Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-03-29 Info Packet r S = City Council Information Packet cm1ilr • wr®rm� March 29, 2018 CITY of IOWA CITY www.icgov.org IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule April 2 Work Session IP2 Memo from City Engineer and Public Works Director Design Parameters — American Legion Road, Foster Road and McCollister Boulevard IP3 Work Session Agenda IP4 Pending Work Session Topics Miscellaneous IP5 Information from Council member Botchway on community discussion: Schools, Racial Segregation, and Social Justice —April 2 IP6 Copy of news release: Community invited to attend forum on hate crimes —April 9 IP7 Letter from Brian Lee, Department of Natural Resources: Letter of Non-Compliance IP8 Memo from Senior Civil Engineer: Iowa Department of Natural Resources NPDES MS4 Compliance Inspection IP9 Invitation: Groundbreaking Celebration for Cross Park Place on April 5th IP10 Civil Service Entrance Examination: Cashier— Parking IP11 Civil Service Entrance Examination: Maintenance Worker 1 — Parking Draft Minutes IP12 Board of Adjustment: February 14 IP13 Planning and Zoning Commission: February 15 IP14 Planning and Zoning Commission: March 1 03-29-18 IP1 City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Subject to change CITY IOWA CITY March 29,2018 Date Time Meeting Location *Monday,April 2,2018 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall (*Revised date) 7:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Monday,April 16, 2018 4:00 PM Reception ICCSD 4:30 PM Joint Meeting TBD Tuesday,April 17, 2018 4:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2018 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 15, 2018 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 29, 2018 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Tuesday,July 3, 2018 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday,July 17, 2018 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday,August 7,2018 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday,August 21, 2018 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting 03-29-18 rp CITY OF IOWA CITY 1P2 ' &ca �iii MEMORANDUM Date: March 29, 2018 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Jason Havel, City Engineer Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Re: Design Parameters -American Legion Road, Foster Road and McCollister Boulevard The City of Iowa City currently has three major street construction projects under design. During the April 2nd work session, staff will discuss the plan development and design parameters for the upcoming American Legion Road, Foster Road and McCollister Boulevard projects. The work session will give staff the opportunity to receive feedback and guidance from Council regarding these projects, which will provide direction as the projects proceed through final design. This memo is intended to provide project information to aid in those discussions. The three projects being discussed have been identified as important capital improvements for many years, and recent school construction and development opportunities have only increased the need for the projects. While not discussed in detail within this memo, all of the projects will include public utility (water main, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, fiber optic, etc.) installation as a part of the projects. In addition, all of the projects will utilize a design speed of 35 mph and consider the recommended improvements from the Bicycle Master Plan for each of the respective corridors. American Legion Road —This project will include the reconstruction of American Legion Road as an arterial street, from Scott Boulevard to Taft Avenue. As part of the reconstruction, the existing roadway will be converted from a rural cross-section, with shoulders and ditches, to an urban cross-section with curb and gutter and a storm sewer system. Sidewalk is planned to be installed on both sides of American Legion Road, with a wide sidewalk planned on the north side of the street. However, sidewalk on the south side will likely not be installed until development occurs in those areas. In addition, the project is anticipated to include a new single-lane roundabout at the intersection of American Legion Road and Scott Boulevard, and a new pedestrian underpass on American Legion Road,just west of Barrington Road near the new Hoover Elementary School. The proposed underpass is part of a safe routes to school strategy that will allow for a grade separated crossing of American Legion Road. In addition, the underpass will serve as an enhancement to the regional trail network, and will become an important link for future trail improvements. Due to the topography of the area and the profile of the road, the location is well suited for a pedestrian underpass, which is expected to help minimize the cost of the construction. A joint utility trench is being considered to allow for relocation of existing utilities ahead of the roadway construction. Street trees will also be installed following completion of the reconstruction project. Regarding the actual roadway design, American Legion Road is being designed with the following parameters: • Total pavement width of 34', with curb and gutter • Two (2) 11' travel lanes, one in each direction • Two (2) 5.5' bike lanes, one in each direction March 29, 2018 Page 2 Functional design for the project was completed in 2015, and the City is currently negotiating a contract with a consultant to complete final design by 2019. During design development, the City will consider whether the addition of a buffered bike lane would be appropriate and contribute to increased safety and comfort for bicyclists. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2020, and the current estimated construction cost is $6,900,000. The estimated overall project cost is estimated at $9,000,000. The City has been awarded $3,608,000 in Surface Transportation Program and Surface Transportation Block Grant funding for the project, with the remaining balance anticipated to be City funded. Foster Road —The project will extend Foster Road as an arterial street from its current eastern terminus, east of Dubuque Street, to Prairie du Chien Road. As part of the project, sidewalk will be installed along both sides of Foster Road, with a wide sidewalk along the north side and a standard 5' sidewalk along the south side of Foster Road. Street trees are planned throughout the corridor, and an eastbound turn lane is also proposed on Foster Road at the intersection with Prairie du Chien Road. The extension of Foster Road will provide greater east/west connectivity in the northern region of Iowa City, and will benefit public safety responses, improve the bicycle network, and relieve traffic congestion from neighboring residential streets, including Linder Road, Kimball Road and Brown Street. Regarding the roadway design, Foster Road is being designed with the following parameters: • Total pavement width of 