Needs Sanitary sewer capacity would need to be looked at in the City's Capital Improvement Plan. Regardless of whether this project went forward, Staff felt sewer upgrades needed to be looked at given the City's policy of encouraging development in the downtown area. Eastham asked if Staff were suggesting that the Commission could look at this particular rezoning request independently and not rezone large parts of the area south of Burlington Street. Miklo said that was correct, the City would not see this as a spot zoning as the area had a very clear relationship to the area just north of Burlington Street. In the near future the Commission would have additional rezoning requests for the general area being discussed. Public discussion was opened. John Hieronymus, Managing Partner of Hieronymi Partners; Kevin Digmann, Hodge Construction; Cal Lewis, architect; Dwight Doverstein, Neumann Monson. Hieronymus said his mother, Frieda, had been a key figure in the development of downtown. Her vision for Iowa City had always been that it would always be more than just a campus town for the University. When urban renewal had become stalled, Frieda had stepped forward and put together some local investment groups to try to salvage the stale environment for the rebuilding of downtown. Her biggest undertakings had been Plaza Centre One on the Ped Mall; the development of Old Capitol Mall; and Capitol House — a 5 -story low income elderly housing endeavor. He was trying to follow in his mother's viewpoint in what could be done for the community and for downtown. Over a long period of time, Frieda had amassed several small parcels of land which when put together comprised much of the block being discussed. The City had taken a large portion of it for the parking ramp, but his family was left with 2/3 of one-half of the block to develop. His mother had also always felt that Iowa City lacked quality office space. At Staffs request his project team had put together a PowerPoint to provide a complete picture of the building, the vision for this particular area and why they were requesting the rezoning. Cal Lewis, said the project team had been working together for the past year and also with City Staff to make sure their efforts were consistent with Staffs ideas for the evolution of Iowa City. In 1993, Frieda had involved him in the current project for the first time. At that time she had been 80+ years old and had told him of her concerns for the future of Iowa City. Her inspiration had stuck with him. for the last 13 -years that he'd been involved with the project. PowerPoint presentation Lewis said in the initial analysis phase the team had considered: the community itself including its architectural heritage, its diversity, the connection of the UI to downtown Iowa C ity. Traffic — Historically Burlington Street had been seen as a barrier to be jumped over. The project team felt that Staff was correct in viewing Burlington as a connector, a place to focus new development, high-density, commercial. Creating a safe environment for pedestrians & encouraging foot traffic in the downtown area. This had started with the evolution of the Ped Mall. The connection between the campus and the city strongly encouraged that type of interaction. They wanted to maintain that connection. Parking Structures — Three structures within one block was a positive feature. They were interested in creating streetscape interaction rather than what was generated by a parking garage. Scale — The CB -10 zoning and the increased density allowed by the FAR would be compatible with the existing high vertical expression buildings. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 4" Existing buffer — The court house and post office were fixed; a stable environment so that the developers could be assured that the area was going to remain that way. It created a safe edge and a buffer to any other kinds of scale developments that might want to occur south of Burlington Street. Lewis said they'd provided a visual pre -view. The number one question for the Commission to consider was did they think this project would be an asset to Iowa City? Would CB -10 zoning on this site help to facilitate this project or a similar project? If Burlington was seen as the gathering place of new development rather than �.� a barrier, this site became a natural and appropriate place for this project to occur. This development was not ' taking away things or changing tha sFagoT the urban downtown fabric or pushing into lower scale residential areas. It was filling a need in a very, concentrated area. What needed to -be done to take advantage of this very un" que site and this very special window of opportunity? Lewis said there was a team of developers willing to invest $40 million of their money into this project, right now. That $40 million was only the tip of the iceberg in terms of the benefits both economic and cultural, getting the quality of people that would be attracted to come and live in this place and all the resources that they could help share with the City and create the quality of lifestyle that Iowa City aspired to. They would be a very positive, reinforcing group to help that process occur. Kevin Digmann, Hodge Construction, said they'd been working on this project for a year. They'd analyzed what was south of Burlington and what was available in the short run that could potentially be developed. They were all very anxious to get going on this project, they'd heard a lot of support from the community for the project, it would be a good thing for downtown. He understood that the zoning needed to be looked at but looking at their project and what surrounded it, it would not affect anyone in the short tem. Miklo said it was Staff s opinion that this application could go ahead independently, but the policy for the larger area needed to be looked at. If the decision was made that CB -10 zoning was appropriate south of Burlington, then the Commission could go forward with the rezoning without waiting on looking at the other areas. Smith asked what was the time frame Hieronymus some direction from the Commission. Hieronymus said they'd been working with this particular developer for a year. The project had been at the point of construction drawings in 1995. They'd removed smaller structures that had been in the way then. Hodge Construction and Hieronymi Partnership had formed a joint venture which had had a life of 18 months to investigate this idea and to see if they could.come up with a project that they believed would fit the vision of what Hieronymi Partnership wanted and would be a doable and reasonable project for Hodge Construction to become involved with. They'd since discussed extending the project another 6 -months. One year of that time had now passed, this was the first critical step in getting the project done. If the zoning didn't change, they would not be able to build this building. After this step came several others before they could even begin to market and see if they could get the type of commitments that were financially necessary to build this building. That would also be critical as to whether or not they could achieve this project. Smith asked Hieronymus if he would be willing to extend the 45 -day limitation period past the 7/31/06 date. Hieronymus said Staff had asked them if they'd be wiling to grant an extension. If the Commission saw this as an independent project and would go ahead and vote on it, they could move forward. If the Commission didn't feel that they could do that, then perhaps they could extend until the Commission's next formal meeting. The project team was already on a time crunch in connecting their partnership to see if this project could even be done. They had one year to get it to the point of being ready to break ground. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 5 Freerks said she appreciated their desire to move forward quickly but the Commission had just received their information packets that week -end. She felt the Commission owed it to the community and to the project team to spend more time and consideration on the application. She hoped that they'd be willing to extend the limitation period, it would be to everyone's benefit not to speed through it. Digmann said at the informal meeting they'd looked at how they could shift the building on the site and other modifications. They'd not spent a year planning without looking at many designs/options in order to get the best of both worlds. They'd tried to locate the building on the site so it would maximize views for everyone and to create the lower level to be as pedestrian friendly as possible. Eastham asked if they'd calculated the FAR and the number of residential units. Hieronymus said the FAR was right at 5. Lewis said approximately 150 residential units with approximately 250 bedrooms, there would be some variability depending on exactly which mix they ended up with. Koppes asked what were the 100 parking spots within the building designated for? Digmann said it was planned for residential; however until they knew they had the go ahead they were not set on the mid -rise condo units. They wanted to keep those floors flexible, they might end up commercial or something else. Eastham asked if they were planning on changing the design depending on what the market analysis showed. Digmann said if they were successful with the CB -10 rezoning they would continue with this design on the outside. If they had a retail tenant that needed different square footage, they would "bump up". the first level to accommodate. They wanted to keep it as flexible as possible. They didn't anticipate changing the footprint very dramatically for any particular user at this point. They'd tried to be flexible enough in design to accommodate any tenant. Lewis said one of the things they'd focused on was a design base that had enough flexibility that it could accommodate different use types. It was very systemic so it could be efficient to build. There was a module that dealt with housing, a model for office, etc. They didn't want to reorganize the building, but within the basic frame work they'd tried to build in some flexibility of use which one had to do as an intelligent developer when you couldn't go out and market until you knew you had a project. Flexible intelligent planning. In consideration of all their investments to date, they didn't want to have to redesign the building. Pam Michaud, 109 S. Johnson Street, said she'd lived in Iowa City for 33 years including downtown near College Green Park on Johnson Street for 16 years. Her concern was that the applicant was asking for more than double density. Had they built in any sustainable or "green" features in the building with either recycled materials or reused content or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) recommendations that would be appropriate for this site. She'd done research on incorporating sustainable materials in to the building, solar heated water, things that wouldn't put an additional drain on city resources. She thought the design was very innovative and liked a lot of the building's elements which had been very carefully considered. Normal, Illinois, on its website homepage had a statement regarding all new construction involving green features being incorporated. Michaud distributed a definition/ informational handout to the Commission. Public discussion was closed. Cal Lewis said these types of issues had been considered at the initial stage of the project. Issues of the environment, energy and sustainability were very critical; it was an integral part of the way he thought about architecture. Specificity of LBED and LBED requirements was a whole layer of effectiveness. Big picture issues had been addressed from the beginning. Miklo asked the applicant to clarify if they were waiving the 45 -day limitation period to August 3, 2006. Hieronymus said they'd like to wait and hear what the Commission was willing to do, if they'd go ahead and vote the project team would appreciate that opportunity. If the Commission felt they couldn't vote, the team didn't want the project to die at this point because they couldn't get the zoning changed. Smith asked if the building as proposed was within the CB -10 zoning requirement(s) Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 6 Miklo said there was some question if the ground level met the store fronts requirements. Staff had been working with the applicant, they were almost there, but there were still some things in question. In terms of height and FAR, it was compliant. Smith said given the fact that the proposal was not consistent with Plans that were 14-years old, was it correct that the existing Plans were a part of policy but not necessarily a part of City Code? Was there a legal obligation for the Commission to move forward with modification of the Plans prior to moving forward with the rezoning or did the Commission have the latitude to consider one ahead of the other or both in parallel? Behr said he thought the Comprehensive Plan would need to be amended. If the Commission wished to recommend the rezoning, they could do both at the same time. Technically the Comprehensive Plan amendment would precede it, but both could go through the Commission at the same time. Koppes said a public hearing would be required which would have to be announced so they could not decide both items at the current meeting. Behr said if the Commission wished to vote yet that evening, they could 'catch up' with it. It could be held at the Council level and the Commission could follow with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. M.Wo said Staff would not advise voting on the zoning until the policy decision had been answered. He was not sure if an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would be necessary or not. They first needed to decide if they were changing the policy, then decide if an actual amendment was needed, then they'd have to go through a formal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Brooks said one of the applicants had said that they'd spent the last year developing their plans. To expect the Commission to take this, contemplate it in a short period and make the decision to change something that was fairly significant to the future growth and functionality of the downtown was not feasible.;There were a lot of issues that needed to be discussed and ironed out. Regardless of whether the rezoning went forward, there was a whole policy discussion that needed to take place including the Parking impact Fee District. He felt that the Commission had a lot of homework ahead of them before he would feel comfortable voting on a rezoning. Freerks said she agreed. The Commission needed to give some direction regarding the whole concept of moving the zoning south of Burlington and how the Commission felt about items identified for consideration by Staff. Also discussion about the building on its own space as weIlL-She-felt_there__v Ls a lot:of merit to moving_ the CB-10 zoning across Burlington.Street and in terms of protecting the wonderful features that were already„ in place in downtown. They needed to discuss a FAR of 10 or if they Want to cut it back down a little to something more realistic. No development had even come close to reaching that scale. They also needed to discuss, if they were to recommend a rezoning would it be piece-by-piece or an overall rezoning. Freerks said the applicant had done a good job of not putting a building on the entire block, of not filling in the entire block. However, who was to say that the next applicant wouldn't want to do so. They needed to consider all the scenarios that could come forward. She appreciated that the applicant had addressed some of the concerns that she'd voiced at the informal meeting. With respect to the glass and ambiance created by the building, as a pedestrian who might never enter the facility, she wanted to consider how pedestrians would feel walking under the glassed area. She'd heard of glass sky-scrapers in other cities creating 'ghost towns' of areas where there was very little street life. Freerks said it was very important to her to make sure that people would feel invited into the open space. She felt that the applicant understood what she meant, but a CZA would be a tool to help the Commission feel more comfortable in specifying conditions in the City's best interest associated with this project. Trees: The trees were shown to grow up against the building's overhang. How would that work in terms of fu#ure growth for the frees. Miklo said the trees would be in the right-of-way, it would have to be a careful choice of trees in consultation with the City Forrester Courtyard and Service Area: After seeing the visual presentation and from comments made by the architect, that area seemed to be more vehicular oriented. People living in the building would have pets, where would they go with their pets? She asked if there could be more green space, an area to be really enjoyed by people. She wanted to see the open space be a real asset and hadn't noted too much green space in the visuals. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes .July 20, 2006 Page 8 Eastham requested Smith and Shannon to withdraw their motion. Brooks said he sensed that everyone was excited about the project but it was more a process question and the need to feel comfortable that all issues had been clarified before they voted on it. He personally wanted to make sure that they were not agreeing to something that would later come back to bite the Commission. He was not ready to make that commitment yet. Freerks agreed. Smith said he did not want to see the project fail, in the interest of preserving the project he would withdraw his motion. Shannon said he would withdraw his second. He wanted the Commission to do this correctly but didn't want to see the discussion get bogged down and talked to death as had occurred in the past. The big items and political decisions would be made at the Council level. The project would be an asset to the community. Brooks asked the developer if they could anticipate an extension until August 17 at the latest. There appeared to be general support for the project; the Commission had had only a few days to think about the project while the project team had had years to think about the project. The Commission represented the citizens and the interests of the community. They needed to be able to provide a well prepared and thoughtful position and policy to the Council. Digmann said they'd been visiting with the City for 6 -months regarding this project. To hear that the Commission had just heard about it two days ago was a surprise to him. They'd already invested a lot of time and money, they wanted to go through the steps and get the project done. Digmann said if given any extension, the Commission would take that long to make a decision. He'd agree to August 3rd and then revisit the issue. Hieronymus said they'd be willing to defer to August 3rd. If it went beyond August 3rd they'd have to consider if it would be better to go to the Council without a recommendation from the Commission. They saw theirs as an independent request and they couldn't move forward until they'd gone through the whole process. Smith made a motion to defer REZ06-00015 until August 3, 2006. Eastham seconded The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). REZONING / DEVELOPMENT ITEM: REZ06-00010/SUB06-00008, discussion of an application submitted by Don Cochran for a rezoning from Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID -RS) zone to Low -Density Single -Family (RS -5) zone and a preliminary plat and a final plat of McCollister Subdivision, a 2 -lot, 9.53 -acre residential subdivision located east of South Gilbert Street and west of Sandusky Drive. Terdalkar said the property was an Iowa City landmark and listed in the National Register of Historic Places. There was no new construction proposed on the property at this time, just a subdivision in to two residential lots. The parcel contained woodlands, groves, isolated large trees, sensitive, and protected slopes. The plat did not delineate the construction areas nor the specific development area on lot two. The extent of the sensitive areas that would be disturbed was unknown. The applicant had been informed of the deficiencies and had indicated that they would submit new drawings but had not done so yet. Staff recommended deferring the application. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Koppes made a motion to defer REZ06-00010/SUB06-00008 until 8/3/06. Smith seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). SUBDIVISION ITEM: SUB06-00011, discussion of an application submitted by ST Enterprises LC for a final plat of Hollywood Manor Part 9, a 12 -lot, 4.84 acre residential subdivision located west of Russell Drive and south of Burns Avenue. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 7 Streetscape and Courtyard: It would be very important for them to invite people in. She wanted the area to be the best that it could be. Then hopefully everyone else who built a development in the future could do something as wonderful as their project. Eastham said Staff had requested the' Commission to consider extending higher density multi-level development across Burlington Street. From what he'd heard so far, he saw a number of reasons to support the change. If there was a majority of the Commission who felt the same, he thought the decision could be made relatively speedily but not that evening. The question remained, did this particular proposal meet design criteria. His interest was not to confuse the developer or himself; he personally preferred that they adhere to the existing design criteria and processes that were in the Zoning Code. Smith said it looked like a good project. He applauded the team, their time, effort and expense that they'd already put into the project. There were some policy decisions that needed to be made. There seemed to be some consensus that the project was heading in the right direction. He didn't feel there was a reason to penalize the team or this project based on the fact that the Commission needed to make policy decisions. Motion: Smith made a motion to approve REZ06-00015, a rezoning of 1.12 -acres of property located at 314 & 328 South Clinton Street from Central Business Support (CB -5) zone to Central Business (CB -10) zone. Shannon seconded the motion. Smith said the Commission should challenge themselves to move forward with the appropriate policy changes. Koppes said she would prefer that the Commission defer their vote in order to discuss parking issues and the Parking District Fee. It seemed that the general consensus was that CB -10 zoning would be appropriate. Miklo said for a CB -5 zone south of Burlington Street, developers were required to pay a fee for 75% of the required parking spaces for residential units. A CB -10 zone required no residential parking and the fee would not apply to this property unless it was made a condition of the rezoning. Staff had a concern for the equity issue of the other property owners in that same parking impact district that had been paying into that fund and for future developments. Staff didn't feel the parking had been adequately addressed and suggested a deferral in order to allow time for the discussion to occur. Eastham said Smith's was a good motion, however he wished to suggest tabling the motion until the next meeting in order to allow Staff time to prepare a set of recommendations in terms of the Comprehensive Plan and the provisions which would apply to this project. He was in agreement to move forward as quickly as possible, but yet that evening was not necessary. He felt it would be advisable to have as many members of the Commission present as possible. Miklo said a probable time schedule would be at the next meeting to identify and come to terms regarding any conditions such as parking, traffic, mix of uses in the building, green space in the courtyard. Staff would need to decide if an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would be needed and a public hearing set for August 17. Then they could vote on both the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the rezoning and send both on to Council. Freerks said she did not feel comfortable making these types of decisions in such a rushed manner; it would set a precedent for others looking for a rezoning. There were way too may unanswered questions; she wanted to be sure that everything was in line with what other people were allowed and required to do. Brooks said his intent was not to vote down the application but to give the Commission another two weeks or what ever time was required to iron out the unresolved issues so he could feel comfortable voting on it. He wanted to be sure that the Commission was not setting any precedents or sending any messages to others who would ask for comparable zoning changes in the future. It would be nice if the Commission could have a year to understand and develop this scenario, but they didn't. Miklo said typically the Commission took two meetings to discuss and consider major rezoning requests. The applicant had met the deadline to have their application on the previous agenda but given the significance of the requested rezoning, the magnitude of the project, potential impact on the community and the change in policy, Staff had taken an extra two weeks to prepare the staff report. It's your money. Keep more of it -^ and file taxes for -_ Editor Stephen schm'dt steohen.s0nridt*oatch.com 10 Like I.1k Patch Newsletter Nearb Join Sign in JOWaCitypatCll 53p Home Events Directory Pies & Clips Commute Real Estate More Stuff q Government Riverfront Crossings Vote Coming to Iowa City Council Next Week The City Council will vote next Tuesday evening on whether or not to declare the Riverfront Crossings district as an urban renewal area. By Hope Nealson Email the author October 12, 2011 Recommend 2 Tweet 0 Email Print 2 Comments Related Topics: Iowa City Council and Riverfront Crossinas The expansion of downtown could become a reality as part of proposed new development along the Iowa River. The Iowa City Council will vote at its Tuesday, Oct. 18 meeting on whether to designate a 44 -acre area between Riverside Drive and Gilbert Street, Highway 6 and Burlington Street, as an Urban Renewal Area. We've known for years there's one direction downtown can grow and that's south," said Jeff Davidson, Iowa City's planning and community development director. "What accelerated it was the flood of 2008." Davidson said the city roughly has $60 million at its disposal to relocate and clean up the current wastewater treatment plant, located at 1000 S. Clinton St. The funding he said came from a combination of federal funding, state I -JOBS funding and from the local option sales tax. The wastewater treatment plant isn't included in the Riverfront Crossings Urban Renewal Plan, which will be voted upon next week. The plant lies within the much larger Urban Renewal Area, which the city approved as part of its comprehensive plan that has been in the works for years. "The reason we started with the small area that's the Riverside Drive condor, is we have a couple projects that are heating up, so we wanted to get that established first," Davidson said. Riverfront Crossings is bordered roughly by Riverside Drive to the west, Gilbert Street to the east, Highway 6 to the south, and Burlington Street to the north. The tax incentives that come with the establishment of an Urban Renewal Area and the Riverfront Crossings Urban Renewal Plan help attract developers, according to Wendy Ford, the Economic Development Coordinator for the City of Iowa City. "I think what developers want to know is that the city actually has a plan in place, and if they make an investment of a few millions dollars, other investments will follow to meet this vision," she said. "The vision has had public input all along the way. We asked, 'OK, community, what do you want to see in this area? Parks, trails, let the river has its space back? So this is the culmination of that whole process."' Ford said establishing the Riverfront Crossings Urban Renewal Plan creates a mechanism for the city to step in and be a partner in development projects, and for it to serve as the developer of public improvements, like trails, parks, streetscape enhancement. "This enables the city to be able to use the tax increment in projects that have a public benefit," she said Assistant City Manager Dale Halling said the Urban Renewal Plan will "open the door" to more incentives for development. "This allows a lot of things to happen like tax incentives, including tax financing increments, and potentially grant funding down the road," he said. Helling added the council has shown support for the Riverfront Crossings Project Plan in the past. "Essentially this (vote) is needed in order to designate it as an urban renewal area," he said. "The majority of council members have been on board so far so we'll see if everyone supports it or not." The vote on the plan will include a public hearing that will allow members of the public to comment on the project. For more info on the plan, visit this link. mail ;:.e Up -utas aec+.;t iris stc; y, Enter your email address Keep me posted Recommend Z Tweet 0 Email ?rint Follow comments Submit tin 2 Comments Tracy K. Pierce Flag as inappropriate 8:10 am on Thursday, October 13,_2011, This map is not correct - it's actually showing the other side of the river, not the Riverfront Crossing area as described in the article. Reoly C7 Stephen Schmidt Flag as inappropriate ' 8:52 am on Thursday_ October 132011_ Thanks, Tracy. I actually had two different relevant maps up, but the other map was featured so that's where the confusion came in. Leave a comment Submit, south downtown district The South Downtown District is the most urban district outside ' of Downtown Iowa City. As an extension of Downtown, the area is currently in transition, with several new mixed-use buildings o recently completed, and several new ones on the drawing board. As development continues, it should retain and enhance its urban form. Residential and office uses should predominate, with retail uses kept to a minimum and located only at strategic locations. As Burlington Street redevelops it will take on more of a pedestrian feel, while bicycle traffic will transition south to Court Street. Clinton Street will become the focal point of the district with its Promenade, which will run north - south through a grand civic plaza on the east side of the Courthouse. On the west side of the district, a meadow created in a bend in Ralston Creek will act as a catalyst for adjacent residential development and be an amenity for local residents. South Dovvntovvn District Summary 01 ' -- -faster flan Objectives: Extension of Downtown to the south ° I 1 > Bridge the Burlington Street divide ai > Provide a mix of residential, office, retail, and civic, uses > Leverage the Clinton Street mobility spine 1 a� > Create new civic spaces as focal points - Clinton Plaza and oo Ralston Creek Meadow aQ !j Development Characr-r: > Similar intensity to downtown 3 j > Improved Clinton and Court Street streetscapes ,_ u o HARRisopls,. > Build on the on-going efforts to improve quality residential ' design - '... Development Program; > Multiple housing option typologies h > Student housing in areas with good access to campus o > Office n o > Convenience retail limited to key corners and Transit Oriented C' ° Development (TOD) area .--, > Potential entertainment uses =H ii d p a� Y¢ c p y CD CL O O On ° C H. g° m R ° w c"CrQ y `n° d dC' ^ n 7 N O O A m 7 y 7 C �° fnD d '� d n M N 0. p y Y O R y .Y.. m a' c Y 'U R 'O �' ro O V CD nN nom, _ 9� rOYr fC p y G. �p y y. O d 7 H N � O n tY � fRD S d O `� T 04 O C m n n c crY Y' 0ts o 'p2 ° H o c 0. tl .dr d C. y Z p R G A N n O T ..� Y ❑ � C3 '1 � OYO O m Y 0. "n-'. C O d f0 q .= < m g G n ¢' m O o' n S d u G t0.D vqq G. < CnT Y N n rx O 0.cr d qq I �f .r} `G .p C• C O y \ I 7 p, 3 N tG C j r � i y S f CT, , O o m F O O O d J •ni Z N O / 7 •"• o o M w N C 0 3 y o a d a U O N a ti w 50 v 2 n 0 c G < a u n m y"ZT , a O P w 3 N � m a p _r o 'w y m mil C O d y o 0 EL O c F r n w S v a O � f ID w m d m ON S C G a N CO 7 G v � n m a`< ,�; . � ', <C m T d m m 0.,m m a N m N � d V N O a m � m� O N ? O C N O d G 9 En. � � 'Zi $ m c o' gip. ,b o °� d O pq C R °7 C w O n y O 6 v y Ow O a. b C O O m C n m p o o' y m N C' tz w d d o o 0 " n. C. 0. 0 n ^ O . ~ N n C m � O 'O ori w t+ d 0. N O m " E; o 0 P C N O m O o. 0 ID � o 00 o ro d Cl. Z m m O m m o ° 12 F v C m o ro C 0 0 7 m t N y O tj 0 r -R. m 0 N •• 0 `n o 0 _d m N ti w 50 v 2 yI C, D o m n C y"ZT , a d N •• 0 6 o 0 _d m N ti w 50 N r m O 0 •O yI C, n C y"ZT , a d y m mil C O O ? r n w Q. ID w m d m d G ,w'"G�i m a`< ,�; . � ', m 0 n C m m 0.,m o'.. o N m d V N O G � E C m _d w �' ti w 50 m o n C j 0{[�u0, f� d m C •`.1'.NIy N Marian Karr From: Joyce Summerwill <jsummerwill@mac.com> Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 10:50 AM To: Council Subject: Support of Recommendation to add to Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan TO: Iowa City Council Members FROM: Joyce and Dick Summerwill 221 E. College St. #1001 Iowa City, IA RE: Staff Recommendation to add to Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan We heartily endorse the Staff's Recommendation to add to Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan which will allow for mixed-use development in this area. We urge you to approve the staff's recommendation as it is in the best interest for the future development of Iowa City. It makes sense to us as Iowa City grows in population, we are mindful of our historic past and expand "vertically" to avoid the mass sprawl of one apartment building after another, destroying historic neighborhoods. There will be continued growth of the University of Iowa in downtown Iowa City with the new School of Music Building and the new Museum of Art. These two additions will undoubtedly attract more people to live in the downtown area. The Chauncy will be an addition to the existing two Moen buildings - which we know are well designed and complement the historic past of Iowa City. The old and new co -exist in design harmony, adding architectural interest representing the past and the future. GO FORWARD! Thank you for your continued service to Iowa City. Joyce and Dick Summerwill Marian Karr From: Mark Blumberg <mark-blumberg@uiowa.edu> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:22 PM To: Council Subject: Staff Recommendation to add to Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan I have been a resident of Iowa City for 23 years. During that time, I have lived in a historic house on S. Summit Street and then, for the last six years, in Plaza Towers. My father was a real estate developer who believed deeply in thoughtful city planning that reflects the needs of the breadth of a community. I have been extremely pleased with the development of the Iowa City downtown over the last ten years. Visiting friends invariably comment on the vibrancy of our downtown area. I agree, and I fully support the recommendation by City Staff to add three civic blocks to the downtown district of the master plan. I am confident that the addition of more high-quality mixed- use developments that cater to a broad array of Iowa City residents and students will benefit everyone in the long run. Sincerely, Mark Blumberg Marian Karr From: Linda Farkas <linda.farkas@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 5:07 PM To: Council Subject: Civic Blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossing Master Plan approval request To the Iowa City Council: The purpose of this letter is strongly support the 3 Civic Blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossing Master Plan. We moved to the Iowa City area seven years ago from the center of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. We wanted to continue to live the same urban lifestyle in Iowa City. This lifestyle would include a diverse urban area with many of our interests, the arts, independent movie theaters, restaurants- all within walking distance from our home. While we immediately became involved with the Iowa City thru Board involvement etc, we struggled to feel the urban lifestyle we were accustomed. HOWEVER, as of December 1st of this year, we moved into the Plaza Towers and feel so completely at home. It gives us everything we were longing for after moving to the Iowa City area. It is imperative to continue this movement by approving the master plan so that the urbanism that has been so beautifully started by the vision of the Moen Group can continue. Because of that vision we are home for good and we want that vision to expand and bring others to the downtown area. Sincerely, Ed and Linda Farkas 221 East College Street #1108 Iowa City, Iowa Sent from my iPad Marian Karr From: Fred <fdery45@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:18 PM To: Council Subject: Downtown District I'm writing in support of staffs recommendation to add the 3 Civic Blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan which would allow for mixed-use development in this area. I moved here to Iowa City almost 5 years ago, having previously lived in Detroit, MI and Richmond, VA. The only reason I moved to the downtown area was because of the "big city" feel provided by the Moen buildings and associated businesses, as well as the myriad cultural opportunities afforded those who live downtown. I feel that expansion of the Downtown District would further enhance the quality of life of current residents as well as new prospective residents by expanding not only modern high-end living options, but also by providing more high end dining, shopping, entertainment options. With expansion of UIowa, as well as many private institutions in the area, and the subsequent expected influx of professionals to the Iowa City area, proper planning through expansion of the Downtown District will place Iowa City in a prime position to benefit financially, culturally, historically, and architecturally in the coming years. Thank you, FRED J DERY JR, MD E GO "We are what we consistently do. Excellence, therefore, is not a singular act, but a habit." "The world around you is a rat race where only the strong survive." "The needs of the many far outweigh the needs of the few." "I ask for no quarter, and I shall grant none in return." "I detest that man who hides one thing in the depths of his heart, and speaks for another." "A bore is a man who deprives you of solitude without providing you with company." "Live free or die." Marian Karr From: Linda Farkas <linda.farkas@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 5:07 PM To: Council Subject: Civic Blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossing Master Plan approval request To the Iowa City Council: The purpose of this letter is strongly support the 3 Civic Blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossing Master Plan. We moved to the Iowa City area seven years ago from the center of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. We wanted to continue to live the same urban lifestyle in Iowa City. This lifestyle would include a diverse urban area with many of our interests, the arts, independent movie theaters, restaurants- all within walking distance from our home. While we immediately became involved with the Iowa City thru Board involvement etc, we struggled to feel the urban lifestyle we were accustomed. HOWEVER, as of December 1st of this year, we moved into the Plaza Towers and feel so completely at home. It gives us everything we were longing for after moving to the Iowa City area. It is imperative to continue this movement by approving the master plan so that the urbanism that has been so beautifully started by the vision of the Moen Group can continue. Because of that vision we are home for good and we want that vision to expand and bring others to the downtown area. Sincerely, Ed and Linda Farkas 221 East College Street #1108 Iowa City, Iowa Sent from my iPad s, Date: March 1, 2015 To: City Council 2015 From Nancy Carlson, Iowa City resident �'"i'' F" Dear Council, ,01;, Below is a summary of actions taken by the City regarding downtown expansion in the Downtown Planning District from 1992 to 2015. I end with a closing statement that, on the basis of these actions, asks you to oppose the Comprehensive Plan amendment recommended by Staff. Near Southside Redevelopment Plan (1992) In the 1992 Near Southside Redevelopment Plan, the City decided the best way to expand the downtown was by redeveloping the area south of Burlington Street. This course of action would add commercial and office space and also create high-density residential development. The Near Southside Redevelopment Plan states that "The location of high-density residential development in the near south side has the ancillary benefit of preserving established lower density areas north and east of downtown that may be subject to pressures for conversion to high-density multi -family uses". Comprehensive Plan (1997) Under the chapter entitled "Iowa City Beyond 2000: How Do We Get There ", the Comprehensive Plan supports "growth downtown consistent with the Near Southside Redevelopment Plan." In the Central District section of the plan, it states, "The integrity of existing neighborhoods, especially those adjacent to downtown and the University of Iowa campus, will require ongoing efforts." In the Downtown Planning District section of the plan, it states, "Because Iowa City is a relatively small and compact city, less dense residential development can be found adjacent to the downtown. As the community grows and the downtown prospers, care should be taken in providing proper transitions between the intensity of downtown development and surrounding residential neighborhoods" Near Eastside Rezoning (2005) In the summer of 2005, the City initiated an action to rezone the commercial area east of Gilbert Street. At that time the CB -5 zone was recommended for the Unitarian Universalist Church and the MidAmerican utility substation facility. When considering what zone would be appropriate for these parcels, the staff looked at the surrounding zoning, the existing land uses in the area, and how the proposed zoning might affect the surrounding area. They believed Central Business CB -5 would be the best fit because CB -5 is intended for the orderly expansion of the Central Business District. At that time Staff suggested introducing the Mixed Use MU zone to the east of Van Buren St. in the area which included the south side of Washington St. to achieve a more gradual transition to the multi -family zone RM12 to the east. Unfortunately, City Council did not approve the proposed MU zone. Eventually, Central Business CB -2 zoning resulted in the demolition of the existing houses where locally owned businesses such as the Red Avocado thrived. Near Southside Rezoning (2006) In 2006 Hieronymous Square Associates requested a rezoning from CB -5 to CB -10 for the property on the southeast corner of Burlington and Clinton. In the analysis for that request, Staff stated, "the Near Southside Plan encourages higher density residential development to the south" thereby supporting "the policy of preserving the older neighborhoods to the north and east of the central business district." The original concept of stepping down from CB -10 to CB -5 was done to create a gradual transition from the taller buildings and greater intensity in the core downtown to the surrounding commercial areas. But Staff also stated that, as the downtown contains historic buildings and storefronts that provide a successful and vibrant center, encouraging a greater intensity of CB -10 south of Burlington would take redevelopment pressure off an already vibrant downtown. Central District (2007) In a manner similar to Staff's comments in the 2005 Near Eastside rezoning, the Central District Plan states, "Any development must be grounded in reality taking into consideration the existing conditions." Title 14: Zoning Code The Zoning Code states that its provisions are "to implement the City of Iowa City's Comprehensive Plan", and more specifically to protect existing and future land uses from intrusions by incompatible land uses. The Zoning Code provides a series of Central Business zones to achieve the "proper transitions" called for in the Comprehensive Plan. The Central Business CB -10 Zone is the most intense zone. The Central Business Support Zone (CB -5) "is to allow for the orderly expansion of the Central Business District in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. It serves as a transition between the intense land uses located in the Central Business District and adjoining areas. It accommodates mixed land uses but at a lower intensity than permitted in the CB -10 District." Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (January 2013) This plan is a further development of the Near Southside Redevelopment Plan. It reinforces the original concept of directing high-density development south of Burlington Street. IC2030: Comprehensive Plan Update (May 2013) IC2030 guides the Comprehensive Plan well into the future. The Introduction notes that the area east of Gilbert Street and north of Burlington Street was not included in the Downtown Master Plan or Central District Plan. It further states that the area has potential to develop at higher densities, and that it should comply with the policies of the Central District Plan in order to ensure quality design and appropriate transitions to the lower -density residential neighborhoods that border them. It ends by stating that, once a redevelopment plan is developed, it should be added to the Central District map. Thus, IC2030, a plan that carries us into the future, does not recommend including this area in the Downtown District. Closing Statement For over twenty years, the City has spent much time and money in achieving its goals of keeping the downtown vital and preserving the integrity of the existing core neighborhoods. During this time, numerous neighborhoods have stepped up to contribute to this goal by establishing historic and conservation districts. In this pursuit, the residents of these areas voluntarily subjected their most significant investment to more stringent zoning regulations. They wanted to make a contribution to preserving the value, ambience and history of their neighborhoods. As a resident of one the core neighborhoods for 35 years, I have not been against thoughtful redevelopment that will enhance our neighborhoods. I welcome it and support it. For 25 years the City's goal has been to support that type of development. I appreciate the time and money that has been expended to support this. I have come, however, to understand the ramifications of re -zoning when it is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. My neighbors and I live with the results of those failed zoning experiments. I believe the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment of adding the 3 -block municipal area to the Downtown District does not support the goals and commitments made by the City and supported by the neighborhoods for over twenty years. I ask City Council to not approve this Comprehensive Plan amendment. 2 2015 G��rlC'n Marian Karr From: kay colangelo <kcolangelo@mchsi.