36', with curb and gutter • Two (2) 11' travel lanes, one in each direction • Two (2) buffered bike lanes, one in each direction, with a 5' bike lane and 18" striped buffer The Foster Road Project is being designed and constructed in conjunction with the proposed Forest Hill Estates subdivision, and the City is currently negotiating a development agreement that will come before the City Council before this project proceeds. The current total project cost estimate for the Foster Road project is approximately $3,200,000, and construction is anticipated to be completed in 2018-2019. McCollister Boulevard —This project will extend McCollister Boulevard as an arterial street from its current eastern terminus, east of Covered Wagon Drive, to Sycamore Street. The proposed roadway will tie into the Sycamore Street roundabout that was installed as part of the Sycamore Street Improvements Project in 2015. As part of the project, a new traffic signal will also be installed at the intersection of McCollister Boulevard and Gilbert Street. Regarding roadway design, no design parameters have been determined for the project. Although specific design parameters have not yet been established, the anticipated parameters are: • Travel lanes 11' in width • On-street bicycle facilities are anticipated. Consideration will be given to the Bicycle Master Plan, which includes a protected bike lane for this portion of McCollister Boulevard. In addition, consideration will be given to the larger McCollister Boulevard corridor, with the desire to provide consistency throughout the corridor for bicyclists. • Street trees will be provided along the corridor • The corridor alignment is expected to follow the preferred alignment determined by a study completed in 2007 • A wide sidewalk is expected to be included along the north side of the roadway • A standard 5' sidewalk is planned along the south side of the roadway March 29, 2018 Page 3 • Project design will consider recommendations provided by Opticos as part of their work related to the South District Plan The extension of McCollister Boulevard will provide an important east/west connection in the southern part of Iowa City, including extension of the City's bicycle facilities network and improved access for public safety response vehicles. It is expected to reduce the traffic impacts on nearby Langenberg Avenue, which have been an ongoing concern for residents in recent years. Currently, the area of the proposed alignment is located outside the Iowa City corporate limits. Annexation of the area and acquisition of the right-of-way will both need to be considered as the project progresses. The City is currently negotiating a contract with a consultant to complete preliminary and final design in 2018, with construction anticipated in 2019. The current estimated construction cost is $3,600,000. 03-29-18 IP3 4:4 sp, 4zegtiifittl arissoPirar CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City. Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org City Council Work Session Agenda Monday, April 2, 2018 Emma J. Harvat Hall - City Hall 5:00 p.m. ▪ Discuss design parameters for American Legion Road, Foster Road and McCollister Road projects [IP2 of 3/29 Info Packet] • Clarification of Agenda Items • Information Packet Discussion [March 22, March 29] • Council updates on assigned boards, commissions and committees 03-29-1W IP4 — ' r CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE PENDING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TOPICS March 29, 2018 Strategic Plan Actions Requiring Initial City Council Direction: 1. Undertake a comprehensive assessment of the current public transit system and implement changes to assure that the service best meets the needs of the entire community 2. Through cooperation with the Iowa City School District, Iowa Workforce Development, Kirkwood Community College, Iowa Works, and others, increase opportunities for marginalized populations and low- income individuals to obtain access to skills training and good jobs 3. Improve collaborative problem-solving with governmental entities in the region on topics of shared interest 4. Explore expanded use of a racial equity toolkit within City government, embedding it within city department and Council levels 5. Consider elevating hourly staff wages to $15/hour or more within two years Other Topics: 1. Joint meeting with the Telecommunications Commission 2. Review 2016 and 2017 Police Department traffic stop data with Dr. Chris Barnum of St. Ambrose University 3. Discuss scope for RAL Recreation Center improvement project 4. Discuss Council Member appointments to committees (term limits) 5. Review alternative revenue sources 6. Consider increasing the salary and benefits for Council members effective January 1, 2020 7. Consider a plan for rubberized surfacing at park playgrounds and develop strategies to address equity gaps noted in the Parks Master Plan and plan for the equitable distribution of destination parks within an easy and safe distance of all residents. (request Parks Commission to discuss first) 8. Discuss IP 6 from 3/1/18 packet regarding recommendations from black parents on youth needs 9. Joint meeting the Johnson County Board of Supervisors (Scheduled for September 18th, 2018) From Council member Botchway -- 13-1-8 IP5 Schools, Racial Segregation, and Social Justice A community discussion with New York Times reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones i Nikole Hannah Jones is an investigative journalist • chronicling the demise of racial it integration efforts and lb.-. persistence of segregation in 1 American society, particularly in education. In 2017, she won a MacArthur Genius Grant. Her work can be found at nikolehannahjones.com. Panelists Leslie Locke, Assistant Professor, University of Iowa College of Education Kingsley Botchway, Director of Equity and Engagement, Iowa City Community School District Student representatives from City and West High Schools Monday, April 2 7 pm to 8:30 pm Iowa City Public Library Meeting Room A Sponsored by the School of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Iowa. If you need a disability accommodation, please email rachel-young@uiowa.edu 03-29-18 IP6 Julie Voparil From: City of Iowa City<CityoflowaCity@public.govdelivery.com> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 12:04 PM To: Julie Voparil Subject: Community invited to attend forum on hate crimes SHARE Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. City of IOWA CI Ty FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Date: 03/29/2018 Contact: Sgt. Derek Frank, Public Information Officer Phone: 319-356-5293 Community invited to attend forum on hate crimes Local law enforcement agencies and the Iowa City branch of the NAACP will host a panel-led community conversation on hate crimes and their impact on our communities. The forum will begin at 6:30 p.m. on Monday, April 9, 2018, at the University Capitol Center(UCC), Room 2520D, 200 S. Capitol St. Panelists include members of the Iowa City Police Department, University of Iowa Department of Public Safety, FBI, Johnson County Attorney's Office, United States Attorney's Office and the NAACP. The group will discuss hate-related incidents, applicable laws, and protocols for reporting these types of crimes. Opening remarks will be made by Iowa City Mayor Jim Throgmorton and NAACP Iowa-Nebraska State Director Betty Andrews. Attendees will have an opportunity to ask questions and learn more about how to keep our community safe and welcoming for all. Parking is available at the Capitol Street parking garage adjacent to the Old Capitol Town Centre. For updates and reminders, RSVP to the Community Forum on Hate Crimes Facebook event. For more information, contact Sgt. Derek Frank at 319-356-5293 or derek-frankiowa-city.orq. 1 COMMUNITY FORUM ON HATE CRIMES Local and federal law enforcement as well as the Iowa City chapter of the NAACP will lead a community conversation. UNIVERSITY CAPITOL CENTRE ROOM 2520D APRIL 9, 2018 6:30 P.M. BRING QUESTIONS More at icgov.org/hatecrimeforumMI do 11 Iptt'il CItrY R= os .r POLICE441t 111. 4A11111ST Questions? -• _ Contact Us CITY Of IOWA CITY UvtSCOCITY OF II1fRAIURI STAY CONNECTED: 2 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES GOVERNOR KIM REYNOLDS DN R LT.GOVERNOR ADAM GREGG IP7 DIRECTOR CHUCK GIPP March 22, 2018 City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Attn: Honorable Mayor and Council Letter of Non-Compliance: NPDES MS4 Permit Part V.A Duty to Comply Subrule 567 IAC 64 .3 (1) Permit to Operate Subject: MS4 Compliance Inspection; FOCD Inspection #68028 NPDES #6-5225005, City of Iowa City MS4, Johnson County, Iowa City Officials: Included with this letter is a copy of my inspection report associated with the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit for the City of Iowa City. Ensure to review the requirements and recommendations section near the end of the report. Detailed comments can be found throughout the report. Non-compliance issues regarding the MS4 permit are outlined in the report and the significant items are listed below: • Failure to specifically target new residents and businesses with MS4 information (MS4 Permit Part II.A.1) • Failure to report all illicit discharges to the Department (MS4 Permit Part II.C.2) . • Failure to review weekly inspections at the time of quarterly inspections (MS4 Permit Part II.D.2) . • Failure to submit the Annual report by April 30 (MS4 Permit Part III) . Please reference the attached picture pages as well for physical on site issues or areas that may need attention. If you have any questions, need assistance, or would like further explanation of any part of this letter, please contact me in this office at 319- 653-2135 or at brian.lee@dnr.iowa.gov. Sincerely, FIELD SERVICES & COMPLIANCE BUREAU Brian Lee ^' Environmental Specialist CJ m Encl. Inspection report, Picture pages N:BLEE\Stormwater\IC MS4 cover 030818 —{f7 C>n N:BLEE\Stormwater\IC MS4 insp 030818 :.<� –0 ' ` 1 N:PICTURES\2018\March\IC MS4 030818 (1-51) ELM xc: Storm Water Section, DNR, Des Moines { 1' 3 0 Ben Clark via email D Iowa City MS4 File • FIELD OFFICE 6, 1023 W MADISON ST, WASHINGTON IA 52353 Phone: 319-653-2135 www.IowaDNR.gov Fax: 319-653-2856 MS4 Compliance Inspection Page I IOWA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Field Office#6 1023 West Madison. Washington, IA 52353 Phone: 319-653-2135 FAX: 319-653-2856 REPORT OF INSPECTION INSPECTION DATE CURRENT: 3/8/18 LAST: 6/28/13 TO: City of Iowa City, IA SUBJECT: Storm Water MS-4 Compliance Inspection Iowa NPDES Permit No: 6-5225005 PERSONS CONTACTED: Ben Clark and Julie Tallman Introduction The compliance inspection of Iowa City's Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4) program was conducted on 3/8/18. The scope of the inspection included an evaluation of the permit requirements. general discussions pertaining to the city's storm water program and on-site visits to City Transit, Equipment. Parks Department, and Street Departments. The West Side Estates Subdivision and Sandhi ll Estates construction sites were also visited. Sites visited are outlined in the appendix. Participants: C=> Brian Lee — Iowa DNR c' rn Bert Noll— Iowa DNR IDS �t7 Ben Stracuzzi — Iowa DNR c •-` ry �, Ben Clark —Senior Civil Engineer --�r� Julie Tallman — Development Regulatory Specialist cri 1 Iowa NPDES MS4 Permit ry C3 Part I. Permit Area/Background Information CM The City of Iowa City (herein referred to as the City) was issued an Iowa NPDES Permit for the discharge of storm water for its Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), totaling approximately 25.9 square miles, on 6/1/14. Additional area has been acquired since 2014, but the exact additional square miles was not known. The permit expiration date is 5/31/19 and the renewal application is due to the Department on 12/2/18. (Are the following items established and is compliance achieved? Yes, No. n/a = not applicable, n/o = not observed) Part II A. Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts Permit requirements Yes No n/a n/o General storm water education brochure x Establish Website x Storm Drain Stenciling x Comments: The City partners with the Iowa Storm Water Education program (ISWEP) regarding brochures and storm water related publications. Each water bill contains City MS4 related information or educational materials. At this time, a specific brochure is not sent directly to new residents and business owners. Some of the ISWEP publications are available on the City's website. The website also includes information on BMP projects, creek maintenance, illicit discharges. the storm water utility fee. and construction site controls. The construction and illicit discharge ordinances are available on the website. The storm water section is under the "Engineering" section on the website, which appears to be a little difficult for the public to find. I did not locate a specific form that website visitors can fill out regarding complaints, but a hotline number was provided. Improvements to the website are planned. The City has previously had interns or summer staff adhere labels onto storm drains. Some of those have come off over time. Iowa City is looking to have specific city storm water language imprinted on the new cast intake structures. They continue to research a better method to identify older intakes. MS4 Compliance Inspection PaQe 2 Part II B. Public Involvement and Participation Permit requirements Yes No n/a n/o Community Clean-Up Events F i E I x Telephone Hotline Number Adopt-An-Intake Program x Creek Maintenance Program MI6 MAR 26 P1112: 45 x Public Notice Requirements x CITY CLERK Comments: 'U .A CITY, IOWA Multiple clean up and storm water related events totaling thousands of volunteer hours are held each year. Carol Sweeting coordinates events and volunteer efforts. The telephone hotline has been established and is available on the website. This phone number is managed by the Public Works Department. Approximately 85 intakes have been adopted within the City's storm sewer system. A free sticker for yard waste collection is provided to those who adopt an intake. Those who choose to adopt an intake will clean it as needed. but if it is backing up, needs vacuumed out or has other issues, the City will be notified. The Creek Maintenance program has been widely implemented, specifically in the older parts of town. The City will work with landowners to improve creek beds and watershed areas. A cost share/reimbursement program is available and Iowa City's Engineering Department will review plans and determine how much can be designated per project. A master plan for natural areas has been developed and that includes creek maintenance projects. Public Notice requirements appear to have been met. Part II C. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Permit requirements Yes ' No n/a n/o Illicit discharge prohibition ordinance x Illicit discharge detection and elimination program x x Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program x Comments: The City continues to implement the established ordinance. In 2016, specific sections of at least three creeks were inspected for illicit discharges. In previous years, all of the waterways had been inspected. Interns and volunteer staff were primarily utilized to complete the inspections. No illicit connections or discharges were located. Digital mapping has greatly assisted in outlining areas to inspect or review. In calendar year 2016, seven calls regarding illicit discharges were called into the hotline number. The City investigated each one and took the appropriate action to eliminate the issue and educate the responsible party. At this time it appears that the City has not notified Iowa DNR Field Office 6 of any of the illicit discharges as required. The solid waste sections (landfill staff) coordinate household hazardous recovery and collection efforts. A mobile collection unit was purchased and has improved the drop off process for the public. The public may also utilize the landfill as a drop off site year round, by appointment. Part II D. Construction Site Runoff Control l Permit requirements _ Yes No n/a n/o Construction Site Runoff Control Ordinance x Construction Site Review and Inspection Program x x Comments: The ordinance for construction site management has been in place since 2006. A construction site runoff (CSR) permit is required for all sites at or above one acre. Sites below one acre do not have to have a CSR. but must not allow an illicit discharge to occur. Applicable sites must also have an Iowa DNR General Permit #2 (GP2). A specific check sheet is utilized for the review process and the CSR is not given until all items are satisfied. The Engineering Department reviews the subdivision applications and the individual lot applications are reviewed by Housing and Inspection Services. The site management of storm water is required and enforced by multiple departments. Public Works (PW) and Neighborhood and Development Services (NDS) each oversee specific construction sites or stages of progress. For subdivision development and for high profile sites, Public Works will conduct weekly inspections until utility work is complete. After that, NDS takes over weekly and quarterly inspections. A third party may be hired on City projects to do weekly inspections. NDS will also conduct the initial. quarterly, and final inspection. NDS staff will review plans in one-on-one meetings to better convey how compliance is to be achieved. The City plans to adopt the Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) in the near future. Inspections are tracked in an electronic database and automatic email notifications are sent to CSR permit holders upon inspection. Erosion control and storm water management for each site is assessed at the time of inspection, however individual review of weekly site inspections does not appear to be conducted at this time. The City implements an escalated enforcement and has implemented penalties. Stop work orders are outlined in the ordinance, but have rarely been utilized. A specific termination form is not utilized at this time and the City does not require notification be sent to them when a DNR GP2 is discontinued. However. a final inspection must be conducted/approved prior to occupancy permits being provided. MS4 Compliance Inspection Page 3 Part II E. Post Construction Storm Water Management Permit.requirements Yes No n/a n/o Construction Site Runoff Control Policy Ordinance FILED x Site Plan Review of Post-Construction Runoff Controls (J _ x Inspection of Runoff Control Devices x Watershed Assessment Program 201$MAR 26 PM12: Comments: CITY CLER Post Construction is covered under the Storm Water Managemelr 9Adiii � jte Sensitive Areas Ordinance. At this time the minimum threshold for implementing post construction management iThree acres. Most subdivisions utilize retention/detention basins, but more rain gardens and other bio-swale type installations are being installed. Each is reviewed by the City for specific goals regarding water quality and quantity improvements. Design review is conducted by the City at the time of the CSR application. A natural areas cost share program is in place for the public. Specific improvements will be considered and reviewed to determine the level of financial assistance or reimbursement. Over the last few years, Public Works has updated the records of all storm water management areas, including owner and responsibilities, within Iowa City. The Public Work Department inspects the post construction areas (natural areas) owned/operated by the City. A specific inspection frequency has not been developed and site specific forms are not utilized at this time. However, these natural areas have been updated in a Natural Areas Inventory and Management Plan regarding land use, watershed assessment, overall maintenance as well as mapping. The Parks and Recreation Department, Public Works, and Planning and Community Development sections work together to assess the watersheds within the City, with the updated inventories providing significant detail. Educational signs and other information is established on site when feasible at these locations. Other information is made available by the City as needed. In addition, general water quality in Willow Creek and Ralston Creek has been monitored since 2008. Part II F. Pollution Prevention/House Keeping Permit requirements Yes No n/a n/o Operation and Maintenance of MS4 x Pesticide and Fertilizer Management Program x Training Program for Municipal Employees x City Facilities BMPs x Comments: The City implements multiple street and storm sewer cleaning efforts throughout the year. The Streets Division is responsible for leaf vacuuming and street sweeping. Priority areas are swept multiple times per year and all areas are swept at least twice per year. A leaf pick up program is implemented each fall and specific priority intakes are also cleaned on a proactive