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 7:54 AM To: Council Subject: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE We wholeheartedly support the City staff's recommendation to add three civic blocks to the master plan. These blocks are in the city center and should be a part of what is referred to as "mixed use." These areas of a town or city bring population density which invites entertainment and restaurants and other venues where citizens gather. It invites music and learning. It keeps a town alive and vibrant and useful to its citizens. It helps to hold a town together. We have lived on an acreage for many years. Our hope is to move to the center of town when we can no longer take care of our land and house. It's either ten acres or the tenth floor for us. We would like to walk to lectures, concerts, the grocery store. Instead of getting snowed in at home, outside of town — we want to put on the boots and walk to a restaurant. We will never move to Florida. We will never move anywhere. We will travel. We will visit family out of state. Iowa City has been our home for almost forty years and will remain so. The boosting of energy in downtown Iowa City has been a remarkable accomplishment. It has been a joy to see it happen and experience the ripple effect of this vision. Please keep it up! Sincerely, Nicholas and Kay Colangelo March 4, 2015 Marian Karr From: Kieft, David W <david-kieft@uiowa.edu> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 8:34 AM To: Council Cc: Jeff Davidson; Geoff Fruin Subject: Support for Comprehensive Plan This correspondence will become a public record. Iowa City Council Members: University of Iowa leadership has discussed the City's Comprehensive Plan review for the "civic district" and specifically the two proposed development projects, The Chauncy and New Pi's new location. The University is supportive of both projects. These developments will bring additional housing and retail opportunities to downtown and the University area, which is something the University supports; but more importantly, the University is in favor of the programmatic aspects of The Chauncy. The bowling alley and expanded location for Film Scene are both unique venues which will serve UI students, faculty and staff. The current location of Film Scene has been a successful addition to downtown Iowa City and an expanded venue will only increase the offerings Film Scene is able to bring to Iowa City. The movie theater and bowling alley also contribute to the marketability of the University and Iowa City. These are the type of spaces other developers have not proposed in the many recent development projects that have come before the City. Sincerely, David David Kieft University Business Manager & Director of University Real Estate University of Iowa 301 University Services Building (USB) Iowa City, IA 52242-5500 319-335-5052 david-ki eftguiowa. edu � r �®p*at CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE � TY OF IOWPC CITY MEMORANDUM Date: December 12, 2014 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator 71,721 - Re: Proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for: i. The blocks generally bounded by Clinton St, Jefferson St, Bloomington St and Dubuque St (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque St District); and ii. The blocks generally bounded by Gilbert St, Burlington St, Van Buren St, and Iowa Ave (AKA the Civic District) On your December 18 agenda, there is an item to set a public hearing on a proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for the North Clinton / Dubuque St District and the Civic District. The Comprehensive Plan identifies two areas, one located generally east of Gilbert St and north of Burlington St, the other located north of Iowa Ave and west of Dubuque St, as areas that were not included in the Downtown Master Plan or the Central District Plan. On October 30, staff initiated the public input process by holding an open house to facilitate regarding these areas. All property owners, residents and businesses were invited by letter. In addition, staff issued a media release and designed a webpage to facilitate public input. To date, we have received over 50 responses via the webpage, and several emails (see attached). Upon setting the public hearing, staff will notify all parties who have expressed interest in being informed of this process (by providing email addresses), will place the staff report on the City webpage, will update the public comment webpage, and will issue a media release of the availability of the staff report for public review, and the date of the Planning and Zoning Commission's public hearing. � r CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: December 10, 2014 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator Re: Proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for: i. The blocks generally bounded by Clinton St, Jefferson St, Bloomington St and Dubuque St (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque District); and ii. The blocks generally bounded by Gilbert St, Burlington St, Van Buren St, and Iowa Ave (AKA the Civic District) Introduction The Comprehensive Plan identifies two areas, one located generally east of Gilbert St and north of Burlington St, the other located north of Iowa Ave and west of Dubuque St, as areas that were not included in the Downtown Master Plan or the Central District Plan. The Comprehensive Plan suggests that while both areas have the potential to redevelop at higher densities both should comply with the policies and goals of the Central District Plan in order to ensure quality design and appropriate transitions to the areas that border them. Both of these areas are currently part of the Downtown Planning District (see attached maps). On October 30, staff held an open house to facilitate public input regarding these areas. All property owners, residents and businesses were invited by letter. In addition, staff issued a media release and designed a webpage to facilitate public input. To date, we have received over 50 responses via the webpage, and several emails (see attached). For the purposes of this report, we have separated the North Clinton / Dubuque District and the Civic District, and have provided staff recommendations for each district separately. NORTH CLINTON / DUBUQUE DISTRICT The majority of the North Clinton / Dubuque District is zoned Planned Residential Multi -Family (PRM). It is characterized by multi -family apartments, former single family homes converted to apartments, religious and other institutions, and other public uses. With close proximity to the University of Iowa, demand is strong for multi -family residential as well as institutional and public uses. PRM Zone: The purpose of the PRM Zone is to provide for the development of high density multi -family housing in close proximity to centrally -located employment, educational and commercial uses. The PRM zone is subject to multi -family design standards, and allows for both a density bonus and height increase up to 65 feet (5-6 stories) provided certain `public benefits' are included in the project. These public benefits include a masonry finish on the exterior of the building, usable open space for the occupants of the building, rehabilitation of a historic building, provision of assisted housing, streetscape amenities, additional landscaping and/or windows that have a height 1.5 times greater than their width. December 12, 2014 Page 2 Public Input: Much of the public input we received emphasized a desire for higher -density housing close to downtown ('build up, not out' was used several times), a desire for improved streetscapes, wayfinding, replacement of older 'run-down' buildings, and a desire for more affordable housing. Some input focused on a desire to not increase density, identified the lack of parking as a concern, and the lack of retail and entertainment. Much of the public input was related to a desire for improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities and amenities. All input received to date is attached. In discussions with University staff regarding this area, UI staff identified the close proximity of the business school as an opportunity for an entrepreneurial center or living -learning community of business students. UI staff also noted the strong market for residential housing close to the Clinton St dormitories, and shared concerns with the appearance of the Clinton St and Dubuque St corridors. Streetscape and pedestrian / bicycle amenities: Dubuque St, and to a lesser degree Clinton St, serve as gateways to the University of Iowa's east campus and to downtown Iowa City. In discussing this area with University of Iowa staff, one of the unique things about the east campus is how intertwined it is with downtown Iowa City. One of the challenges is that there is no clear 'gateway' to campus or to downtown. Related to this, the streetscape and the appearance of some private residences have been identified as not contributing to these corridors serving as 'gateways.' While multi -family zones and the PRM zone has design standards to encourage higher -density housing to result in a more attractive living environment, it may not be designed specifically to encourage higher -quality streetscapes in high -visibility corridors; therefore staff suggests a review of these standards in conjunction with future public projects to improve the appearance of the Clinton St and Dubuque St corridors. Central District Plan: The effect of adding the North Clinton / Dubuque St District to the Central Planning District is that it would become subject to the policies of the Central Planning District, and any redevelopment would be subject to certain building design standards as required in the Zoning Code. Existing policies and goals in the Central District Plan that are pertinent to the North Clinton / Dubuque St District include: Selected Existing Housing and Quality of Life Goals — Central District Plan • Goal #1: Promote the Central District as an attractive place to live by encouraging reinvestment in residential properties throughout the district and by supporting new housing opportunities. • Goal #1(d): Support the goals and objectives proposed in the Historic Preservation Plan. • Goal #2(d): In higher density multi -family zones, ensure that adequate infrastructure and open space is provided to create a livable environment for residents. • Goal #3(c): Implement targeted code enforcement for areas that receive a higher level of complaints regarding zoning code violations, snow and weed removal, and trash control that affect neighborhood quality of life Selected Existing Transportation Goals — Central District Plan Goal #1: Balance traffic circulation needs, preserve neighborhood character, and public safety issues. 2 December 12, 2014 Page 3 • Goal #1(b): When planning for street improvements, give consideration to all modes of transportation, including walking, bicycling, and driving. Balance these needs with desirability of on -street parking and street trees. • Goal #3: Develop a plan to formalize safe bicycle and pedestrian connections between the major destinations in the district, including downtown Iowa City, neighborhood commercial areas, the UI campus, parks and elementary and secondary schools. • Goal #3(d): Continue to explore options such as high -visibility crosswalks to improve pedestrian crossings where major pedestrian routes intersect with arterial streets. Central District Plan Land Use Map: The Central District Plan map is a general guide for future land use and development. Staff proposes adding the North Clinton / Dubuque St District to the Central District Plan map with land use categories consistent with the rest of the Central Planning District (see attached map). The entire Central District Plan is available at: hftp://www is oq v org/site/CMSv2/File/planning/urban/centralPIan/CentraIPlanlayoutA.pdf Staff Recommendation on North Clinton / Dubuque St District: 1. Staff recommends the Central District Plan land use map be amended to include North Clinton / Dubuque St properties, as shown on Exhibit A. 2. Staff recommends the Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: A. Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors without overly discouraging redevelopment. B. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned / reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design. 3 December 12, 2014 Page 4 CIVIC DISTRICT The Civic District, so named due to the municipal/public uses in the district, is a mixed-use area in that it contains a variety of uses. Besides municipal uses, it contains multi -family, commercial, and institutional uses. Historically the three municipal blocks (bounded by Gilbert St, Iowa Ave, Van Buren St and Burlington St) have been identified as municipal campus blocks. These blocks contain City Hall, Fire and Police stations, the Recreation Center, Swan Parking Facility, and Chauncey Swan Park. Several years ago, the City advertised the corner of College St / Gilbert St (this corner is already identified as commercial in the Comprehensive Plan) for a private mixed-use building and the City Council has selected a preferred developer of the property. While the municipal blocks will still contain municipal government uses, the City realized that it is ultimately inefficient and contrasts with the desire for mixed-use development to maintain these blocks solely for public uses. The City has also had a proposal for a mixed- use building on the Recreation Center surface lot, south of the Swan parking facility. As noted in the introduction to this memo, the Comprehensive Plan identifies the need to ensure appropriate transitions to the neighborhoods that border this area. These transitions are embodied in the designated zoning classifications: The east side of Van Buren St and the north side of Iowa Ave are zoned CB -2 and CB -5, transitioning to multi -family zones to the east and north. The area around College Green Park has been designated as a historic district, ensuring that any redevelopment or additions are in keeping with the historic character of the neighborhood. Public Input: Much of the public input received emphasized mixed-use and higher densities, the need for housing and attractions for diverse ages and households (not just students), a desire for more bike lanes, bike parking/storage, more attractive streetscapes, a desire for preserving historic structures, a desire for more contemporary design, and in general support for the growth of downtown. Some public input also emphasized a desire to limit heights and to not increase densities. Much of the public input emphasized the need to extend mixed-use development into the Civic District including retail and housing for diverse households; some input noted extending `downtown' into the civic district. At the same time, staff has heard concerns with the growth of downtown and the impact on adjacent neighborhoods. Ralston Creek: Staff also prompted public input on the Ralston Creek corridor. We received public input on the need to clean and maintain the creek corridor, provide more pocket parks along the creek and improve the creek greenway, increase seating along the creek, improve the interaction between the creek and nearby parking (Swan ramp and the Recreation Center lot), and to create event space along the creek. In reviewing the Central District Plan and Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, both plans already emphasize goals improve the creek corridor, provide better access to the creek, and make the creek more of an attraction visually and physically. Three Municipal Blocks: The three municipal blocks on the east side of Gilbert St, between Iowa Ave and Burlington St, are currently in the Downtown Planning District, but were not included in the Downtown / Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. The text from the Downtown Planning District (from the 1997 Comprehensive Plan) states: 4 December 12, 2014 Page 5 The logic of promoting higher density residential development in the Downtown Planning District rests in the concept that people who live in and near downtown will walk to work (or classes in the case of University students), will patronize downtown businesses, will add to after-hours vitality, and create a sense of safety downtown. Higher density development in the downtown also reduces pressure on the less dense older neighborhoods surrounding downtown. The three municipal blocks also have land uses which are more consistent with a 'downtown' context than a neighborhood context, including City Hall, Police and Fire stations, the Robert A Lee Recreation Center, Chauncey Swan parking facility (home of the Farmer's Market), and access from a 4 -lane arterial street (Gilbert St) and a 5 -lane state highway (Burlington St). This context, combined with the City goal of encouraging more mixed-use development and no longer viewing the three municipal blocks as solely for municipal functions, leads staff to recommend these three blocks stay in the Downtown Planning District, and be added to the Downtown District section of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. There is a natural change in topography on each side of Ralston Creek I Van Buren St on the east side of the three municipal blocks; and there is a change in land use with higher -intensity municipal uses and functions on the west side of Van Buren St, and lower -intensity mixed-use development on the east side of Van Buren St. Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan: The effect of adding these three blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (see attached map) is that these blocks will be subject to the policies and goals of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. In the 'Strategic Infill' section of the Downtown District Section, the Plan states: In order to reinforce the existing fabric that currently exists in Downtown Iowa City, new development should be mixed-use and pedestrian -oriented in nature. In addition, it should follow a list of very basic rules that are consistent with the existing character of downtown. The following guidelines were developed following a thorough analysis of the patterns and framework that make downtown special. These include: • New development should be located on sites that do not contain historic buildings. • Active uses, such as ground floor retail (and not blank walls) should front onto the street frontages and the City Plaza. • Upper floors should contain office, commercial, and residential uses. • Buildings should be built to the property line. • Corner locations should be reserved for taller buildings, creating a block structure with taller buildings on the corners and lower scale historic buildings between them. • The taller buildings on the corners should have a lower base consistent with [any] adjacent historic buildings to make them `feel' contextual with the rest of downtown, while also limiting the perceived height of towers. 5 December 12, 2014 Page 6 Parking should be located both on -street and behind storefronts in parking structures Much of the public input emphasized a desire for more diverse housing options (non -student) than is currently in great supply downtown. Page 18 of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan summarizes the residential market findings: It states that there is a potential market for 'High Quality High Amenity' rental units and condominiums, and that demand is likely to come from young professionals, empty nesters, and recent retirees. It further states that the market suggests there is unmet demand for high quality rental and condominium product in Downtown and the north half of Riverfront Crossings. In staff's opinion, the three municipal blocks are a potential location for mixed-use development and adding them to the Downtown District would be consistent with that goal. The Downtown District chapter starts on page 53 of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, which is available on-line: http //www icgov orq/site/CMSv2/file/planning/2013-09-25-DowntownandRiverfrontCrossings.pdf. Central District Plan: Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, outside of the three municipal blocks, be added to the Central District Plan and identified as mixed-use (These properties are already identified as 'mixed-use' in the larger Comprehensive Plan land use map). Existing policies and goals in the Central District Plan that are pertinent to the North Clinton / Dubuque St District and consistent with much of the public input include: Selected Existing Housing and Quality of Life Goals — Central District Plan • Goal #4: Encourage development of businesses, institutions, and public entities that provide goods, services, and amenities that support healthy neighborhoods. • Goal #4(a): Encourage a diverse range of businesses that provide essential services to the Downtown area — grocery, clothing, household items, etc. • Goal #4(b): Encourage investment and reinvestment in existing commercial areas that provide goods and services for Central District neighborhoods. • Goal #5(a): Install pedestrian lighting where needed to create safe travel corridors for pedestrians. • Goal #5(c): Provide for walkable/bikable routes to and through commercial areas. Selected Existing Transportation Goal — Central District Plan • Goal #3(e): Explore the viability of alternative routes for bikes and pedestrians along Ralston Creek, recognizing the difficulties posed by private ownership of the creek, access, and flooding. Selected Existing Open Space Goals — Central District Plan • Goal #3: Improve the amenities offered in existing parks or other open spaces • Goal #5(a): Develop plans for improving visual and physical access to Ralston Creek and for restoration of the stream along both public and privately owned sections of the creek. 0 December 12, 2014 Page 7 Staff Recommendation on Civic District 1. Staff recommends the three municipal blocks, bounded by Iowa Ave, Gilbert St, Burlington St, and Van Buren St remain in the Downtown Planning District and be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit B. 2. Staff recommends the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Land Use Map be amended to include the three municipal blocks shown as a mix of 'Civic' and 'Mixed Use' and be added to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit C. 3. Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St, be added to the Central District Plan and shown as 'Mixed Use' as shown on Exhibit A. Approved by: Doug Boothroy,1 11irector Department of q4ighborhood and Develop ent Services ATTACHMENTS Map 1: North Clinton / Dubuque St and Civic Districts Map 2: Downtown Planning District Map 3: North Clinton / Dubuque St District aerial and zoning Map 4: North Clinton / Dubuque St District land uses Map 5: Central District Plan sub -areas Map 6: Civic District aerial and zoning Map 7: Civic District land uses Exhibit A: Central District Proposed Land Use Map Exhibit B: Downtown District Proposed Boundary Map Exhibit C: Downtown District Proposed Land Use Map Summaries of public input received 7 �..1. bm la� still"" M 1111 I■1 null ■■i ME Downtown ■Ii 11r: 1111!' =111: !1111! =11t� :1111 :11G■lPlanning Didirict i :111 c"1111: :1111: 1111: 11111 � �;, �_ , -� ■11: .11: :!{1'!—'1= X11111 :IIIc 11111, �� �� � ■ :111 11111: �.:II � 111111 =111 ■ 11111 !1111' 11111 :11: ■ "■ =11■ :lilt: =111�� = ' " • _ _1 r -II— 111_ 11 111E =1111! :.1111: alr, i"lii :■ RIC '111,11■ it 1110 �`�� .111.:111= =1111- _111__ T1s -■L. _ II. 111_ _ I ■ r :1111: 11= r11 c�lii 111111 �il�~:1,111: X111 :il ■■ !!!1_L0 111118 ■= :1111 it �■■ till■ 1111: :1■1 IIf- ■{��:■1: 11111,1 ■ !11■ :I■ ■' 1■1� :111:-1-1111= II11W :II �'%� ■■ ■■ � IIk: ,1,1,111 � =111- 1111111 1111: :1 � '1111: �' ■111!_=1111 :■ �� ,�r_r tl: JI']ii altrrili :►� !111' 11v !■1 �!� Ita1 !'_'�IIII I1�� 11111— 11 1 ■11 t 1� ■■ 11111 11 .•:. 1..:]: -�n■ _Iills 1■■ n ■1-: Hill ■� ■ i 111 � ■ IIIr::al! It■ ,fl 11 _�t1tEW =■11 11111 :■1 :■r= _1111 111 _T Mims1 11 '1111 11112 _'■ 1.111 �-1111 lie we MEMO Fill .. i is � `- - ����_ _ - _. ��.. ■...., .. =111. - _� _ ��� .. `�.�� �� ■,� i•_• �I ni.111 n_ =i� �i� 1111 1111! ■��■�� .._ T '� — — — _ -- INN � 1 \ ■■ ,_ � � \ice I� ��� i� �i C i■i 111 ===@@WON Mill Ir .111,■ ,� �� G , Ill �ii = II111 111111ir IIII��1 ��� ■ ■ ■>=' _: `■i == , Itc x'111111 ■"�Ifl HE ii — �'• _,'� ■ �: _ = i�� ii =J : II■ :111 1 il♦�il ■ ...�....... 1 ��t,` 1■ ■lit ` JI 1111 I i 11� ■ ■ uV umvC JI A » w Fi: 7i __J— of a� CL O _O IIyyy���• VY Ive e /. •':V: •oil n p K ti •.'•••.'• • •.• y 2 tt/ tt/ y. no t! ti as 4 M '"�i aLt+_• - �. bT a ,7�� ,r -- M M M O O W N N W N N N N N N N M M Y Y M Y OV O j y L W O m = O V N O Oe A L W N O N N A N Y O L P j •j •j •j T j z T •j T T T = = I11 T T T T III T T p n a j o g m a m j m N a g s J J J > > » » » » 3'� s J Ef 3 3 ' N o U G •`,� � U 7 T C n > T u a � IJ I CANTON ST uV umvC JI A » w Fi: 7i __J— of a� CL O _O IIyyy���• VY Ive e /. •':V: •oil n p K ti •.'•••.'• • •.• y 2 tt/ tt/ y. no t! ti as 4 uV umvC JI A » w Fi: 7i __J— of a� CL O _O IIyyy���• VY North Clinton/Dubuque Street District Land use PRM i„I JR: il- 1ILM 1 I ! 111: BLOOM,NGTO\ ST ju C 1 Isa s MARKET ST CBS � fJ0 t tA (n N 2 O J U • ' si! jEFFLRSON ST Single Family & Duplex ■ Multi Family & Rooming House Mixed Use ■ Commercial ❑ Office Public—City/Other Public ■ Private Institutional ❑ University MAP 4 MAP 5 Central.. ',, .aaniNO raic* l i Subarea A 1 l _. Subarea B I _. Subarea C The housing section of this document divides the Central Planning District Into three subareas: Subarea A Includes many of the oldest neighborhoods In Iowa City and the widest variety of hous- Ing types; In Subareas Band C, singe -family housing predominates. N q Nwi |� ■ 0 § ! 0 N © ! ! ! 2 { § !! c 2i °°-i2� �; \i!�§ ■ ui f:.�1,7]!!;!, &ra.eq:|ki ■ � � ol ! )�)k\§ !}/ƒ/{\!}}�\ > §6AiA l��,u»,,.����!§uu�.��.� �|; ;;\}k&kk;;�w) ......����������..��......... - .- Civic District Land Use U Uwav ❑ Single Family & Duplex ■ Multi Family & Rooming House Mixed Use ■ Commercial ❑ Office ■ Public—City/Other Public ■ Private Institutional University MAP 7 Central District Plan osed Future Land Use 1 W1:11-31111_1 ANN PE BLOOMINGTON �E NNS.. INN knm � AHI \I\ WASHINGTON Z 1' [- Low -Medium Density MF Stabilization ® High Density Multi -Family Redevelopment - High Density Multi-Fam Mixed Use - Open Space Urban Mixed Use Public Institutional - Neighborhood Commercial Riverfront Redevelopment - Urban Commercial - Private Institutional ® Commercial Redevelopment Single -Family Residential Stabilization Office commercial - Low to Medium Density Multi -Family - Intensive Commercial Single -Family & Duplex Residential - General commercial Document Path: S:\Iowa City GIS\PCD_Maps\ Urban_Planning\20080630_Central Planning District\ReZoningMapForJY.mxd Z O rn Z 2 O 11) EXHIBIT B downtown district ,rte r� ti x � � Downtntov 1 1 � 1 1 II '.. \ �` _, o \ \\ University \ District _ 1 I \ \ I 1 \ I \ West \ \ I Riverfront 1 1 1 South Downtown COO, :- o o e � Central Crossings II .• . � I II I II I II I II 11 II 11 Park District II II fi /i t Gilbert j I District / I 1 1 I / I 1 /81 South 1 Gilbert j c A A C y 3 � � m oV ux .� E i is v 549 X ¢ v f u �7 a u'f vii ll lJ! P. Lw� m 2 n. a am . ] r� WWI mums MA iffim 13 NMI - rlot ■ i _1 ■ It Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts 1 Q1 What are the strengths of these areas? Answered: 49 Skipped:6 es Date SurveyMonkey Adjacent to downtown and services Important to increase diverse housing stock in the downtown 11/17/2014 10:50 AM 2 Central location of significant city services easily accessible to citizens. Ralson Creek. Entry way to downtown. 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 3 Restaurants nearby? Captive audience Restaurants 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 4 Civic District- Upscale housing being brought in with activities for the entire community. The Chauncy brings life 11/17/2014 9:20 AM to needed upscale housing and arts/culture and activities North Clinton/Dubuque Street District- Development proposed will enhance building needs. Create a more viable pleasing view for the city 5 Good restaurants. Good number of student -related housing. 11/11/2014 1:24 PM 6 Close to downtown, some historic character. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 7 Walkability. Close to campus and downtown but not as busy. The area off Clinton I think is more a 10/31/2014 8:54 AM student/university area. East of Gilbert area seems more like a transition to the residential neighborhoods. The farmers market helps makes this area nice, and your close to library, city hall, rec center, etc. So it seems more civic than university oriented. It's a nicer place to bike and walk. 8 New Pi is very important to this area. Good healthy food, jobs, betty supportive of the community. 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 9 New Pioneer Co-op, the Farmers Market, bike library, the UU, the Senior Center, the Presbyterian church. 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 10 Someone emailed me this survey, but the survey does not describe the boundaries of the study area. How can 1 10/30/2014 8:01 PM comment???? 11 They are quite nice as they are now. Look nice, work well. Still have the feeling of a smaller town in them. If the "'- 10/30/2014 8:00 PM planners want a megalopolis feel, they should take jobs elsewhere. 12 New Pioneer Coop is very important to downtown Iowa City! 10/30/2014 6:40 PM 13 Location to downtown current activities and upscale development 10/30/2014 5:26 PM 14 Proximity to downtown. Walkability. Seems like there are many buildings or parcels that are ripe for development 10/30/2014 4:44 PM " and rejuvenation. 15 Central proximity; active entertainment and social life; shopping and business; cultural life; older buildings and 10/30/2014 1:03 PM landscapes hold a classical appeal 16 The Civic District has increasingly become the center of important public institutions, including buildings that 10/30/2014 9:19 AM serve government, recreation, senior living, senior activities, and commercial establishments. 17 a busy, attractive (for the most part) downtown area. 10/30/2014 3:26 AM 18 These areas currently offer a wide variety of civic and private mixed use, all attractive amenities that will be 10/29/2014 11:35 AM enhanced by additional populations and ideas, including allowing more density by going vertical. People increasingly want to participate in the city's varied activities, and more and more people are hoping to take up permanent (NOT just rental) residency close to downtown, very close in, to where things are happening, perhaps some cultural venues right in their own resident buildings. 19 Civic District - Ralston Creek North Clinton/Dubuque St - could be an amazing gateway into the city 10/29/2014 10:11 AM 20 These areas host some of the City's prominent civic buildings and provide infill opportunities for additional mixed 10/29/2014 9:50 AM use housing and retail. Ralston Creek is also an asset to the Civic District. 21 diverse amenities, great streetscapes, slow traffic, heavy foot traffic, lovely street cafes! 10/28/2014 2:02 PM 22 These areas are all Central City—where the action is; it's the heart of Iowa City. Will love to see more residential 10/28/2014 1:06 PM and retail in these areas. It creates movement and that is always good I think it's good for the city to build "up" not "out" and these areas are perfect spaces for that concept. The more adults living downtown the better for us all— helps business, makes interactions more enjoyable. The historic fabric of the Central City is also a big plus. 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 23 close in to UI campus and downtown 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 24 Great location. In the heart of the town. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 25 These are important areas for growth and improvement in the city as a whole 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 26 The Civic Area, in particular, Sets a tone for our city when approaching from the East side neighborhoods and 10/2712014 8:27 PM business parks. It's seen by a tremendous amount of people while commuting to/from work. An opportunity exists to bolster the cultural and creative tone of Iowa City. It's also an area highly accessible by walkers, bikers, runners etc. 27 proximity to campus, downtown, amenities like grocery, restaurants, unique shopping, lack of dependence on a 10/27/2014 2:16 PM car 28 proximity to central business district... and where the chauncey is going, no historical or beautiful old buildings 10/27/2014 1:49 PM need to be affected or torn down. 29 The proximity to the Ped Mall, but not being on the Ped Mall makes this (as well as the Northside) the perfect 10/27/2014 11:01 AM place for retail growth in Iowa City. The Ped Mall can be its own worst enemy for retail, and the city would benefit ` at promoting more on -street options. 30 obviously both are very close to downtown area, which we need to expand in order to grow. I'm a big proponent 10/27/2014 10:35 AM of the two projects that are planned and see the need to proceed with the CB -10 zoning. 31 Proximity to downtown, walk ability, location in general. 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 32 walking downtown 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 33 Having mixed retail, office, and residential spaces in the zone would stimulate downtown including those 10/26/2014 3:26 PM supporting businesses in it, increase the sense of membership with downtown better beyond the University population, and otherwise help to re-energize the downtown area. 34 Well situated in the city's downtown, and don't require the destruction of a high use or historic structure. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 35 North Clinton/Dubuque is a natural fit for high density student housing as the east and west boundaries are 10/24/2014 4:37 PM already defined with University housing on the west and an arterial road, Dubuque, on the east. The Civic District should be strongly considered for young professionals/non student residents that want to be downtown. The requires building up, not building out. The Downtown District will require a strong permanent resident population to attract and maintain businesses other than bars/restaurants. 36 Proximity to traditional downtown district, good parking, parks 10/24/2014 11:35 AM 37 a) college life (responsible) 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 38 The two areas are different in some significant ways, so it would have helped if this question was worded 10/23/2014 2:55 PM differently. Strength is their limited scale as areas that transition to two very different residential neighborhoods. The north Clinton/Dubuque area feels more connected to the university campus. It also includes some very nice historic buildings that should be preserved. The Civic Complex is more of a meeting between the downtown and adjacent residential areas. It's strength is it openness, lower scale. Iowa Avenue is attractive and Washington Street has the potential to be. College, Washington, and Iowa are all great streets for pedestrians and bikers. The streets feel less congested and traffic seems more residential than commuters zipping about. The Farmers Market, Co-op and and smaller local businesses help to make this area pleasant. 39 Historic buildings, varied businesses food choices, good examples of building taller to best use our limited space 10/23/2014 1:29 PM close to the urban core. 40 convenient location, accesible parking. 10/23/2014 12:29 PM 41 Since Ralston Creek runs into and through the area, it can be a source for a very attractive park area. Today ! 10/23/2014 9:41 AM much of the area is parking ramp and bridges. It can become a very attractive area. 42 North Clinton/Dubuque District: This area is very charming and welcoming. Recent upgrades have renewed the 10/22/2014 1:10 PM area and have improved the area's former reputation as the CBD's "poor cousin." I appreciate the signs that require drivers to stop for pedestrians in the walkways of this district. Civic District: The presence of adequate parking and the Civic and Rec Centers provide anchors to this area not only for existing downtown residents but the community as a whole. 43 A variety of uses, decent parking (esp. Chauncey Swan ramp). Nice to have the civic campus located downtown 10/22/2014 12:41 PM with mix of cultural and commercial, and some residential, right there. 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 44 The historic character of the area and the community feel ... walkability, locally owned businesses, mix of housing 10/21/2014 10:40 AM (various income and age levels --from families to students and older people). The implementation of historic and conservation districts, better zoning (as in the Neighborhood Conservation zones) and the design review for new structures has significantly enhanced and stabilized these areas over the past couple of decades. 45 potential 10/21/2014 9:09 AM 46 Civic District: close to center of downtown. Has the potential to extend and become part of the CBD, improving 10/21/2014 8:38 AM the block of College street between Gilbert and Linn. Great parking amenity with Swan ramp North Clinton District: close integration with pentacrest and college of business 47 proximity to downtown dining, events, etc. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 48 The south end of the North Clinton/Dubuge district contains some historic buildings that add character, and some 10/20/2014 3:32 PM churches and similar religious buildings that add a cultural element. The Civic District's anchors are City Hall, the Rec Center, and the State Historic Society along with half of the Credit Union, New Pi and the Farmer's Market. Only the latter is in a building that has any historic interest — it is the last of the buildings in the district that still relates to the former railroad branch. There is lots of parking here, much used to support Downtown. 49 1) Like the Blue Bird Cafe, the Motley Cow, the Oasis, etc. (restaurants) 10/20/2014 2:02 PM 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts Q2 What are the weaknesses of these areas? Answered: 46 Skipped:9 # Responses 1 Single uses; surface parking - waste of space, unattractive. Ralston Creek - not really being used as an amenity. Reduction of street trees - could be a better entry to downtown of city; surface lots (city lot) - like the parking, but provides development opportunities. 2 Panhandling. Not enough fun quirky shops. Parking can be annoying. 3 1 Civic District- Potential creek flooding- what can be done to divert SurveyMonkey Date 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 4 Need more housing that's not targeted to or primarily used by students. Need more housing that is likely to attract - 11/11/2014 1:24 PM young professionals and empty -nesters. Need to encourage development of additional retail and entertainment venues/uses that will attract those residents. Also need Class A office space. Tax base smaller based upon UI and charitable ownership/use. Need more pet waterers. 5 Lack of historic character on some parcels, underutized space. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 6 The Clinton area neighborhood feels pretty crowded and the streets are is not too attractive. The east of Gilbert 10/31/2014 8:54 AM area is more open, but needs some work. Need to develop the old bus station corner in a way that complements the park and farmers market. That big new building on Washington is the worst. Taking down those houses was really unfortunate. 7 1 wish there were a place outdoors to swim downtown. 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 8 Too much expensive student housing, too many drunk bros wandering around, all of the Moen monstrosities. 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 9 They are vulnerable to over -planning by the City. This can destroy a lot that we have that is good. Be mindful of 10/30/2014 8:00 PM the successful businesses in the near North side and don't do anything to disturb or harm them. 10 None 10/30/2014 5:26 PM 11 Limited parking. Some areas are flood -prone (in the Civic area). Costs are very high for development and rent. 10/30/2014 4:44 PM Almost no affordable housing for long-term city residents. 12 Parking is generally accessible but not always. THERE IS TOO MUCH STUDENT HOUSING IN THESE AREAS. " 10/30/2014 1:03 PM There can be more student housing, if needed, in areas of the westside near the old Menards. 13 At present there are only limited housing, office, and entertainment facilities in this area. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM 14 The streets, sidewalks and ped mall areas are looking run-down and drastically need a makeover. The alleys are ![ 10/30/2014 3:26 AM disgusting and should be cleaned, services consolidated and the physical alley needs to be vitalized and made to be safe and attractive for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Lack of ability to use tasteful, protruding signage makes for boring, generic -looking downtown. There is data to show that attractive, appropriate signage is important to the vitality of businesses and a whole downtown. 15 There is some dated ugliness in new and old structures alike; good design and a better sense of place will be 10/29/2014 11:35 AM appreciated for years to come. I believe the city planners are well attuned to this, and sophisticated audiences moving to Iowa City will appreciate quality in the future, even if it includes replacement, re -purposing, or at least renovation of some time -warn structures now as well as over time. In some ways Iowa City is stuck in the past. We are all proud of its history, but it's time to mix more and more modern desirable, livable structures close to the center of activities. I believe old and new structures live well side by side. 16 North Clinton Dubuque St - A very ugly gateway to downtown and the whole city really. Civic District - surface 10/29/2014 10:11 AM parking behind City Hall on Iowa Ave, not 17 Lake of signage and way finding. Lack of real connections, despite their adjacencies, to the Downtown area. 10/29/2014 9:50 AM 18 too much low end housing primarily filled with temporary residents, ugly low-cost apartment buildings 10/28/2014 2:02 PM 19 none 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 20 Both have blighted areas and need improvement. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 21 None 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 22 Currently the buildings are outdated, not highly populated, and relics of the late 70s and early 80s. This is a far 10/27/2014 8:27 PM cry from the pedestrian mall area and Dubuque street, which have blended historical and contemporary VERY well. 23 a hardware store (i realize there's one on dodge st) but there needs to be a satellite that carries batteries, 10/27/2014 2:16 PM lightbulbs, household/apartment items -etc, as we/city infills with residential, commercial and office parking may prove to be a little more challenging 24 none 10/27/2014 1:49 PM 25 Right now the area is architecturally weak. There are some open spaces, low buildings. Something about it isn't 10/27/2014 11:01 AM very walkable or inviting. Moen's project would be a fantastic way to connect this area to the Ped Mall visually and draw people east. 26 At this time not very aesthetically pleasing (abandoned building, parking lot...... 10/27/2014 10:35 AM 27 Blighted and run down. 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 28 A thriving downtown is for all ages. 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 29 Current weaknesses are those attributes listed above that it fails to offer. It is now mostly occupied by a parking 10/26/2014 3:26 PM ramp, a small city park and vacant space. The co op, a wonderful part of life in Iowa City for many decades, has long outgrown its potential and the increased traffic and residents nearby would enhance both the need for more space and the ability to gain return on it. 30 This is the edge of downtown and it will always have some clash with adjoining neighbors as downtown 10/26/2014 3:14 PM continues to expand. 31 North Clinton/Dubuque Street have existing properties that may not be easily transformed into high density 10/24/2014 4:37 PM housing. Also the northern border should be extended all the way to north Clinton for continuity. The Civic District has to cross Burlington. 32 We have an abundance of student housing, but little in the way of young professional housing. This is an area we 10/24/2014 11:35 AM need to remedy to be competitive in a global economy. We have to show a continuum of living options from student, to young professional to family housing. 33 a) too secluded, abandoned -like b) too much traffic c) college life (irresponsible) 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 34 Parking in the North Clinton/Dubuque street district is a problem for future development of the area. 10/23/2014 5:09 PM 35 The buildings that went in along Washington Street, east of the Chancy Swan Ramp are a real eyesore and it 10/23/2014 2:55 PM was a shame to see those old houses go --and the old businesses are largely gone too. This really took away from the charm of the area. It seems now the goal is to have the urban downtown butt right up to the lower scale residential neighborhood. That is unfortunate. I would like to see the scale kept lower in this area and preserve historic buildings where possible. We don't need lots more commercial in these areas. Keep the feel residential. 36 Flooding potential, growth potential, surface parking. 10/23/2014 1:29 PM 37 Noise, drunk students on weekends ect. 10/23/2014 12:29 PM 38 Presently the bridges and ramps make the area quite unattractive. 10/23/2014 9:41 AM 39 North Clinton/Dubuque District: Additional retail opportunities in the area would further enhance the sense of 10/22/2014 1:10 PM place of this district and provide additional tax revenues for further improvements. If visible links to this district from the CBD could be created, I think the connection with the CBD would enhance both districts. 40 Parking lots seem like a poor use of space in these downtown areas. 10/22/2014 12:41 PM 41 There is still not as much oversight of the maintenance of rental properties (and their tenants) in these districts as 10/21/2014 10:40 AM there could be. Absentee landlords are not the best stewards of property and do not contribute very well to the life of neighborhoods and the community that lives in them. 42 under -developed --low density. 10/21/2014 9:09 AM 43 Civic District: the existing civic buildings North Clinton District: isolation from CBD 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 44 destinations are more spread out and sparse. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 45 The north end of the North Clinton/Dubuge district is dominated by rather characterless apartment buildings, 10/20/2014 3:32 PM fraternities and and rooming houses, with most of what could be green space paved over for student parking. There are a few older buildings here that ahave a bit of character, but not much. Aside from the New Pi building, the Civic District has managed to almost completely eface its history. The public buildings lack character -- they look cheap because that was a key design goal. It is another district dominated by parking, which detracts from the character of the area. And, of course, there is a long legacy of inappropriate floodplain development here, with over a century of fill that puts the banks of Ralston Creek way above their natural elevation -- much of that was probably put there by the railroad. 46 Its unfortunate that the University and City didn't have the foresight to make the arts campus roll from one side of 10/20/2014 2:02 PM the river to the other and anchor the downtown area on the north side with a theater and art museum, This could have resulted in a more cohesive arts campus and it would be a better side of the downtown to attract customers to since it would be easier to get in and out of town. 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q3 What should be considered when the City is reviewing development proposals? Answered: 47 Skipped:8 # Responses Date 1 How development will impact future tax base 11/17/2014 10:50 AM 2 Mixed use; complementary purposes to downtown - synergy with Central Business District, 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 3 Need a quick way to get around town. Keep Market and Jefferson one-way. 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 4 Continue to focus on mixed use- upsscale 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 5 Whether the proposals will attract young professionals and empty -nesters and will provide office space and 11/11/2014 1:24 PM entertainment venues for them to populate/enjoy. Make the areas more dog -friendly. 6 Increase residential and commercial density in all non -historic parcels, preserve historic structures where 11/3/2014 1:40 PM feasible. 7 Keep the height down east of Gilbert and create something that does not overwhelm the park or the surrounding 10/31/2014 8:54 AM uses. Also make the park more of a feature that complements City Hall. Make sure the co-op gets a home our of the flood plain and preserve the Unitarian Chruch building. Keep the bike library in this area. Affordability, sustainability, scale, and character. Let the high rises stay west of Gilbert and south of Burlington. 8 Please help New Pi find a new home! 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 9 The purpose of buildings - do projects serve the whole community or only elite groups? 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 10 That you don't destroy what we have that is good in the attempt to "improve" and "develop". 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 11 The optimal location for New Pioneer Coop! A wonderful employer, supporter of many local farmers, and provider ', 10/30/2014 6:40 PM of healthy, local food! 12 Overall usage and impact for multi purpose exposure - lifestyle (art/culture), urban living - upscale, activities 10/30/2014 5:26 PM (beyond the scope of rest/bar). Multi business usage - to enable growth of new business into the Iowa City area. 13 Affordable housing is incredibly important. Think in terms of long-term residents who are stable and looking for 10/30/2014 4:44 PM reasons to stay. They are paying taxes and investing in the local economy and should have their needs considered first --before the fleeting desires of college students. Help New Pioneer Co-op find a new home in the downtown area, escaping the flood risk of Ralston Creek and establishing a new and improved DOWNTOWN retail location for their well-established and well -loved local business --so that the business can continue to grow and people who live/work downtown can still have access to affordable, healthy food without necessarily needing a car. 14 Affordable housing for families and employees who want to walk to work or downtown. Increased housing options 10/30/2014 1:03 PM for vibrant but retired residents. There is too much student housing.which destroys the neighborhood sense. 1 would rather see more affordable family, retiree housing and community-based housing for the disabled that augments an urban sense of diversity, community and cultural richness. 15 In reviewing development proposals, the city should consider the range of facilities that developers are proposing, 10/30/2014 9:19 AM as well as the track record of the principal developers. 16 The current overabundance of student housing in and on the periphery of the downtown. There is a stated 10/30/2014 3:26 AM demand for more workforce housing as well as housing for families who are looking for a walking lifestyle - with a pronounced de -emphasis on the use of cars or the needless consumption of fossil fuels.One particular area of concern to me is the West Bank building recently purchased by the Clarks. We do not need another gross apartment building for students. What a great opportunity the UIMA and the School of Music present for cleaning up our residential act downtown. Wouldn't it be a huge shame to have these beautiful buildings with the incredible beauty of the activities going on both inside and outside of these buildings, denigrated by another Clark -style student ghetto, poorly monitored and poorly maintained? 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 17 Flexibility in changing zoning to meet current needs and challenges and aspirations is in order. Zoning in areas 10/29/2014 11:35 AM such as these, as opposed to zoning in residential areas further out, needs to be more flexible. Iowa City is truly and international city, and its downtown can reflect this in architecture and excitement, not "stuck in the mud" NIMBYism. 18 Planning in these areas should be in the context of the larger downtown and guided by design guidelines and 10/29/2014 9:50 AM standards that are predictable and friendly to use. Dense infill should be encouraged and prioritized to help support a sustainable approach to protecting neighborhoods to the east of Ralston Creek. Ralston Creek seems to be a natural divide, as does the Chancey Swan parking garage. The City should not deter height - development proposals that demonstrate compact development design principles support a sustainable growth pattern by keeping our densest development within the central core where utilities and public infrastructure are already in place to handle them. Good design is good business. The City should prioritize well designed projects which means a process should be in place to guide well designed buildings and how they interface with the sidewalk / streets. 19 Will it make us proud? Will it create a happy environment for those living and working in the developed area? 10/28/2014 1:06 PM Does it add to the downtown? 20 adjacency to UI and downtown 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 21 Land efficiency, sustainable efforts, (NOT LEED!!!) Land use, high density 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 22 Improving the downtown and increasing housing and economic development 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 23 1. Does it provide some sort of some for everyone (market, gallery, movie theater, restaurant, etc) 2. Provide a 10/27/2014 8:27 PM majority of single-family housing (town homes, condos, etc). This downtown area is has TOO much housing for the college rental market. 24 sensitivity to current historic architecture there are a large number of neighborhoods where the style, size and 10/27/2014 2:16 PM height have not integrated well with existing streets capes (granted -some of which need updates). 25 overall benefit to iowa city; its citizens and their overall quality of life 10/27/2014 1:49 PM 26 Mix of use (residential, retail, etc) and quality of developer's past projects. 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 27 The mix of retail, housing and architectural design. 10/27/2014 10:35 AM 28 The need for more housing and commercial space. The ability to attract people downtown for a purpose and the 10/27/2014 9:42 AM positive development to improve the area. 29 promoting walkable, mixed-use neighborhood for all ages. 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 30 The track record of those submitting them, viability of them to a wide range of residents including students, and " 10/26/2014 3:26 PM the degree of fit with the City development plan. 31 Will it be successful. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 32 The best interest of the City. 10/24/2014 4:37 PM 33 Less required retail/commercial on ground level. This requirement has resulted in eyesore vacant space 10/24/2014 1:15 PM (particularly along the west side of Gilbert south of Burlington). There is no convenient parking and without convenient, nearby parking there will never be sustainable commercial/retail in those spaces. 34 Innovative proposals that have a WOW factor. We live in an age when people can and will move anywhere. 