basis. The Wastewater Department is responsible for the storm sewer system and will jet, clean, and televise specific sections as needed. Storm Sewer improvement projects are conducted as time and funding allows. The City continues to improve the mapping and tracking of cleaning efforts. The Parks Department implements the Pesticide and Fertilizer Management Program. City applicators are certified and attend training as needed. The City utilizes low phosphorus fertilizer and also implements soil testing to be able to apply as needed. Reportedly, pesticide application has significantly been reduced in an effort for the City to be more health conscience to the public and to reduce (chemical) liability. City staff that are directly involved in City facility management go through annual storm water training, specifically spill management/response and general good housekeeping training. A site specific spill prevention control and countermeasure (SPCC) inspection form is implemented for multiple facilities. Dan Striegel, Equipment Superintendent, oversees the inspection process and receives the documented inspections, which are conducted monthly. The City continues to implement post construction practices and natural areas into their own construction plans, even when less than the three acre minimum. Part Ill. Reporting Requirements Annual Report Requirements Yes No n/a n/o Submitted by April 30th Annually x Component Implementation x Summary of Data w/Narrative x Expenditures for Implementation of MS4 Permit x Summary of Actions x MS4 Compliance Inspection Page 4 (Annual Report: Continued) Comments: The last four annual reports were received: 5/2/17 (2016-2017 report) 5/3/16 (2015-2016 report) 9/3/15 (2014-2015 report) 7/31/14 (2013-2014 report) The last two annual reports were thoroughly reviewed for this inspection. The reports outline multiple events, projects, and efforts put forth by the City to attempt to maintain compliance with the MS4 permit. Each section of the MS4 permit is outlined and detail on the specific methods or program is provided. Outline of City MS4 expenditures is provided as well. Other reportable data is outlined and tracked annually. The City captures multiple quantitative elements in regards to achieving permit compliance. In addition, accomplishment and exceedance of goals are outlined. Between 2016 and 2017's annual report, multiple instances of similar or duplicated language was observed. The report does not appear to have been completely altered or updated as needed to reflect only the information related to the specific current year. COMPLIANCE SUMMARY NON-COMPLIANCE ITEMS: -Failure to specifically target new residents and businesses with specific MS4 information (MS4 Permit Part II.A.1). -Failure to report all illicit discharges to the Department (MS4 Permit Part II.C.2). -Failure to review weekly inspections at the time of quarterly inspections (MS4 Permit Part II.D.2). o -Failure to submit the annual report by April 30th (MS4 Permit Part III). c;, COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS and REMINDERS: N Part II.A Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts 'fin -v ni -Develop a method to specifically reach new residents and businesses regarding MS4 related inf<? tlora_ jJ -Create a form on the website for reporting storm water related complaints and providing feedbak. •• cn Part II.B Public Involvement and Participation -Ensure the hotline phone number is located on brochures and other storm water related information for the City. Part II C. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination -By the next business day. the City must report any illicit discharge to Iowa DNR Field Office 6. -Focus annual illicit discharge detection to those areas that are receiving new flows or that have not already been inspected since additional flows have been introduced. Part II D. Construction Site Runoff Control -Review individual site weekly inspections at the time quarterly inspections are conducted. -Utilize stop work orders as required as a means to bring attention to erosion control non-compliance. -Ensure all CSR sites have a quarterly inspection conducted by City staff, unless City staff are inspecting weekly. Inspections must review all areas (lots, common areas, private streets, etc.) under the construction permit that have not been finally stabilized. Part II E. Post Construction Storm Water Management -Ensure all post construction management areas are inspected for proper maintenance. Part II F. Pollution Prevention/House Keeping -Ensure all MS4 components (except for underground piping) are inspected at least once every five years and each component inspection is documented. Part III. Annual Report -Submit the annual report by April 30th annually. MS4 Compliance Inspection Page 5 RECOMMENDATIONS: Part II.A Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts -Add more specific informational materials regarding construction site BMPs to the website. Include pictures of examples of compliant erosion and sediment controls to the website. -Improve navigation within the storm water portion of the website. -Include the Iowa DNR and EPA websites on the webpage. The Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship have local Urban Conservationists and their assistance may be helpful regarding specific projects. Part 11.13 Public Involvement and Participation -Outline storm water related volunteer and educational opportunities within the storm water section of the website. -Break down the total number of storm water related calls to the hotline number and document the total within the annual report. -Develop a protocol outline and/or checklist sheet for those who adopt intakes. Part II C. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination -Utilize a spreadsheet with an automatic reminder to notify the Iowa DNR Field Office of any illicit discharges. -Document the outcome of any illicit discharge investigation and add that to the annual report. Follow up with the Iowa DNR regarding the results. Part II D. Construction Site Runoff Control -Ensure all staff inspection forms are consistent and address the necessary compliance items. Add the Iowa DNR permit number to the City's weekly inspection form. -Send all staff conducting inspections to inspector training at least every few years. -Utilize a discontinuation form for the City's CSR permit. -Capture total number of sites inspected and add that data to the annual report. ' Part II E. Post Construction Storm Water Management -Inspect the post construction/natural areas at least once every two years. -Involve site inspectors in the review/approval process. ';'<r7-, -Develop a site specific inspection form for each site. -Establish training for all City staff who review or inspect post construction/natural areas. Include 1 nb of th ublic who oversee non-city owned sites. -Add the Natural Areas/Post Construction ordinance to the website. Part II F. Pollution Prevention/House Keeping -Have other departments (Safety, Fire Dept., utility, etc.) go through spill response and good housekeeping training. -Implementing illicit discharge training for all staff. -Expand the current site SPCC inspection form to include good housekeeping and general storm water management features and best management practices. -Record the annual mileage (or hours) for the street sweepers. Part ill. Annual Report -Submit the annual report via email to Iowa DNR Field Office 6. -Have the report cover a specific range of 12 months (i.e. calendar year, April through March) so that the report can be complied in April and submitted prior to May 1. -Report additional quantitative data in spreadsheets and add those spreadsheets to the annual reports. -Outline new goals the City wishes to accomplish for the next annual report. -Add the annual report to the website. AUTHENTICATION INSPECTOR: Brian L--, Environmental Specialist DATE: 312? 