10/24/2014 11:35 AM Architecture and innovative spaces are necessary for our community to shine. We have some great historical properties that need to be complimented with the new. 35 a) creating more walking storefronts, such as ART GALLERIES (which would include coffee shops and bars), 10/24/2014 3:55 AM maybe a few dance clubs (both alcohol and juice bars). non-drinkers still like to go out and enjoy themselves. 36 Keeping heights down and keeping the busy, urban feel to the west of Gilbert and the south of Jefferson. Let 10/23/2014 2:55 PM these area be a buffer --no more than 4 to 6 stories. concentrate high rises around Burlington and to the south. Where there is commercial it should be like the northside Market area. 37 Most efficient(maximal) use of space, preservation of historic properties as defined by the Secretary of the 10/23/2014 1:29 PM Interior and Local Ordinance (Preservation Plan and allied documents), allowing for affordable (LMI) housing in addition to more affluent housing options, on site water retention, alternative energy (especially solar and geothermal) /energy efficiency, High sense of architectural design 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 38 The historic architecture of Iowa City is of great culture and importance to the history of our town (UNESCO world :' 10/2312014 12:29 PM heritage ect.), new designs should emphasis this history rather than attempt more post modern skyscrapers in a town that is a historic literature site rather than massive metropolis. 39 Build an attractive 5 story building on the corner of College/ Gilbert and maintain Chauncey Park.lf the city bought 10/23/2014 9:41 AM the New Pi land a park could be built which would extend the very popular Farmers' Market. Some of the area could be used for city employees parking. 40 Civic District - "When you're alone and life is making you lonely you can always go downtown; the lights are 10/22/2014 1:10 PM much brighter there. You can forget about your troubles, forget all your cares - so go downtown." Petula Clark. I remember when the parking lot on which Plaza Towers now resides used to be a "dead zone." The corner of College and Linn was a barren area that did not encourage pedestrian activity. So much has changed for the better since Plaza Towers and the Public Library have been built in that area. That comer is vital and encourages additional development in the vicinity. The proposal to build an additional mixed-use project on the corner of Gilbert and Linn will enhance not only the immediate area but will add additional stimulus to the central business district. The residents of the downtown help create a 24-hour downtown and a built-in market for downtown retailers and entertatinment. They will also provide immediate patrons for the music and art facilities proposed in the area. Downtown housing reduces urban sprawl and minimizes the need for constructing additional and expensive infrastructure. It also improves the city's tax base while displacing very few people. Downtown housing promotes greater "green" living by increasing the density of the population per square foot. Additional residential housing in the Civic District also reinforces a sense of place and reduces the image of danger and risk. 41 The chance to minimize environmental impact and maximize the diversity of downtown amenities through 10/22/2014 12:41 PM encouraging higher density, mixed use development. 42 All proposals should be evaluated with the primary criteria of ENHANCING THE COMMUNITY AND 10/21/2014 10:40 AM CHARACTER OF IOWA CITY. Build with an eye to the long term. Evaluate design with a strong sense of how any given plan will contribute positively to the strengths listed above—the historic character of the area, the feel of a neighborhood that takes pride in its uniqueness and local quality of life. 43 Iowa City MUST be different than Coralville and North Liberty. Coralville and NL are "short" suburban towns with 10/21/2014 9:09 AM very low density and very poor land usage. Iowa City must do better -encouraging tall buildings with mixed use will differentiate Iowa City from surrounding cities and will be more sustainable. 44 Adding variety to the business and amenities that are in the city. The quality of building, design, construction type, 10/21/2014 8:38 AM and residential units. 45 connection of downtown public spaces with adjacent residential areas 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 46 Parking should be under, not beside new development, so that we don't see neighborhoods close to downtown 10/20/2014 3:32 PM as being dominated by hot dead parking lots. We need to preserve what historic structures we have, but these areas have lost most of their history already. 47 Keep Market and Jefferson as two way streets. Do not turn Market and Jefferson into one way streets. Ease of 10/20/2014 2:02 PM Parking Create some large scale office space to attract more companies to locate offices downtown. No public or other subsidized housing. No higher density of housing. No high rises. Some of the so-called "modern" architecture staff seems to prefer will look like hell a few years down the road. Its not fun to walk in a shadow of buildings plus its is colder in the winter. Let the sun shine down on the sideswalks by keeping building heights reasonable. No TIF!!! 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q4 What types of uses (e.g. residential, commercial, cultural, institutional) are appropriate for these areas? Answered: 50 Skipped:5 # Responses Date 1 residential, commercial and cultural 11/17/2014 10:50 AM 2 Mixed/public, private with public using only what is necessary; divest from other unnecessary property ownership ! 11/17/2014 10:49 AM Like the residential/older houses; mixed look: churches 3 Restaurants / Move campus are/theaters/galleries North of downtown. Eg - See Torpedo Factory Art Center in 11/17/2014 10:42 AM Alexandria, VA. 4 Civic District- residential, some commercial, culture North Clinton/Dubuque Street District- business mix 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 5 Mixed-use multiple -family and retail/commercial. High rises should be encouraged to enhance the downtown 11/11/2014 1:24 PM experience and make efficient and environmentally sensitive use of available space. UI uses should be minimized to the extent possible. _ 6 All. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 7 Institutional uses --daycare would be nice. A mix of uses would be great. Don't overwhelm the area. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 8 New home for New Pi! Low. Income. Housing. A children's toy and clothing store. 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 9 Commercial (non -chain) restaurants, arts venues, small independent businesses. 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 10 Just please not industrial. And no more condos for rich people. 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 11 Residental, upscale hotel, culture, activiy 10/30/2014 5:26 PM 12 All of the above! 10/30/2014 4:44 PM 13 Building the cultural appeal even more. 10/30/2014 1:03 PM 14 Mixed use housing, entertainment, commercial, and cultural facilities would be desirable.. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM 15 As I;ve said, family and work -force residential, cultural and better commercial enterprises are appropriate here. 10/30/2014 3:26 AM The downtown district is driving a pretty smart and focused bus in terms of vision and taking advantage of the opportunities available for attractive and functional growth. The city's partnering effort with the downtown association is to be commended so far, and I hope this continues. The balance is delicate for this area and the sensitivity of the city is crucial to making the best of the current opportunities that may not again be so rich. 16 All kinds of buildings mentioned above. I particularly think dense residential home (condo) ownership should be in 10/29/2014 11:35 AM the planning on a large scale, Baby boomers and others are maturing and want to be close to things in condos DOWNTOWN. To me, this means the need for vertical construction to provide people with residential "downsizing" locations that appeal. Iowa City is a bit behind the curve, and should be a leader as a University town where excitement, innovation, and forward thinking are or should be the norm. We have great opportunities here presented, as new demographics come into play --big time. 17 North Clinton/Dubuque St - residential Civic - Cultural - open space along Ralston Creek, More Commerical 10/29/2014 10:11 AM 18 Mixed uses residential and office seem most appropriate, although the City should not preclude the others if the 10/29/2014 9:50 AM site and use are deemed appropriate. 19 There is still a major lack in a band of mid-range and upper -range housing especially for young professional and 10/28/2014 2:02 PM empty nesters who do not wish to own property, this band is primarily between $800-1600 for a single tenant unit. 'I I also believe the market would bare many more higher end housing units (particularly rentals) for professionals and young professionals above that range as well. There is a clear decline in the desire for home ownership amongst this demographic nationally, while a growing desire for downtown urban housing (see Des Moines, Omaha, Kansas City as regional examples). 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 20 Not sure what"institutional " means, but I certainly believe residential, commercial and cultural are all appropriate, ', 10/28/2014 1:06 PM probably in combination. People who live downtown want food, drink and things to do close at hand. 21 mix of uses 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 22 We need housing, and property that will bring more variety to downtown as a destination. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 23 The current plans for development are very important to the future of the downtown. 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 24 Multi unit mixed buildings. Sustainable growth by promoting one structure of both residential and commercial. 10/27/2014 8:27 PM Also, common green space areas. 25 small shops ala urban neighborhoods -cheese, wine, gardening, bike, hardware, galleries, small playground/parks 10/27/2014 2:16 PM just to sit and read or watch passersby, cafes/bistros/diners, art structures that encourage inter action such as fountains... 26 i think the chauncey would be a great addition to our downtown.. please allow the zoning change and allow this 10/27/2014 1:49 PM great mixed use urban scale project to proceed. 27 A mix of residential and retail. 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 28 The mix of retail, housing and architectural design, as stated above. Theaters, galleries, and similar Urban 10/27/2014 10:35 AM amenities, but we need more space for our great downtown to grow, we need housing, office space and retail " space, at this time we don't have enough space for sustained growth. 29 All would be good investment. The Chauncy project as proposed has all of these advantages and should move 10/27/2014 9:42 AM forward. 30 1 mile of downtown 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 31 1 don't think the greater downtown area can or should try to compete with chain stores. Coralville cannot be 10/26/2014 3:26 PM outdone in that area. Smaller specialty stores and restaurants that are either smaller chains or unique seems the best way to draw people not only from out-of-town but across town. Iowa City has always thrived on the arts and the City should continue making that a part of their plan for the greater downtown area. 32 Retail, entertainment, commercial, cultural, and residential. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 33 North Clinton/Dubuque is a natural fit for high density student housing as the east and west boundaries are 10/24/2014 4:37 PM already defined with University housing on the west and an arterial road, Dubuque, on the east. The Civic District should be strongly considered for young professionals/non student residents that want to be downtown. The requires building up, not building out. There should be a healthy amount of commercial and cultural. The Chauncy Project would be a great fit. The Downtown District will require a strong permanent resident population to attract and maintain businesses other than bars/restaurants. 34 If any of them require convenient nearby parking, forget it. 10/24/2014 1:15 PM 35 1 understand that high end condos make development numbers works best, yet I think there is a market need for 10/24/2014 11:35 AM some micro units that are affordable to young professionals and any opportunity for the city to help ensure some level of affordable housing for low to middle income helps create diversity. 36 since iowa city is a "bike -friendly town" (http://bikeleague.org/content/9-top-10-national-universities-now-bfus), we 10/24/2014 3:55 AM should make more "bike lanes": mini -streets on the street, with actual street lines as one would see on streets (saw them in Campaign -Urbana and found them adorably awesome). which would mean, take away cars and encourage more bikes and pedestrians to be out; this will lead to healthy living, tool 37 For the civic district commercial/cultural/institutional seems most appropriate. Residential does not seem like a 10/23/2014 5:09 PM good use of this area. 38 Have a mix of uses—that's great! but keep the scale low. Keep the character ecclectic and preserve some of the 10/23/2014 2:55 PM history. Keep the farmers market and the park and make them more of a feature. Enhance the washington street !. intersection with Van Buren and the Washington Street medians. The Civic area should have an open parklike feel and should not be in the shadow (metaphorically speaking) of a 10 story (or higher) building. Encourage senior housing near the City campus since you have the library, and Robert A. Lee, and Mercy Hospital. Encourage student -type uses more toward campus. Get rid of the city parking lot or screen it and have city employees and other permit holders park at the top of the ramp. Save the lower levels of parking for library patrons and folks coming downtown to do business. Also, do something to make the Rec Center lot more attractive --it is really not pleasant. Help get the coop out of the floodplain for heaven's sake!!! and help the bike library find a home in the area. 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 39 Residential, commercial office, commercial retail, neighborhood commercial, commercial restaurant, commercial 10/23/2014 1:29 PM lodging, cultural, and institutional are all appropriate in both districts. 40 No more bars, things that enhance the community and culture of iowa city and affordable housing are what we 10/23/2014 12:29 PM currently need. Maker's center would be an excellent addition as well as entertainment that does not involve alcohol. 41 Certainly the College/ Gilbert corner can be used for general mixed housing units (not just $350-500K condos. 10/23/2014 9:41 AM Parkland along Raltson Creek would augment the attractiveness of these housing units. 42 Residential/commercial 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 43 North Clinton/Dubuque Street: There has always been a tension in the existing North Side neighborhood 10/22/2014 1:10 PM regarding the presence of multi -family housing that is predominantly occupied by students who may not have the same "investment" in the North Side. Some of this pressure could be reduced by encouraging multi -family housing at more affordable rates. This could be a combination of owner -occupied housing and rental housing. I believe this would produce housing opportunities needed in the community while protecting the integrity of the North Side. Civic District: Land values in this area are expensive given their proximity to the existing CBD and the presence of City buildings. This area is not a site that can likely be developed for more moderately priced housing. At the same time, higher density housing similar to Plaza Towers would provide other housing opportunites for a population that does not want a retirement setting or that prefers the vitality of downtown (where the lights are brighter). The presence of the existing Chauncey parking ramp, the creek and the lower grade relative to land futher to the east would reduce the impact on existing residential properties. Additional recreational opportunities in the area would also enchance downtown living. 44 All, although I hope residential is part of mixed-use buildings, higher density is appropriate. 10/22/2014 12:41 PM 45 Mixed use is best ... include ALL of the types. 10/21/2014 10:40 AM 46 mixed is ONLY thoughtful option. It's time to undo the segregated uses of the 1950s and 1960s. That kind of 10/21/2014 9:09 AM zoning was disastrous for cities. 47 Civic District: cultural and entertainment, residential North Clinton District: Residential 48 residential/commercial. 49 Students need a place to live, and the north half of the North Clinton/Dubuque district should remain largely student housing, as it is. The cultural and institutional use of the south end is also good. As parking tightens and their buildings age, the religous institutions at the south end (aside from the two chaplaincies) will be tempted to flee to the suburbs. The flight of churches from Downtown Iowa City is not a good thing -- even though each of the churches that has fled have had good reasons to do so. 50 Restaurants, theater, art museum. Commercial office space. No higher density of housing. No high rises. 3/3 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 10/20/2014 3:32 PM 10/20/2014 2:02 PM Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q!5 Is there the opportunity to strengthen streetscape elements? Answered: 48 Skipped:7 Yes No 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% # If yes, what are these opportunities? Date 1 wider sidewalks - more walkable "freshen up" downtown with new landscape, esp. trees 11/17/2014 10:50 AM 2 There always are. Trees. The Civic District due to surface lots - really lacks in this. 1 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 3 Powerwash sidewalks Lighting Greenspace 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 4 Expand streetscape views for right of way- include street designs to these areas, signs, etc. 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 5 There are always opportunities. I think distinctive lamps and user friendly benches are nice. Pet waterers are 11/11/2014 1:24 PM good. 6 Make areas an extension of downtown and northside marketplace where possible, including streetscape 11/3/2014 1:40 PM elements. Consider bike lanes as well. 7 Green things up. Separation between sidewalks and street. More bike facilities, better lighting—like northside. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 8 Better lighting. Mini parks.bike fix stations. Better way for venues to post... digital? 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 9 Preservation of existing buildings when possible, maintaining and expanding green spaces, lowering amount of 10/30/2014 8:19 PM signage / advertising allowed. __... 10 Use permeable paving around trees that are planted and make the mixture of trees more diverse. Give the trees a 10/30/2014 8:00 PM chance: more access to water than they get now will enable more kinds to grow downtown. 11 Edible landscapes! 10/30/2014 6:40 PM 12 Development of this area will expand the downtown IC areas and could be the next "North IC" development area 10/30/2014 5:26 PM to grow our city in the directions needed. 13 1 would like to see some connections with the river areas 10/30/2014 1:03 PM 14 Green areas, set -backs from buildings. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM 15 See the streetscape plan 10/30/2014 3:26 AM 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 16 Large, even tall buildings are fine. They can have setbacks at street level, and allow for plantings and other 10/29/2014 11:35 AM features that add to the pleasure of walking in their midst, but low profile buildings close to the center of town are the wrong and old way to be thinking. 17 Everywhere - there doesn't seem to be much in either district. 10/29/2014 10:11 AM 18 Yes - way finding, lighting, sidewalks and connections to Ralston Creek - if the Creek were ever treated as an 10/29/2014 9:50 AM amenity and cleaned up and improved. 19 Green, and places for activities are always good, accompanied by public art. 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 20 elements that make the street a more pleasant place for pedestrians 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 21 Update lights, signs. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 22 Show Iowa City that progress can come without sacrificing the historical. Create contemporary, modern buildings 10/27/2014 8:27 PM to blend. 23 porous pavements on sidewalks to reduce snow/ice hazards, lighting, community gardens, art, maps/wayfinding 10/27/2014 2:16 PM integrated (vs looking like it doesn't belong). 24 look at plan 10/27/2014 1:49 PM 25 "Brighter" architecture is one thing. Glass and metal have really brightened up the Ped Mall so things aren't so 10/27/2014 11:01 AM brown. Quality retail is the best way to bring people onto the sidewalks. 26 The city is in the works of improving our streetscape, which is very impressive, but we just need to expand both 10/27/2014 10:35 AM to the east and south. 27 Lighting and the new building will improve the overall area 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 28 The street art including statues, banners, benches etc. should continue -- though I suggest other yearly statues 10/26/2014 3:26 PM beyond Herky. I don't know the feasibility of transforming the non -University into useable public space that is much more attractive than currently is. But if able to be accomplished, this has always struck me as an under developed possibility from the power plant and south. 29 Modernize it and get rid of vacant locations. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 30 Should just be consistent with the downtown master plan. Walking ! biking being the main elements. 10/24/2014 11:35 AM 31 bike lanes, better sidewalks and more bluelight emergency buttons (there's not that many, if you notice ... just a 10/24/2014 3:55 AM few here and there - i think little of eastern illinois university (small charleston, illinois) had more than i see here) 32 Intersections and medians. Take a look at van buren and washington and Iowa Avenue --this is a great area. 10/23/2014 2:55 PM Decorative brick, nice lighting, plantings, simple benches, art. Treat this are like the northside shopping area. 33 Expand amenities seen in the Central Business District and Northside Marketplace --plantings, street furniture, 10/23/2014 1:29 PM lighting. 34 current space has beautiful mural which has been there for a few years now. 10/23/2014 12:29 PM 35 The civic area is particularly unattractive. 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 36 Additional trees, plantings, flower pots, pedestrian -friendly intersections, and outdoor dining should be included in 10/22/2014 1:10 PM any proposals for these two districts. 37 More ornamental street lighting, cohesive planters and paving (more brick?), aesthetically designed 10/22/2014 12:41 PM crosswalks/alley entrances. Expanding the "literary walk" area. 38 Utilize plantings, sculptures, distinctive signage and lighting. Require all designs to have "human dimensions" 10/21/2014 10:40 AM such as porches, street side entrances, sidewalks, landscaping, etc. Minimize the prominence of parking by putting it in back of buildings or requiring landscaping that softens the effect of multiple cars (a good example of the latter is the parking lot of Mercy Hospital's Emergency entrance along Gilbert Street... care was taken to create a buffer of plantings, a mini park with benches and planters). 39 I'd like to see more covered walkways next to buildings. 10/21/2014 9:09 AM 40 High quality building design and materials, 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 41 it fine as is. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts 42 Parking -lot views aren't attractive. Putting parking under new structures would be very wise. We have already begun this in (or near) both districts, and it works. 43 Keep the pavements clean and updated. Keep Jefferson and Market as two-way streets. Lights and holiday decorations encourage people to get in a buying spirit. Flowers in the spring and summer. 3/3 SurveyMonkey 10/20/2014 3:32 PM 10/20/2014 2:02 PM Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts Q6 Is there the opportunity to strengthen pedestrian and bicycle amenities? Yes No Answered: 47 Skipped:8 ,H Ww"P �11 vs✓;[.. .. , a. �"z%;' SurveyMonkey 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1 2 3 4 If yes, what are these opportunities? Date More bike parking 11/17/2014 10:50 AM Bicycle parking in Civic District. Easily access to drive on Dubuque Street If it doesn't interfere with cars Continue streetscape plans to keep continuous look 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 5 More bike racks. More enforcement of ordinances prohibiting bike riding on sidewalks in and around the ped mall +: 11/11/2014 1:24 PM (I realize that's not in these districts). 6 Widen sidewalks, decorative or brick paving, more bike lanes. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 7 More bike racks. Covered racks. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 8 Better / more bike lanes and bicycle parking, a covered bicycle parking area. More clearly marked cross walks. 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 9 More and better racks for bicycles and motor bikes. 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 10 Bike lanes and parking. Bike service stations. Even just having a full-service grocery store in the walkable- 10/30/2014 4:44 PM bikeable part of town is an important element in empowering bicyclists and pedestrians. Reduce car traffic wherever possible to slow down traffic and make it safer. 11 Especially more and better bikeways, close -in bike parking, rapid pedestrian -friendly transportation to the hospital 10/30/2014 1:03 PM and across the river, perhaps to places like the center of Coralville (maybe using the river as a rapid linkage.) ALSO, A GOOD BIKEWAY EXCLUSIVELY FOR BIKES THAT RUNS FROM EAST OF DOWNTOWN, SHIFTING TO BURLINGTON STREET, ACROSS THE RIVER, THROUGH THE HOSPITAL/SPORTS CAMPUS ON MELROSE (INTO UHEIGHTS AND BEYOND TO C-VILLE). 12 Broader sidewalks. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM 13 See streetscape plan 10/30/2014 3:26 AM 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 14 1 think the streetscape mentioned above will help with pedestrians, but I'm not well versed on how to improve 10/29/2014 11:35 AM bicycling needs. More bike parking (some covered would be nice). How about some place to sit or find cover while you are waiting 15 This can always be done. 10/29/2014 10:11 AM 16 More bike lanes out of downtown and also would love to see some some bike locker opportunities, either on the 10/28/2014 2:02 PM 10/23/2014 1:29 PM streetscape or in the parking garage for downtown residents to store bikes downtown long term residential bike parking), wide radius "bump outs" at intersections, zebra crossings, etc. 17 safe and attractive paths and walkways connected to the country are huge 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 18 streetscape elements 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 19 More bike friendly roads. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 20 intermodal might decrease cars traffic -widen existing roads and/or sidewalks as has been done north of i80 on 10/27/2014 2:16 PM 10/23/2014 12:12 AM dubuque street. It would be great to minimize the need for addtional cars in these two districts by including additional pedestrian 21 look at plan 10/27/2014 1:49 PM 22 NA 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 23 bike lanes, boulevards, 10/27/2014 10:35 AM 24 Connect this area to the rest of downtown 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 25 Smart Growth for Iowa City. Make it a place where people want to Live and Work and be proud to say you live in 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 10/21/2014 10:40 AM Iowa City. etc... see the suggestions for strenthening streetscapes above. 26 Though possibly an odd way of responding, it amazes me that bicycles are not more closely regulated downtown. 10/26/2014 3:26 PM 10/21/2014 8:38 AM This is a hazard to those on bikes too. Stop signs are usually not obeys, many go the wrong way on busy streets, Its fine as is 10/21/2014 8:17 AM and dash from riding on the street to sidewalks. I've been close to hit many times. For bikes and pedestrians and These areas are already very walkable and bikeable, but in the Civic District, biking north -south is largely 10/20/2014 3:32 PM motorists to get along well safety laws should be a priority as the were, I think, until the current police chief. confined to Gilbert, one of the most bicycle unfriendly streets in town (North Clinton serves as a way for cyclists 27 Make it bicycle friend with wide sidewalks and a transition on on street paths. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 28 _ BIKE LANES! (http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/index.cfm) - iowa should be on this map! sample bike lane: , 10/24/2014 3:55 AM http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/images/bicyclists/ppw_crossing.jpg - something more detailed. 29 More bike parking (some covered would be nice). How about some place to sit or find cover while you are waiting ! 10/23/2014 2:55 PM for the bus. 30 A road diet and ample bike parking, a better way to limit bike storage in highly used areas (perhaps by requiring 10/23/2014 1:29 PM residential bike parking), wide radius "bump outs" at intersections, zebra crossings, etc. 31 accessible bike lanes 10/23/2014 12:29 PM 32 People living in these "affordable units" and working downtown could do without automobiles, hence advocating 10/23/2014 9:41 AM bicycles and pedestrians 33 Improve sidewalks and add bike lanes 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 34 It would be great to minimize the need for addtional cars in these two districts by including additional pedestrian 10/22/2014 1:10 PM and bicycle amenities. These amenities would enhance the people -oriented nature of the districts and encourage people to enjoy the areas without concern for increased traffic. 35 Designated bike lanes (more than "sharrows") wherever space allows. Prettier crosswalks (again, paving comes 10/22/2014 12:41 PM to mind - the area at Iowa Ave. and Linn Street is a nice example. 36 Create bicycle paths, pull out lanes for buses, and add benches, decorative walkways/sidewalks with planters, 10/21/2014 10:40 AM etc... see the suggestions for strenthening streetscapes above. 37 wider sidewalks, bike racks, seating 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 38 Its fine as is 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 39 These areas are already very walkable and bikeable, but in the Civic District, biking north -south is largely 10/20/2014 3:32 PM confined to Gilbert, one of the most bicycle unfriendly streets in town (North Clinton serves as a way for cyclists to dodge the heavier traffic on Dubuque, in contrast). It would be nice if there was an easy way, coming north on Gilbert, to dodge east onto Van Buren, perhaps following the creek (on the diagonal). The barriers to this are mostly south of the Civic District. 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 40 Don't use sharrows. They are horrid. I prefer wider sidewalks. Remember, a lot of people will continue to use 10/20/2014 2:02 PM cars. If you want people to shop and buy lots of stuff, don't discourage the use of cars. 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q7 In the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District, is there the opportunity to increase residential density (the number of dwelling units in a given area)? Answered: 40 Skipped: 15 Yes wib�di No 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Yes _ 82.50% 33 No 17.50% 7 Total 40 # If yes, what are these opportunities? Date 4� 1 Perhaps be careful of obscurity gateway to downtown. I like the feeling of residential mix now - at least the 11/17/2014 10:49 AM properties that are kept neatly. 2 Encourage development of high-rise apartments/condos. 11/11/2014 1:24 PM 3 Redevelop non -historic buildings into taller, larger apartment/condo buildings. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 4 Please no more new apartment buildings. Keep the older houses. Offer help for upkeep, or buy out the current 10/30/2014 8:00 PM owners, remodel and repair if necessary, and then sell them to families. 5 Upscale housing is needed for professionals outside of the College attendees. Will increase economy and build a better mix of individuals into Iowa City living. 6 BUT NOT FOR MORE STUDENT HOUSING. 7 Isn't there enough saturation already? 8 Verticality is a must as part of the building mix, and I think flexibility in zoning variances are in order to accommodate more density by going up. The downtown can be an even more exciting landscape with additional "high-rises." For other kinds of historic low profile landscapes and neighborhoods, people need only to journey out from the center of the city to areas where this character will inevitably (and appropriately) be maintained and cherished. (Obviously there are some downtown properties of historical significance that need to be preserved, and I see this happening with the Englert, the MidWestOne building, and likely the Jefferson Hotel.) For the future, verticality is a must. The downtown can be an exciting landscape with additional high-rises. For other kinds of historic low profile landscapes and neighborhoods, people need only to journey out from the center of the city to areas where this character will inevitably (and appropriately) be maintained and cherished. 1/3 10/30/2014 5:26 PM 10/30/2014 1:03 PM 10/30/2014 3:26 AM 10/29/2014 11:35 AM Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 9 This already has high density in it and across from it with the dorms. This isn't going to be single family homes. 10/29/2014 10:11 AM Students want to live close to campus - add density here, relieves pressure from other neighborhoods where single families live (or could live). 10 This area would be well suited for Mixed Use Residential - density is critical to ensuring an efficient use of the 10/29/2014 9:50 AM City's infrastructure already in place and to support the larger Downtown commercial base. Housing for both students and young professionals should be considered. 11 Yes, but with less college student housing and more units aimed at more permanent residents. Love the 10/28/2014 2:02 PM UniverCity program, that's a great idea. More of that would be so great! 12 1 feel it is essential to build up, not out 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 13 taller buildings 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 14 Increase vertical density. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 15 Through condo buildings AND town home units (5 plex) 10/27/2014 8:27 PM 16 re -zone to accomodate 4-6 story construction with a sensitivity to current aesthetic. 10/27/2014 2:16 PM 17 Building some higher buildings will increase density. This will hopefully add people without adding to parking 10/27/2014 11:01 AM issues. 18 not sure, it seems like that's pretty dense, but I'm not sure of numbers. 10/27/2014 10:35 AM 19 The Chauncy project will provide much needed housing. 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 20 The current development plan for the old bus station parcel and I would say the Hieronymous property on Clinton !; 10/26/2014 3:26 PM street but am not sure the University is not planning to develop it. 21 High-end housing is needed to attract the people to the downtown so it can thrive. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 22 Go up. 10/24/2014 4:37 PM 23 If I were king for a day, I would find clusters of old houses that are not in good repair nor have historical value and 10/24/2014 11:35 AM work to raze and create townhouse projects which could keep ownership costs down but create small niches for families among the college residents to help reshape neighborhoods. Mann is a critical piece of the puzzle, this area needs a school which attracts young families. I support the notion of taking down the old school, building a new learning environment on the city park property and then putting a new park on the old footprint of the Mann school. 24 it is already too crowded. the empty spaces, you will need to put storefronts (corner shop groceries like John's, 10/24/2014 3:55 AM art galleries, coffee shops, bars and dance clubs). if you want more housing, go to the south end: benton and riverside - make highrise apartmentsl start building UP and create a skyline in iowa cityl :) 25 1 think the areas close to campus are good for student housing. But preserve historic buildings. 10/23/2014 2:55 PM 26 Find a way to require surface parking be developed to a higher use so that residential units would be built. An 10/23/2014 1:29 PM ordinance setting the City as the only entity allowed to provide parking for hire. Continue to allow demolition of non -historic buildings through increased density in zoning. Conduct a historic property identification and evaluation inventory survey in the two districts as directed by Certified Local Government requirements. 27 If so, only by AFFORDABLE housing, Iowa City lacks affordable housing for young professionals, which is why 10/23/2014 12:29 PM many entering the job market are forced elsewhere. we have a surplus of 5+ bedroom houses, and single bedroom apartments well over 10001mo. Where is affordable housing for people who work at the public library, university or other low paying but highly important jobs. Consider how many people live below the poverty level, a student can't work enough hours to afford rent alone. 28 More efficient buildings, ie commercial 1st floor residential upper floors 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 29 Please refer to my response to Question No. 4. In addition, increasing residential density in this District would 10/22/2014 1:10 PM provide more of an 24-hour area that would encourage commercial development; it would also reduce pressure in the North Side to convert homes into multi -family housing or to remove existing structures for multi -family housing. 30 Yes! Taller buildings I would think is the most efficient and common-sense way to accomplish this. 10/22/2014 12:41 PM 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 31 1 would be very careful about this. This area has a strong mix already of historic houses and apartment buildings. 10/21/2014 10:40 AM Greater density is not something I would encourage, or at least I would be VERY careful about so as not to disrupt the character of this area as an important transition zone between residential/neighborhood and the downtown/university district. 32 Taller, more dense buildings. But you first need to find a land owner whoi help wants to do this and help make it 10/21/2014 8:38 AM financially possible. w 33 built up not out. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 34 Mostly at the north end, replacing old rooming houses and small frats with buildings more akin to the newer 10/20/2014 3:32 PM building on the southwest corner of Daverport and Dubuque. This fills a quarter block with parking underneath. It's rather characterless, but still, an effective use of space. 35 Do NOT increase the density of housing! 10/20/2014 2:02 PM 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts 08 In the Civic District, are there opportunities to increase mixed-use facilities? (Mixed-use development blends a combination of residential, commercial, cultural, institutional, or industrial uses, where those functions are physically and functionally integrated, and that provides pedestrian connections.) Yes No Answered. 43 Skipped: 12 SurveyMonkey Answer Choices Responses Yes 95.35% 41 No Total 2 43 # If yes, what are these opportunities? Date 1 Surface parking lot south of the parking garage. Mixed use - high density residential 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 2 Not until all downtown storefronts have businesses (and some look like bad space). 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 3 Get going on The Chauncey. That's the perfect example of how to help the downtown footprint step east across 11/11/2014 1:24 PM Gilbert Street. 4 Redevelop non -historic buildings into taller, larger mixed-use apartment/condo buildings, partially fill in surface 11/3/2014 1:40 PM parking lots with buildings that have underground parking, leave small amount of surface parking if needed. Make "! it an extension of downtown proper. 5 Co-op. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM . 6 ... ... ... . Please NO industrial stuff. More housing for middle income elderly people downtown: giving up driving but still 10/30/2014 8:00 PM being able to easily access the ICPL, restaurants, Credit Union, groceries (Co-op, Bread Garden) and the UIHC and Dental College via bus would be very attractive to a lot of people. And dilute the student and oligarchy population that is there. 7 Office space, variety of housing accommodations, entertainment facilities. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM 8 Yes. Innovative and appropriate partnerships are desirable - the Plaza Towers, 201 @ Park, the new UIMA 10/30/2014 3:26 AM project are excellent examples! 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 9 I'm in favor of doing this anywhere it becomes possible downtown, especially in these areas of current concern, 10/29/2014 11:35 AM of course. The focus in mixed use (based on dramatic demographic changes coming) should be on incorporating condominiums for people to buy as they downsize and want to spend their later years close to Iowa City's best offerings. (The same is true of young professionals who want to live close in while building up equity in property, but walking -distance close to the amazing cultural scene that we have here.) 10 Yes - see comments above. 10/29/2014 9:50 AM 11 More buildings like plaza tower that are mixed used, appeal to mixed generations, provide additional amenities 10/28/2014 2:02 PM like hotels, grocery, entertainment, etc give Iowa City a metropolitan feel that is incredibly appealing to the type of urban population that we want more of downtown. 12 1 think the Chauncey is a perfect opportunity, blending residential,cultural and commercial. And it goes up, not 10/28/2014 1:06 PM out. It expands the mix downtown and brings a new excitement to the city. 13 taller mixed use buildings ! 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 14 Any development in this area should consider mixed use. Make the living exciting by bring a reason to live and 10/27/2014 9:33 PM visit these units by interesting other parts of the mixed use areas. 15 The current plans for improving this area should be approved. 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 16 The Chauncey. Moen has shown the success of plaza towers and park 201. Those projects and their successes 10/27/2014 8:27 PM speak for themselves. Plaza towers has become the hub for downtown activity. 17 diy shops to enhance the neighborhood connections, miniature versions of shops for bikes, cars, gardening, beer 10/27/2014 2:16 PM making so that it almost has a maker space feel encouraging the neighborhoods to seek out advice and how to for their own property(s). 18 chauncey plan allows of that 10/27/2014 1:49 PM 19 NA 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 20 1 was under the assumption that we were moving forward to do that, which is exciting, I don't think those areas 10/27/2014 10:35 AM are very aesthetically pleasing as the planned developments. It would be a big improvement to have The Chauncey and New Pi developments done and help bring more people downtown, both as residents and shoppers. 21 The proposed Chauncey has all of this 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 22 As is occurring, buildings with businesses and offices on the ground floor and living spaces above. 10/26/2014 3:26 PM 23 The Chauncy please. 10/24/2014 4:37 PM 24 It seems like this is being done with the new UI led properties. 10/24/2014 11:35 AM 25 with fraternities/sororities, religious groups and the library, there are plenty of volunteers to make things happen! 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 26 Sure, but don't bring the height of downtown across Gilbert St. Clean up the old bus station / Jon Wilson area but 10/23/2014 2:55 PM don't erect a building that overwhelms the park, the farmers market, and the civic uses. Keep it low. Provide opportunities for seniors and families who are attracted the the library, Robert Lee, and farmers market and coop. Leave the high-rises to River Crossing. No high-rises on Iowa Ave. either. Old Cap should be the focal point, not a glass and steel box. 27 Proceed with the Chauncey as designed and approved. Allow air rights to private housing and commercial 10/23/2014 1:29 PM properties over City owned surface parking. Industrial zoning probably is out of place as is intensive commercial uses. 28 cultural --walking paths. residential --affordable housing units. 10/23/2014 9:41 AM 29 More efficient buildings, ie commercial 1 st floor residential upper floors " 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 30 Absolutely. The Gilbert/College site is exactly where additional housing could be placed to further provide readily 10/22/2014 1:10 PM available residents to support the CBD and the proposed Clinton/Dubuque District. I suspect the impact that Plaza Towers and the Library had on Linn Street would also enhance the Gilbert Street area. 31 Planned developments like the proposals for College/Gilbert corner with bowling/movie theater, gallery, offices, 10/22/2014 12:41 PM cafe, and residential. Can we get something like that in more locations? Is this being considered for the public parking lot area next to Bluebird Cafe/Riverside Theater? 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 32Your statement says it well ... the combination integrates a variety of uses and provides pedestrian connections. " 10/21/2014 10:40 AM This is vital to the success of a downtown. 33 complete the developer agreement for the Chauncey building ASAP and get is started. 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 34 develop more mixed-use buildings at larger scale. less small scale buildings with level one commercial and two 10/21/2014 8:17 AM levels of student housing. 35 This is less clear, but proposals for short towers with apartments above commercial space make sense. The one 10/20/2014 3:32 PM proposal that has come and gone would have been an eyesore, but the basic idea is sound. 36 You could consider art studio/sales space below residences or commercial office space. Only make the space 10/20/2014 2:02 PM available to those who also sell their work. Encourage companies like Meta Communications to locate downtown. 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts 09 In the Civic District, how can the Ralston Creek corridor be enhanced? Answered: 39 Skipped: 16 1 111 Would be nice to feel like the natural area was more accessible - very overgrown - riprap is unattractive - could SurveyMonkey Date 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 7 ; New pi! 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 8 be address 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 2 Clean Creek _ 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 3 Move faster to develop Chauncy project 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 4 Clean up the creek. Maybe provide more walking/biking paths along the creek. 11/11/2014 1:24 PM 5 Have a small green belt and trails follow the creek, occasional pocket park, perhaps. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 6 More views of creek. Seating. Native plants. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 7 ; New pi! 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 8 More maintenance on creek sides, benches, areas for people to relax. New Pi it's such an essential part of 10/30/2014 8:19 PM i downtown, but better / safe pedestrian and vehicle traffic flow needs to be implemented in their lot and alley areas. 9 Clean it up every spring. 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 10 Turn it into green space, flood -proof event space, or parking. Move New Pi and other businesses away from it 10/30/2014 4:44 PM and reduce the impact of flooding. 11 PRESERVING THE HISTORICAL FEEL RATHER THAN PLOWING IT OVER 10/30/2014 1:03 PM 12 Looks difficult to me --the creek there seems to be under existing structures for the most part. If a new structure 10/29/2014 11:35 AM sometime is put in place in this area that goes above the creek perhaps the structure can be elevated above the flood area, and then have people -friendly viewing areas of the stream on the creek level. 13 Give it room to breath - allow trails along it. Add some greenspace 10/29/2014 10:11 AM 14 It can be opened up to serve as an amenity to the public, allowing for paths alongside for the public and to 10/29/2014 9:50 AM " restore it to it's natural state. 15 Would love to see a walking path that runs the length, I creek is kinda hidden. 10/28/2014 2:02 PM 16 Beautify it with plantings, stone walls and footbridges. Keep it clean. 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 17 open it up: bike trail along it 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 18 Clean it up and enhance it. Celebrate the creek! 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 19 1 20 Provide more drainage and flood mitigation systems. 21 river/creek-bike/walk trails, mini amphitheater/stage where existing new pi is located, 22 NA 23 Walk ability, lighting, aesthetically pleasing buildings with multiple uses 24 1 am not sure. 25 More development of recreation areas and removal of old structures. 26 !': Cleared with a trail would be great. 27 what is "ralston creek"? 1/2 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 10/27/2014 8:27 PM 10/27/2014 2:16 PM 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 10/26/2014 3:26 PM 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 10/24/2014 4:37 PM 10/24/2014 3:55 AM Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 28 Clean it up. Art, and seating along the area between parking ramp and creek. Also it would be nice to have 10/23/2014 2:55 PM information about the creek—maybe a map or something. The Robert Lee parking lot needs some help. 29 Enhancement would be tricky and would require the cooperation of private land owners. However, an opportunity 10/23/2014 1:29 PM exists to swap land with the New Pioneer Coop to provide air rights over city -owned parking and to construct downtown park amenities in place of the current store location. 10/23/2014 9:41 AM 30 See above 31 Clean up the creek 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 32 Accommodations should be made to enhance the riverbanks, provide picnic facilities and shelters and 10!22/2014 1:10 PM ( bike/pedestrian paths. 33 Not sure what's needed for the waterway to be protected. The walled area near the Co-op seems less than ideal 10/22/2014 12:41 PM and has caused flooding concerns in the past. Perhaps a larger culvert under Washington street, with nicely designed bridge aspects? A flood wall with a mural? A mini skate park that doubles as spillway for the creek? 34 1 haven't thought about this much, but I would strongly encourage thoughtful consideration of this issue. Take 10/21/2014 10:40 AM care to preserve (or recreate) as much of the natural environment as possible, but also make the creek a community asset—think "a natural park running through town." 35 Green space and park space. When the Coop Moves, that space should be a park/green space/flood plain. 10/21/2014 9:09 AM 36 clear out the weed trees 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 37 connect mixed-use with downtown. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 38 Turning the creek into a greenbelt instead of a ditch would be nice, but this is a pie in the sky idea that would 10/20/2014 3:32 PM involve pulling development back half a block from the creek and removing a century of fill (some probably toxic) from the land in question. The net result would significantly lower the upstream flash flood risk, and could pay off in the very long run, but in the short run, it would cost money we don't have. 39 Clean it up periodically. 10/20/2014 2:02 PM 2/2 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q10 What other factors should the City consider? Answered: 37 Skipped: 18 # Responses pate 1 Get more people living close to downtown - consider mixed use that includes high density residential - build up in ! 11/17/2014 10:49 AM civic district 2 Families still need vehicles 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 3 Continue improvements- those that don't keep business updated and clean 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 4 1) How can the City protect against erosion of tax base (i.e., keep more property from becoming UI owned). 2) 11/11/2014 1:24 PM How can the City best attract young professionals and empty -nesters - through housing, office space, and entertainment opportunities. 5 Expand downtown. Increase residential density, particularly aimed more toward young workforce, working -aged 11/3/2014 1:40 PM professional couples in mind. Probably more student apartments as well, but the professional age group is still currently the most underserved. Keep in mind the shockingly low vacancy rate of apartments/condos within a 1 mile radius of the center of downtown and encourage as much building for greater density as possible while protecting historic character where feasible. 6 Keep TIF to a minimum. If you have to clean stuff up, fine. But realize if you TIF something in one place you eat 10/31/2014 8:54 AM into market on other properties. Why do offices need so much money to go downtown? You shouldn't have to pay to finish their space and provide free parking. 7 " Add sound fixtures to the permanent stage! Thus it's an ongoing expense for artists. 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 8 Not spoiling the atmosphere of the town that we have now. It's not broken, so don't try to fix it. 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 9 1 view the Chauncy project as the most comprehensive and inclusive project presented. Moen Mgmt continues to 10/30/2014 5:26 PM remain forward thinking in ways that create a unique opportunity for the lifestyles of Iowa City residents and guests. Their other building projects brought in high end residents which enabled the retail market to change in downtown IC. Upscale restaurant needs, activity choices are not as focused on college acivities. We need to continue to growth of this level of building to build and expand on the college base. 10 Obviously the development south of Burlington should be considered over the next thirty years. 10/30/2014 1:03 PM 11 The civic mindedness of the developers' proposals, based on their previous work in the City and their presence in 10/30/2014 9:19 AM the City. 12 1 applaud the City Council and City planners for not allowing themselves to be trapped in old zoning boxes in 10/29/2014 11:35 AM public high -use areas. 13 A permanent home that's specific to the Farmer's Market - maybe something that allows for a few year-round 10/29/2014 10:11 AM farmer's market shops. 14 Encouraging energy efficiency within buildings is important. But it isn't as important as encouraging the densest 10/29/2014 9:50 AM projects (and efficient buildings) in the City center, which in the end, keep population and employment bases centralized to utilize infrastructure already in place, reduce carbon emissions from cars, and encourage a healthy citizen base in walkable communities. 15 Lots of emphasis on pedestrians and safe and enjoyable movement of walkers and bikers. 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 16 Don't be afraid of higher density. Give citizens more reasons to live downtown. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 17 inter modal, move to electric light rail, bus or large vans 10/27/2014 2:16 PM 18 NA 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 19 1 think the City has done a great job of looking forward, gathering great proposals and developing our core to 10/27/2014 10:35 AM strengthen our whole community. 20 Please move the Chauncey forward it is long overdue and will be a great addition to downtown. 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 1/2 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 21 Do you aspire to help create places people LOVE? 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 22 Congruency between new buildings themselves and the architectural history remaining in the area. " 10/26/2014 3:26 PM 23 Madison WI, they did a nice job. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 24 Increasing the commercial tax base in order to provide some top notch social services and increase the borders 10/24/2014 4:37 PM 10/21/2014 10:40 AM of the SSMID. residents of a given area. Give everyone a chance for input (as you're doing here --bravo!!!), use balanced and 25 Affordable housing, unique housing stock and blending different economic classes together should be the overall 10/24/2014 11:35 AM goal. The more people live proximate to downtown the more vibrant it can be. People want to get away from the input, and LISTEN to them, making adjustments as necessary. Put COMMUNITY AND CHARACTER first! suburban sprawl, car intensive model. If people can afford to live in a manner where they can work, educate, That small vocal segments of the public really do not know what they are talking about. 10/21/2014 8:38 AM shop and play without a car, this community can really thrive. density, cost. 26 ART GALLERIES! and integrating the college kids with the "townies". 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 27 Keep it funky and local and eclectic. Keep it local. Green it up. 10/23/2014 2:55 PM 28 The City should take into account that it has provided TIFs to competitors to the New Pioneer Coop and chosen " 10/23/2014 1:29 PM against including them in recent development. The complaints of a transition zone, to me, are a moot point as response. Some critical self reflection of success and failures by city staff is also important. there are lower intensity areas already in place due to current zoning in the blocks separating the College Green neighborhood and the Civic District and the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District and the Northside Neighborhood. 29 affordable housing, increasing cultural and non-alcoholic entertainment and value, emphasis on history of Iowa 10/23/2014 12:29 PM city and fame as literature UNESCO site. 30 The skyline tapering from the 12 and 14 story buildings in the heart of downtown to the 2 story houses in the Van 10/23/2014 9:41 AM Buren -Dodge Street area. The present commitment of the city for a 15-20 story building on the College/ Gilbert 2/2 site is not acceptable. 31 The civic district often feels unsafe. " 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 32 Don't be afraid of higher density and diversity of uses. To the extent the City can facilitate for-profit development, 10/22/2014 12:41 PM mixed use should be the key -- not more apartment buildings. 33 Iowa City has made some mistakes in its town planning/urban development but it is strong when it listens to the 10/21/2014 10:40 AM residents of a given area. Give everyone a chance for input (as you're doing here --bravo!!!), use balanced and informed judgement in writing guidelines, making plans, etc. give the residents ample opportunity for review and input, and LISTEN to them, making adjustments as necessary. Put COMMUNITY AND CHARACTER first! 34 That small vocal segments of the public really do not know what they are talking about. 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 35 density, cost. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 36 I've run out of ideas. 10/20/2014 3:32 PM 37 City planners should listen to all points of view, not just those people who agree with the planners' points of view. 10/20/2014 2:02 PM When the planners solicit input, it too often appears their materials are designed to seek a predetermined response. Some critical self reflection of success and failures by city staff is also important. 2/2 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 11 Other comments Answered: 29 Skipped: 26 # Responses Rate 1 Really like the Chauncey plans - do more like that in civic district to bring people to urban core 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 2 _. ... ., _, . .._...,, ..,. _.._ . ,, .._ _......,. 1 think things are generally on the right track. I'm 51 and have been in Iowa City and working downtown about 25 11/11/2014 1:24 PM years. The movement of what I'd call 'the downtown' south across Burlington is finally taking shape, and it's going - to be awesome. I think if I eat right and make it to the gym a bit more, I'll live long enough to see if the requirement that various residential buildings downtown have retail space on the ground floor makes sense. I will say that many, many of those required storefronts are empty or turn over. A lot. BUT, consistent with requiring property owners now to set those spaces aside for the time when the market demands them, if the City encourages more density in development downtown - high-rises, multi -use facilities, etc. - the effort will complement that prior planning. Thanks for the opportunity. 3 More tall buildings because they are the most efficient use of space in addition to being the most environmentally 11/3/2014 1:40 PM friendly. Building "up" instead of "out" not only adds vibrancy but is also the more environmentally -sustainable practice. 4 Keep it green. Open. Don't make it all hardscape. Buildings should be no taller than 5-6 stories. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 5 Please consider easing busking restrictions. It's sucked the soul out of town. Weird is ok! 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 6 Permeable paving!! 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 7 Please include New Pioneer Coop in the plans! They and the Iowa City Farmers Market have been the brightest 10/30/2014 6:40 PM shining stars in Iowa City for a long time! 8 We are truely a blue zone community and more zoning to create well rounded urban living is essential. 10/30/2014 5:26 PM 9 Please please please make sure that New Pioneer Co-op is included in long range planning for the downtown 10/30/2014 4:58 PM area! It is essential to the spirit of Iowa City as an independent minded community. 10 Iowa City is increasingly a magnet both for retirees and for young professionals anxious to avoid the commuting 10/30/2014 9:19 AM life. Population movement from the suburbs back into cities is a nationwide phenomenon to which Iowa City should be hospitable. As a university town is it is ideally placed to accommodate this demographic shift which, among other benefits, reduces the carbon footprint of the population by reducing the need for automobile transportation. 11 A new demographic day is coming, and more and more people (beyond the ever-present burgeoning hoard of UI 10/29/2014 11:35 AM student renters) will want to take up residence as close to the center of town as possible. At present almost all habitable space other than Plaza Towers and a few other condos are available. Our city continues to be listed as one of the top 10 places in the U.S. in which to retire/reside because of our amenities. But close to the center of the action, where? 12 The City should approve the Chauncey and New Pi proposals in the civic district area. They are great projects 10/29/2014 9:50 AM that add to the commercial core's viability. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 13 If I can provide any more feedback, I'd love to help. Andy Stoll, downtown resident andy@stoll.net 10/28/2014 2:02 PM 14 Keep the growth going. There are some exciting developments happening in Iowa City. See them through. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 15 Keep us moving forward on downtown development! 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 16 small shops and cafes exist throughout europe that encourage strolling, looking at a city view watching people 10/27/2014 2:16 PM play chess/checkers or botche ball (boule) sip on a glass of wine or a cup of coffee in the afternoon promoting interactive play and conversation(s) among multiple ethnicities, perspectives, culture... idyllic but not accomplished unless tried. 1/2 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 17 1 have run RAYGUN on the Ped Mall for the last 4 years, and with stores in Des Moines and Kansas City, we've 10/27/2014 11:01 AM been able to compare those 3 markets. Iowa City is the weakest market, and I think the crux of that is trying to 10/21/2014 10:40 AM j people do ... listen to them. create a downtown that better balances students and residents. Too many students scare off the residents, and 26 Development money is scarce and Iowa City must compete with many other towns and cities for that money. It's 10/21/2014 9:09 AM the residents usually spend more money. However, Iowa City wouldn't be the city it is without the university. communities. Adding a more "grown up" side of downtown — taller buildings, on -street -retail, etc -- may be a good way to advance downtown beyond just the Ped Mall. 18 The vocal minority that opposes all development does not speak off all of us and slows down the progress the 10/27/2014 9:42 AM city is making. 19 Chop. Chop.Keep this going and get it done. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 20 again, start building UP and proactively design a skyline for Iowa City's hilly landscape. 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 21 It was a shame that you didn't ask the public for input before the chancey debacle. That was bad planning. Also, 10/23/2014 2:55 PM it would have been nice to have more notice of the meeting. And you don't even have a link on your home page. 22 It is good these areas are being looked at and incorporated into the comprehensive plan. 10/23/2014 1:29 PM 23 Will the City Council actually pay any attention to this new plan? 10/23/2014 9:41 AM 24 Thank you for the chance to weigh in on this area! It was good to look at what's there now and see the potential 10/22/2014 12:41 PM for really positive improvement for some denser development with diverse offerings, not just bars or multi -family. 25 Thanks for the opportunity to offer my thoughts!!! I care deeply about this subject and the areas in question. Many 10/21/2014 10:40 AM j people do ... listen to them. 26 Development money is scarce and Iowa City must compete with many other towns and cities for that money. It's 10/21/2014 9:09 AM important that Iowa City captures development dollars and use them rather than let them "leak" to other communities. 27 This is a very odd survey. It seems more like an opportunity to write an opinion piece, not a survey. 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 28 ditto 10/20/2014 3:32 PM 29 There are other important areas of Iowa City besides the downtown and surrounding areas. Please keep it 10/20/2014 2:02 PM convenient for people to travel across town and to commute into Iowa City. If you make traffic too slow, people won't want to cross town much or companies will locate businesses outside of Iowa City where it is easier to get to. 2/2 October 31, 2014 N Q Mayor and City Council - _- City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street > Iowa City, Iowa 52240 ` Ca �. Mayor and City Council Members, — -- •---� Thank you for inviting the community to comment on the Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street` Districts and the comprehensive plan vision for these areas. As you know, the Iowa City Downtown District is a non-profit entity with a mission to champion the Downtown District as a progressive, healthy, and culturally vibrant urban center of the region. The TCDD Board of Directors has discussed the City's Comprehensive Plan review for these areas and proposed development plans within the Civic District. We are unanimous in our support of increased mixed-use density in both the Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts. New, dense infill development that brings additional residents, employees and exciting entertainment and cultural uses like bowling, cinema space, and other amenities to our near -in environments is a win for our commercial core. Similar to the newly selected site for the University of Iowa Museum of Art and the Voxman School of Music underway, the Chauncey and New Pi developments will support our existing businesses with an influx of new people that will help keep the Downtown and Northside Neighborhood businesses economically viable. The ICDD also believes in a "2% Solution" for supporting a vibrant downtown (Bruce Katz, Brookings Institute.) This entails providing opportunities for 2% of our community's population to live in our City core. New developments that include a mix of housing units tailored towards a mix of incomes and household types will help us achieve this goal. The TCDD is growing in a positive direction and the "natural" boundaries of Downtown are evolving. Community members are already calling areas to the east of our boundary to Ralston Creek and along the Burlington Street Corridor "Downtown." We believe that accommodating equally dense developments in these close -in areas is a sustainable and efficient approach to growth that best utilizes public infrastructure already in place. Thank you very much for your hard work, patience, and vision for the sustainable growth of Iowa City. Sincerely, 'lam 6&—re Nancy Bird Executive Director Iowa City Downtown District Iowa City Downtown District 14'/ S. Clinton Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 319-354-0863 John Yapp From: Geoff Fruin Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 8:03 AM To: Tom Markus; Doug Boothroy; John Yapp Subject: FW: Comprehensive Plan for Civic District Fyi. From: Kieft, David W [mailto:david-kieft@uiowa.edu] Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 7:52 AM To: 'Marc Moen' Cc: Jeff Davidson; Geoff Fruin Subject: Comprehensive Plan for Civic District Marc University of Iowa leadership has discussed the City's Comprehensive Plan review for the "civic district" and specifically the two proposed development projects, The Chauncy and New Pi's new location. The University is supportive of both projects. Both will bring additional housing and retail opportunities to downtown and the University area, which is something the University supports; but more importantly, the University is in favor of the programmatic aspects of The Chauncy. The bowling alley and expanded location for Film Scene are both unique venues which will serve UI students, faculty and staff. They also contribute to the marketability of the University and Iowa City. These are the types of spaces other developers have not proposed in the many recent development projects that have come before the City. I have copied City leadership on this email. David David W. Kieft University Business Manager & Director of Real Estate University of Iowa 301 University Services Building (USB) Iowa City, IA 52242-5500 John Yapp From: mark@shopactiveendeavors.com Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 11:13 AM Subject: CB -10 Zoning Dear Council Member, We are writing you to express our support of the expansion of the municipal campus area to CB -10 zoning. Iowa City is in dire need of expanding and further developing its downtown area. We believe the Chauncey and New Pi projects are well thought out and essential for further growth. If we are to continue developing a vibrant, energetic, and dynamic urban feel for our downtown we need projects such as these. We have witnessed a terrific rebirth and resurgence of our unique downtown in the past few years and these developments will help us continue to grow and create a place where our citizens can live, work, and play... the place we all want Iowa City to be. Thank you for your vision and perseverance through this difficult process. Best regards, Mark Weaver & Eadie Fawcett Weaver Mark R Weaver President Active Endeavors -Iowa City 319-337-9444 office 319-400-2414 cell Serving Iowa since 1986 www. shopactiveendeavors.com www.active-sandals.com Comprehensive Plan Update- Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts City planners are preparing to amend the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan to include the Civic District and the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. Iowa City residents are invited to share their preferences for future development and to identify any issues the city should consider in planning documents for these areas. What are the strengths of these areas? • Civic District n m eA- V S Og Cl- North l • No�rth CiintonoVubuque Street District (/ �U 1" j W i � � U,� '�j o VD ca- What are the weaknesses of these areas? • Civic Distri, I--l-k e y e- t r CA- b01, f'Jl 4A �1 �• North Cli'n/toryMbuque Street District What should be considered when the City is reviewing development proposals? l 9Z) What types of uses (e.g. residential, commercial, cultural, institutional) are appropriate for these areas? �" • Civic Dlstnct J �l ;l 5 r\ o wt c� .% 2 c� n�_ �ui%(fns C� W • North'Clinton/Dubuque Street Dish c �( , VV1�V Sl Y t� Is there the opportunity to strengthen streetsca e elements?1 es No �' ,� a ' 2 �' r e ��l�l �% iA ldf,%"�'vIIf yes, are these opportunities? /'' �- I Is there opportunity to strengthen pedestrian and bicy6lle amenities? es No �, r e , _clkS S t ' �`� ori if yes, w -at are these opportunities? In the North Clinton/Dubuque District, is there the opportunity to increase residential density the number of dwelling units in a given area)? ees�) No Ifyes, what are these opportunities? lk Y� r- -j; f` Ge 110- — /, � U In the Civic District, are there opportunities to increase mixed-use facilities? (Mixed-use development blends a combination of residential, commercial, cultural, institutional, or industrial uses, where those functions are physically and functionally integrated, and that provides pedestrian connections) Yes No If yes, what are these opportunities? j / � � � �� � A) %� (-62+- k lU�cid \�In the Civic District, how can the Ralston Creek corridor be enhanced? h04 What other factors should the City consider? Other comments Feel free to submit other input to John Yapp at john-yapp@iowa-city.org. Comprehensive Plan Update- Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts City planners are preparing to amend the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan to include the Civic District and the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. Iowa City residents are invited to share their preferences for future development and to identify any issues the city should consider in planning documents for these areas. What are the strengths of these areas? • Civic District • North ClintontDubuque Street District What are the weaknesses of these areas? • Civic District • North Clinton/Dubuque Street District What should be considered when the City isreviewingdevelopment proposals? � '�� �Z�fr'f/►�, �v �6G � �' !� � C UM i'��•"*w � �V1i V'PJ�'r� d � 1 r-- VA*Y W c4l% &t -:-r&uM G! -w¢, rr-es-a-oc •, CA4""cay 5-&om*. k -e -op �c -op What types of uses (e.g. residential, commercial, cultural, institutional) are appropriate p. for these areas? f a s • Civic District 4 UO SD / �j�wow► S7i; a"j Sa�.e • North Clinton/Dubuque Street District do � � ar la •b � r.�'� �- Is there the opportunity to strengthen streetscape elements? Yes No If yes, what are these opportunities? Is there the opportunity to strengthen pedestrian and bicycle amenities? Yes No If yes, what are these opportunities? In the North Clinton/Dubuque District, is there the opportunity to increase residential density (the number of dwelling units in a given area)? Yes No If yes, what are these opportunities? In the Civic District, are there opportunities to increase mixed-use facilities? (Mixed-use development blends a combination of residential, commercial, cultural, institutional, or industrial uses, where those functions are physically and functionally integrated, and that provides pedestrian connections) es No If yes, re these opportunities? � ei 1/�oafCt' Vic. d��- bye ', c$S! a�tU4� -:. APO"dig c 8 Z . In 1�c District, how can the Ralston Creek corridor be enhanced? Ir 10, c.�c-cec,c�0 1i'_('s�t What other factors should the City consider? Other comments Feel free to submit other input to John Yapp atjohn-yapp@iowa-dty.org. Comprehensive Plan Update- Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts City planners are preparing to amend the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan to include the Civic District and the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. Iowa City residents are invited to share their preferences for future development and to identify any issues the city should consider in planning documents for these areas. What are the strengths of these areas?rld �` GI -(' 5, i ( / i • Civic District I /� Ci (�'A1�� ` ltr X74 j V � (/�% (� �p/� � (IL • `�0orth Clrntbuque teat Dlsfrict � a C;� r �� What ale the weaknesses of thele areas? • Civic District • North ClintoWDubuque Street District What should be considered when theity is revI wing evelopn)ent proposals? �l IV's- , �v its es What types of uses (e.g. residential, commercial, cultural, institutional) are appropriate D hj Civic District 9'' eo rvi c ams • North ClintonOubuque Street District s Is there the opportunity to strengthen streetscape elements? Yes No If yes, what are these opportunities? Is there the opportunity to strengthen pedestrian and bicycle amenities? Yes No If yes, what are these opportunities? In the North Clinton/Dubuque District, is there the opportunity to increase residential density (the number of dwelling units in a given area)? No ' If yes, are these opportunities? C� In the Civic District, are there opportunities to increase mixed-use facilities? (Mixed-use development blends a combination of residential, commercial, cultural, institutional, or industrial uses, where those functions are physically and functionally integrated and that provides pedestrian connections) ��� E l 9- (/ !IQ� k es No If ye , re these opportunities? 1h ZC P'1o��` nas't s In the Z'Ilv'dic/D�14'--ttrrict,how can the Ralston Cek corridor bee hanced? ��� A'd f'/ZJ) (gin61 � �y What oth r factors should the City consider? t i -& 1�l e- �Ld� %�%� �o its n. DC /' i �q. � `fit. -7� Other comments cow �t1 s . ,� l 2 11 �d te'N _O'd Feel free to submit other input to John Yapp at john-yapp@iowa-city.org. John Yapp From: Dennis Detweiler <detsolon2@webtv.net> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 2:33 PM To: John Yapp Subject: Destruction of Iowa City History I'm 66 years old and was raised in the north end of Iowa City and moved to Solon 33 years ago because Iowa City started losing it's historical heritage. It didn't look like home anymore. Money and big business talks in Iowa City and the rest of us have to leave it to memory. "Change and Progress" is the sorry excuse for what? Downtown has slowly been destroyed of it's heritage and character. An ugly flat exterior paneled hotel sits in the middle of the street blocking easy access to downtown from Dubuque street. A pedestrian mall blocks convenience to shops while parking is an expensive pain. The historic brick streets are gone or covered with asphalt in many areas of town. Too many ignorant ideas over the past 50+ years. I recall a few decades ago when the City government decided the downtown store fronts had to change the street entry doors on shops to swing inward to avoid hitting pedestrians. Then, figured out it was a fire trap and everyone had to change back again. The generation that built those buildings had it figured out long ago. When you destroy historical buildings, you can't change your mind afterwards. Back scratching big shots are making the decisions and lining their pockets while the City government plods along in need of a brain transplant. If you're not from Iowa City and just here for the money, political stature or architectural fame without regard for the town's heritage, find another town. Dennis Detweiler Solon, Iowa John Yapp From: Bob Elliott <elliottb53@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 11:03 AM To: John Yapp Subject: Historic? Hello John: In an opinion piece in today's Press -Citizen, Pam Michaud encouraged readers to write to you about historic preservation concerns. As a result, I'm taking this opportunity to express my hope that you and your city staff colleagues, as well as city council members, are concerned about well intentioned, but misguided, efforts to take away property owners' property rights based on questionable historic preservation assumptions. For instance, I believe the old train station adjacent to South Dubuque Street has rather significant historic value for reflecting architecture, rail transportation, and society priorities of days gone by. But those two remaining crumbling structures on S. Dubuque clearly lack sufficient historic value to compensate for taking away the owner's property rights. I agree with my former newspaper colleague, Bob Hibbs, that well meaning Friends of Historic Preservation are too often over zealous in their views about historic values and limiting property owners' rights. Best wishes. Bob Elliott Iowa City John Yapp From: John Yapp Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 4:42 PM To: Marian Karr Subject: FW: Dubuque St Cottages Another one for the Council packet From: groutmar@aol.com [mailto:groutmar@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 4:06 PM To: John Yapp Subject: Dubuque St Cottages Too late to save, no interest until owner chooses to demolish, which he has every right to do. '92 "master plan" means nothing after so many years without action. Pascha is an upstanding member of this community and does not deserve this treatment. He is not required to sell or repair HIS property. There isn't enough documented history of these cottages to make such a stink. The renters have been provided more than fair and ample treatment over the years. Shame on them and shame on 'friends' of historical preservation for their lack of regard for the property OWNER. The 'friends' of historical preservation should first and foremost be good neighbors and this means working WITH property owners in a timely manner, not after plans they don't like, or agree with, have been implemented. Sunny M. John Yapp From: John Yapp Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 5:27 PM To: Marian Karr Subject: FW: Cottages For Council packet -----Original Message ----- From: Holden, PalmerJ [mailto:pholden@iastate.edu] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 5:17 PM To: John Yapp Subject: Cottages Private property rights should not be over-ridden without compensation. Let the preservationists buy the property. Dr. Palmer Holden ISU Emeritus Prof. 15 Mary Court Iowa City, IA 52245 515-231-5543 John Yapp Subject: FW: COTTAGES From: Jerry maynard <iamaynard(c_mchsi.com> Date: January 7, 2015 11:08:18 AM CST To: john-yapp(a�lowa-City.org Subject: COTTAGES John. It would be absolutely ridiculous for the city not to recognize the remaining cottages and the railroad station as Historic Structures. These are way older than other areas in the city classified as historic structures. The area on the corner of Summit and Court street is designated as historical and some of those houses had additions added on around 1950 or so that do not even meet the standards for being a Historical District except for one single house down the street on Court which I think was one of the early Governor mansions. These cottages were built way back around 1850 and I think it was said that the individual who destroyed the one did so without waiting for the city to review the request by the historical committee. Because of this the city should require him to re-create the same structure. Even tho it wouldn't be the original it would still have the original appearance so new comers to Iowa City would know what this area looked like back in the middle 1850's. I've lived in this town and close to that area since 1965 and a lot of the city actions frankly have been totally disgusting. If it wasn't for the University where I was employed for 39 years I would have left long ago. The only real meaningful historical district in the whole town is that one block area and to destroy this will destroy the history all newcomers to town will never know or see. The council must stop this immediately. 1 Jerry Maynard 26 Montrose Ave. Iowa City, IA. 52245 January 12, 2015 To Members of the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission: We are a group of long-term residents and homeowners living in the historic neighborhoods closest to downtown Iowa City. We are writing to express our concerns about the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments to be discussed at the Planning and Zoning Commission's public hearing on January 15, 2015. While we are in general agreement with City staff recommendations to add the North Clinton/ Dubuque District to the Central Planning District, we are troubled by the proposed addition of the Civic District to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Our concerns are these: We believe it is critically important to prevent the abrupt and unsightly transition between the high-rise structures allowable in certain Downtown/Riverfront Crossing Districts and their low-rise and largely historic neighbors. One can imagine, for example, the Civic District one day being populated with shoulder -to -shoulder, 15- story apartments or condos, towering over (and destroying the views from) College Green Park and the near Northside. We would thus advocate the requirement of more appropriate transition zones between districts, as recommended in the City's -Comprehensive Plan. • Instead of adding to the existing Downtown District, the Civic District presents an ideal opportunity to create a distinctive mixed-use area on the Near Eastside (just as Northside Marketplace has its own distinctive character) that would further strengthen the Comprehensive Plan's emphasis on appropriate transitions between districts. Cities need diversity, and Iowa City is deficient in walkable neighborhood commercial districts. Finally, we strongly encourage the development of more diverse and affordable housing options within both the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings and Central Districts for populations other than college students (retirees, working professionals, young families); and further, that such options incorporate a multitude of housing types, from single-family homes (as promoted by the admirable UniverCity Program) to mid -rises, duplexes, low-rise townhouses/apartments, and even pocket neighborhoods. Expanding the Downtown District without additional discussion and possible zoning adjustments would erase these valuable and fleeting opportunities to enhance the quality and livability of Iowa City's unique Downtown and surrounding districts. As Joni Mitchell so famously sang, "You don't know what you've got til it's gone." We urge the City to reconsider the addition of the Civic District to the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Districts, and instead, within the Central District, require more appropriate transition zones, encourage more mixed-use commercial areas, and incentivize more affordable housing for all. Thank you. Susan Shullaw (718 N. Johnson) Cathy Cole and Michael Feiss (603 Brown) Linda McGuire (618 Ronalds) Joy Smith and David Rust (915 Bloomington) Nancy Hauserman (729 N. Linn) Claire Sponsler and Jeff Porter (413 N. Gilbert) Dave Moore (425 Davenport) Chris Welu-Reynolds and John Reynolds (619 Brown) Nialle Sylvan (1722 Morningside Dr) Leslie Schwalm (819 E Market) Sarah Clark (509 Brown) Judith Pascoe (317 Fairchild) Jon McPheron (220 Bloomington) Deanna Thomann (208 Fairchild) Elizabeth Moon (423 Ronalds) Laurie & Dan Cummins (12 Bella Vista PI) From: Jodi Connolly <buzziowacity@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 3:29 PM To: John Yapp Cc: PlanningZoning Public Subject: Civic district Sirs, We, as downtown business owners, support staff recommendations regarding the Civic District. It serves all our vital interests to grow our city responsibly and without undue rancor. Thank you very much for your time and efforts, Thomas and Jodi Connolly r .®r. at CITY OF IOWA CITY CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: January 29, 2015 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator Re: Additional information for, and discussion of proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for: The blocks generally bounded by Gilbert St, Burlington St, Van Buren St, and Iowa Ave (AKA the Civic District) This memorandum responds to Commission questions and requests for the Civic District, generally bounded by Gilbert St, Burlington St, Van Buren St, and Iowa Ave. What other locations are reserved for multi -story buildings in the downtown? Most if not all building sites downtown are to be developed with multi -story buildings. Staff has attached the map (see Map 1) of proposed building heights from the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan, which shows the variety of building heights in the downtown and articulates the policy of encouraging taller buildings on corner locations, with shorter buildings along a block face. Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District: One factor staff did not include in the December 10 report on the Comprehensive Plan amendment is the fact that the three municipal blocks (south of Iowa Ave, west of Van Buren St) are already a part of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District, which extends to Van Buren Street on the east and Iowa Ave on the north. This Parking District allows for a reduction in required on-site parking provided: The property is located in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District; • The project must not result in the demolition of a property that is designated as an Iowa City Historic Landmark, registered on the National Register of Historic Places, or individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places; • The project must qualify for bonus height, bonus floor area, or other development assistance or financial incentive from the City for including uses, elements or features that further housing, economic development, or other goals of the Comprehensive Plan including the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Building Height Map: Staff has prepared a building height map (Exhibit C) to help articulate/visualize the policies of the Downtown District, which states that corner locations should be reserved for taller buildings. Staff developed a map of the three municipal blocks showing recommended building heights. While we do not have a form -based code for the Downtown District, building height will be made a part of requirements for any rezoning applications submitted for this area. For example, for properties designated as 4-6 stories, either the CB -5 zone or CB -10 zone with a conditional zoning agreement specifying a height limit would be appropriate. March 4, 2015 Page 2 Staff wishes to call special attention to the north side of the three municipal blocks along the Iowa Ave frontage. As shown on the map, for the north side of Iowa Ave (currently occupied by the City Hall surface parking lot and Unitarian Church properties) the recommended height is two-four stories. This height is in keeping with the majority of the Iowa Ave corridor. However, to recognize the location of the block face as part of the downtown area and municipal campus, and for consistency with Downtown and Riverfront Crossings goals, it is recommended that additional building height may be granted through actions which have some public benefit such as preservation of historic property, provision of affordable housing, or other public benefits. These standards would be negotiated as a part of a rezoning application (please note the Unitarian Church property is currently zoned CB -5; City property is zoned Public). Civic District land use zoning pattern and natural features: Some of the Discussion at the January 15 meeting was regarding the 'transition' between the downtown and the College Green Historic District. Our Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code does not define the term 'transition,' however it is commonly understood to be an increase or decrease in density and intensity over a horizontal distance, combined with buffers such as natural or man-made features. As proposed in the Civic District, the 'transition' is provided through a combination of the zoning pattern, the built environment such as the parking ramp, Ralston Creek, and the College Green Historic District and College Hill Conservation District. West of Van Buren Street / Ralston Creek, the three municipal blocks are proposed to be designated as a Mixed Use / Civic area at the east edge of downtown (see Exhibit D). These blocks include the Police and Fire stations, City Hall, Recreation Center, a 450 -space parking facility, Chauncey Swan Park and provide the setting for numerous events, meetings, music, Farmers Market and other activities. East of Van Buren Street / Ralston Creek, the first tier of properties are proposed to be designated as Mixed Use in the Central District Plan; these properties are currently zoned either CB -2 or CB -5 (which function as mixed-use zones). Properties along the west side of Johnson Street and in the College Green neighborhood are zoned multi -family residential (RM -12 and RNS-20). The College Green Park neighborhood is further protected by the College Green Historic District and the College Hill Conservation District. Exhibit E shows potential building heights based on staff's proposal for the three municipal blocks, and based on existing zoning for the remainder of the area. Ralston Creek, in combination with the zoning pattern, reinforces and provides a natural visual and functional break-point between the downtown and civic uses to the west, and mixed use and residential uses to the east. As noted above, the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District already extends to the Van Buren St, between Iowa Ave and Burlington Street. Historic properties: The Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan contains policies which are intended to promote the preservation of historic buildings. The Plan states that development incentives (such as density bonuses) and policy options that encourage preservation should be implemented. The current zoning code allows for a density bonus for the adaptive reuse of historic structures in the CB -5 and CB -2 zones, which allows for additional square footage in buildings developed on the vacant portions of the property. It does not, however, allow for this bonus in the CB -10 zone, nor does it allow for the type of historic preservation density transfer to a separate development project, as allowed in the Riverfront Crossings zones. It would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to amend the Zoning Code for Central Business (CB) zones to allow for transfer of density rights for historic buildings, similar to the Riverfront March 4, 2015 Page 3 Crossings zones. Given that the City controls approximately 2.5 acres of surface parking lots within the Civic District, it may have role in providing sites for development transfer. Identification of historic properties: Iowa Site Inventory Forms, which document the historic and architectural values of individual buildings, were reviewed for each property in the Civic District. Forms are not available for 505, 507, 513 and 517 Iowa Avenue and 18 S. Van Buren Street (more on these later). Based on the forms only one property, the Unitarian Church at 10 S. Gilbert Street, is clearly identified as being eligible for the National Register (copy of Iowa Site Inventory Form attached). The properties at 410 and 422 Iowa Avenue may also be eligible based on architectural characteristics. For properties which do not have Iowa Site Historic Survey Forms, only 505 Iowa Avenue has potential for National Register eligibility. The other properties have been altered to such an extent that they do not appear to have sufficient integrity to meet the criteria for eligibility. Staff has amended the 'Building Height' map (Exhibit C) to identify the Unitarian Church property as a `Key Historic Property' consistent with other identified historic properties in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. This makes this property clearly eligible for transfer of density, modifications to zoning code dimensional and setback standards, and reductions in required parking in order to encourage preservation. This designation does not however require preservation; in order to regulate the property in terms of historic preservation it would need to be designated as a Local Historic Landmark, a legislative (i.e. rezoning) process outside of the confines of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Recommendation for the Civic District: 1. Staff recommends the three municipal blocks, bounded by Iowa Ave, Gilbert St, Burlington St, and Van Buren St be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit B, C and D. 2. Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St, be added to the Central District Plan Land Use Map as an addendum and shown as 'Mixed Use' as shown on Exhibit B. 3. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed addendum to the Central District Plan and Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan Attachments Map 1— Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Map/ Visualization of Building Heights [3 (from page 106 of Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan) F1 r -t r `, �J v ,j ; NAM heights 1 Level 2-3 Levels _ 4.6 Levels 7-15 Levels ._ Existing Waterways Study Area Boundary lei 0' 400' 800' 1600' Civic District JEFFERSON Proposed Addition to the Central Planning District O Low -Medium Density MF Stabilization - High Density Mufti-Fam - Open Space Public Institutional ® Riverfront Redevelopment - Private Institutional Single -Family Residential Stabilization ® Low to Medium Density Multi -Family Single -Family & Duplex Residential ® High Density Mufti -Family Redevelopment Mixed Use ® Urban Mixed Use - Neighborhood Commercial - Urban Commercial ® Commercial Redevelopment Office Commercial - Intensive Commercial - General Commercial Proposed Addition to Downtown District of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan, designated for mixed use and civic land uses WASHINGTON EXHIBIT B IOWA Document Path: S:\PCD\Kirk Lehmann\GIS\Maps\Planning\Central Planning District\CentralPlanningAdditionCivicDistrict.mxd Z O rn Z 2 O Downtown District Addition * Additional height may be approved in conjunction with preservation of historic IOWA property, provision for affordable housing, or other public goals. z z J Legend COLLEGE Proposed Height (in stories) ® 2-4 - 4-6 7-15 - Park BURLINGTON - Key Historic Building ---- 1 WASHINGTON Document Path: S:\PCD\Kirk Lehmann\GIS\Maps\Planning\Central Planning District\RFCProposedHeightMap.mxd EXHIBIT C z 5 a r W • t} tG 166 43 7,r E ,PSI 11111 got saw e ... C T E99 E` a o•x9oo�2« Ein �,3�rnN��i d o P�- V 6 d d d L L V£ A V �ot'o cAS �c'a V d Yii Y L d A O A« vi rnp,5 .p.o x Iv N O d C d 75 O O 2 m m � S a t} tG 166 43 7,r E ,PSI 11111 got saw e ... C T E99 E` a o•x9oo�2« Ein �,3�rnN��i d o P�- V 6 d d d L L V£ A V �ot'o cAS �c'a V d Yii Y L d A O A« vi rnp,5 .p.o x Iv N O I I � m w I I i I 0 ' U i II I II I II I j I I I F__ --- L --- I L__ �.-1 svom N3WS NVn t O w Ln Y i+ C d a° Z 0 0 Z J m m I r , ,�' wlll; �� I O IOWA 11 �-- MEMORANDUM CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: February 24, 2015 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator Re: Additional information related to proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for North Clinton / Dubuque St District and Civic District Comprehensive Plan Function Comprehensive/District Plans function as long-term visions for the community, and are also touchstones for documenting community goals, demographics, issues and aspirations. As stated in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan, the Plan is roadmap for directing growth and change over time; and sets a foundation for policies, strategies, and other actions. The Central District Plan states district plans are intended to promote patterns of land use, urban design, infrastructure, and services that encourage and contribute to the livability of Iowa City and its neighborhoods. These plans are advisory documents for directing and managing change over time and serve to guide decision making, public deliberation, and investment. Similarly, the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan states The Master Plan will serve as a framework to guide future public and private investment. In the context of zoning and development, Comprehensive Plans are not regulatory. While they are not regulatory in and of themselves, they do however provide the basis for evaluating future rezoning requests, zoning code amendments, and public decisions related to infrastructure and investment. For example, if a Comprehensive Plan or District Plan included a goal of evaluating setbacks and building placement concerns where commercial property abuts residential property, this would provide the basis for subsequent evaluation and potential zoning code amendments. Historic Preservation Plan As noted at the February 3 Work Session, the Historic Preservation Plan is adopted as an element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Central District Plan refers to the Historic Preservation Plan, and includes a specific goal to "Support the goals and Objectives proposed in the Historic Preservation Plan." The link to the entire Historic Preservation Plan is: http://www.icgov.org/site/CMSv2/file/planning/urban/histPlan.pdf. Pertinent sections include Goals #1-4 on pages 31-46, and the section on Downtown on pages 70-72. The area encompassed by the North Clinton / Dubuque St District and the much of the Civic District have had historic surveys completed, which resulted in the site inventory forms for specific properties, which staff referred to at the February 3 work session. These surveys are the basis of Historic District and/or Historic Landmark applications; For example, the Jefferson Street Historic District was a result of the survey of the Clinton St / Dubuque St corridor. The Historic Preservation Plan and subsequent historic surveys provide the basis for any Historic March 4, 2015 Page 2 District and Historic Landmark applications, which function as an overlay zone and require the legislative rezoning process for approval. Dimensional standards in selected commercial and residential zones To provide additional information regarding setbacks and other dimensional standards in commercial and residential zones in the Civic District, staff has prepared the following table: standard Dimensional Standards for Selected Zones Zone Minimum front Maximum Maximum Floor to area Building setback front setback height rati02 coverage maxi CB -2 01 12' 45' 2 N/A CB -5 01 12' 75' 3 N/A RM -12 15' for single-fam N/A 35' N/A 50% 20' for multi-fam RNS-20 15' for single-fam N/A 35' N/A 50% 20' for multi-fam Mixed Use 5' 15' 35' N/A 50% 1. A 10 -foot setback is required for properties fronting on Burlington Street 2. Floor to Area (FAR) ratio is one means of controlling building bulk on a property. For a property with an FAR of 2, 2 square feet of floor area may be constructed per 1 square foot of lot area. Additional FAR is possible for providing defined public benefits (per Zoning Code Table 2C-4) such as masonry finish, enhanced streetscape, usable open space, adaptive reuse of a designated Historic Landmark, and similar benefits. 