1//C3 REVIEWER: Jeff Prier, Environmental Specialist Senior DATE: 77(/i1/ MS4 Compliance Inspection Page 6 APPENDIX • Construction site field review Project#1 Project#2 Location West Side Sandhill Subdivision Estates Are BMPs adequately implemented to prevent a discharge? No Yes Are design specifications and details for all BMPs included on the SWPPP not Yes (per 6/17 plans? reviewed inspection) Are maintenance requirements specified in the plans? SWPPP not Yes (per 6/17 reviewed inspection) Are quarterly inspections being conducted by the City? Yes Unknown Comments: I visited the West Side Estates Residential Subdivision (Permit#31739-31451, expires 10/17/22) with Ben Clark. Construction activity was ongoing at the time of our visit. Approximately 20 acres had been disturbed and some terracing and grading had taken place last fall and/or earlier this spring. Perimeter silt fence was in place and so was a rocked exit area. Minor tracking to the east was observed and the intakes at the edge of that pavement(Tumbleweed Terrace)were not protected. Those intakes appeared to discharge to a location off site. Temporary stabilization may have attempted to have been implemented last fall, but a majority of the disturbed area appeared to be bare, unstabilized soil. I was not able to determine if the area had been seeded. Silt fence on the north perimeter had been breached by construction activity and needed to be reinstalled. Sediment had also appeared to discharge beyond the fence during a rain event, which likely occurred earlier this spring. The pond to the north did not appear to be a part of this construction site and that is where the sediment appeared to discharge. Due to the current status of this site, a City quarterly inspection is pending for this development. Weekly inspections were conducted by the City through December 20, 2017. The temporary stabilization effort at this site was poor. Even if stabilization was implemented in the fall, a new effort must be implemented to be in compliance. Erosion control must be improved for this site to ensure sediment is not discharged to other parts of the development and the pond to the north, assuming it is not part of the permitted area. The temporary stabilization requirement must be properly enforced. The weekly inspections conducted by the (GP2) permit holder must indicate the areas that have been disturbed and therefore do not need temporary stabilization. Sandhill Estates (Permit # 28482-28255, expires 4/1/19) along Covered Wagon Drive was reviewed by Bert Noll and Julie Tallman. Multiple erosion control measures appeared to be implemented and a discharge of sediment off the permitted area was not observed. The streets were clean and all implemented BMPs appeared to be maintained well. A large area of fill-soil was observed off the northeast end of Covered Wagon Drive, but no issues were observed at the time of their visit. An inspection of this site was conducted by the Iowa DNR in June of 2017. A discharge off site was not observed at the time of that inspection, but the storm water pollution prevention plan needed to be signed and updated and inspections needed to be improved. City inspection records were requested and proof of individual lot inspections was provided. However, a quarterly inspection of the other, non-lot areas (common areas, fill areas, streets, etc.)was not provided. At this time it is unclear if a quarterly inspection is being conducted by the City on all non-lot areas that have been disturbed under the City's CSR and/or Iowa DNR GP2 for Sandhill Estates. Post construction storm water management field review Project#1 Location Hunter's Park ev What type of storm water element is implemented-imperviousness, Storm Water ca co public infrastructure/drainage, open space, water body protection Retention, Prairie a 2 g• Natural Area '� "�-C N Last inspected? Unknown =in al r" m Last maintained? Fall 2017 cp Comments: u, This storm water retention area was turned over to the City in 2014 and natives were implemented in 2017. The City has been maintaining and cleaning it as needed. Trees and other brush had been cleared out and establishing seed took time as rains and wet weather would not allow the ideal conditions for seed to establish. The area is divided by a berm and has concrete structures that will retain water for an extended period and then allow a slow discharge. Rip rap checks are also in place. Overflows are built into the concrete structures. The low flow drain has caused some issues as it easily would get plugged and cause more severe overflows to the surface. Leaves can easily plug the drain path and needed to be removed again at the time of our visit. Informational/educational signs were posted around the area. MS4 Compliance Inspection Page 7 Maintenance/Housekeeping field review Project#1 Project#2 I Project#3 Location (city shops/materials storage Iiaw l e Transit and Parks Streets/Engineering parks/recreation chemical storage, catch t Equipment What type of BMP installed? Drain Indoor Drain 201$11AtR 26 Ptd 12' 45 protection/Spill kits storage/drain management/indoor management storage & washing Last inspected? CITY CLERK Feb 2017 Feb 2017 Feb 2017 t-0-WA CITY, i&WA Comments: Ben Clark and I visited the fueling station off of McCollister Avenue. This area is managed by Transit and Equipment. The fueling station is covered, on a concrete pad, equipped with two spill kits, and has an emergency shut off button. The concrete pad does not have the capability to contain spills and there is no curb or depression area prior to reaching vegetation. Mr. Clark expressed possibly implementing a drain swale and/or a containment BMP. The main Transit and Equipment site is located at 1200 South Riverside Drive. We met Dan Striegel, Equipment Superintendent, on site and we discussed the status of the site and the inspections that are conducted. Snow from downtown Iowa City is brought to the southern end of this site to melt. The area is swept when the snow melts and the sweepings are landfilled. Asphalt millings are stored in the same general area. Some other