3. Building coverage percentage is a means of controlling the building footprint size on a property. A building coverage of 50% means that the building footprint may occupy only up to 50% of the lot. 4. While there are no mixed-use (MU) zones in the affected areas, it is a logical zone for areas identified as 'mixed use' on the land use map. There is a provision in the Zoning Code for side and rear setbacks (but not front setbacks) in commercial zones that where a side lot line or rear lot line abuts a residential zone, a setback at least equal to the required setback in the abutting residential zone must be provided along the residential zone boundary. MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks Paula Swygard, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: Phoebe Martin STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, John Yapp, Robert Miklo, Jann Ream OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Mondanaro, Rockne Cole, Beth Stence, Laura Bergus, Connie Champion, Ritu Jain, Nancy Quellhorst, Marc McCullum, Al Raymond, Joe Tiefenthaler, Jon Fogarty, Pam Michaud, Andrew Sherburne, Helen Burford, John Hieronymus, Duane Musser, Angela Villhauer, Beth Hieronymus, Joe Hughes, John Wyler, Brian Boelk, Nancy Bird Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. The Commission moved by a vote of 1-5 (Freerks affirmative) that the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District) be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Additionally under the Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with the proposed addendum to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. The Commission moved by a vote of 6-0 to recommend approval of SUB15-00001, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a preliminary plat of Highlander Fourth Addition, a 17 -lot, 39.98 acre commercial subdivision located north of Northgate Drive subject to resolution of deficiencies and discrepancies noted below. The Commission moved by a vote of 6-0 to recommend approval of amending Portable Sign requirements in City Code Section 14-5B'Sign Regulations;' Table 5B-4'Sign Specifications and Provisions in the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones' as shown in Table 1. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 15.2015 Eastham moved to approve the minutes. Thomas seconded. Motion carried 6-0 with corrections noted. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 23 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque Street District). Yapp presented a map of the area. Hektoen asked if anyone on the Commission needed to disclose any conversations they have had regarding this item. There were none. Staff is recommending adding the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District to the Central District Plan including the addition of three goals to the Central District Plan: A. Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors B. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned / reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design Yapp explained that at the previous Commission meeting, as well as the work session held, there was discussion regarding historic properties. While the Central District Plan Map does not specifically identify potential historic properties, the plan does contain polices for the preservation of historic properties. These policies are based on the adopted and periodically updated Historic Preservation Plan, which is also an element of the Comprehensive Plan. A goal of the Preservation Plan is to identify historic properties. Identification of historic properties: Iowa Site Inventory Forms, which document the historic and architectural values of individual buildings, were reviewed for each property in the N. North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. Historic properties at 30 N. Clinton, 130 Jefferson Street and 115 N. Dubuque Street are included in the Jefferson Street Historic District and are therefore already protected by the Historic Preservation Commission. The only other property that is identified as being individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places is the Sanxay-Gilmore House at 109 E. Market Street. A copy of that Iowa Site Inventory Form is available upon request. Eastham asked what would be added to the Comprehensive Plan if this were approved. Yapp answered that the map showing the Central District Plan would be updated, showing the addition of the new area, along with the three goals Staff has recommended. The impact of adding this area to the Central District Plan is that the area then become subject to all the policies and goals within the Central District Plan. Eastham asked then if that would include the language regarding the possible historic eligibility of 109 E. Market Street. Yapp said it would not include the language regarding that specific property because the Central District Plan refers to the Historic Preservation Plan for specifics. The Historic Preservation Plan does not currently include that specific property (109 E. Market Street) but it does identify that larger area as one that has had a historic survey for which Site Inventory Forms have been documented. Freerks asked if the Historic Preservation Commission would be looking at these properties, and Yapp confirmed the Historic Preservation Commission would be discussing this at their meeting next week. Freerks opened public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 3 of 23 Jim Mondanaro spoke to support Staff's recommendations for the new P&Z. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham stated he was interested in the Historic Preservation Commission's opportunity to give their advice on this issue, and therefore moves to defer until the next meeting. Thomas seconded the motion. Eastham reiterated his motion to defer is to give the Historic Preservation Commission the opportunity to give their advice on the possible historic value of the properties in this area. Hektoen informed the Commission that to designate properties as historic is a rezoning action, and this issue is just discussing a comprehensive plan action. Freerks understands, and is not saying hearing from the Historic Preservation Commission will have any impact on the decision, but adding a few weeks to allow making sure all the pertinent information is gathered is the right thing to do. A vote was taken, motion to defer carried 6-0. Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District). Yapp began by showing a map of the larger Central District Plan, and showing that the Civic District in respect to that. Yapp stated the first focus would be the three blocks, south of Iowa Avenue, west of Van Buren Street, and Staff is recommending those three blocks be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. At this time, that area is largely occupied by municipal functions, the Unitarian Church property is at the northwest corner of this area. Next Yapp showed a map of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan indicating suggested building heights within that area, as well as for the three municipal blocks. The Downtown Plan recommends taller buildings on corner locations with mid -rise buildings along the block face. Staff is showing taller building 7-14 stories at the corners of College and Gilbert Streets, and Burlington and Gilbert Streets. Along the east half of the majority of the blocks would be building heights of 4-6 stories, and 2-4 story heights along the Iowa Avenue frontage. The difference for the Iowa Avenue frontage is due to looking at the Iowa Avenue Corridor, the majority of the buildings in that area are 2-4 stories in height. Staff has also noted a key historic building in that area, the Unitarian Church at 10 S. Gilbert Street has had an Iowa Site Inventory Form prepared and it is clearly eligible as a historic landmark. Consistent with the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan there are policies, including the use of transfer of development rights, bonus incentives and the reduction of parking requirements, which are intended to promote the preservation of historic buildings. Given that the City controls approximately 2.5 acres of surface parking lots within the Civic District, it may have role in providing sites for development transfer if the parking lots are to be developed. Yapp next showed the land use map for the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan and stated that Staff is recommending those three municipal blocks be shown as mixed-use designations. This would encourage both the municipal civic activities that currently exist and allow for mixed- use designation in the future. Dyer asked about the property along Iowa Avenue, heights being limited to 2-4 stories, but there Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 23 could be a bonus granted for preserving the Unitarian Church? And therefore if a development preserved the church, it could then be higher in that location. Yapp confirmed that the intention was to allow additional height along the Iowa Avenue frontage if the church was preserved. That would all of course have to be reviewed and approved by the City Council, including a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Dyer stated that then would defeat the purpose of keeping buildings along Iowa Avenue low. Yapp replied that the scale of the buildings would still be in line for the area, the intent was for a possible additional stories in the context of preservation. Hektoen stated that the code currently allows for certain density bonuses designation of an Iowa City landmark at a ratio of 3 square foot area to 1 square foot area reused. So there is a defined ratio that is allowed in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones. It is not the same as the density transfer that is allowed in the Riverfront Crossings form based zones. This area will still be zoned CB designations, not the Riverfront Crossings designations. Eastham asked if the Unitarian Church property is currently zoned CB -5, and is about 8000 square feet, so what would the maximum height be allowed under the current CB -5 zone. Yapp replied 75 feet with bonuses. Eastham then asked about the proposed height legend shown on the map, asking if it doesn't limit building height in any of those areas, the only limitation on the building height is whatever zone, and changes to the underlying zone could change the building heights. Yapp confirmed that is correct. He stated that comprehensive plans are not regulatory, they function as plans, the regulations would come into play if and when zoning requests for these properties at which time the Commission would review the rezoning request in the context of comprehensive planning document. So for example, if a rezoning request was received for a location that indicated 4-6 stories in height as appropriate, the Commission could either recommending rezone that to a zoning the allowed 4-6 stories in height or if a CB -10 zone was requested for example, the Commission could apply a conditional zoning agreement to limit the height to be consistent with whatever the adopted plan is for that area. Hektoen reiterated by adding this area to the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan that does not mean these properties will be added to the zoning for the Riverfront Crossings area or be rezoned to a Riverfront Crossings zoning designation. This is just the master plan, not the zoning code. Thomas asked at this phase if the impacts of the proposed heights of the buildings looked at from an environmental impact position such as traffic and parking. For example, a cluster of 7- 14 story buildings could demand quite a bit of traffic and parking needs for that particular area. Yapp stated the appropriate time to evaluate those types of demands is when there is a rezoning request with an actual project to evaluate. Freerks opened public hearing on the inclusion of the three municipal blocks into the Downtown Riverfront Crossings District. Rockne Cole (1607 East Court Street), chair of the Iowa Collation Against the Shadow, stated that at the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting there was a lengthy discussion of the transition zones and Ralston Creek being a natural barrier of a transitional zone and encourages the Commission to address that issue. Cole also noted that in the Staff report, exhibit C, outlines the possibility of 3 15 -story buildings within a block and a half. He Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 5 of 23 encourages the Commission to explore, especially how it pertains to Robert E. Lee, and if Staff is aware of any plans for the City to sell the Robert E. Lee Recreation Center to allow that sort of development. That would be a major departure in that particular area, people can differ on beliefs of what are appropriate building heights, but his group is particularly against such tall buildings and feels that height is a big deal and should be taken into consideration and if there are three tall buildings in a block and a half, especially within such a proximity to Iowa Avenue, and the view of the Old Capital, even a 75 foot building is a major departure of what is there now and a change to the sight line. Cole requests the Commission defer decision on this until the Staff can answer what they are going to do with the Robert E. Lee center, and the public has adequate input. Cole did commend the Staff, Commission and previous City Councils for adopting the Riverfront Crossings Plan, a lot of it made sense, that to the south of Burlington you would have more dense vertical development to take pressure off the neighborhoods. That was a good plan and feels this Commission should stick to it. However he feels that same theory is now being used to put pressure back on the neighborhoods and if there are 3 15 -story buildings within a block and a half next to a historic district, that is a major departure and this Commission should allow adequate public comment on that and delay decision on that, and the Staff should publicize that because this is the first time the public has seen a concept of possible 15 story development at the Robert E. Lee Center. Beth Stence (310 Golfview Avenue), is representing Trinity Episcopal Church at the corner of College and Gilbert Streets and is urging the Commission to vote against the proposed amendment Staff has recommended for the Civic District. She stands before the Commission on behalf of Trinity because they believe the changes that will follow from the revised Comprehensive Plan will significantly harm cultural institutions like churches and infringe on spaces that promote public discourse. She asks the Commission to take a moment to imagine if right outside the space they are meeting in tonight there were tall buildings, up to 15 stories, sunlight becomes scarce, making it harder for greenspaces to thrive, making outside public areas and the exteriors of existing buildings gloomy. Imagine the increased pressure on public parking as these large buildings do not supply adequate parking of their tenants. This becomes a barrier to events at surrounding businesses and cultural institutions, especially for those in the community that are not young or able-bodied. Rather than continuing to be an area where our community can congregate and thrive, it becomes an area to simply "get through". In the future, if this becomes part of the Comprehensive Plan, we anticipate specific zoning change requests would come before this Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission has previously argued against CB -10 type development in this area and the Church agrees with that previous decision. Changes to zoning that favor revenue generating development over the impacts to faith, cultural, and community facilities and public greenspaces will harm the quality of community life so she asks the Commission to consider all the impacts that could derive from this potential change and vote against the planned amendment. Laura Bergus (2231 California Avenue) and has lived in Iowa City for 34 years. She expressed she is really excited about the potential for downtown Iowa City to grow up, as so many parts of town continue to grow out. She used to live in the lot that is at the east of the very eastern edge of this district, and other locations in the downtown area. Where she is currently living there are developments with lots of cookie -cutter buildings and not a lot of architectural differences or types of uses, so what really excites her about the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is it would allow higher intensity, and higher density uses. She does agree that taller buildings do need to be considered with respect to the environmental impact, but when discussing places where people can gather, or people can congregate, people can live and participate in all kinds of community activities and higher intensity, higher density, mixed-use Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 23 areas actually gives those type of opportunities. She hopes the Commission will consider that as this amendment is not talking about buildings with one type of use, as no one probably wants downtown to just be a whole bunch more bars or more apartments, the whole point is mixing up the uses. Bergus reiterated she supports the staff recommendations and appreciates the opportunity to speak tonight. Connie Champion (430 S. Summit) totally supports the amendments to the Civic District and thinks it is exciting and has been dealt with for several years now. She likes the mixed-use, the density, the lack of urban sprawl it brings, and people like to live close to the core of the city. Ritu Jain (829 Kirkwood Avenue) is speaking on behalf of the CBC and is also a downtown business owner and feels developments like this would actually enhance the city. There have already been some high-rises downtown and it has changed the face of downtown and the community building for the downtown has been great. She hears a lot of people want to be living downtown and mixed -uses like this are bringing those people from what they call the suburbs to the core of the city, so she is definitely in favor of this plan. Nancy Quellhorst, representing the Iowa City Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber supports the Staff's recommendation for the Civic District Plan, they feel it is important that the Civic District remain in the Downtown Planning District and to be added to the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan and the Downtown Master Plan. Employers are losing opportunities to expand because they are struggling with obtaining talent acquisitions. It has been noted that mixed-use projects downtown are critical to attracting the workers that are so important to the success of businesses. These workers have a great desire for high density housing in an urban environment. It is also attractive to retirees who are increasingly attracted to walking ability and access to downtown amenities. The Civic District Plan fosters smart growth, yields affordable infrastructure and the highest revenue potential for the city which is very important to funding our social services and community needs. Quellhorst suggests that both Plaza Towers and 201 Washington, which are both high rise structures, have not created a gloomy environment at all and on the contrary have increased the vibrancy of the downtown area and that is very critical to attracting the workers needed to sustain the community. Marc McCullum (113 South Johnson Street) commented that at the last meeting Nancy Bird spoke about diversity in the downtown area, the blend of old and new, and the concern he has about this proposal is we are just going to get new. There is not anything being put in place to preserve the diversity in the neighborhood. He would encourage the Commission to think about why they would up -zone an area next to a historic neighborhood. He agrees with the ideas of walkable neighborhoods, but also need for small businesses and for density but doesn't feel it always has to be in a high-rise. McCullum does think the City should be looking at the Robert E. Lee area, and was surprised when the RFP for College & Gilbert they didn't look at that block as a bundle. He feels that area should be visioned like the East Village in Des Moines, with low- rise structures replicating areas of the downtown area, such as the 100 block of Dubuque Street where there are small retail outlets. The question is really how this development will play out next to a 150 year old historic park and historic neighborhood. His concern is losing all the historic structures in this area, seems like every church is being looked at as a lot development and it is a challenge to know how to allow some things to go forward without taking out the whole neighborhood. Al Raymond (1045 Westside Drive) wished to echo the sentiments of Marc McCullum, and that the folks opposed to this are not necessarily opposed to what it might bring to Iowa City. He Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 23 was a little hesitant about the high-rises that went up in downtown but they have not become part of the skyline and they do add something to that part of the city. His concern with this amendment is it will stick out like a sore thumb. This area already feels like it's fading out of downtown and into residential and this would create a disjoint that doesn't make sense. Additionally to say we need density to encourage people to come here and work, he would like to see that data backed up. Raymond encourages this decision to be deferred until there is more clarification on these issues. Beyond that, this all feels like a retroactive justification for the Chauncey Building. The City chose a project that didn't make sense to a lot of the community, that didn't even make sense to some of City Council, and now after the fact we are seeing adjustment to the Master Plan to kind of shoe horn this project in. He also feels some of the area in the Riverfront Crossings area south of Burlington would be excellent for these types of projects. Joe Tiefenthaler (222 Washington Street), Executive Director at Iowa City FilmScene and one of the Co -Executive Directors of the Mission Creek Film Festival, said that is seems at the last meeting and this one there is discussion about losing cultural centers. Tiefenthaler has worked in literary non -profits since graduating college and was headed to New York but was called back to Iowa City for the rarest of opportunities, a full-time arts job opening in Iowa City. Those type of positions aren't open or created very frequently and therefore Iowa City has lost a lot of talent to the coasts over the years. He chose to return to Iowa City for a chance to hone and build on a home grown not-for-profit cinema wing to the vision and commitment the Moen Group has shown for this community and for its growth. Growth in population, in opportunities, employment and business, and the art entertainment scene and mixed purpose and opportunities all imperial. In their first year, FilmScene has seen more than 30,000 movie goers through their doors. That is over 600 people per week, citizens and families that are seeing movies on critical topics, issues, kid's programming, special appearances and discussions, focusing on filmmakers, musicians, UI professors, community leaders and national experts. These are films from Palestine and Japan, from Poland and Chile, and films made right here in Iowa City. There are films and events that would not otherwise be possible without FilmScene. One possible benefit of the rezoning would be the Chauncey project and FilmScene, to see what they can do with two downtown locations and two screens, helping to redesign downtown not just in north and south terms, but in the vibrancy of east and west, helping to redesign Iowa City as an arts employer. Tiefenthaler has lived on or around College Green Park for 15 years, those are beautiful homes and they deserve preservation, but if those homes another block away are such a dissent for mixed-use zoning that is a different meeting and a different motion and he is fully in support of this recommendation for this rezoning. Jon Fogarty (708 Whiting Avenue) recalled the discussion last month to consider the daily impacts of these decisions. The truth is, you have to do this, we have no options, there are no other plays in the playbook, it is this or nothing. The proposed developments and the ideas in the three blocks are going to be magic and far better than anything else that is happening in Iowa City and it will save us. If you believe that, you might as well imagine Iowa City's downtown surrounded by a wall placed on a great mountain that is a giant horseshoe shape. The mighty Ralston Creek was discussed the last time as a buffer zone, and if you through in that 20 foot wide street that is Van Buren, you can't see that CB -5 development on Washington Street because of that magnificent buffer, transition zone, and that is what we need to be speaking about, the transition zone. There needs to be a transition zone from the larger developments and the historic neighborhood. The CB -5 development that is on Washington Street did not change the fabric of the neighborhood one bit, and those houses that were taken down, the houses next to it, and the houses up the block and around the corner are all Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 8 of 23 replaceable and that is why we have no options. Fogarty stated that was a big mistake and they did lose some of the fabric of the neighborhood, and it was preventable. These buildings aren't magic and they don't have to go there, and everyone that shares his viewpoint would be in favor of finding alternate locations. The title for the option is on the slide, that is what Riverfront Crossing is supposed to be about, or is that to be talked about and otherwise ignored. There are some great things going on in Riverfront Crossings and that area needs it, it is an area of downtown that has long been neglected, and presents a great opportunity for us to make this Central Business District probably three times as large as it is today. Growth, commercial, residential, you can put it there, it is a huge opportunity, and we need to seize it. The focus on these three blocks here, like they are the real estate messiah is baffling. Fogarty stated it has been seen over the past two years what happens if these options aren't explored, and the consequences to the day to day neighborhood. Washington Street is now radically different and all the things people love about downtown Iowa City and take place in this Civic District will be directly impacted. Just to imagine 4-6 story buildings on Van Buren where the Co-op and radio station currently are and to see a 6 story building rather than the Victorian houses. Ultimately what is being asked for is to consider the options and consider the impacts. The Victorian homes are not replaceable, and the fabric of a neighborhood is not redeemable. Pam Michaud (109 South Johnson) stated that the 4 story apartment building that was built in an insensitive block, the east wall of that building is 18 feet from her home's west wall. There is no buffer zone. The website of Neumann Monson says very politically "It is to build architectural enhancements to the surrounding neighborhoods not to fight or be distracting from the neighborhood". That did not happen. The public cannot trust that sentiment or the glossing over of the title of this amendment which is Riverfront Crossings Plan. Two years from now people will say "that was always Riverfront Crossings, you just misunderstood". Michaud says let's just call it correctly and say it will be CB -5 and that's it. What is next to her home is a 4 story building 45 feet tall. If you want 75 feet, just add 30 to that. That is monstrous next to a historic district and that is what you'd be adding by Iowa Avenue and Washington Street. That is not a sensitive transition zone to two-story Victorian houses. Michaud is happy to live in a historic district, and abide by the guidelines, and they have to ask for permission for a lot of things, and should get some respect and transition zone for that. Michaud is asking the Commission to defer this item based on the public input and the galloping development can gallop south of Burlington. The Comprehensive Plan was just updated six or seven months ago and now it's going to be changed dramatically. That is inconsistent and is not respecting all the work that went into the Comprehensive Plan for Iowa City. It's a laissez-faire movement. Andrew Sherburne (1204 Sheridan Avenue) is one of the co-founders of FilmScene and has lived in Iowa City for 11 years, having come here for his wife to go to school and never really planned to stay but rather move back to St. Paul where the arts opportunities are plentiful and lots of mixed-use areas, where we thought we could raise our children and experience the best of what a city has to offer. But something changed, and there was a certain gravitational pull in Iowa City and that Iowa City does have those cultural opportunities, you can find the same things you can find in a big city, but you can find it in a community that is tighter -knit and closer together. When we decided to stay in Iowa City and raise a family here, we knew we wanted to live near downtown. We wanted to be as close as we could be to those cultural opportunities and that is how we selected our home, and why we live within walking distance to downtown Iowa City. Founding FilmScene for him, and for this entire community, there was no other place an art house cinema could go but into the downtown. It's the cultural heart of the city and a place where the art can deliver 32,000 people the opportunities that FilmScene has delivered over the past year. And it's a place where the community can deliver just as much to them. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 9 of 23 Sherburne stated they were proud to be in downtown and this rezoning opportunity will allow them to strengthen what they've built over the course of the last few years. And not only have that, but to strengthen the gravitational pulled of Iowa City that draws us all closer, that brings us all in from far away, a signature development like the Chauncey will be a calling card for Iowa City and will provide that cultural home for FilmScene and allow them to expand and provide common spaces and housing so people will be able to live closer to these opportunities. Sherburne encouraged the Commission to follow the Staff recommendations, and he supports the rezoning. Freerks closed public hearing. Thomas moved to defer this discussion and decision until the Commission can hear from the Historic Preservation Commission. Eastham seconded. Yapp confirmed that the Unitarian Church property is the only property identified as historic in that three block area. Hektoen asked if the Historic Preservation Commission is looking at that property of if it has already been designated. Yapp replied that the Commission has requested to look at the entire area to see if any properties should be identified and will be doing so at their next meeting. Thomas also wants the Historic Preservation Commission to look at the amendment and see if they have any concerns about addicting these three blocks to the Downtown District. Eastham stated that the Master Plan for the Downtown District does have language that says the historic character of the Downtown District is an important asset for the community as well as the businesses and people located there. There has also been a lot of discussion if buildings on College Street could be taller in height and if it would affect historic character. Eastham would like to ask the Historic Preservation Commission to give some advice or guidance on those questions. Freerks stated that this area is really about some parking lots, civic buildings, parking ramps, a park, and it is pretty clear there is a historic structure here. Yapp stated that in the context of the Comprehensive Plan identifying the Unitarian Church property as a key historic structure is about the most significant thing we can do for a comprehensive plan. Hektoen reminded the Commission that what they can do with a Comprehensive Plan amendment, again this is not a rezoning. The language in the Comprehensive Plan is already as strongly worded as it can be regarding this historic parcel. Freerks agreed, but wanted to make sure that if they defer they would be receiving additional information in the future to help formulate a decision. Miklo added that the Historic Preservation Commission's role is focus on historic buildings and district and it seems like what you are asking for is them to evaluate, which is the Planning and Zoning Commission's role. Eastham clarified he is asking for the Historic Preservation Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 23 Commission have an opportunity to inform the Planning and Zoning Commission about the historic aspects of these proposed plans. Miklo stated that is a valid question for the area to around these three blocks, and the area east of it, but for these three blocks it is not necessary. Hektoen stated the Historic Preservation Commission with regards to this particular application to amend the Comprehensive Plan; it is not their role to consider the impact of surrounding development on even further away historic buildings. Their expertise is to evaluate the historic significance of a particular property. This is the reason the Comprehensive Plan amendments come to P&Z first not Historic Preservation Commission. Freerks is concerned that with regards to this three block area, there is not any more information the Historic Preservation Commission can give to assist with the decision. Thomas asked if Trinity Church was identified as a historic structure, and Freerks answered yes however the real issue is the underlying zoning of the area and is unsure what the Historic Preservation Commission can give as added information. Theobald is in agreement with Freerks and doesn't see how the Historic Preservation Commission can assist with this particular area. A vote for deferral was taken failed 3-3. Swygard moved that the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District) be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Additionally under the Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with the proposed addendum to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Eastham seconded the motion. Eastham wanted to state for the record he struggles with why these three blocks need to be changed in the Comprehensive Plan to something different and especially for higher density and commercial uses. There just doesn't seem to be a real rationale why the three blocks need to change from their present need and use. He also noted that the character of walking down College, Washington or Iowa is very different east of Gilbert Street. Thomas stated his concern is with transition, and that is something the Commission has discussed many times now. He understands that the policy has been for some 20 years that if the downtown is to expand beyond its current boundaries that should preserve and reflect the character of the downtown itself. That character is essentially a 2-6 story building and that is why the C13-10, CB -5 and C13-2 series was developed. As the downtown expanded the CB -5 and C13-2 would provide for a quality for that expansion that would be very reminiscent of what is seen in the downtown itself. Overall he likes densities, but certain densities are suited for certain areas. Eastham added that the Riverfront Crossings District provides a huge opportunity to accomplish the goals that people have said they want for the Downtown District including higher residential density and improved access to office space. Those needs are also met by the current Downtown District plan. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 11 of 23 Freerks stated there have been comments from people that it is a good thing though to add more density in areas where there are amenities, such as the Robert E. Lee Recreation Center or the Chauncey Swan Park. Thomas added that CB -5 density allows for up to 75 feet, that is a 6 story building. A vote was taken and the motion failed by a vote of 1-5 (Freerks affirmative). Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that the remainder of the Civic District, north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St, be added to the Central District Plan Land Use Map as an addendum and shown as 'Mixed Use' as shown on Exhibit B. Additionally staff recommends IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed addendum to the Central District Plan Yapp showed a map (exhibit B) which was the area north of Iowa Avenue and east of Van Buren Street. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this larger area and the North Clinton/Dubuque Street area as areas that should be examined more closely and amended into the Central District Plan. This area north of Iowa Avenue and east of Van Buren Street, staff does recommend it be added to the Central District Plan making it subject to the Central District Plan policies. Staff recommends identify the area as mixed-use in the land use map; the area is already largely mixed-use, containing residential, office and commercial development. Much of the area is currently zoned both CB -2 and CB -5. Yapp showed a map showing potential building heights within the larger area and the historic districts around and north of College Green Park. Swygard questioned if there were any single family housing zoned in these areas. Yapp does not believe so, it is all zoned multi -family. Freerks pointed out that the area is actually not representative of the underlying zone, due to the neighboring historic areas. She believes the whole area needs more reflection on the transition as one walks down College Street or Iowa Avenue and reusing the homes as commercial rather than building new CB -5 building therefore maintaining the feel of the area. This would include setbacks from the street, areas between structures, green space and so if we can't call them historic structures in this area, we find a way to maintain that sense and feel in the area and CB -5 does not do that. Eastham asked why designate these areas as mixed-use and Yapp replied because that is how they are being used. Freerks added that mixed-use needs more limitations for this area due to what might go there given the opportunity. This is the opportunity for the Commission to set as part of the goals to look at setbacks, greenspace, and whatever might replace these mid -block sections stay in character with the area. Freerks opened public hearing on this portion of the current Civic District. Marc McCullum stated he proposed some time ago a village type overlay, because of the rampant redevelopment the community is losing a lot of the little boutique stores and things like that and anything to encourage that would be good. Another thing to consider is the bundling of parcels in these areas to assure the development of scale. And perhaps if there is a restriction to do that, perhaps through special exception, that would then give the City a little bit more MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3, 2015 — 5:30 PM — WORK SESSION E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks Paula Swygard, Phoebe Martin, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, John Yapp, Robert Miklo, Kent Ralston OTHERS PRESENT: PuRn • •;� Freerks called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton I Dubuque Street District). Yapp explained that this district is generally north of Jefferson Street, between Clinton Street and Dubuque Street, and showed the area on a map. Staff is proposing to add the blocks (bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton I Dubuque Street District) to the Central District Plan. The area is made up largely of institutional buildings (churches and The University of Iowa) and multi -family mixed use buildings. A question arose during Commission discussion regarding the definition of Mixed Use. In the context of the Central District Plan, Mixed Use is defined as: low to medium density residential uses including single family, duplexes, townhouses, and multi -family; and small scale commercial uses, offices, personal services, and other uses that serve residents and visitors to the area. Buildings can be mixed-use or single- use buildings. An area may be primarily commercial in nature or may be primarily residential depending on the market. Development is intended to be pedestrian -oriented with buildings oriented to the street --- With_. With regards to historic property, the Central District Plan Map does not specifically identify Historic properties, but the plan does contain polices for the preservation of historic properties. These policies are a based on the adopted and periodically updated Historic Preservation Plan, which is also an element of the Comprehensive Plan. A goal of the Preservation Plan is to identify historic properties. Staff conducted research of the area, searching for identification of historic properties: Iowa Site Inventory Forms, which document the historic and architectural values of individual buildings, were reviewed for each property in the N. North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. Historic properties at 30 N. Clinton, 130 Jefferson Street and 115 N. Dubuque Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 2 of 8 Street are included in the Jefferson Street Historic District and are therefore already protected by the Historic Preservation Commission. The only other property that is identified as being individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places is the Sanxay-Gilmore House at 109 E. Market Street. A copy of that Iowa Site Inventory Form is available upon request. Although four other properties in the district have some historic merit, the forms indicate that they are not individually significant enough to be listed on the National Register and there is not a sufficient grouping to form a historic district. Eastham questioned the exact area of the district, as it appears to be different on various maps and asked for clarification on which map represented what the staff was recommending. Yapp clarified that there were some discrepancies on how the "gap" areas were identified on the Comprehensive Plan maps and the actual Central District map. Eastham also asked about the historic preservation review and if the Historic Preservation Committee has reviewed the two areas. Miklo answered that they had not had it as an agenda item, but they are aware of the areas. Eastham asked then for confirmation that staff is recommending that the Commission act on these two amendments to the Comprehensive Plan before the Historic Preservation Commission makes any decisions on the historic designation of the buildings in these areas. Miklo stated that there are already historic designated houses in the Central District so those will remain regardless of this decision, and also that Commission can make recommendations to Council at any time for historic designations. Eastham noted that he was uncomfortable with making a decision about the amendment before the Historical Preservation Commission discussed the areas, and Freerks agreed it seemed as if they were moving too fast and perhaps not with all the necessary information needed. Hektoen stated it was precedent that P&Z has made recommendations and then HPC has made designations after. Freerks just noted that the P&Z Commission is trying to be more careful about changing overlays and moving areas around without having all concerns addressed. Eastham again stated he felt P&Z could defer these amendments until after the HPC had an opportunity to discuss the areas. Miklo feels that is not necessary because the Central District has policies regarding historic buildings already those will cover any new areas added into the Central District. Eastham said that if staff already conducted historical research of the areas, as stated in the staff memo, then that shows some concern. Hektoen clarified what Miklo was saying that this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan does not change any kind of analysis with regards to their historic value or if they should be preserved or designated doesn't have an implication on this. Miklo stated that as with the Downtown District Plan, where the historic buildings are identified on the map, they have done the same with this Central District by identifying the one property that is already identified as historic on the map. Freerks stated that there has been lots of conversation and input from the community requesting clarification regarding timelines of changes and to look at historic possibilities before changes happen and therefore need to look at situations where there may be historic structures and not make changes without having given time to HPC to review as well. Although the two Commissions are separate and their decisions do not have to have a direct impact on the other, Freerks believes decisions should be conscious of each other. Miklo said he feels the amendment document does take the historic properties and the possible historic properties into consideration. Eastham stated he feels the HPC should still issue an opinion of the areas, and the possible historic buildings in the area, before decisions on changes to the district are made. Thomas stated he felt that any area that falls into the University Impact zone is an area that falls into pressures where time may be a Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 3 of 8 factor. Additionally due to the recent conversations regarding the South Dubuque Street area, it seems like this is an opportunity now to address the historic preservation aspects to avoid having to deal with it in the future, when it might be too late. Hektoen asked what the Commission is asking staff for with regards to this amendment. Eastham answered that if in the future a rezoning application comes forward, the Commission is required to look to the Comprehensive Plan for guidance, and if the rezoning were to affect a historic property, the Commission would like that noted in the Comprehensive Plan if that property is designated as historic. Freerks and Eastham both noted that they would like to see the HPC give an opinion on the property at 109 E. Market Street. Miklo stated it is clearly eligible for historic designation as indicated in the Iowa Site Inventory Form. Freerks asked Miklo for confirmation that making this amendment does nothing more to increase development in this area, and he confirmed that was correct. Hektoen stated the amendment actually brings this area into the goals and policies of the area, which includes protection of historic preservation. Yapp also stated the specific goals that staff are recommending in the amendment would be added to the Central District Plan: A. Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors without overly discouraging redevelopment. B. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque Stand Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned I reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design. Yapp asked if it would be helpful to forward the sections of the Historic Preservation Plan to the Commission, and Freerks agreed it would, the more information the Commission can have the better informed their decisions can be. Thomas said he would be interested in the Historic Preservation Commission's thoughts regarding the sequencing, if there was anything more they could identify or make reference to as amendments if this area goes into the Central District Plan. Thomas also raised a general concern regarding reviewing the multi -family design standards and his assumption is that housing will go towards student housing given the location. He asked if the City has had any conversations with the University with respect to developing design standards with that in mind, knowing there will be a very specific user here. Yapp said there have been general conversations with University staff regarding general design standards. Thomas asked for more specific standards, knowing these buildings will be housing students the lifestyles of the tenants will be different. Yapp said they have discussed with the University a concept of a living learning community for students in a building that might be privately owned but to be designed to function as a living learning community. Thomas stated his other concern was regarding the transportation goal, which Thomas supports, however they may want to add an addition to that especially thinking about Dubuque Street and what the possible options might be for more open space in that area and to emphasis the connectivity of the area. Eastham asked about the design standards that could be included in the code, if provisions Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 4 of 8 specifically for student housing can be added. Miklo stated that the area already has planned designed standards to reflect green space and parking issues, but the staff's intent, assuming the proposed goal is adopted, is to follow up with more specific recommendations on additional design standards. Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District). Martin stated she sits on the Board of Directors of The United Action for Youth that is housed on Iowa Avenue and questioned if she could participate in the conversation. Hektoen stated Martin can participate as long as she feels she can be impartial. Martin stated she can be impartial, but just wanted it stated for the record. Yapp began by showing a map of the area to help explain that staff is proposing to take the Civic District and put the three municipal blocks south of Iowa Avenue and west of Van Buren Street and make those part of the Downtown District section of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. And then the areas north of Iowa Avenue and east of Van Buren Street become part of the Central Planning District and identify those as mixed-use. Currently this area is part of the old Downtown Planning District from the 1997 Comprehensive Plan. For the area proposed as the Central Planning District, those areas are currently used as mixed-use areas and are currently zoned CB -2 and CB -5 which is central business support zones. Mixed- use allows for commercial, residential, and office land use on those properties, and that is how they are used now. The three municipal blocks proposed to be added to the Downtown District, the rationale behind that recommendation is the intensity of the uses on those blocks is primarily municipal functions, City Hall, Police Station, Fire Station, Recreation Building, Chauncey Swan parking facility, Chauncey Swan Park. These are sites that hold many different events and functions including Farmer's Market, athletic events at the rec center, meetings in City Hall, so it seems more appropriate as a downtown type designation. Those municipal blocks also front onto Gilbert Street, a four -lane arterial street, to the south end which is Burlington Street, also Highway 1. Given the input staff received from the Commission at the last meeting, staff wanted to articulate more clearly what is recommended for building heights similar to how the Downtown District and Riverfront Crossings Plan identifies building height scenarios in that plan, staff has done the same for these blocks. The Downtown District Plan recommends taller buildings on corners with shorter buildings along the block face, so this plan show taller buildings on corners of College Street and Gilbert Street and also the corners of Burlington Street and Gilbert Street to be 7-15 stories which is consistent with the Downtown District and River Crossings Plan. Staff recognizes the need for the height transition and show the east side of the municipal blocks as 4-6 stories. Translating that to future zoning, that could be either a CB -5 zone or a CB -10 zone with a height limit which can be done through a conditional zoning agreement. Miklo pointed out the north area, along the Iowa Avenue frontage, noting that importance of the Iowa Avenue corridor as it is the view path of the Old Capital, and staff recommends 2-4 stories height limits for buildings that front onto Iowa Avenue. Staff has identified the Unitarian Church property as a key historic building, and again the Riverfront Crossings Plan does identify key historic buildings in that plan, the Unitarian Church property is clearly eligible for historic designation, so it is appropriate to show that on the map. Yapp pointed out the two asterisks on the map, staff looked at the policies in the Riverfront Crossings Plan, which includes policies for preservation of historic property and as incentives would offer density bonuses and parking reductions. One way the City could potentially participate in that would be to allow a more significant structure on the Iowa Avenue frontage, which is now a surface parking lot, in exchange for preservation of the church Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 5 of 8 property. Yapp handed the Commission a memo prior to the meeting starting with a revision to provide more detail about the historic policies. The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan contains polices which are intended to promote the preservation of historic buildings. The plan states that incentives and policy options that encourage preservation should be implemented. The current zoning code allows for a density bonus for adaptive reuse of historic structures, and Yapp pointed out the church property is currently zoned CB -5. The CB -5 and CB -2 zones allows for additional square footage in buildings developed in the vacant portions of the property. Yapp pointed out that in this particular case the vacant portions of this block face are owned by the City as parking. The current zoning however does not allow for this bonus in the CB -10 zone nor does it allow for the type of historic preservation density transfer to a separate development project which is part of the form -based code in the Riverfront Crossings Zone. It would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to amend the zoning code for the central business zones to allow for this type of transfer of development rights for historic buildings similar to the Riverfront Crossings Zones. Given that the City controls the surface parking lots in the Civic Districts, the City may have a role in providing locations for this transfer. Yapp next showed the Commission a building height transition map, a corrected map was handed out prior to the start of this evenings meetings because on the map included in the packet the Unitarian Church property was identified as a 2-5 story in potential height and that was based on the current zoning, but after reviewing that property, staff realized as part of their Comprehensive Plan amendment they propose a 2-4 story height limit, again with a possibility of going taller if the church is preserved. Regarding more specifically historic properties in the Civic District, staff reviewed the Iowa Site Inventory Forms, and based on the available forms only the Unitarian Church at 10 South Gilbert Street is clearly identified as being eligible for the national registry. The properties at 410 and 422 Iowa Avenue may be eligible based on architectural elements, those are the United Action for Youth properties. For properties that do not have Site Inventory Forms, 505 Iowa Avenue has potential for National Registry eligibility. The other properties in this district, in Staff's opinion, have been altered to such an extent they do not meet the criteria for eligibility. Miklo added that a professional architectural historian prepared the reports, so it was not just staff opinion. Miklo added that everything except the south side of the 500 block of Iowa Avenue has a Site Inventory. Martin asked about the United Action for Youth buildings, stating that they have been extensively remodeled, but because the fronts have retained the original architecture they may still be eligible. Miklo confirmed that was correct. Freerks stated that making a change in this area may have an impact on the future of the area in a way that the other comprehensive plan amendment may not. She questioned about the properties along College Street, there are blocks that have a certain distinction and with the current zoning in that area Freerks needs clarification how this amendment works with regards to transition from the mixed-use properties to the historic properties or the homes in that area. Homes are setback further from the street than any of the commercial properties. Yapp replied that he had not reviewed all the setbacks for that area, and would need time to review. Freerks believes that the setbacks are as important as the height limitations and perhaps the Commission needs to look at the zoning in these areas to help with the transitions in these areas. Thomas added that especially in the area where they are discussing central business zones abutting residential zones there needs to be a side yard transitional edge. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 6 of 8 Eastham agrees that the "feel" of walking down College, Washington, or Iowa there is a distinct difference once east of Gilbert Street. Thomas asked for confirmation on his understanding of the history of discussions of planning in the Downtown District, his recollection is that densities higher than CB -5, meaning CB -10, east of Gilbert Street were first introduced in the College/Gilbert RFP and this discussion today is a follow up to that. Yapp confirmed that is generally correct, in the past the City and the public have always seen those three municipal blocks as City Campus, then after the City went through a facilities study and realized it did not need all that property to be part of the City Campus, and introduced allowing mixed-use development on those three blocks. After that discussion, then there was the issuance of the RFP for the College/Gilbert property. Thomas stated he could not discover any discussions regarding buildings east of Gilbert being larger than 6 stories and asked if staff recall of any such discussions. Yapp could not recall any specific discussions. Yapp added that the three blocks west of Van Buren Street, the City blocks, they are already part of the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Parking District and that was a zoning code change implemented after the Riverfront Crossings Plan was adopted and that parking district does allow for a reduction in required parking for things like historic preservation of buildings and for properties that meet other public goals. Swygard asked Yapp what some of those other public goals might be. Yapp replied an example would be affordable housing. In this context historic preservation and affordable housing are the two main allowances for a reduction in required parking. Eastham asked with regards to historic preservation, the Riverfront Crossings Plan states "protecting historic character and key historic structures" is an overriding goal to consider. Eastham feels the phrase historic character is not the same as a specific building. Eastham also pointed out on the map, the two blocks between College/Burlington and Gilbert/Van Buren there are two parts identified for higher building heights and those do appear as corner areas of the blocks but the one on the south side of College and Gilbert seems to be larger than just the corner but seems to be more of a quarter of the block and questioned why that area was larger than just the corner. Yapp answered that since it's directly adjacent to the Chauncey Swan parking ramp is one factor and it is also adjacent to Chauncey Swan Park, a designated open space. Eastham also pointed out in the Staff memo, there was rationale for providing more density in this part of the Civic District and a need for more Class A office space in the Downtown District but there is not much analysis as to what the yield is for the additional Class A office space. Miklo replied that much of the "older" downtown has older buildings and in those buildings they are not designed for Class A office space. The Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan suggests is for preservation for much of the older downtown as opposed to redevelopment to provide for that Class A office space. In the Riverfront Crossings form -based code there are provisions for height bonuses if a developer creates Class A office space but that does not apply to downtown yet. Hektoen stated that in the CB -10 zoning there is a provision for height bonuses for Class A office space. Yapp pointed out that all the properties currently zoned public will have to be rezoned to be developed and at that time the Commission and the Council can impose height limitations or Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 7 of 8 other limitations or setback discussions at the time they are actually zoned and what is embodied in the zoning for the area is what regulates the area. Hektoen pointed out the Comprehensive Plan is meant to guide the rezoning process not define it. Eastham asked a question about the height limitations, Yapp explained that east of Van Buren Street the height limitations are based on the existing zoning. The height limitations can be changed if the zoning is changed. Miklo stated the height legends on the maps gives guidance to the Commission and Council for future decisions of the areas. Freerks reiterated that her concern is not only height limitations, but also setback requirements and transitions from commercial to residential areas. Yapp agreed to provide the Commission with the setbacks for the areas before Thursday's meeting. Yapp explained that there is a provision in the zoning code for setback averaging and he will look at that and see how it might function in this area. Freerks also suggested perhaps dividing the Civic District amendment into two separate items due to the areas that are more residential and have possible historic properties and how the transition from the areas is maintained. The Commission agreed they would like Staff to prepare the area as two separate items for a motion for Thursday's meeting. Yapp recapped what the Commission is requesting for Thursday's meeting; pertinent policies from the historic preservation plan and how they would affect these two areas, provide the existing setbacks and building placements in the different zones in this area and how those relate to each other, they will provide language of how a comprehensive plan functions, what it covers, how it relates to a zoning code, and finally dividing the agenda up into potentially three different motions. Freerks reminded that at Thursday's meeting they will hold public hearing on these agenda items. OTHER AGENDA ITEMS None ADJOURNMENT Martin moved to adjourn. Swygard seconded. Motion carried. z O N U gwa 20 0 W W) ZWN V �Z� N o N ad Z Ow z~ H za Z a J a c z H W W 2 R 0' O LL z NXXXXXXX v-XXXXXXX w 0 Nxxxxxxx N NXXXXXXX �wc�mao�U-)wU) �Xo0CD0000 W w J W 4 W Z }aZw OC OZ Ov ZOa aaoo� 0 � wU=�?�oaoa cn 2 a>-alxa== W y W� W O U Q '0 x��' a� N � i) c O O O N Y U) U5 "_ O aQaz3: ii n n n u XO O� LU Y MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks Paula Swygard, Phoebe Martin, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, John Yapp, Robert Miklo, Kent Ralston OTHERS PRESENT: Dan Cilek, Marc Moen, Sarah Clark, Rockne Cole, Alan Swanson, Jim Knapp, Casey Cook, Amanda Van Horne, Ann Christensen, Mark Nolte, Marc McCullum, Tim Conroy, Pam Michaud, Cecile Kuenzli, Ethan Diehl, Rudolf Kuenzli, Matthew Fleming, Mary Bennett, Nancy Bird, John Fogerty, Joyce Summerwill, Amanda Ward, Joseph Knock, Dick Summerwill, Joe Hughes, Deanna Furhmeister, Dan Furhmeister The Commission moved by a vote of 7-0 to approve REZ14-00023, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a rezoning from Interim Development -Research Park (ID -RP) to Commercial Office (CO -1) zone for approximately 34.21 acres of property located north of Northgate Drive Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. There were none. Comprehensive Plan Item A public hearing for discussion of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton 1 Dubuque Street District): and the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District). Yapp began discussing the 2013 Comprehensive Plan and that it states identifies two areas, one located generally east of Gilbert St and north of Burlington St, the other located north of Iowa Ave Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 2 of 24 and west of Dubuque St, as areas that were not included in the Downtown Master Plan or the Central District Plan. The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan states that while both areas have the potential to redevelop at higher densities both should comply with the policies and goals of the Central District Plan in order to ensure quality design and appropriate transitions to the areas that border them. Both of these areas are currently part of the Downtown Planning District (from the 1997 Comprehensive Plan). Yapp showed a map of the area and defined the two areas in question. For the purposes of this report, staff has separated the North Clinton I Dubuque District and the Civic District, and have provided staff recommendations for each district separately. First is the North Clinton I Dubuque District. The majority of the North Clinton I Dubuque District is zoned Planned Residential Multi -Family (PRM). It is characterized by multi -family apartments, former single family homes converted to apartments, religious and other institutions, and other public uses. With close proximity to the University of Iowa, demand is strong for multi -family residential as well as institutional and public uses. The purpose of the PRM Zone is to provide for the development of high density multi -family housing in close proximity to centrally- located employment, educational and commercial uses. The PRM zone is subject to multi -family design standards, and allows for both a density bonus and height increase up to 65 feet (5-6 stories) provided certain 'public benefits' are included in the project. These public benefits include a masonry finish on the exterior of the building, usable open space for the occupants of the building, rehabilitation of a historic building, provision of assisted housing, streetscape amenities, additional landscaping and/or windows that have a height 1.5 times greater than their width. Yapp pointed out on the south end of the Clinton St / Dubuque St District by Jefferson Street that is a portion of the Jefferson Street Historic District is represented on the map as Overlay Historic District (OHD). Freerks asked Yapp to discuss or explain how the overlay will come into play with this change to the area. Yapp stated that the historic overlay will not be affected by the comprehensive plan changes. Freerks asked how the historic overlay district would be affected by development. Yapp explained that any demolition of properties, or proposed exterior changes, such as an addition or change in the exterior of the property, or construction of an accessory building such as a garage, would need to be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission before a building permit could be issued. Eastham asked if the OHD limits redevelopment height? Can a two-story building in an OHD be replaced by a five -story building? Yapp stated that it would depend on two different things. One the underlying zoning, and what that zoning would allow in terms of height, and two it would need to be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Yapp continued his presentation showing a map of the land uses. The North Clinton I Dubuque St District has many land uses, private institutions (religious), multi -family uses, mixed-use buildings consisting of both residential and commercial or offices, and there is also an office use and single- Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 3 of 24 family or duplex uses in this district as well. Yapp showed photos of the area to show the variety of the land uses. Yapp moved on to describe the Civic District, The Civic District, so named due to the municipal/public uses in the district, is a mixed-use area in that it contains a variety of uses. Besides municipal uses, it contains multi -family, commercial, and institutional uses. Historically the three municipal blocks (bounded by Gilbert St, Iowa Ave, Van Buren St and Burlington St) have been identified as municipal campus blocks. These blocks contain City Hal!, Fire and Police stations, the Recreation Center, Swan Parking Facility, and Chauncey Swan Park. The zoning of this area is also a mix, the municipal blocks are zoned public, for the most part with portions of them zoned C65 for non-public uses. The east side of Van Buren St and the north side of Iowa Ave are zoned CB -2 and CB -5, which are central business support classifications. The land uses in the Civic district are public uses, and a mixture of office, commercial, and mixed-use land uses Yapp explained that they received public comment on the Ralston Creek Corridor, and he believes the Ralston Creek Corridor represents an opportunity for the area. He showed images of the area and stated that some of the comments were to clean up some of the invasive species in the corridor, make Ralston Creek more accessible, and provide trail and/or way -side parks along the creek corridor. Additionally much of the public comment was related to historic buildings, and he showed on the images the designated historic landmarks at 130 E. Jefferson Street and 30 N. Clinton Street. There are also several potential historic buildings in both the areas discussed this evening, 10 S. Gilbert Street, 410 & 422 Iowa Avenue, and 109 E. Market Street. Yapp began discussing the staff recommendation for the Central District Plan and stated that staff proposes adding the North Clinton I Dubuque St District to the Central District Plan map with land use categories consistent with the rest of the Central Planning District. Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, outside of the three municipal blocks, be added to the Central District Plan and identified as mixed-use (These properties are already identified as 'mixed-use' in the larger Comprehensive Plan land use map). This proposal will fit in with existing polices and goals in the Central District Plan which include: • Goal #1: Promote the Central District as an attractive place to live by encouraging reinvestment in residential properties throughout the district and by supporting new housing opportunities. • Goal #1(d): Support the goals and objectives proposed in the Historic Preservation Plan. • Goal #2(d): In higher density multi -family zones, ensure that adequate infrastructure and open space is provided to create a livable environment for residents. • Goal #3(c): Implement targeted code enforcement for areas that receive a higher level of complaints regarding zoning code violations, snow and weed removal, and trash control that affect neighborhood quality of life Selected Existing Transportation Goals —Central District Plan Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 4 of 24 • Goal #1: Balance traffic circulation needs, preserve neighborhood character, and public safety issues. • Goal #1(b): When planning for street improvements, give consideration to all modes of transportation, including walking, bicycling, and driving. Balance these needs with desirability of on -street parking and street trees. • Goal #3: Develop a plan to formalize safe bicycle and pedestrian connections between the major destinations in the district, including downtown Iowa City, neighborhood commercial areas, the UI campus, parks and elementary and secondary schools. • Goal #3(d): Continue to explore options such as high -visibility crosswalks to improve pedestrian crossings where major pedestrian routes intersect with arteria! Streets • Goal #4: Encourage development of businesses, institutions, and public entities that provide goods, services, and amenitiesthat support healthy neighborhoods. • Goal #4(a): Encourage a diverse range of businesses that provide essential services to the Downtown area- grocery, clothing, household items, etc. • Goal #4(b): Encourage investment and reinvestment in existing commercial areas that provide goods and services for Central District neighborhoods. • Goal #5(a): Install pedestrian lighting where needed to create safe travel corridors for pedestrians. • Goal #5(c): Provide for walkable/bikable routes to and through commercial areas. Selected Existing Transportation Goal —Central District Plan • Goal #3(e): Explore the viability of alternative routes for bikes and pedestrians along Ralston Creek, recognizing the difficulties posed by private ownership of the creek, access, and flooding. Selected Existing Open Space Goals —Central District Plan • Goal #3: Improve the amenities offered in existing parks or other open spaces • Goal #5(a): Develop plans for improving visual and physical access to Ralston Creek and for restoration of the stream along both public and privately owned sections of the creek. Yapp explained that some of the input they received they could not find a goal or policy in the existing district plan, so as part of putting these areas into the Central District Plan staff recommends three additional goals: • Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors without overly discouraging redevelopment. • Transportation Goal #3 (k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned/reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 5 of 24 Yapp reconfirmed that this is the recommendation for the Central District Plan. Freerks asked Yapp to discuss and explain how this plan is different and used different than the Civic use map. She pointed out it appears there are additional properties. Yapp explained that when they reviewed the existing boundaries of the central district use map, there were slight inconsistencies with what was in the comprehensive plan. He pointed out the area that is being recommended to add to the Central District Plan, and the rest is already in the Central District Plan. Yapp discussed the remainder of the Civic District, the three municipal blocks, those are part of the old downtown planning district, in the 1997 Comprehensive Plan. Yapp explained staff is recommending these three blocks be added to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings area and will be subject to some of policies and goals of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan: • New development should be located on sites that do not contain historic buildings. • Active uses, such as ground floor retail (and not blank walls) should front onto the street frontages and the City Plaza. • Upper floors should contain office, commercial, and residential uses. • Buildings should be built to the property line. • Corner locations should be reserved for taller buildings, creating a block structure with taller buildings on the comers and lower scale historic buildings between them. • The taller buildings on the corners should have a lower base consistent with [any] adjacent historic buildings to make them 'feel' contextual with the rest of downtown, while also limiting the perceived height of towers. • Parking should be located both on -street and behind storefronts in parking structures Eastham questioned the recommendation that new developments not be located on historic properties, and asked if there was a sequence to the staff's planning process, stating that specific consideration cannot be given to historic properties, if they do not know what the historic properties are. Yapp replied that it is for the properties that are already designated as historic or if designated in the future through the historic landmark designation process. Yapp continue on and gave the staff recommendation for the three municipal blocks in the Civic District are: 1. Staff recommends the three municipal blocks, bounded by Iowa Ave, Gilbert St, Burlington St, and Van Buren St remain in the Downtown Planning District and be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit B. 2. Staff recommends the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Land Use Map be amended to include the three municipal blocks shown as a mix of 'Civic' and 'Mixed Use' and be added to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit C. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 6 of 24 3. Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St, be added to the Central District Plan and shown as 'Mixed Use' as shown on Exhibit A. Eastham asked if "Mixed Use" in this area would have the same meaning as the rest of the Comprehensive Plan, as in the Central District. Yapp explained that yes "Mixed Use" means buildings that have a variety of uses, including residential and/or commercial or office uses. Freerks questioned why in the Civic Land Use Map Ralston Creek was not used as more of a barrier and kind of a dividing area, and instead have the boundary in the middle of block. Swygard agreed that there is a question in the area between the Civic District and the east side of Van Buren Street. Freerks confirmed that the entire area is confusing, multiple districts, multiple overlays, and bringing the Riverfront Crossings area over to this area, and giving a designation to an area that has in the past been a "no man's land". Her feeling is that doing this movement within districts is kind of a "up zoning". Yapp explained that it is a comprehensive plan land use map redesign, but it could result in re- zoning actions or be a basis for rezoning actions in the future. He reiterated that staff recommended that the three municipal blocks be part of the Downtown District for the reasons they are higher intensity in use, they are served by major arterial streets, and they are served by a parking structure. Therefore the remainder of the area, north of Iowa Avenue and East of Van Buren St they recommend being part of the Central District due to the types of uses of the buildings, the intensity of the uses, are more in keeping with the Central District policies and goals. Freerks commented that in the past there has been public comment on keeping transitions from areas to areas, and she doesn't think this district has enough transition. Hektoen stated that the boundary of the Central District already includes the home to the east. Yapp confirmed that only the three municipal blocks would be going into the Riverfront Crossings/Downtown area. Eastham also questioned how the staff recommendations build the concept of transitions both in the concepts, height and building design, characteristics, etc. from one side of the transition are to the other. Yapp stated that consideration was given, with Ralston Creek there is a topographic transition east and west of the creek, and also in the zoning as east of Van Buren St. it is CB -2 and CB -5 zoning and then to the east transitions to multi -family zoning, then further east transitions to the College Green Historic District. Also the recommended land use map indicates mixed use designation east of Van Buren and north of Iowa Avenue, which then transitions to residential land use designation, so there is mixed use and multi -family between the downtown and residential areas. Eastham believes that the staff recommendation actually extends CB -10 zoning across Gilbert Street into those three blocks of civic uses. Yapp stated it could be CB -5 there as well, however Thomas pointed out there is no CB -5 zoning in the Downtown District. Freerks asked staff to explain what the area east of the Civic District is. Hektoen said that was the Central District, and the staff recommendation is to add the area of the Civic District, with the exception of the three municipal blocks from the Civic District into the Central District. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 7 of 24 Thomas asked if the Northside Market Place was in the Central District and Yapp confirmed that it was. Freerks opened public hearing. Dan Cilek (Oakland Avenue) works for Meta Communications Company and they recently moved offices from South Gilbert St to the Downtown District, and stated he does support the proposed recommendation due to the effect it is having on his business. He really hopes to see trails built along Ralston Creek and to have more recreational area around the creek. Cilek hears from his staff that they want to live in housing near the downtown area to be close to work and other businesses. Marc Moen, commented about the Civic District, having focused on the area for many years, and made investments in the area, and the area that was once reserved for City Campus would now be considered for development. On that consideration, his company retained design and landscape experts to look at the possibilities of the area, most specifically the corner of College Street and Gilbert Street. After a couple years of research on what that area could be, and sustain, it seemed logical it would be part of the Central Business District. Having this area included in the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Plan will be great for this building, and Moen supports this proposal. He stated it is critical to move forward to sustain Iowa City, but also critical to maintain the historic buildings and areas which is a crucial part of the fabric of downtown. This proposal allows the City to move forward and attract the best and the brightest of people and businesses in Iowa City, and allows businesses to recruit which is very important. Adding mixed use buildings to the area will only expand the area, the alternative is to take buildings down, which would lose the integrity of the fabric of the downtown area. Moen reiterated he supports the recommendation to Council to allow mixed use buildings in this area and feels it will be an advantage to both the College Green area and the downtown. Sarah Clark (Brown Street) distributed copies to each commissioner a letter signed by 21 folks who live in the north side and Goosetown neighborhoods. The letter states: As longtime residents of closest to downtown Iowa City, we are writing to share our concerns about the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments to be discussed at the Planning and Zoning Commission's Public Hearing to be held of January 15, 2015. While we are in general agreement with City Staff recommendations, to add the North Clinton/Dubuque Street district to the Central District we are troubled by the proposed addition Civic District to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings/Downtown Master Plan. Our concerns are these. We believe it is critically important to prevent the abrupt and unsightly transition between the high-rise structures allowable in certain Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Districts and their low-rise and largely historic neighbors. One can imagine for example the Civic District one day being populated with shoulder to shoulder 15 story apartments or condos towering over and destroying the views from College Green Park and the near north side. We would thus advocate the requirements of more appropriate transition zones between districts as recommended in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Instead of adding to the Downtown District, the Civic District presents an ideal opportunity to create a distinctive mixed-use area on the near -east side just as north -side market place has its own distinctive character and that would further strengthen the Comprehensive Plan's emphasis on appropriate transitions between districts. Cities need diversity and Iowa City is deficient in walkable commercial districts. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 8 of 24 Finally, we strongly encourage the development of more diverse and affordable housing options within both the Downtown/Riverfront Crossing and Central Districts for populations other than college students. We are thinking retirees, working professionals, young families. And further, that such options incorporate a multitude of housing types, from single-family homes, as promoted by the admirable UniverCity Program, to mid -rises, duplexes, low-rise townhouses, apartments and even pocket neighborhoods. Expanding the Downtown District without additional discussion and possible zoning adjustments would erase these valuable and fleeting opportunities to enhance the quality and livability of Iowa City's unique downtown and surrounding districts. As Joni Mitchell (and I'm showing our age here) so famously sang "You don't know what you've got until it's gone". We urge the City to reconsider the addition of the Civic District into the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings District and instead, within the Central District require more appropriate transitions zones, encourage more mixed use area zones, and incentify more affordable housing options for all. Rockne Cole (1607 East Court Street) is speaking as co-chair of the Iowa Coalition Against the Shadow and as a concerned citizen related to this project. We oppose adding the three blocks contained in the Civic District to the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings District Master Plan. This Commission should defer this decision until the Commission can come up with a plan specifically tailored to the unique aspects of this area. Colel believes the key thing to emphasize here is they have some incredibly articulate logical members of this community on both sides. He is quite confident regardless of which argument the Commission hears tonight, they will not be able to determine whether this is a downtown area or a neighborhood area. And the reason is because it has aspects of both. On the one hand, you are essentially within one block from the College Green Park. On the other hand, you look to the west of that and you are two blocks down to the downtown and it's precisely because that no side is going to be able to tell you definitely whether it's purely downtown or purely a neighborhood. That is what makes it a transitional area. As far as he can tell by the comments made tonight by Mr. Yapp, what he is identifying as a transitional zone is essentially to the east of Ralston Creek to College Green Park. So basically a half a block protection. The reality is, it's true Mr. Moen has put in a lot of time effort, but the City should have had this conversation four years ago before it put out the request for proposal for that area. The reality is now there is a proposal that has polarized the community. Cole believes the greatest irony here is as we look forward, how do we save the downtown, and how do we save our neighborhoods. The proposal tonight is destabilizing the neighborhood, it's destabilizing the long- term residents that are there. I know each and every resident that resides along the west side of College Green Park, every single one of them is opposed to this project, this zoning designation. The Trinity Church has spoken as a church and while it's not confirmed, a substantial number of the members are opposed to this designation. And so because, and when you have a designation where there are two sides of the community, operating in good faith, both passionately believing in the purpose of what they believe in, that is precisely when this commission should step back, allow additional time, delay this process, and reopen so we can get something uniquely tailored for this area. Cole stated he is quite confident that if allowed, and the multitude got their ability to participate, the result would be something less controversial. Everyone agrees it needs to be developed, everyone agrees it needs to be mixed use, the question is, are we going to essentially have an intense use building within a block of a historic neighborhood. Cole is asking the Commission to defer, and one final comment some of the downtown developments have been Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 9 of 24 good, but the reality is they are downtown, and moving into the transitional zone will just create more conversations of the same in years to come. Alan Swanson (Blank & McCune Real Estate). His business is in the Civic District, or very close to it. He thinks moving the Civic District into the Riverfront Crossings area is a stroke of genius. It is something that looks to the future, and should not be waited on, not only are there young people who want to live downtown, many people of all ages from all over the country are looking to live in downtown Iowa City to be close to everything going on as possible. This would be a way to have higher density for people to live here beyond the students. Young professionals and retirees will live there and use all the things that are coming to Iowa City more and more and it's a time to move forward for Iowa City. Swanson stated he sees Iowa City as an international city, and while there may be a few tall buildings, they are not and will not be side by side, there will be some discretion where they are put. Jim Knapp stated there was an area in the Central Business District that appears to be absent and that is the corner of Clinton and Burlington, and the northeast side of that. There is a privately owned parking lot there now, but supposedly there are no legally owned privately run parking lots within the City of Iowa City, but this has been allowed by special agreement. This lot is large enough to house a city parking structure, and is competing against the already existing City parking lots. Knapp questioned why it is allowed to have a privately owned parking lot there. This would be an area perfect in the Central Business District perfect for a tall building, rather than in an area where it will be a shadow on a church and part of the rest of Iowa City. Knapp feels that high- rise buildings should not be on the edge of the district where there are parks and residential areas. Casey Cook (1 Oakpark Court) stated planners are like hockey players, the most successful ones anticipate where the puck is going to be. You are looking at the big picture, the Comp Plan reflects this perspective. It also considers the big picture, the community at large. Cook stated what he liked about this plan, he feels this plan continues the City's commitment to compact incontiguous development as a critical element in a community that works. This plan supports and enhances an investment in the Central Business District, it is the heart of the community, and we need to build on that success. Cook stated the City should continue to nurture a trail and pathway system the knits our community together and passively contains stormwater and emits flooding. An efficient community can be humane as well as gentle on the environment. We should continue to compete effectively with the communities around us, and capitalize on our resources as a critical aspect of good stewardship. We are all part of a large and complex community, a community of communities in fact, and he encourages the Commission to bring manifold considerations into their deliberations. Cook then stated his concerns about the plan, as well as additional questions for the Commission to think about. Is there some coordination between the planning policy and the concerns of the finance department? Specifically what is the impact on revenues from recent changes imposed by the state, that now assess partial commercial properties, mixed use, at residential rates. Basically half their value. What are the consequences of the rollback on multi- family assessments on City, County and School revenues? How committed do you believe the state is to backfill these lost revenues and for how long? And how does it affect your planning? If the City continues to trade restrictive zoning for tax benefit dollars, at what point are you willing to reduce support for the Senior Center? At what point do you cut support for the Summer of Arts, or Jazzfest? At what point are you prepared to cut support for human services? Can the City afford to jeopardize their support of the library? These are the kinds of considerations Cook believes Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 10 of 24 needs to come into the process, he feels the people in this room are asking important questions, wanting to know where historic preservation fits it, the priorities in the planning process, the quality of design and architecture. Cook stated as a six-year member of the Planning Commission, and a commercial real estate appraiser with a 30 year history in Iowa City, with a master's degree in urban planning from The University of Iowa, he shares the concerns. While design, architecture and historic preservation are important parts of the process, the Comp Plan needs to be a lot more. Amanda Van Horne (1722 Ridgeway Drive) is before the Commission as an elected representative of Trinity Episcopal Church. Van Horne stated that Trinity Episcopal Church is a Iowa City institution that has been on that corner since 1871. The church has been against the Chauncey development and can make the same arguments tonight because changing the Comprehensive Plan allows that development to proceed. She could argue that high-rise buildings impinge on the light of their neighbors, that buildings over 10 stories are not cost-effective to build, and that these costs are passed along to their tenants, making it impossible for affordable housing, that density alone does not make for environmental sustainability, and the use of a TIF for this sort of building hinders tax payers dollars without realizing a significant community benefit in return. But the question of the Chauncey is not before the Commission today, what is before the Commission today is changes to the Comprehensive Plan. Many of the arguments about the Chauncey is that it is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and with these changes that alter the default zoning, that would no longer be the case. The Comprehensive Plan shares a vision seen amongst a diversity of the community on how land is used to serve the good of all. What is that vision for Iowa City? How is the manner in which we use land and other resources affect the community? A city gains its character from the relationships between businesses, cultural institution, government and individual citizens and visitors. Churches are in the category of private cultural institutions. Among their unique contributions to a city's character is their ability to draw people together across boundaries of age, economic status, and personal interests. Secular public stations offer similar opportunities for people to come together. We've chosen neighborhoods, occupations, and neighborhoods, based on generation, economical, and other characteristics. Van Horne notes that the Central District and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan as it was presented today, does not support the continuation of these private sources. Van Horne represents Trinity Episcopal Church because they believe the changes that will come from this Comprehensive Plan will harm churches and infringe on spaces that allow for public discourse in the city. Trinity and other downtown churches operate seven days a week, hosting group meetings, social events, and art performances in addition to offering spiritual care for their members. Chauncey Swan Park serves as a spontaneous town square, hosting the farmer's market, food trucks, protests and other political speech. Incorporating this entire area into the Downtown Planning District makes it possible for tall buildings to be built in multiple locations. A tall building that towers over the nearby park and other buildings, eclipsing them from sunlight throughout the day, will be detrimental to the character of the public spaces, and will have a chilling effect, literally, on the park. A tall building, who's users monopolize the parking garage because the building itself does not supply significant parking, will place a particular burden on nearby churches and other community organizations like the recreation center and farmer's market creating a barrier to participation in these areas for those that cannot easily walk and ultimately effecting their growth and mission potential and restricting participation. The church views this as an improachment on their historic space. The contributions of Trinity and other Iowa City churches to the community is significant. Trinity has provided space to The University of Iowa jazz department, since their offices and classroom Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 11 of 24 spaces were destroyed by the 2008 flood. Trinity provides volunteer labor and publicity for the annual shelter house book sale, has been an overflow location for the program, and it provided leadership for the Agave Cafe. Downtown churches are united in efforts to provide free lunch, EIP, and annual school supply and outwear drives. All of this is work that flows from our community in the downtown area, and would not take place if the church was located in another space. Churches are an untapped resource of volunteers and social services, churches makes friends of strangers, even if that stranger doesn't attend that community of faith, an in a civic culture that favors for-profit entities the contributions of faith communities will remain unacknowledged until pressures placed on them, such as the changes proposed by this Comprehensive Plan, impair their ability to do their work. At that time, the extent to which they contribute to the City's quality of life, will become readily apparent in its absence. If this change to the Comprehensive Plan goes forward, if the zoning is changed to allow the Chauncey to be built, Van Horne believes Trinity will follow the lead of First Christian Church, St. Patrick's, and perhaps the Unitarian Church, and leave the downtown area. The community will be the poorer for it, many of Iowa City's faith communities are among their oldest, they've had an integral part in knitting together its fabric, and making it what it is today. What would a community be like without any of its faith organizations? What will be lost if these faith communities disappear from downtown? What holes would there be in our everyday life? Van Horne challenges the Commission to consider how these proposed changes will be realized, and indeed much of that vision has already been articulated by the City, but to think of who will be unintentionally harmed, and urges the Commission to vote against the changes to the Civic District Plan. Ann Christensen (827 Dearborn Street) read to the Commission a passage from a book by Bill Brycen, who is an Iowa native, grew up in Des Moines, but spent most of his adult life England. He writes about growing up in Des Moines, and highly recommends his books, they are non-fiction, historic books, with a lot of width to them. At one point when he was living in England, he's married to an English woman, they were moving back to America for few years, he decided to take a walking tour of England, and he critique the various towns and cities he walked through, and he was very critical in much of what was done in the name of urban development, in the name of progress. And in Manchester, his comment was, he talked about what he considered two very ugly buildings, and then he said "but let me also say that neither is as bad as the Maples Building, that rises like some kind of half-witted practical joke, a dozen or so stories into the air in the middle of a long street of unguinous Victorian structures. Now how did that happen, he asked". If this high- rise building is permitted on that corner, the Chauncey, Christensen is going to write to Brycen and explain to him exactly how this happens, and how we end up with a blithe in our community. That tall of a structure does not belong on that corner, and there are a lot of other places around town that it could go. Mark Nolte (lives on the west side of town) has been a resident of Iowa City since 1993 and moved here from a community that continues to shrink, because there is apathy. What is so great about this community, there are people are both sides of this issue, but as Nolte represents the community as his job is to attract people and businesses to come to this community, and that we are at a very unique point in history. The City needs to think about how they are going to sustain and grow the tax base, what people are looking for now is density, to live in areas that are fun and healthy and vibrant and they don't need a car. Nolte stated he supports historical preservation but also acknowledges we need more density, more office spaces (office vacancy rates are near zero). Nolte hears from companies all the time that would like to come to Iowa City but there is not Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 12 of 24 sufficient office property downtown for them. Additionally any housing that can be added that fits the design and ethos of the community he supports, stating there needs to be more done for affordable housing, and some of those elements have been addressed in the Chauncey development. Nolte stated his support of the staffs recommendation, believing it is something Iowa City needs. Although he is not a parishioner of the church, nor lives on Iowa Avenue so he is not personally affected and is sensitive to those who are, however long term the City needs to be thinking about how they can grow, and move forward sustainable. Nolte stated height should not be the issue, as long as there is good design and good architecture, it can be a nice addition to the community (gave the example of Grant Park in New York City, surrounded by very high buildings). Marc McCullum (13 South Johnson), just purchased this property about a year and a half ago, even after the development issues had arisen, but still wanted to be in this neighborhood. On the east side view of his building he has wonderful views of the park, and on the west side of the building he has wonderful views of a direct skyline view of downtown Iowa City. McCullum supports density and development, but is afraid of, is by having this move in the Central Planning District, there are design guidelines, in the Downtown District there are no design guidelines. McCullum finds that visitors to Iowa City like the areas such as Clinton Street, the lower -rise buildings. The Washington Plaza Building is built to CB -5 and it doesn't feel like there is a transition from that building to the residential areas. That building followed the Central Planning District guidelines, and that same developer is building a wonderful building up on Linn Street. McCullum feels that if the Commission adopts this plan, while there might be provisions to protect historic structures, there are no guarantees, as seen from other areas in the Riverfront Crossings District. If this proposal goes forward, he believes the area will lose the church, the youth homes, every property owner is re-evaluating their property situation. Tim Conroy (1410 Foster Road) questioned why this area wasn't originally considered when the Riverfront Crossings District was first discussed in the Comprehensive Plan. The area in question seems to be one of the most organic organizing meeting areas for Iowa City residents, such as farmer's market, Rummage in the Ramp, and the Rec Center. All of these are amazing public gatherings and to bring it into the Comprehensive Plan, is a good thing. The question is if the area should go beyond Ralston Creek, which would serve as a natural divide, as Commission Freerks brought up. Conroy doesn't feel a bunch of tall buildings will go up if the Civic Area is pulled into the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings area because a lot of the land in question is owned by the City. He agrees with pushing the boundaries a little to include more businesses into the Downtown District. There are several businesses east of Ralston Creek that would like to be in the Downtown District. Conroy does not discount the fears and feelings of the residents of the College Green Park area, but that will not be included in this proposal. The project looming in everybody's mind, the Chauncey, is another discussion. Pam Michaud (111 South Johnson) stated she has lived in her house for 24 years and has seen four Victorian houses destroyed right behind her home to be replaced by a block long, ungraceful, four story building for undergraduates. 120 bedrooms were added to the neighborhood in a year. That was zoned CB -2, limit of 45 feet high. Michaud can see keeping the Gilbert Street area CB -5 because it is stepping down from CB -10. Michaud stated that terms like Central District and Comprehensive Plan are euphuisms for "taking over". A transition zone to a historic area is not two buildings. It's hardly even two blocks. It is ludicrous to say there is a transition zone when buildings of any height will be built right up to the historic neighborhood. Michaud stated that as Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 13 of 24 seen in major cities in America and abroad, historic areas make a difference, and Iowa Avenue will not be the same without the Unitarian Church and the two Victorian houses. Being part of a historic district is an honor, and stated there is a need for transitional zones. Michaud also stated that developers of large buildings, that will allow residents to have dogs, should be required to also provide a dog park for the residents. That would be structuring in green space. She also stated that she believes Iowa City will soon have an overabundance of hotels and more and more people are wanting to stay at B&B's so hotel prices need to drop to compete. In closing, Michael reiterated that massive block long buildings do not belong adjacent to historic Victorian homes. Cecile Kuenzli (705 S. Summit Street) is asking the Commission to not fold the Civic District into the Riverfront Crossings District because if it is done, there will be no transitional zone between the high-rises and the residential areas east of Van Buren Street. Mr. Yapp acknowledged that when asked, and stated there would only be a half a block of transition. Well, half a block does not constitute a transitional area. Additionally a lot has been said this evening from the developers and real estate community on how attracted young people will be in the future to this new development. Kuenzli stated that everyone needs to remember during the public hearing for the Chauncey the young people came out in force to oppose that project because what they liked about Iowa City was the old areas and the "funky" parts of Iowa City and made a point to state they don't take visitors to see high-rise structures, rather they take people to see places like The Mill, The Haunted Bookshop, The Hamburger Inn, The Soap Opera, New Pioneer, and such. Some of those businesses have already disappeared and she urges the Commission to save what is left and the transitional areas. Ethan Diehl (201 E Washington St) and grew up in Iowa City since his family moved here in 1975, moving away to attend college and then later live in Austin Texas for 16 years. He moved back to Iowa City and specifically to live in the 201 E Washington Street building, Marc Moen's building downtown. He chose to move back to Iowa City for the small town charm, as well as the international flavor of the Writer's Workshop. He remembers when an Iowa City that was opposed to the Ped Mall in 1977, and then again opposition to the Hotel Vetro, and opposed to a number of beautiful projects in the downtown area. If the Council is interested in young people coming back to Iowa City, which is a good thing considering how good the public schools are, they should be in favor of projects like this and this new development. Rudolf Kuenzli (705 S. Summit Street) had many questions when listening to Mr. Yapp give his presentation. There seems to be terms used, such as Central Business District, and trying to fold the three municipal blocks into the Central Business District. (Yapp confirmed that the three municipal blocks would be folded into the Downtown District.) Kuenzli stated that there is always consequences in zoning, because the Central Business District has been designated for density, high-rise buildings as has the Riverfront Crossings. Kuenzli agrees with the staff that the Riverfront Crossings will be the future of Iowa City, there are so many plans and projects in the works. Having lived in Iowa City for 45 years, coming during the middle of downtown urban renewal, and since then, until now, he has not seen so much planning and so many projects. Kuenzli is trying to suggest to put the emphasis of the Central Business District into the Riverfront Crossings and try to keep Gilbert Street, due to its proximately to the east side historic district, as the beginning of a transitional area. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 14 of 24 Matthew Fleming presented an anecdote in support of the proposed changes. A year and a half ago he was offered a position at Mercy Hospital and when his wife and he considered moving to Iowa City, if the mixed use structures that exist in downtown Iowa City were not here, they likely would not have come to this great community. So as a somewhat young professional, he believes Iowa City needs more of structures developed in Iowa City and they will attract younger people. Mary Bennett (1107 Muscatine Ave) is very concerned about the College Street Park and as the oldest park in the town it is not being shown its due respect. She had listened to the many hours of debate on the Chauncey building project, it is appears that this proposal it to retro fit some of the plans in an effort to accommodate more growth in the city. Bennett stated her concern about how this will impact the Civic area, being an avid user of the rec center she enjoys coming out of that building and looking at the sky and enjoy the space around Ralston Creek. The Civic buildings were designed 50 years ago with the skyline in mind and keeping the views unobstructed to show respect to the neighborhoods. These two buildings are part of the historic Iowa City and could be nominated for the National Registry at some point. While these are city -owned properties right now, that can change in the future, and new structures could get built. Will the City build a high- rise building for their offices? If the City continues to grow, there will be a premium on the city - owned land. Bennett believes the downtown area has already grown out of control, and does not need to improach onto the neighborhoods to the east. It is ironic that 175 years ago Chauncey Swan himself came to this area and stood on the land where Old Capital was built, and wrote about how beautiful it was and how appropriate of a location to have a city in this location. He commissioned the drawing of the first map of Iowa City that designated very prominently areas for churches near the immediate downtown area. Areas for schools, in the immediate downtown area, where are those schools now? Where are those churches now? He talked about promenades and green spaces, even in 1839. Why isn't there green spaces surrounding Ralston Creek, why don't we imagine a beautiful farmer's market under a canopy right next to the creek, instead of underneath a parking ramp. Bennett feels the City needs a broader imagination in looking at how our community is going of grow. The tax base will grow alone with all the development and high- rises in the Riverfront Crossings area, and feels there needs to be stop to the erasing of the past throughout the City. If the City approves drawing the boundary line for the Downtown District half- way up to Johnson Street, how long after will it be that more multi -family structures will be built in the area. This proposal tonight does start a trajectory that will be very harmful. Additionally Bennett works at the State Historic Society of Iowa, the 400 block of Iowa Avenue was once all nice mansions, on the north side, and on the other side very nice four square farm houses. Bennett encourages the Commission and the City to slow down, get the correct boundaries set, and focus on the needs of the community. Nancy Bird, the executive director of the Iowa City Downtown District, and has had the pleasure of being introduced to Iowa City over the past couple of years. Their board has discussed many times what the boundaries of downtown Iowa City are. She has been listening carefully of when people talk about downtown, what they think downtown is, the various constituent areas, and to support the businesses of the downtown area. So for those who don't know, the boundary of the Downtown District is from Burlington Street up to Bloomington Street, including the north side neighborhood, and then from Gilbert Street to Clinton Street. In essence they have three neighborhoods in the downtown area, the Old Capitol Center, the downtown and the north side. What strikes Bird about the proposal tonight, which she supports, and her board supports, the community at large, these boundaries are on a map in a book, and people don't know where they Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 15 of 24 are. There are natural boundaries such as Ralston Creek, and other boundaries such as parking structures. One of the things her board is trying to do is listen to the property owners and citizens discuss historic buildings and there is a lot of passion around these buildings. Some are in need of repair and reinvestment and in order to do that the City has to be careful about new growth around these areas, recognizing one of the best things you can do to maintain a sustainable area is make sure you have density in the core, and believes in keeping the density downtown. Bird stated in her career of working with municipals, it is imperative that every five years they look at their Comprehensive Plans due to technology changes, market shifts, and climate shifts. One of the challenges of her job is not having enough spaces to put interested people, the vacancy rate is less than 2% and there a lot of people are invested in this community and being able to have some flexibility east of Gilbert Street will give the City the space that may be needed in the future for growth while saving historic areas as well. Therefore Bird gives here support to this proposal. Freerks asked Bird if her association has had much discussion on historic districts. Bird replied that yes, they have talked about historic properties. And with the guidelines established, she has been working with City staff on making them more stringent so there is predictability of what can be done to avoid controversy. Predictability is very important. Freerks stated there is very little protection in that area right now. John Fogerty, one of the co-chairs of the Iowa Coalition Against the Shadow, spoke to the Commission about compromise, feeling Ms. Bird was the only speaker so far this evening that supported the proposal but saw the need for compromise on the properties east of Gilbert Street. Fogerty believes this whole proposals is because of Mr. Moen's project, if his project was in the already CB -10 zone, or Riverfront Crossings, and there wouldn't be a need for this conversation. Fogetry stressed to the Commission to think if there are other options for bringing all these young people back to Iowa City. There is plenty of space south of Burlington Street. He believes that yes there are options for these three blocks that would bring in revenue for the City and allow for the appropriate transition to the College Green District and allow for some mixed use development. He implores the Commission to think about the effects of this proposal years down the road and the impact it may have on the Victorians in the neighborhood. He feels they should look at other options, and is in support of emphasizing the Riverfront Crossings area and south of Burlington. Joyce Summerwill stated she is a retiree who recently moved downtown, and did so because they wanted to. They had lived in a very nice neighborhood in Iowa City, having lived here for over 50 years, and what she has seen Iowa City become is many thanks to the folks that serve on commissions and who serve in the City and have made the City better to live in. The purpose for everyone tonight is because they all feel passionate about their views, whatever they are, but from her perspective that living downtown with a variety of people, with the wonderful churches, with the wonderful parks, with the services, with the variety of people, this is what attracts people to Iowa City. Change is going to happen no matter what anyone wants to do to stop it. The best thing to do is to manage the change that comes with good thinking, good planning, good design, good usage, and from her perspective in Iowa City currently, the best use of land. She believes vertical development, planned accordingly with good design, is the only way to secure good neighborhoods that are already in Iowa City. It has sadden her over the years to see what apartment complexes that have gone up in the neighborhoods, the so called sprawl, probably necessary because students needed a place to live. But now we are even seeing the University Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 16 of 24 endorsing higher buildings, so she believes the question of whether we like or don't like vertical buildings, is not the question. We have to think as planners and as future people who may want to live here, what you want your city to be, and we want all of these components to be a part. She feels the plan the City has outlined is a good use for growth. Amanda Ward (201 E Washington St) is relatively new to Iowa City, only having lived here for three months. She had moved here from Los Angeles and at first was very disappointed but came here to be the director of VIP Services for Hotel Vetro so is in the unique position of talking to the travelers that come to Iowa City every day. One of the first things she noticed about the Ped Mall was the mix of old buildings and new buildings, where in California they don't have that, and found the old buildings to be beautiful but also likes the mix of the new architecture, including the new building she lives in. Ward discussed the Victorian homes, and stated there is a huge difference between a Victorian home and a home on the National Registry, so when she first drove through Iowa City and was looking at the Victorian homes, she noticed buildings with broken cornices, trash cans in front of them, that are failing apart and are run down, not the beautiful mansions everyone is talking about this evening. She continued to discuss the arbitrary boundaries and the time put into these conversations, and the appeal to slow down and don't make a rush decision. Ward feels the opposite, speed up, make a decision, and hopefully it's a decision of moving Iowa City forward, into young and old, newbies and traditional people who have lived here a long time. As she mentioned, she talks to people every day, they are attracted to the downtown area, they are wanting to live in the Ped Mall, they are wanting to be down where they are close to the action of the city for its vibrant nature, so having the opportunity for buildings that will provide that for people, that will become a draw for people to come to Iowa City, she can't see that as a negative thing. Ward stated she understands the emphasis on the old and protecting the old, but the new is as equally as important. Joseph Knock, agrees with the people who say a decision should not be made tonight, that there should be some consideration for what should be expanded and what should be kept. If however, this district is folded into the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Plan, he would suggest that they try to save or preserve as many historical properties as possible. He also suggests that new buildings adhere to some of the architecture of that area, so rather than having an out of place, block long development, to try to have the development resemble what is already there. Jim Knapp thanked the Commission for showing the beautiful picture of the congregation because back in 1989 he rebuilt that steeple and was on scaffold 65 feet above ground. He reiterated that they town needs to keep its historic nature and building new high-rises that are 15 or 20 stories high are not necessary. Dick Summerwill stated he was going to speak in favor of this proposal but after hearing Casey Cook talk earlier and feels his comment need to be taken note of. Summerwill stated he has lived in Iowa City almost his whole life, was away for 10 years, but came back, and when he came back the downtown was a mess, it was the kind of downtown that the University would not bring their professors through when they were recruiting them. Young people were fleeing the area. Urban renewal came and went, and frankly made this discussion look like a piece of cake. Summerwill feels this is a wonderful conversation because it is discussing compromise and what can be done. The biggest idea tonight for a compromise is to make Ralston Creek the boundary, because that is a natural boundary. After going through urban renewal it took 30 years to get enough buildings Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 17 of 24 and streetscapes to encourage people to come downtown, they are now coming. Summerwill believes the downtown is the best today as it's ever been and that is because there are cohesive efforts between the University of Iowa and the City of Iowa City and it is growing and dynamic and there needs to be room for more growth. In closing he urged the Commission to not delay the project, but to move forward. Cook stated that he has renovated three old houses, ages 1910-1920, and there is a big distinction between an old house and a historic house and questions if historic has been well defined. Cook also sat on the Board of Directors for the United Action for Youth and that house at 422 Iowa Avenue has a nice paint job, but it is not in good condition, and if designated as a historic property, it will devalue that home around a half million dollars. Cook has also done some work on the Unitarian Church, and if that building stay intact, on that site, it will reduces its value by about two- thirds. When you think about what people are paying for land in the downtown area, it makes him very much in favor of this district. Cilek spoke to give a comparison to what is Meta experienced, they were on South Gilbert Street, in half the amount of space, and when they moved into the new building at 201 Washington, they have approximately twice the space, the utility bills are half as much, due to LED lighting, and other upgraded features. So when folks talk about historic that is important but they need to recognize a business looks at utilities, high-speed internet, and other amenities that come with a new building, is what will attract new businesses to Iowa City, and outweighs worrying about where the buffer zone is. Cilek feels the his company will be looking for additional space in the future, and will want to be close to their current downtown location. McCullum stated that Mr. Cook just re-emphasized the concern about how it seems that every church in this area is being looked at as a development project. The community will lose all those properties, those churches, so there won't be any old, just new. Freerks closed public hearing. Freerks stated that this is a topic that needs to be discussed and mulled over, and entertains a motion to have discussion. Eastham moved that the Commission defer this item until the first meeting in February. Swygard seconded the motion. Eastham questioned staff on how many sites of redevelopment on multi -story currently are identified in Downtown District Plan. Yapp stated that would take some time to count. Hektoen asked if Eastham was just asking how many are designated in the plan itself, and Eastham confirmed that was his question. Swygard also had a question for staff on the Riverfront Crossings/Downtown Plan, it says that ultimately the City should pursue the creation of form -based code to regulate all new development downtown, and asked staff to comment on if that is in the works. Yapp confirmed it is on the staff work program, and the initial steps of that was a discussion with the Downtown District earlier this week regarding establishing design standards, facades, signage and so forth, and that he sees this as a first step to establishing a form -based code for the Downtown District. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 18 of 24 Eastham stated that staff has asked the Council to establish proposals for inclusionary affordable housing, and asked if the staff has considered extending those proposals or measures into the Civic District. Yapp answered that the City Council direction that they were given was to develop and propose inclusionary zoning standards for just the Riverfront Crossings Area at this time. Eastham asked for confirmation that the staff proposal is to only include into the Downtown District Plan only three blocks of this Civic Area, and Yapp confirmed that was correct. Eastham also noted that there is only one potentially historical structure in that three block area, and Yapp confirmed that is correct as well. Freerks stated her concern that the Commission may not even be ready to vote on this issue even at the next meeting, as this is such a big subject with a lot of energy around it, and the ongoing discussions of historic structures, and lessons were learned in discussions of previous historic areas that need to be heeded at this time. Freerks believes that not all structures need to have gone through the historic preservation process, but the Commission and the City needs some type of map showing the areas that might be in question so people can move forward with the correct expectations. Freerks feels this proposal today seems hobbled together and if moved forward will just divide those interested more. She understands the need for taller structures and building vertically in some areas, but there is also the need to maintain parts of these areas, and protect areas, and could not do so if they moved forward with the proposal as it is. The boundary being set in a middle of a block does not make sense, and there is a need to go through and look at what the base zones are in these areas and are those zonings really what the community wants for these areas. Freerks believes there needs to be a better plan and wants to call for an informal meeting to discuss this issue prior to the next formal meeting for this topic. Informal meetings are also open to the public. Hektoen clarified that the proposal is not talking about establishing a boundary mid -block. That boundary is there currently. Freerks understands but still feels the issue needs to be looked at overall for more clarity. Eastham stated as he understands this proposal, staff has suggested that three square blocks which are almost entirely owned by the City of Iowa City, be incorporated into the Downtown District. So the Commission is tasked with deciding if that is a good idea or not. Whether there are existing proposals of development on that area is not of the Commission's concern. Swygard stated she would like to see these two Comprehensive Plan Amendments broken into two separate pieces. Eastham agreed that would be a good idea. Thomas agreed that they should be discussed separately as they are on two different timelines. Dyer shared her confusion still on the area in question. Yapp explained the areas on the map outlined in blue are proposed to be added to the Central Planning District, as they are both part of the old Downtown Planning District, and they were not included in the Downtown Master Plan, and were not included in the Central District Plan. Yapp stated that staff would work to schedule an informal meeting to discuss this issue and once the time is set it will be posted to the website. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 19 of 24 Swygard had a question regarding the motion, and if the motion is to delay to the next meeting or further. Freerks stated it could be discussed again at the next formal meeting, but hopes an informal meeting can be held as well. A vote was taken, motion carried 7-0 REZONING ITEM (REZ14-00023) Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a rezoning from Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) to Commercial Office (CO -1) zone for approximately 34.21 acres of property located north of Northgate Drive. (REZ14-00023) Miklo showed the location map of the property, this property is located in the North Corridor District. This property is currently zoned Interim Development — Research Development Park (ID - RP) and the proposal is to change the zoning to Commercial Office Zone (CO -1). The purpose of the CO -1 zone is to provide specific areas where office functions, compatible businesses, apartments and certain public and semipublic uses may be developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The CO-Izone can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or industrial areas. Miklo said the Comprehensive Plans show this area as Office Research Development Center. The proposed CO -1 zoning, as well as the Research Development Park (RD) and Office Research Park (ORP), are appropriate zoning districts to implement the land use plan. The property to the south is currently zoned CO -1 and developed as Northgate Office Park. Properties to the west, north and east are currently used for agriculture, including a farm residence that is located directly north. The land use plan depicts the areas to the west and east of the subject property as also being appropriate for Office Research Development Centers; the property to the north is identified as Rural Residential. Miklo said the CO -1 zone is generally viewed as being compatible with residential neighborhoods. It has a maximum building height of 25 feet (generally two stories) and does not allow more intense commercial uses that may detract from nearby residences. The Commercial Site Development Standards that apply to the CO -1 zone require street trees, parking lot coverage trees and landscaping around the perimeter of parking lots to further improve compatibility with nearby residential uses. Miklo said that there are some traffic implications with this development. Initially the only street access to this property will be via Northgate Drive, which intersects with Dodge Street (Highway 1). In the long-term Oakdale Boulevard is planned to cross the northern portion of this property to provide additional access to Highway 1. Additional access may also be available from Moss Ridge Road as shown on the concept plan. Staff measured existing traffic volumes, and forecasted future volumes, at several locations along Northgate Drive. It was concluded that at the Steindler Orthopedic Clinic Driveway the average daily traffic (ADT) on Northgate Drive would be approximately 5,547 upon full 'build -out' of the subject property —assuming similar land -uses currently present on Northgate Drive. This figure was derived using existing traffic counts and existing developed acreage which resulted in an additional 84 vehicles per day per acre. Traffic volumes were measured at the Steindler driveway as there is a secondary means of access at this point which allows egress between Northgate Drive and the Quality Inn Property. Therefore, Prepared by: John Yapp, Dev. Services Coordinator, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, I RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENISVE THE THREE BLOCKS SOUTH OF IOWA AVE, EAi OF VAN BUREN ST AND NORTH OF BURLINGTON PLAN AMENDMENT FOR T OF GILBERT ST, WEST WHEREAS, Staff initiated a`�process in 2014 to determine how he three blocks south of Iowa Ave, east of Gilbert St, west f Van Buren St and north of Burlin ton St should be designated in the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, Staff held an open house and created a webpa to receive public input, and the Planning and Zoning Commission eld public discussion on th proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, A majority of the thre blocks are owned by he City of Iowa City for public use including City Hall, Police and Fire ations, Swan Parkin facility and surface parking lots, the Recreation Center, and are the locatI of multiple public athletic, and other events such as the Farmer's Market; and WHEREAS, The City has determined t\devopment es not ed all of the property in these three blocks for public use, and allowing mixed-use ithin walking distance of downtown and the University of Iowa campus is consistentwnt n and City goals; and WHEREAS, The three blocks do not contain y residential uses, are bordered by a five -lane arterial street (Burlington St/Highway 1) and y'' four -lane arterial street (Gilbert St), and are served by a 450 -space parking facility; and WHEREAS, The three blocks currently are a location., of a variety of uses including civic, athletic, and recreational uses and provide parkin for downtown employees and are already a part of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings park' g district, and WHEREAS, The three blocks are not ppropriate to add to the Central Planning District as the Central Planning District is predomin tly residential in character and the existing civic uses are more appropriate for a downtown se ng; and WHEREAS, After receiving publi input staff has proposed adding these three blocks to the Downtown District section of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan in order to encourage mixed-use developm t and civic on these three blocks; and WHEREAS, the Planning and oning Commission, after a vote to defer consideration failed on a 3-3 vote, failed to recommen approval by a vote of 1-5. '1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The three blocks south of Iowa Ave, east of Gilbert St, west of Van Buren St, and north of Burlington St be added as an addendum to the Downtown District section of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan consistent with Exhibit B. Resolution No. Page 2 2. Exhibit C, which provides guidance on buildings heights to be considered in any future rezoning requests, be added as an addendum to the Downtown District section of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. 3. Exhibit D, which reflects land use on the three blocks being for `Civic and Mixed Uses,' be added as an addendum to the Downtown District of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Passed and approved this ATTEST day of 20 Central District Plan Civic District JEFFERSON Proposed Addition to the Central Planning gistrict F R-1 El Z J_ O Low -Medium Density MF Stabilization - High Density Mufti-Fam ® Open Space Public Institutional ® Riverfront Redevelopment Private Institutional O Single -Family Residential Stabilization Low to Medium Density Multi -Family Single -Family 8 Duplex Residential ® High Density Mufti -Family Redevelopment Mixed Use ® Urban Moved Use - Neighborhood Commercial - Urban Commercial ® Commercial Redevelopment Office Commercial - Intensive Commercial General Commercial Proposed Addition to Downtown District of the Downtown an Riverfront Crossin s Plan, designate or *ixed use and,civic EXHIBIT B Document Path: SAPCD\Kirk Lehmann\GIS\Maps\PlanningtCentral Planning District\CentralPlanningAdditionCivieDistrict.mxd IOWA Z O Z Z 2 O. 0 F Riverfront Crossings Plan Downtown District Addition * Additional height may be approved in conjunction with preservation of historic property, provision for affordable housing, or other public goals. z z J Legend Proposed Height (in stories) ® 2-4 - 4-6 M 7-15 MPark BURLINGTON - Key Historic Building IOWA EXHIBIT C z 5 Document Path: S:\PCD\Kirk Lehmann\GIS\Maps\Planning\Central Planning District\RFCProposedHeightMap.mzd %,I kf§! » 77t�(a■! 2l 8E t3 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Strcct Iowa City. lowa 52240- 1826 (3 19) .356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.lt gov.org LATE HANDOUTS Information submitted between distribution of packet on Thursday and close of business on Friday. Consent Calendar Resolution ITEM 4d(10) IOWA CITY GATEWAY — See memo, resolution and additional corre3.ap de.nce Regular Agenda: ITEM 6a COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT - See additional correspondence Marian Karr From: Martin Izakovic <izakovic_m@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 2:24 PM To: Council Cc: marc moen; Martin Izakovic Subject: Iowa City Comprehensive plan update To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to support growth of residential and business space in downtown Iowa City. It attracts a diverse group of people and same is true for mixed use developments that bring more services and attractions downtown. I have been living in downtown IC since 2006 and I really believe the urban feel that the downtown has and may expand ads to IC a lot and can shape the future appeal of our city even more. I live in downtown in Plaza Towers and work downtown at Mercy Hospital. I rarely use my car and I walk along the proposed development area almost every day. I support the recommendation to add the 3 Civic Blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan which would allow for mixed-use development in this area. This will allow development in an area where there is land available without having to remove historic buildings. Thank you and feel free to contact me if you have further questions. Martin Izakovic 221 East College Street 4802 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Pugh Hagan Pra h mo« ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS NEAR 5 2015 March 5, 2015 VIA E-MAIL AND U.S. MAIL Iowa City Council 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 C 1100 SIXTH STREET SUITE 102 CORALVILLE, IOWA 52241 PHONE 319-351-2028 FAX 319-351-1102 RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Blocks Generally Bounded by Gilbert St., Burlington St., Van Buren St., and Iowa Ave. (aka the Civic District) Dear City Council Members: PUGHHAGAN.COM MPUGH@PUGHHAGAN.COM On behalf of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association ("HBA"), I write to express the RBA's support for the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert St., Burlington St., Van Buren St., and Iowa Ave. The HBA appreciates the time and commitment the City has taken in recognizing these important blocks and their potential future. It respectfully encourages the City Council to adopt Staff's recommendation that the three municipal blocks bounded by Gilbert St., Burlington St., Van Buren St., and Iowa Ave. (the "Civic District") be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. The addition of the three municipal blocks to the Downtown District is a logical extension of the Downtown area. This area already contains a variety of mixed uses, but the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments will expand and enhance the Downtown's presence by attracting new businesses to an area of the City that can benefit from economic development. Likewise, it provides the opportunity to retain permanent residents through new mixed-use redevelopment. It also allows for the natural expansion of the City's municipal campus, which is a necessity for our growing City. The HBA views the proposed amendment as an integral step in continuing the City's sustainable revitalization efforts. The HBA also supports the building height recommendations proposed within the amendment. To foster mixed-use development of this area, taller, multi -story buildings are critical for both investors and residents. Much of the public comment received by the City in prior work sessions support higher density, vertical structures. A gradual step down of building height toward the easterly portion of the Civic District is a thoughtful transition to the City's more traditional residential areas. Natural buffers, such as Ralston {00039034} PUGH HAGAN PRAHM PLC March 5, 2015 Page 2 Creek and the topography of the area (which slopes upwardly as you move east to Summit Street), aid in this transition. However, HBA believes the property located at the corner of Gilbert Street and Iowa Avenue (currently owned by the Unitarian Universalist Society of Iowa City) should be designated for 4-6 story development and not 2-4 stories as currently proposed. This property is better suited for frontage along Gilbert Street where taller buildings already exist and would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the City's policy of encouraging taller buildings on corner locations. A 4-6 story development for this lot would also be consistent with the property's current zoning designation as CB -5. Allowing a slightly taller development on this site will not interrupt or detract from the overall character of Iowa Avenue in light of the City's parking ramp and the Vogel House immediately to the west. The HBA would also like to emphasize that while an Iowa Site Inventory Form may have been completed for the Unitarian Church parcel, this property has not and should not be predetermined as a historic landmark. The purpose of the Iowa Site Inventory Form is to merely "gather[] information about historic features and aspects of a property." Iowa Site Inventory Form Instructions, at 1 (July 2014). It does. not place the property on the National Register or grant Iowa City Historic Landmark status. While portions of the Church building itself may be old, this should not be interpreted as meaning the entire site is historic and worthy of preservation efforts. Additionally, the Church parcel should not be designated as a "Key Historic Property" as proposed in the amendment. The HBA realizes Staff's intent with this designation may be to provide the property with the opportunity of qualifying for certain development incentives, which is the proper way to promote historic preservation. However, the use of "key" implies the premonition the City favors unilaterally rezoning this site as a historic landmark. Any such attempt without the Church's prior consent strikes at its legal property rights, especially in light of the Church's recent vote to move from and sale the parcel. The HBA believes the same development incentives can be offered to all property located within the Civic District without designating an individual site as "Key Historic Property." The HBA again supports the proposed addition of the three municipal blocks to the Downtown District and encourages the City Council to approve the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. Very truly yours, PU H HAGAN PRA M PLC Michael J. Pu MAR cc: The Greater Iowa City = ZO15 Area Home Builders Association (00039034) Marian Karr From: Scott Dunn <scottdunn1@mac.com> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 1:51 PM To: Council Subject: support of addition the of the 3 civic block to and Master plan to allow for mixed use development. dear city council robbie moray and I have lived at Plaza Towers since it's inception. we strongly endorse the recommend 3 block addition to allow for mixed use development. We love having a diverse and walkable urban experience in downtown Iowa City. The development proposed will only enhance that experience and make Iowa City and even more attractive and vital place. thanks for your consideration and all of your hard work on our behalf. Scott Scott dunn and 221 a college st #1204 iowa city is 52240 Marian Karr From: Gene Chrischilles <tgenec@gmail. com> Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2015 9:25 PM To: Council Subject: Amendment regarding the "Civic District" Members of the council, I am contacting you with a request to follow the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board on this matter. They did not believe that the comprehensive plan should be amended and the 3 square blocks under consideration should be added to the Downtown District and River Crossing Master Plan. Their strong 5-1 vote makes it abundantly clear. I agree with them and I am assuming their voting reflects the opinions of many people in Iowa City who contacted them. Please don't view this issue as simply one in which you are so highly invested that you can't change course. This area will eventually be developed, maybe just not in the way you had originally planned. This area should not be rezoned and there are many, many people in this city who think so. Thanks for your consideration of this matter. Gene Chrischilles Iowa City Planning and Zoning Items City Council March 9, 2015 Comprehensive Plan Item "Two areas — one located to the east of Gilbert Street and north of Burlington Street; the other located north of Iowa Avenue and west of Dubuque Street — were not included in the Downtown Master Plan or the Central District Plan... Staff recommends a process be initiated to appropriately address how these areas redevelop over time ..." - IC2030 Comprehensive Plan NORTH CLINTON/DUBUQUE ST and CIVIC DISTRICTS �3 n GERI ..J t a4 oei .N. r �• j- DIST RSCT. rag CITY OF IOTA CITY 0 Comprehensive Plan • Is a roadmap for directing growth and change over time; and sets a foundation for policies, strategies, and other actions (IC2030 Comprehensive Plan) • Plans are advisory documents for directing and managing change over time and serve to guide decision making, public deliberation, and investment (Central District Plan) • The Master Plan will serve as a framework to guide future public and private investment (Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan) downtown district L Proposed addition to Downtown Downtown ::��"'r'►��� ? _; ;� District 1 II II I South Downtown I I I University I szsrr�. II I I "' J rcc \\ Distn<t 1\ �� Central Crossings I 1 \ 11 II A .t. Gilbert —ji- L= -- 11?I District 0 I West \V • V Park Distract II 11 I River(ront Irl I rl— --r—,,I t L__j I South I / 1 \\ I 1 Gilbert j 1 I--___--- \ j 1 1 I cfV ----J .awe •.a Civic District Chauncey Swan Park, 405 E. Washington Street Public Park lir n I Aft am NDS Ralston Creek Corridor Looking east from College Street bridge Ralston Creek Corridor Looking north from College Street bridge NDS 47 .S All - ...' NDS .S All - NDS Downtown District Addition z z J IOWA Potential Historic Building - h W _ m Legend COLLEGE Proposed Height (in stories) 2-4 - 46 - 7-15 - Park BURLINGTON - Key Historic Building IOWA WASHINGTON EXHIBIT C V Staff recommendation for the three blocks of the Civic District west of Van Buren St, north of Burlington St. The three blocks of the Civic District bounded by Iowa Ave, Gilbert St, Burlington St and Van Buren St be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan These blocks are higher intensity in use (Recreation Center, Police Station, Fire Station, City Hall) Served by Gilbert Street and Burlington Street (Highway 1) Served by a 450 -space parking facility Within one to two blocks of Pedestrian Mall and Library Home to publicly -oriented community events and functions, such as the Farmer's Market, food trucks, live music, Rec Center events Opportunity to add mixed-use development without encroaching into residential neighborhoods / historic districts `m MA "Iiiilil Exhibit D land use Residential - Civic - Mixed Use _ Commercial 17 ad _ University _ Parking Structures Existing Waterways .t CividMixed Use Exhibit D land use Residential - Civic - Mixed Use _ Commercial Govemment ad _ University _ Parking Structures Existing Waterways Study Area Boundaries CividMixed Use ■ r a` ■ 1` , Exhibit D land use Residential - Civic - Mixed Use _ Commercial Govemment - _ University _ Parking Structures Existing Waterways Study Area Boundaries CividMixed Use lei 0' 400' 600' 610 Code Amendment Item Ordinance amending Title 14: Zoning to broaden and clarify the placement standards for portable signs allowed in Central Business District Commercial Zones Portable Sign Proposal Summary of proposal Currently portable signs are only permitted on private property — Under proposal, portable signs would continue to be permitted on private property Allow portable signs on City right-of-way within 30 inches of front facade wall or property line Allow for businesses not on the ground floor to have or to share a portable sign — up to two portable signs per storefront Require a minimum 8 -foot wide clear path for pedestrians be maintained i.e. a minimum 8 -foot path must be maintained between the portable sign and any sidewalk cafe, planter, or other streetscape amenity NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT AND ESTIMATED COST FOR THE NORMANDY DRIVE RESTORATION PROJECT, PHASE IIIB, IOWA RIVER CORRIDOR POROUS HMA TRAIL & LOWER CITY PARK HMA TRAIL LOOP IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS: Public notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost for the construction of the Normandy Drive Restoration Project, Phase 1116 in said city at 7:00 p.m. on the 9t' day of March 2015, said meeting to be held in the Emma J. Harvat Hall in the City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street in said city, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk. Said plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost are now on file in the office of the City Clerk in the City Hall in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any interested persons. Any interested persons may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making objections to and comments concerning said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improvement. This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and as provided by law. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 9th day of March, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the Emma J. Harvat Hall of the Iowa City City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider a Resolution Authorizing Conveyance of 711 North Gilbert Street, also described as part of Lots 8 and 7, Block 53, Iowa City, Iowa, to an income -eligible family. Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 9th day of March, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the Emma J. Harvat Hall of the Iowa City City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider a Resolution Authorizing Conveyance of 429 Ronalds Street, also described as part of Lot 1, Block 51, Iowa City, Iowa, to an income -eligible family. Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK R Publish 2/27 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE NORTH PLANT SALVAGE AND DEMOLITION PHASE OF THE IOWA CITY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT RELOCATION PROJECT IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS: Public notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost for the construction of the North Plant Salvage and Demolition Phase of the Iowa City Wastewater Treatment Plant Relocation project in said city at 7:OOp.m. on the 9th day of March, 2015, said meeting to be held in the Emma J. Harvat Hall in the City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street in said city, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk. Said plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost are now on file in the office of the City Clerk in the City Hall in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any interested persons. Any interested persons may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making objections to and comments concerning said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improvement. This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and as provided by law. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK �•I-r _ CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: March 3, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: Geoff Fruin, Assistant City Manager Re: Community Spaces During the public comment portion of the February 23rd City Council meeting, there were suggestions by members of the public concerning the reuse of buildings in the community. A couple speakers commented on the potential reuse of the Control House building at the North Wastewater Treatment Plant. A different speaker suggested the City take an active role in preserving the privately owned Unitarian Church property on the corner of Gilbert Street and Iowa Avenue. In addition to these particular comments the City has received similar inquiries or noted similar public commentary on these same properties. As the City Council contemplates these requests, it is prudent to consider existing City resources that may provide options for non-profit groups and community members to gather and engage. A brief overview of such facilities is provided below: East Side Recycle Center In addition to providing affordable public rental space for two non-profit agencies, the LEED Platinum East Side Recycle Center has an Education Center available for public use. The facility accommodates up to 75 people and carries a charge of $12.50 per hour for private use and $5 per hour for non-profit groups. The cost to develop this East Side Recycle Center was approximately $4.4 million. Ned Ashton House The Ned Ashton house is a historic landmark property that was purchased by the City in 2011 and subsequently refurbished for public use. The facility, which sits along the Iowa River and is designed to allow flood waters to flow through it, can accommodate up to 100 people. Fees range from $60 to $120 per hour or $375 to $750 per day, depending on the day of the week. Non-profit groups receive a 50% rental discount. Last year the City partnered with Project GREEN to develop the Project GREEN Gardens around the property. Flood buyouts in the immediate vicinity provide ample opportunity for other similar partnerships. The Ned Ashton House preservation project cost the City approximately $525,000. Riverside Festival Stage at City Park This 472 seat outdoor theater is located in Lower City Park. It includes two dressing rooms and a concession stand. The theater was built primarily for the Riverside Theatre organization, but is available to rent for $75 to $100 per hour. Non-profit groups receive a 50% rental discount. Due to the frequency of flooding in Lower City Park, Riverside Theatre has decided not to utilize the stage for the upcoming year. It is unknown at this time whether they will pursue use of the theater in the future. The City's construction cost for the Festival Stage complex totaled approximately $425,000. The Park Lodge at Terry Trueblood Recreational Area The Park Lodge is approximately 5800 square feet and accommodates up to 150 people. Hourly rentals range from $54 to $215 depending on size and day of week. Daily rentals range March 3, 2015 Page 2 from $375 to $1500. Non-profit groups receive a 50% rental discount. The park acquisition and development totaled more than $8 million. All of these facilities are in addition to more traditional community spaces that can be utilized at the City's two recreation centers, Library and Senior Center. City staff periodically review rental provisions and adapt usage policies as community needs and demand for the facilities evolve. It is undetermined how existing facilities may or may not meet the needs of those requesting City preservation of the Control House or the Unitarian Church. However, I believe the availability of such resources demonstrates that the City has been aggressive in developing facilities for public gathering in recent years. 