facility equipment and containers were observed stored outside as well. Transit vehicles are also stored in this area, but are reportedly drained of all fluids and left for recycling/scrap. The truck wash is contained under roof and drains to sanitary. Used oil is collected in a barrel on the east side of the building and only minor staining was observed around the hose. No exterior secondary containment was observed. The large funnel apparatus on the top of the barrel appeared to be open and could collect storm water or allow storm water to mix with the oil. The nearby parking lot drains are covered when the oil is pumped out. All vehicle maintenance is conducted under roof and the interior drains are directed to sanitary. Providing containment for the snow melt area and asphalt millings is recommended. Labeling all containers for their current use is also recommended. Placing a roof and/or secondary containment around the used oil container is strongly encouraged. Bert Noll and Julie Tallman reviewed the Parks Department Facility and the Streets /Engineering Facility. The Parks Department is located at 2275 South Gilbert Drive and is operated by Joe Wagner, Senior Maintenance Worker. He oversees the implementation of the Pesticide and Fertilizer Management Plan. More precise fertilizer application has been implemented through the use of soil testing. Pesticide application has been reduced as well which allows less product to be stored on site. A climate controlled trailer houses the pesticide and fertilizers that are utilized. He indicated that the exterior fueling station was removed and all other (small volume) fuel is stored under roof. Equipment is also stored under roof and the interior drains reportedly drain to the sanitary sewer. Spill kits are located inside. The Streets Facility is located 3800 Napoleon Drive. Brock Holub was contacted on site and he provided specific site information. Salt is stored under roof, but the sand-salt mix is stored outdoors. It is located on a concrete pad with containment and the drain that collects any runoff can be manipulated to drain to the sanitary sewer during the months this mix is stored outdoors. It can be switched to the storm sewer once the sand/salt mix is removed and the area is cleaned. Other equipment and material are stored under roof and no maintenance takes place here. A truck wash station is located on the west side. It is lined with concrete walls and the drains are directed to sanitary. A portion of the wash water appeared to travel south and reach a separate drain, but it was not known if that drain is connected to the sanitary sewer. Providing more effective containment and/or determining the drain connection around the wash area is recommended. A storage area for rock. concrete, bricks, and asphalt milling was observed south of McCollister Blvd, west of the Iowa River. This area was fenced off and the entrance and access avenues within this fill/storage area were rocked. Specific erosion and sediment controls were not observed. Adding this area to the facility inspection list is encouraged. Sediment control management practices need to be implemented to minimize discharges of any site material. If this area is intended to be filled in any manner, a flood plain permit would need to be obtained, if not already. Contact the Flood Plain Technical Assistance Hotline (866-849-0321) for further assistance. Ben Clark and I also discussed the Iowa City Airport, located at 1801 South Riverside Drive. This facility appears to be independently operated, but the City of Iowa needs to determine affiliation to see who has oversight of facility management. A storm water permit (GP1 - General Permit #1 for Industrial Activity) is effective for the facility through 9/30/18. The City of Iowa City is listed as the permit holder. Any other City-owned facility that has an active GP1 (or that may need a GP1) may need to be reviewed for MS4 compliance and inspected accordingly. MS4 Compliance Inspection Page 8 Agget • rr ;� d, ., 'x r ,.. # a + ,,. _,,,, ia�• - ;�{ _.. '-.a .. 1, r:.. • f i _ ,a, ' 1.Outlet/overflow needs cleaned at Hunter's Park detention area. 2. Silt fence and temp.stabilization need addressed at West Side Subdivision. 1-1 I 411.ilfw _ A`R. Y .m, Ia + er4 ' a anuaw�a ��' t I annum F.'.r rrr,o�ua • Y MU.- �� .' 'i,11^111;`"*.'' '' • ,_ y��i.; 71 gf: �4Y �� 3. 4 y \/. .' :kt .. } - ':?- `1,. r iN-,- . r ` '' , ,, ,' y -T . d r ip _ ' 3.Exit area at West Side Subdivision needs additional controls 4. Secondary containment and/or roof recommended for used oil at Equip.facility. • - .tea>. )183-10 A113 i.,,*t Y;,, ., 5h :Z11.1d 9Z SVW 131_01 - - ,. _- diliAl I ‘k . _ .r..„,..,..iv..-.._ J'j'.. Jir- , - k...•• 5 Wash water entering a(storm water?)drain at Streets. 6.Controls recommended around snow melt pile at Equipment facility. o3-29-18 k I P 8 tiI_, .® CITY OF IOWA CITY assay MEMORANDUM Date: March 29, 2018 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Ben Clark, PE, Senior Civil Engineer Re: Iowa Department of Natural Resources NPDES MS4 Compliance Inspection Introduction: The Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) recently conducted a compliance inspection of the City's National Pollutant Discharge Eliminate System (NPDES) permit for the discharge of storm water from the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) to the waters of the State of Iowa. The results of the inspection can be found in the attached letter and report. History/Background: The permit requires the implementation of six Best Management Practices to reduce storm water runoff pollution: Public Education/Outreach; Public Involvement/Participation; Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination; Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control; Post- Construction Storm Water Management; and Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping. These are collectively known as the MS4 program. The scope of the inspection included a desktop review of the MS4 program, on-site visits to City facilities, and visits to active construction sites. The report noted four (4) non-compliant issues and made several recommendations based on the review and site visits. Discussion of Solutions: The four(4) non-compliant issues and discussion of solutions are as follows: Failure to specifically target new residents and businesses with MS4 program information. Staff currently targets all residents, new and existing, through informational water bill flyers, the City's website and social media. Staff is currently working on a means to identify and distribute information to new residents and businesses. Failure to report all illicit discharges to the IDNR. This was the result of a misinterpretation of the permit. Staff has typically used discretion in notifying and/or or requesting assistance with illicit discharges depending on the severity of the case, where minor cases were addressed locally and the IDNR was not notified. The IDNR will now be notified of