02-23-15 CITY OF IOWA CITY 3e(7) '���-� MEMORANDUM Date: January 23, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager(LU From: Ron Knoche, Director of Public Works Re: North Plant Salvage and Demolition Phase Iowa City Wastewater Treatment Plant Relocation Project, Plans, Specifications, Form of Contract and Estimate of Cost Introduction Plans, Specifications, Form of Contract and Estimate of Cost for the North Plant Salvage and Demolition Phase of the Iowa City Wastewater Treatment Plant Relocation Project are complete. A public hearing and Council approval are necessary to allow the project to move forward. History/Background After the 2008 flood rendered most of the North Wastewater Treatment Plant inoperable, a multiphase flood mitigation plan was put in place to permanently remove the facility from the path of repetitive flooding. Operations have been moved from the North Plant and consolidated at the South Plant. Demolition of the now decommissioned North Plant is the next phase of the plan. Discussion of Solutions The Iowa Flood Mitigation Program (IFMP) is designed to allow cities to capture 70% of future state sales tax growth to fund flood mitigation projects. An agreement with IFMP Board has allowed Iowa City to capture up to $8.5 million dollars in future state sales tax growth to pay for the demolition of the North Wastewater Treatment Plant. The agreement requirements include: the removal of all structures from the site; constructing 5 acres of wetland; and streambank stabilization. Financial Impact Iowa City will need to bond to pay for the project. The bonds, including finance charges will be retired using future state sales tax growth. The Engineers Estimate for the North Plant Salvage and Demolition Phase is $5.5M. Recommendation Staff recommends approving the Plans, Specifications, Form of Contract, and Estimate of Cost. Cc: Ben Clark, Senior Civil Engineer Jason Havel, City Engineer Dave Elias, Wastewater Superintendent Jeff Davidson, Economic Development Administrator CITY OF IOWA CITY all MEMORANDUM Date: February 18, 2015 Tom Markus Cit UTo: Y Manager 9 iJ From: Geoff Fruin, Assistant City Manager Re: Supplemental Information on the North Wastewater Treatment Plant Control House On February 23, 2015 the City Council will be asked to set a public hearing on plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate of cost for the demolition of all structures on the former site of the North Wastewater Treatment Plant. In recent weeks, some community members have expressed an interest in preserving the Control House as a future park amenity. This memo outlines several of the factors that staff has considered, which ultimately inform our recommendation to remove this building with all other structures on this property. Control House History The Control House was constructed in 1935 as a joint project between the City and the University of Iowa. Construction funding was also received through the federal Public Works Administration (PWA), an initiative from the New Deal program. The building measures approximately 70'6" x 27'6" and is two stories in height with a full basement. A one-story garage was added to the east side in 1970. It has a Neo -Classical design with a reinforced concrete structural system, masonry walls and a steel frame roof. The design is reminiscent of many similar projects from the era and was designed by Currie Engineering, a company that worked on several wastewater facilities throughout the State of Iowa. As part of the preparations for this project staff reviewed the demolition plans with the Iowa State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). This review concluded with their affirmation of the City's opinion that the Control House does not appear eligible for listing on the National Register of Historical Places. That said, staff recognizes the appealing architecture of the structure, the national significance of the PWA program, and the role that the facility played in the growth of Iowa City from 1935 to the present day. 2008 Flood Experience The North Wastewater Treatment Plant property was inundated by the 2008 flood. Included with this memo are two photographs showing the flood waters throughout the larger property and a close-up of the southwest corner of the Control House where a sandbag levee was constructed to protect the building. In this photo you will see pumping equipment that was utilized to remove flood waters from the basement. Several repairs to the building were required to restore full operations. In the photo showing the larger perspective of the property, you can notice the sandbag levee only extended across the north, east and west sides of the Control House. The south side was not protected with sandbags because the treatment tanks at the rear of the building were elevated just above flood waters. When the treatment tanks are removed, the resulting grade will leave the building isolated and more susceptible to flooding. After the 2008 floods the City decided to consolidate wastewater operations at its south plant and decommission the operations at the north plant. At the same time, several structures were removed in the immediate area including the City's Animal Shelter and the 1937 Iowa National Guard Armory building. These decisions moved the City closer to realizing its plan to create a February 18, 2015 Page 2 flood resilient riverfront park. After completion of the approximately $55 million dollar south plant expansion project, the City officially decommissioned the north plant in 2014. Iowa Flood Mitigation Program The Iowa Flood Mitigation Program was signed into law in 2012. The program provides funding for communities to pursue projects that will mitigate future flooding. The program is facilitated through a competitive application process that is reviewed by the State Flood Mitigation Board. At the time the program was created, Iowa City had no funds budgeted for the removal of structures on the north plant site. It was anticipated that the facilities located at the North Wastewater Treatment Plant would sit vacant on that site for the foreseeable future. The City put together a funding application and ultimately was successful in securing $8.5 million in future state sales tax dollars from the Flood Mitigation Board. These funds will partially offset the costs of demolition, wetland establishment, and targeted river and creek bed stabilization. The City has already started to incur costs toward this grant amount including consultant fees, mercury removal and asbestos abatement. During this process, the City Council formally authorized the application to the State Flood Mitigation Board, the acceptance of the grant award, and approved a consultant contract for the development of the demolition plans and specifications. The City cannot preserve the Control House under the grant agreement with the State Flood Mitigation Board. However, the City can seek an amendment to the agreement. At this time, staff has no reason to believe that the State Flood Mitigation Board would not support such an amendment. However, we feel it would be highly unlikely that they would provide any additional funds for the preservation of the Control House. Control House Demolition and Restoration Estimates Prior to preparing the grant application for the Iowa Flood Mitigation program, the City contracted with Stanley Consultants to prepare estimates for the North Wastewater Treatment Plant demolition project. At that time the demolition was estimated at $4,393,000. If the Control House was to be excluded from the demolition project, the total cost estimate dropped to $4,331,000, reflecting a savings of $62,000. The relatively small savings illustrates the complexities of preserving the Control House. The building is connected via piping to the immediately adjacent tanks and the removal of such tanks would require a more labor intensive demolition approach. Specialized demolition on the Control House has already been completed with the removal of asbestos from the building. If the building was removed from the demolition project, Stanley Consultants estimated that $554,000 would be required to bring the building to a usable condition. This expense includes further demolition, new roofing, select window replacement, HVAC enhancements and miscellaneous repairs. This expense essentially reflects the minimum investment needed to adequately preserve the building in its current state. Not reflected in the $554,000 figure are expenses related to transitioning the Control House into a programmable space for the public. These additional expenses have not been carefully analyzed as no specific use has been identified. Likely expenses would include new utility services, flood protection measures, ADA improvements including ramps, upgraded doorways and an elevator, interior remodeling, restroom expansions, and exterior signage and landscaping. These expenses would likely be several hundred thousands of dollars. Ongoing operating expenses have not been estimated at this time. City Park Experience In developing a new riverfront park, the City should carefully consider our recent experience at City Park. City Park has flooded several times since the 2008 flood. In each instance, various February 18, 2015 Page 3 programming elements and facilities within the park were impacted. Examples include the closure of the amusement rides, the cancellation of baseball games and tennis matches, and the cancellation of theatrical performances at the park's signature stage. The staff time involved with relocating rides, protecting facilities and cleaning up the park are considerable. Sports organizations are left to find replacement fields and the Riverside Theatre organization experienced such financial hardships that they have decided not to utilize the outdoor stage in the coming year. In response to the seemingly annual flooding events, the City is beginning a new planning process for City Park and studying options to relocate programmed elements from the park to more weather -reliable community locations. All of these experiences give staff caution when considering programmed efforts in a new riverfront park that is being intentionally designed to take on flood waters. The constant protection and cleanup efforts are not economically sustainable for the City or any other organization that may ultimately rely on the programmed space within the park. Park Planning and Improvement Financing With the recent City Park experience in mind, the City began initial master planning for the park that builds upon the ideals expressed in the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. A draft plan has been presented to the community and contains numerous aspects that support local foods, arts, physical activity, as well as natural landscaping and wetland development. Careful consideration will have to be given to all aspects of the park. For example, the trees that will be planted must be able to sustain life in submerged conditions and the lighting, pavilion, and play amenities must all be designed as floodable elements. While it is important that the community set an initial vision for this park, it is also critical to remember that the City has not budgeted funds for these park improvements in its five year capital plan. The flood mitigation grant will likely not cover all of the expenses associated with the demo, grading, wetland and riverbank obligations that the City has under our agreement with the State. Prior to pursuing park development, the City will have to identify resources to restore badly eroded riverbanks, acquire private property contained in the park plan, and complete the Kirkwood to Capital road project. These are each significant projects on their own merit and will likely take many years to complete. Therefore, it is likely the future park site will sit as vacant grassy land for a number of years. Any structures left after the demolition project will require regular maintenance and upkeep before they can be effectively incorporated into a park setting. While the City has been maintaining these buildings for several years, those expenses were covered by the Sewer Fund and have shifted to the expanded south plant. Any future maintenance efforts will shift to the General Fund, which will likely face considerable financial pressures in the coming years. Recommendation Given all of the considerations outlined in this memo, staff recommends that the City Council proceed with approval of plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate of cost for the demolition of all structures at the former site of the North Wastewater Treatment Plant. Marian Karr From: Angela Romero <angelaromero1984@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 12:41 PM To: Council; Matt Hayek; Susan Mims; Kingsley Botchway; Terry Dickens; Rick Dobyns; Michelle Payne; Jim Throgmorton Subject: Save the North WWTP Control House A broad and growing number of residents and arts, food, environmental and community groups call for the preservation of the historic PWA -era Control House as a priority in the redevelopment of the Riverfront Crossings Park and District. We urge the City to seek an amendment to the agreement with the State Flood Mitigation Board for the preservation of the historic Control House as a public community center for the arts and environmental education for the Riverfront Crossings Park. The 2008 flood of the riverfront remains an urgent call for the City of Iowa City to take bold steps for climate action, riverfront resiliency and regenerative city initiatives. Angela Romero Marian Karr From: Jeff Biggers <jrbiggers@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 8:35 AM To: Matt Hayek; Susan Mims; Kingsley Botchway; Terry Dickens; Rick Dobyns; Michelle Payne; Jim Throgmorton; Council Subject: Control House / Riverfront Park Attachments: PWASewagel 934. png Dear City Council Members, I am writing to encourage you to preserve the historic Control House, as part of the Riverfront Crossings Park development, and to seek an amendment with the agreement with the State Flood Mitigation Board. Built in 1935 to address the urgent environmental crisis of open sewage, the historic Control House is uniquely suited to serve as a year-round community center for a broad range of residents, community groups and public interests, including local food entrepreneurs and educators, environmental and Iowa River education and restoration, the arts, and other skills vital to creating a resilient and regenerative city in an age of climate change. As we all know, climate change will continue to place unprecedented stress on Iowa City and the riverfront, and result in escalating service costs. To keep our community thriving under these pressures, citizens must have places to galvanize and contribute their energy and skills. The goals of the Riverfront Crossings area include sustainable development, making it a prime location for these gatherings. Like the Beckwith Boathouse, the Control House --which sits in the 500 -year flood plain --will need to be renovated for future flooding, as part of other permaculture, restoration and flood mitigation efforts in the Riverfront Park. Non -profits, such as Backyard Abundance, the ArtiFactory, the Iowa City Fab Lab, and others have already expressed interest in partnering and residing in the building to make it economically successful -- and a year-round anchor for the Riverfront Crossings District. In effect, any monies lost will be eventually be recovered in the long run as the space is used to help citizens assist with community -wide resiliency efforts. Halting the demolition exemplifies our city's sincere desire to take major steps toward creating a resilient city that can adapt to the long-term pressures and costly damages caused by climate change. Attached please find the news clip from 1934, when the Iowa City City Council voted to accept a $516,000 grant administered by the Public Works Administration (PWA), as part of the New Deal, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's response to the Great Depression. As an intact PWA project, the building bears strong potential for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A, and perhaps under Criterion C. In this respect, it is very important to ascertain that the National Register eligibility of the Control House has been reviewed by an architectural historian --not simply an architect --as per the proper review process. Thank you for your and consideration. Sincerely, Jeff Biggers V1 O Iowa lot P mw ir- * Itot m e = ZS Am v E -a PON- 4 m Q 4i a :• 1 V1 O Iowa lot P mw ir- * Itot m e = ZS Am v E -a PON- Marian Karr From: Carla Paciotto <c-paciotto@wiu.edu> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:12 PM To: Council Subject: Control House/River Front Park Dear City Council, I am an Iowa City resident, home owner, educator and mother of two children in the public school system. I am writing to encourage you to preserve the historic Control House, as part of the Riverfront Crossings Park development, and to seek an amendment with the agreement with the State Flood Mitigation Board to keep it from being needlessly demolished. Preserving the historic Control House is an important investment for our children's future, and for the resiliency of our city and our riverfront. As a year-round community center for diverse communities in Iowa City, including nonprofits, education groups, artists, local food advocates, Iowa River friends, schools, and environmental and climate action organizations, the PWA -built Control House would greatly enhance the interest and use of the Riverfront Park, and provide skills and a permaculture infrastructure vital to creating a resilient city. According to recent studies, drought and flooding and extreme climate change will result in unprecedented stress on Iowa City and the riverfront, as well as escalating service costs. To keep our community thriving under these pressures, citizens must have places to galvanize and contribute their energy and skills. The goals of the Riverfront Crossings area include sustainable development, making the Control House a prime location for these gatherings. The small investment required now will be recovered in the long run as the space and park is used to help citizens assist with community -wide resiliency efforts. Thank you for your time and action on this matter on March 9th. Saving the historic Control House exemplifies our city's sincere desire to take major steps toward creating a resilient city that can adapt to the long-term pressures and costly damages caused by climate change. Sincerely, Carla Paciotto Sent from my iPhone Marian Karr From: Miriam Alarcon avila <miriamalarconavila@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 12:20 PM To: Matt Hayek; Susan Mims; Kingsley Botchway; Terry Dickens; Rick Dobyns; Michelle Payne; Jim Throgmorton Cc: Council Subject: Please take action to preserve the Control House Dear City Council Members: Please take action to preserve the Control House which is slated for demolition as part of the Riverfront Crossings Park development. This may include amending the agreement with the State Flood Mitigation Board. We know it's an old building that needs work; but also it is a space that can provide roof to the community for activities with ecological and educational purposes. A place to go to learn to care for our community, to learn to balance our daily routine, with the ecological balance of the river, a place to co -create and give our children a healthier life. Here are some links to Ecological Centers growing all around the world, we are in need of a space of this nature in our corridor. http://ecologycenter.org http//www.theecologycenter.org http://globaleco.org/index.php?option--com content&task=view&id=52&Itemid=32 http•//ecology cent terorg/ecohouse/ http://woodbinecenter.org http•//www brookhaven org/Departments/HighwgyDepartment/WildlifeEcologyCenter.aspx Thank you for the consideration and for all you great work creating a sustainable community. Sincerely, Miriam Alarcon Avila Sent from my Whone Marian Karr From: Tom Carsner <carsner@mchsi.com> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 10:57 AM To: Council Subject: Control House Preservation Attachments: Riverfront Crossings Control House City Council Letter 3915.docx To the City Council Members: I encourage you to preserve the Control House as part of the Riverfront Crossings Park for a variety of reasons. 1. Preserving the Control House will remind park visitors of the purpose for which the site was formerly used. It is also a structure built with New Deal funds that reminds us of the power of government to help citizens in need. We only get one chance to reserve our heritage. 2. The Control House would provide another indoor meeting space for non-profit groups to meet. Iowa City is woefully lacking in public meeting space and every new opportunity to create such a space should be taken. It would be especially beneficial for groups that include outdoor activities as part of their mission, because such a meeting space in the park would simultaneously allow both indoor and outdoor activities. 3. Preserving the Control House would give an opportunity for local engineers to meet the challenge of flood -proofing the ground floor of the building and otherwise remodeling the structure to allow it to remain in a flood plain. The Beckwith Boat House and other structures show how Iowa City can be pragmatic about flooding, but not let it prevent creative ideas about how to use riverfront properties. 4. Preserving the building will save money in the 3-5 year perspective. Yes, the price may be higher than planned for at first, but with flood proof renovation, rental income, and the benefits the building will bring to the community, in 3 to 5 years it will easily be seen as money well spent for years to come. Thank you for the consideration and for all that you do to create an abundant community. Sincerely, Tom Carsner 1627 College Court Place Iowa City, Iowa io Marian Karr From: Raud Kashef <raudkashef@gmail. com> Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2015 9:57 PM To: Council Subject: Control House Hello, My name is Raud Kashe£ I'm a student at the University of Iowa. Please do not demolish the Control House. Allow the community to transform it and let our city thrive and set an example for other cities as a center for local food, biodiversity, environmental education, arts, and a public venue in the Riverfront Park, etc. I was always impressed with Iowa City's efforts in making a more livable city. Destroying the Control House would surely be a step backward. Considering we have serious flood control problems, that area of Iowa City is really ugly, we are trying to become a blue zone, and all that would happen after demolition is it would be left as a big grassy area for nothing, it would be straight silly to allow the demolition to move on. The way I see it, we have two choices. Let us good people make Iowa City better, simply because we care, or suppress our efforts and make Iowa City worse. Thank you. -Concerned Citizen (Raud) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, SPECIAL PROVISIONS AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE SLOTHOWER ROAD WATER MAIN PROJECT, IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS: Public notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on plans, specifications, form of contract, special provisions and estimate of cost for the construction of the Slothower Road Water Main Project in said city at 7:00 p.m. on the 9th day of March, 2015, said meeting to be held in the Emma J. Harvat Hall in City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street in said city, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk. Said plans, specifications, form of contract, special provisions and estimate of cost are now on file in the office of the City Clerk in City Hall in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any interested persons. Any interested persons may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making objections to and comments concerning said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improvement. This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and as provided by law. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSED EXECUTION OF A QUIT CLAIM DEED FOR OUTLOT B, BOYD'S FASHIONABLE ACRES, IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON SAID PROPOSED CONVEYANCE FOR MARCH 9, 2015. TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS: Public notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on its intention to convey, via quit claim deed, any interest it has in Outlot B, Boyd's Fashionable Acres to Casey Boyd, L.L.C. at 7:00 p.m. on the 9th day of March, 2015, said meeting to be held in the Emma J. Harvat Hall in the City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street in said city, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk. Said resolution and quit claim deed are now on file in the office of the City Clerk in the City Hall in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any interested persons. Any interested persons may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making objections to and comments concerning said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improvement. This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and as provided by law. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK l� i � C 6�y Prepared by: Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Asst. City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5230 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A QUIT CLAIM DEED FOR OUTLOT B, BOYD'S FASHIONABLE ACRES, IOWA CITY, IOWA TO CASEY BOYD, L.L.C. WHEREAS, Outlot B, Boyd's Fashionable Acres,Iowa City, Iowa, was to be conveyed to the adjacent property owner, pursuant t.o a at note indicated on the final plat of said subdivision; and WHEREAS, Casey Boyd, L.L.C. recorded a deed Outlot B to the City; and WHEREAS, the City had ndt accepted the possession thereof; and WHEREAS, Casey Boyd, L.L. . has asked the deed for said parcel to clear p any title o conveyance of Outlot B to the adja ent property to convey title of thereof and has never taken to convey to it a quit claim ms that may arise in the NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL\ND BY IHE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The Mayor is authorized, and the Ci Clerk to attest, a quit claim deed for Outlot B, Boyd's Fashionable Acres, to City, Iowa, to Casey Boyd, L.L.C. in a form approved by the City Attomey and record the same at Casey Boyd, L.L.C.'s expense. Passed and approved this ��_VC90 ATTEST: CITY CLERK of 2015. Approved by Attomey's Offic� STAT, OP SCI A'T�O QUIT CLAIM DEE THE IOWA STATE BAR ASSOCIA Official Form #106 Recorder's Cover Shea Preparer Information: (Name, a0ress andphone umber) Joseph T. Moreland, 120 E. Washington Street, I;aress) , IA 52240, Phone: (319) 337-9606 Taxpayer Information: (Name and comp te Casey Boyd, LLC, 2613 Newport Road, Solon, Return Document To: (Name and co Joseph T. Moreland, 120 E. Washington 337-9606 Grantors: City of Iowa City addNss) Iowa (Nty, IA 52240, Phone: (319) irant es: Casey lRoyd, LLC Legal description: See Page 2 Document or instrument number of previously recorded documents: 0 The Iowa State Bar Association 2005 IOWADOCSO 777 Legal description: See Page 2 Document or instrument number of previously recorded documents: 0 The Iowa State Bar Association 2005 IOWADOCSO THE IOWA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION Official Form No. 106 Joseph T. Moreland F OR TH GAL EFFECT OF'VE USE OF THLST , CC MLT Y06WLAWYER QUIT CLAIM DEED 71V fi� For the considefation of one Dollar(s) and other valuable consideration, City of Iowa City ' \ do hereby Quit Claim to Casey Boyd_ C all our right, title, interest, estate, ed real estate in Johnson County, Iowa: claim and demand in the followin\Acs, Outlot B, Boyd's Fashionableccording to the plat the eof recorded in book 39, page 296, plat records of Johnson County, Io This deed is exempt according to Iowa\Code 428A.2(6). Each of the undersigned hereby relinquishes I ights of dower, homestead and distributive share in and to the real estate. Words and phrases herein, inc din acknowledgment hereof, shall be construed as in the singular or plural number, and as masculine or fe nine ge der, according to the context. Dated: City of Iowa City Grantor) (Grantor) (Grantor) (Grantor) (Grantor) (Grantor) STATE OF , COUNTY OF This record was acknowledged before me this day of by Signature of Notary Public O The Iowa State Bar Association 2013 Quit Claim Deed IOWADOCS® Revised August 2013 REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS STATE OF -IOWA , COUNTY OF JOHNSON This record was acknowledged before me this day of by as of City of Iowa City Signature of Notary Public STATE OF COUNTY OF This record was acknowledged before me this day of by as of Signature of Notary Public STATE OF , COU TY OF This record was acknowledged b;re me this day of by as of Signature of Notary Public W �) 3/a_3 t3 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY -UNIVERSITY PROJECT I URBAN RENEWAL PLAN IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA The City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa will hold a public hearing at its meeting on March 9, 2015 which commences at 7:00 P.M. in the Emma J. Harvat Hall, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk to consider adoption of the City -University Project I Urban Renewal Plan, Amendment No. 13 (the "Plan") which adds the following projects to the Plan: a hotel development at 328 S. Clinton Street and a multi -family housing development at 316 S. Madison; and A copy of the plan is on file for public inspection in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. The City of Iowa City, Iowa is the local agency which, if such Plan is approved, shall undertake the urban renewal activities described in such Plan. The general scope of the urban renewal activities under consideration in the Plan is to assist qualified industries and businesses in the Urban Renewal Area through various public purpose and special financing activities outlined in the Plan. To accomplish the objectives of the Plan, and to encourage the further development of the Urban Renewal Area, the plan provides that such special financing activities may include, but not be limited to, the making of loans or grants of public funds to private entities under Chapter 15A of the Code of Iowa. The City also may install, construct and reconstruct streets, parking facilities, open space areas and other substantial public improvement, and may acquire and make land available for development or redevelopment by private enterprise as authorized by law. In addition to these sources, the City may provide financial incentives through utilization of revenues received pursuant to the Local Transient Guest Tax Fund (known as the "hotel and motel tax"), to the extent allowable under Iowa Code Chapter 423A.7 and Iowa Code Section 403, The Plan provides that the City may issue bonds or use available funds for such purposes and that tax increment reimbursement of such costs will be sought if and to the extent incurred by the City. Any person or organization desired to be heard shall be afforded an opportunity to be heard at such hearing. This notice is given by order of the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, as provided by Section 403.5 of the State Code of Iowa. Dated this 23rd day of February 2015. s/Marian K. Karr City Clerk, Iowa City, Iowa (END OF NOTICE) 44-f Depenment of Management Form 631.1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BUDGET ESTIMATE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2015 - ENDING JUNE 30, 2016 City of Iowa City -,Iowa The City Council will conduct a public hearing on the proposed Budget at 410 E Washington St City Hail on 3/9/2015 at 7:00 pm (Date) xx/xx/xx (hour) The Budget Estimate Summary of proposed receipts and expenditures is shown below. Copies of the the detailed proposed Budget may be obtained or viewed at the offices of the Mayor, City Clerk, and at the Library. The estimated Total tax levy rate per $1000 valuation on regular property .......... $ 16.65519 The estimated tax levy rate per $1000 valuation on Agricultural land Is .. ......... $ 3,00375 At the public hearing, any resident or taxpayer may present objections to, or arguments in favor of, any part of the proposed budget. (319) 356-5041 Marian K. Karr phone number city Clerk/Finance orficera NAME Budget FY Re -estimated FY Actual FY 2016 2015 2014 (a) (b) (c) Other Financing -Sources Revenues&O 1 52,033,986 51,608,730 50,046,476 Taxes Levied on Property 2 0 0 0 Less: Uncollected Property Taxes -Levy Year 31 52,03 3,986 51,608,730 50,046,476 Net Current Property Taxes 0 5,601 Delinquent Property Taxes 4 5 126 1,020, 6 652,624 434,671 TIF Revenues 6 2,786,289 2,594,500 3,309,480 Other City Taxes 7 1,515,312 1,580;852 1,667,327 Licenses & Permits 8 1,935,478 2,402,663 2,018,085 Use of Money and Property 9 30,466,252 45,017,425 43 295,775 Intergovernmental 10 43,444,413 42,422,236 42,514,744 Char s for Fees & Service 11 879 0 0 Special Assessments 12 2,845,586rE2 3,619,456 6,273,347 Miscellaneous 13 13,876,21813,733,819 22,816 814 Other Financing Sources 14 52,631,24745,748,712 43,016,079 Transfers In 15 202,555,88609,381,017 215,397,899 Total Revenues and Other sources • ., ditu res &Other Financing Us s Ex en 1.6.....22,668,141 . . 23,013,243 21,555,265 y 17 7,815,170 7,424,280 6,349,112 s 18 283,833 303,841 264,333 ocial Services MalGovernment 19 13,332,011 13,531,479 12,664,856 Recreation and Economic Development 20 6,486,418 13,970,140 8,149,602 10 978,652 7,039,143 vernment 21 22 8,834,822 13,207,838 17,315,399 13,160,156 Debt Service 23 36,301,340 41,516,396 17,103,180 Capital Projects Total Government Activities Expenditures 24 108,929,573 125,224,380 71,807,946 89;114,697 65,443,454 BusinessTypelEnter uses 25 26 49,057,825 157,987,398 197,032,326 154,558,151 Total ALL Expenditures 27 52,631,247 45,748,712 43,016,079 Transfers Out Total ALL Expenditures/Transfers Out 28 210,618,645 242,781,038 197,574,230 r Excess Revenues s& Other Sources over 29 . . .'-,8,062,759 -33400,021 17,823,669 (Under) Expenditures/Transfers Out 30 136,906,796 170,306,817 152,483,148 Beginnin Fund Balance July 1 311 128,844,0371 136,906,796 170,306,817 Ending Fund Balance June 30 ®, CITY OF IOWA CITY 14 10--lW811 MEMORANDUM Date: February 17, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: Dennis Bockenstedt, Director of Finance Re: FY2016 Proposed Budget Revisions & Public Hearing Introduction: A public hearing will be held March 9, 2015 in consideration of formally adopting the FY2016 Proposed Budget, FY2015-2017 three-year financial plan, and FY2015-2019 five-year capital improvements program. The budget must be certified by the Johnson County Auditor's office by March 15, 2015. The attached Notice of Public Hearing and budget summary were made available to the public on February 17, 2015, as required by state law, to allow for public input. History/Background: The proposed budget document was made available to City Council and the general public on December 19, 2014. Budget sessions were: then held in January, 2015, during which department directors presented their proposals and responded to questions from City Council. The following is a summary of changes from the proposed budget as printed in December 2014. In brief, the revisions below were to update property taxes and state funded "backfill" of property tax rollback amounts based on certified property valuations from the Johnson County Auditor's Office. In addition, there is a correction to increase the internal chargeback of the equipment division in the wastewater collection system that was overlooked in the budget process. Financial Impact: The proposed levy rate for FY2016 is $16.655 per $1,000 of taxable valuation; this is unchanged from the proposed levy rate presented in December. The FY2016 levy rate represents a (0.30%) decrease from Iowa City's FY2015 total levy of $16.705 per $1,000 of taxable valuation. Over the past four years, the City's levy rate has decreased 6.65%. General Fund Revisions General Fund changes include: update property taxes and state funded "backfill" of property tax rollback amounts based on certified property valuations from the Johnson County Auditor's Office with an increase of $7,630 and $3,000 respectively and increase the funding transfer for the operation and maintenance of the transit system for the update property taxes and state funded "backfill" of property tax rollback amount fpr $1,037. General Fund Revenue Expenditures Net Effect on Fund Balance Revised: Property Tax Estimate $7,630 $7,630 Revised: State Rollback Backfill $3-0001 $3,000 Revised: Transfers -Out – Transit Fund $1,037 Total +— $10,630 $1,037 �k4o,vof) $9,593 February 17, 2015 Page 2 Special Revenue Fund Revisions Special Revenue fund changes include: update property taxes and state funded "backfill" of property tax rollback amounts based on certified property valuations from the Johnson County Auditor's Office with a decrease of $7,545 and $1,165 respectively and decreasing amount remitted to TCDD for the updated property taxes and state funded "backfill" of property tax rollback amounts from the Downtown SSMID of $11,917. Special Revenue Net Effect on Revenue Expenditures Fund Balance Revised: Transfers -In —General Fund` $1,037 Revised: Property Tax Estimate ($7,545) ($7,545) $126,999 ($126,999) Revised: State Rollback Backfill ($1,165) ($1,165) Decrease in remit of SSMID ' ($11,917) $11,917 Total ($8,710) ($11,917) $3,207 Enterprise Fund Revisions Enterprise Fund changes include: increase the funding transfer for the operation and maintenance of the transit system for the update property taxes and state funded "backfill" of property tax rollback amount for $1,037 and increasing amount of internal chargeback of the Equipment Division in the wastewater collection system that was overlooked in the budget process for $126,999. Enterprise Fund Revenue Expenditures Net Effect on Fund Balance Revised: Transfers -In —General Fund` $1,037 $1,037 Increase in Equipment Chargebacks $126,999 ($126,999) Total $1,037 $126,999 ($125,962) Debt Service Fund Revisions Debt Service Fund changes include: update property taxes and state funded "backfill' of property tax rollback amounts based on certified property valuations from the Johnson County Auditor's Office with a decrease of $1,587 and $28 respectively. Debt Service Fund Revenue Expenditures Net Effect on p Fund Balance Revised: Property Tax Estimate ($1,587) ($1,587) Revised: State Rollback Backfill ($28) ($28) Total 1 ($1,615) $0 ($1,615) All Funds Net changes across all funds as compared to fhe FY16 budget proposed in December, 2014 show an increase in revenues and transfers in of $1,342 and an increase in expenditures and transfer out of $116,119. The overall net effect is a decrease in fund balance of $114,777. February 17, 2015 Page 3 All Funds General Fund _ Special Revenue Enterprise Debt Service Total e Expenditures Net Etfect on Fund Balance 0 S($8,710) E$1,037 ($11,917) $9,593 $3,207 $1,037 $126,999 ($125,962) ($1,615) $0 ($1,615) $1,342 $116,119 ($114,777) Staff recommendation is to adopt the two resolutions regarding 1) the FY2016 Budget and 2) the FY2015-2017 Financial Plan and the FY2015 — 2019 Capital Improvement Plan following the public hearing on March 9, 2015. Oepanmem or Management Form 631.1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BUDGET ESTIMATE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2015 - ENDING JUNE 30, 2016 City of Iowa City Iowa The City Council will conduct a public hearing on the proposed Budget at 410 E Washington St, City Hali on 3/9/2015 at 7:00 pm (Date) xx/xx/xx (hour) The Budget Estimate Summary of proposed receipts and expenditures is shown below. Copies of the the detailed proposed Budget may be obtained or viewed at the offices of the Mayor, City Clerk, and at the Library. The estimated Total tax levy rate per $1000 valuation on regular property .......... $ 16.65519 The estimated tax levy rate per $1000 valuation on Agricultural land is .. ......... $ 3.00375 At the public hearing, any resident or taxpayer may present objections to, or arguments in favor of, any part of the proposed budget. (319) 356-5041 Marian K. Karr phone number City Clerk/Finance officer's NAME Budget FY Re -estimated FY Actual FY 2016 2015 2014 77 (a) (b) (c) Financing So u rces .s& Other Fina Re venue ., 52,033,986 51,608.730 50,046,476 Taxes Levied on Property1 2 0 0 0 Less: Uncollected Property Taxes -Levy Year 3 52,033,986 51,608,730 50,046,476 Net current Property Taxes 0 '0 5,101 Delinquent Property Taxes 4 5 1,020,126 652,624 434,671 TIF Revenues 6 2,786,289 2,594,500 3,309,480 Other City Taxes 7 1,515, 312 1 580;852 1,667,327 Licenses & Permits 8 1,935,478 2,402,66 3 2,018,085 Use of Money and Property 9 30,466,252 45,017,425 43,295,77 5 intergovernmental 10 43,444,413 42,422,236 42,514,744 Charges for Fees & Service 11 979 0 0 Special Assessments 12 2,845,586 3,619,456 6,273,347 Miscellaneous 13 13,876,218 13,733,819 22,816,814 Other Financing Sources 14 52 631,247 45,748,712 43,016,079 Transfers In Total Revenues and Other Sources 15 204555,886 209,381,017 215,397,899 E_penditures & Other Financing Us •.: 16 :. •.� ::•':.. , • 22,668,1Q1 � �.23,013,243 ' . .21,555,265 Public Safety 17 7,815,170 7,424,280 6,349112 Public Works 18 283,633 303,841 264,333 Health and Social Services 19 13,332,011 13,531,479 121- I--56 Culture and Recreation Community and Economic Deveicpment 20 :: 6,486,418 13,970,140 10,978,652 General Government 21 22 8,834,822 13, 207,838 8,149,602 17,315,3Q9 7,039,143 13,160,156 Debt Service 23 36,301,340 41,516,396 17,103,180 Capital Projects Total Government Activities Expenditures 24 108,929,573 125,224,380 71,807,946 89;114,697 65,443454 Business Type/Enterprises 25 26 49,057,825 157,987,398 197,032,326 154,558,151 otal ALL Expenditures 27 52,631,247 45 748,712 43,016,079 Transfers Out Total ALL ExpenditureslTransfers Out 28 210,618,645 242,781,038 197,574,230 Excess Revenues & Other Sources es over 29 ' 8,062,759 -33,400. 021 •• 17,823,669 (Under) Expendttures[Transfers Out 30 136,906,796 170,306,817 152,483,148 Beginning Fund Balance July 1 31 128,844,037 136'906,796F______170,306,817 Ending Fund Balance June 30 CITY OF IOWA CITY FISCAL YEAR 2016 BUDGET JULY 1, 2015- JUNE 30, 2016 PUBLIC HEARING Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director PREPARATION OF THE FY2016 BUDGET Consistent with City's financial goals Guided by City Council strategic plan priorities Focused on creating a sustainable financial model in an uncertain financial environment Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director BUDGET CONSISTENT WITH FINANCIAL GOALS FY2016 Financial Goals: 1. Prepare for property tax shortfall resulting from 2013 legislative changes while maintaining service levels 2. Retain Moody's Aaa bond rating 3. Maintain a competitive tax and fee environment for economic development purposes 4. Continue to achieve the GFOA awards for financial reporting and budget presentation Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director BUDGET/ FINANCIAL GOALS 1. Prepare for property tax shortfall resulting from 2013 legislative changes while maintaining service levels a. Continues funding the Emergency reserve fund to protect against: * Sudden revenue shortfalls such as elimination of State property tax backfill * Pension and Health Care rate spikes * Natural disaster/emergency and mitigation funding * Other Unforeseen Financial Emergencies b. Maintains sustainable fees and rates that sufficiently recover the cost of operations including depreciation where feasible c. Continues to seek operational efficiencies through software implementation, Internet accessibility, and department re -organization Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director 2 BUDGET/ FINANCIAL GOALS Retain Moody's Aaa Bond Rating Continues to emphasize low debt levels and controlled spending General Debt as % of Legal Debt Limit 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% FY08 FY09 7 FYI FYI Percent 44.37. 39.8% 34.3% 36.2% if—U FY12 TFY13 FY14 * FYI 5 'FY 16 *FYI 7 33.2% 26.5% 28.7% 26.2% 26.1 7. 25.37. Maintains strong reserve and fund balance levels *estimated Policy change to increase maximum individual fund balance levels to 30% of expenditures per Moody's Aaa benchmark Continues to shift capital financing to `pay -as -you' go versus long-term debt obligations Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director BUDGET/ FINANCIAL GOALS 3. Maintain a competitive tax and fee environment for economic development purposes FY2016 proposed tax rate: $16.66 per $1,000 of taxable value Fourth consecutive property tax rate decrease Proposed property tax rate will be the lowest in last fourteen years Continue to explore opportunities for revenue diversification such as the local option sales tax or a utility franchise fee increase Dennis Bockenstedt. Finance Director 10 Year Levy History and Rollback Percentage $18.00 $17.80 $17.60 $17.40 $17.20 $17.00 $16.80 $16.60 ]h $16.40 $16.20 $16.00 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Tax Rate $17.30 $17.30 $17.72 $17.85 $17.76 $17.84 $17.27 $16.81 $16.71 $16.66 Rollback 46.00% 45.56% 44.08% 45.59% 46.91% 48.53% 50.75% 52.82% 54.40% 55.73% Dennis Bockenstedt. Finance Director BUDGET/ FINANCIAL GOALS 4. Continue to achieve the GFOA awards for financial reporting and budget presentation FY2016 budget document will be submitted to the GFOA for the Distinguished Budget Presentation award (received award for past three fiscal years) The City will continue to participate in the GFOA Certificate of Achievement in Financial Reporting program (City has received award for twenty-nine consecutive years) Continue efforts to integrate performance measures and the strategic plan into budget document Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director BUDGET GUIDED BY STRATEGIC PLAN PRIORITIES Strategic Plan Priorities: To foster a more INCLUSIVE and SUSTAINABLE City through a commitment to: 1. Healthy Neighborhoods 2. A Strong Urban Core 3. Strategic Economic Development Activities 4. A Solid Financial Foundation 5. Enhanced Communication and Marketing Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director STRATEGIC PLAN PRIORITIES Inclusiveness Continues expanded funding for Human Rights agency partnerships and welcoming initiatives Police and Fire outreach programs Continues partnership with St. Ambrose University on disproportionate minority contact w Funding for staff diversity training Funding for ADA improvements at the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center Funding for youth minority recreation programs Sustainability Roadway Vegetation Management Program added in CIP Increased funding for street tree planting including additional landscaping on Lower Muscatine and South Sycamore Funding to centralize controls for HVAC systems in municipal buildings Funding for streetlight LED lighting Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Program continued Funding for road diet projects/expanded bike lanes (Mormon Trek, First Avenue Underpass) Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director STRATEGIC PLAN PRIORITIES 1. Healthy Neighborhoods Continues investments in residential housing stock, including the UniverCity, GRIP, and Targeted Neighborhood Investment Programs The FY16 budget includes funding for two UniverCity homes Creation of new UniverCity neighborhood fapade improvement program Continues investments in neighborhood parks, trails, and events Frauenholtz-Miller Park development Mercer Park playground upgrade; Willow Creek & Kiwanis Park improvements Tower Court Park & Pheasant Hill Park renovations Continues Programs for Improving Neighborhoods (PIN) grants Iowa River Corridor Trail extension — Normandy Drive to Rocky Shore Drive City/School recreation facility partnership with expanded recreation facilities incorporated into Alexander Elementary Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director STRATEGIC PLAN PRIORITIES 2. A Strong Urban Core Downtown & Near Downtown Development Riverfront Crossings park development/removal of the north wastewater treatment plant Central Business District Streetscape Enhancements — Washington Street & Pedestrian Mall Burlington corridor improvements (Clinton & Madison) Parking Ramp fapade improvements 3. Strategic Economic Development Activities Economic & Community Development Micro Enterprise Loan Guarantee Program - partnering with local banks Funding for Englert Theatre and Film Scene Riverside Drive pedestrian tunnel construction Funding for Towncrest Area redevelopment Funding for the ICAD Group Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director STRATEGIC PLAN PRIORITIES 4. A Solid Financial Foundation Budget sustains strong fund balances: Major fund balances projected to remain stable Revenue enhancements in Parks & Rec programs, Water fund, Housing Rental inspection fees, Planning fees, and Landfill fund Continues funding for an emergency reserve fund 5. Enhanced Communication & Marketing Funding for marketing Human Rights programs and awareness Partnering with the U of I for re -designing the City web site and related e -government services Expanding/consolidating translation services Increased functionality for online citizen feedback program GovXpress Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director EXPENDITURES BY FUND TYPE FY2016 Operating expenditures are a decrease of 5.06% from FY2015 FY2016 is a balanced budget `Enterprise Fund capital projects are presented within Enterprise Funds ""Internal Service Funds are considered non -budgetary Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director SUMMARY FY2016 Proposed budget was guided by clear financial goals: Preparing for property tax shortfall resulting from 2013 legislative changes, retaining the City's Aaa bond rating, maintaining a competitive tax and fee environment for economic development purposes, maintaining GFOA presentation awards Priorities were determined by the City's Strategic Plan: Healthy neighborhoods, a strong urban core, strategic economic development activities, a solid financial foundation, and enhanced communication and marketing Focused on a sustainable financial model with controlled spending: Total FY2016 budget expenditures (all funds): $175,973,939 Represents a 5.06% decrease in operating expenditures Proposed Property Tax rate: $16.66 per $1,000 of Taxable Value Rate decrease of $.05 from FY2015 Fourth consecutive rate decrease; lowest rate in 14 years Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director