all illicit discharges. Failure to review weekly inspection reports at the time of quarterly inspections. The specific language for this requirement is not included in the permit. However, staff will now review weekly inspection reports at the time of quarterly inspections. Failure to submit the annual report by April 30th. The past two reports were completed but not received by the deadline. Staff intends to deliver paper copies to the IDNR one week in advance of the April 30th deadline. Staff does not foresee any issues addressing the non-compliant issues and looks forward to implementing the recommendations to strengthen the MS4 program. March 29, 2018 Page 2 Financial Impact: None Recommendation: Implementation of the steps outlined in this memo. 03-29-15 IP9 Kellie Fruehling From: Crissy Canganelli <crissy@shelterhouseiowa.org> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 8:35 AM To: Council Cc: Geoff Fruin Subject: Please join us at our Groundbreaking Celebration for Cross Park Place on April 5th 4ON Cross Park pl A HOUSING F RST PROM= ace Dear Friends: Please join us for a Groundbreaking Celebration for Cross Park Place—a Housing First Project of Shelter House. When: April 5th, 4:30 p.m. Where: 820 Cross Park Avenue, Iowa City Parking: Off-street parking is available at Good News Bible Church (845 Pepperwood Lane) Cross Park Place is a demonstration project for the state of Iowa.The building will be comprised of 24 one-bedroom apartments with on-site offices and an exam room for case managers and partnering health and behavioral health clinicians. Housing opportunities will be made available through a Housing First approach—a permanent housing intervention proven to save both money and lives—and will be targeted for the chronically homeless of our community demonstrating high cross-system service utilization. Many thanks to both our public and private partners whose collaboration and ownership have made our vision a reality: Abbe Health, City of Iowa City, HBK Engineering, Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, Iowa City Housing Authority, Iowa City Police Department, Iowa Finance Authority,Johnson County and Johnson County Jail Alternatives, Mercy Hospital, MODUS Engineering, Neumann Monson Architects, Prelude Behavioral Services, SouthGate Companies, The Housing Fellowship, United Action for Youth, and the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics. Crissy Canganelli Executive Director, Shelter House office: 319.338.5416 ext. 200 cell: 319.530.8706 fax: 319.358.7132 Shelter House More than•root and a Wed 1 I ri IP10 �=.:.®prat -.. ow au i WI CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City. Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.lcgov.org March 16, 2018 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Cashier — Parking Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Cashier— Parking. David Sterling IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION • c.7 -,,-4Q".}L-tre-----' W . Lyra . Dickerson, Chair G m --I �7 -77 c,-< -s r m co Jim Dickerson, PGA Golf 319-351-0596 p 1 03-29.18 IP11 I CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington 51rcrt Iowa Citi', Iowa 52240-1826 (3191 356-5000 (3191 356-5009 FAX ‘rtan.rcgov.org March 26, 2018 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination —Maintenance Worker I— Parking Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Maintenance Worker —Parking. Brenner Gibson IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION LyraWV. Dickerson, Chair N o CO `-- r' C')-G N --11C) co e rn • C./l cn O 39-18 IP12 MINUTES PRELIMINARY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 14, 2018 —5:15 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Gene Chrischilles, Ryan Hall, Bryce Parker, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: Connie Goeb STAFF PRESENT: Susan Dulek, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas McInerney, Mike Oliveira, Bob Carlson, Dan Rohwer CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. ROLL CALL: A brief opening statement was read by Chrischilles outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures that would be followed the meeting. CONSIDER THE JANUARY 10, 2018 MINUTES: Parker moved to approve the minutes of January 10, 2018, with edits. Hall seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC18-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by Thomas McInerney for a special exception to allow a drive- through restaurant in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone located at 51 S. Riverside Drive (Gateway Plaza). Walz began the staff report with an aerial view of the zoning of surrounding properties, focusing on the Gateway Plaza property at the intersection of Riverside Drive and Highway 1. The subject site is surrounded by CC-2 zoning; across Riverside Drive there is a public zone where the transit facility is located. Properties to the north will eventually be part of the Riverfront Crossings Zone but that designation will not extend south of Highway 1 or west of Orchard Street. Walz noted there are two access points and both set well back several hundred feet from the major intersection of Riverside Drive and Highway 1. The shopping center is served by a frontage road, and new curb cuts for the proposed us will be created from the frontage road. Walz stated the applicant submitted a concept plan to show how they may install required improvements for the parking area. She noted that while it was not a final plan, it showed generally how the parking area for the larger shopping buildings, which is currently non- conforming, define the parking aisles and to better direct vehicle traffic across the larger shopping center parking lot with endcaps (end islands) and required shade trees, etc. The Board of Adjustment February 14, 2018 Page 2 of 10 expansion of the shopping center with additional space of the restaurant requires that the parking area come closer to conformance with current code standards. Walz next reviewed the specific criteria beginning with access and circulation. Wherever possible or practical the code encourages drive-through lanes to be accessed from secondary streets, alleys, or shared cross access drives. The property has access from Highway 1 West and South Riverside Drive via a frontage road, which is part of the public Highway right-of-way. The frontage road provides circulation around the large shared parking area that serves the Gateway Plaza shopping center as well as adjacent properties to the west and south. The next standard is to provide for safe pedestrian movement, the number and width of curb cuts serving the use may be limited. Walz said the two primary access points from the two primary arterial streets would feed into the frontage road and the only new curb cuts would be from the frontage road. She noted, this is an area of the community that is not pedestrian friendly, however, over time the City is making improvements beginning with the Highway 1 multi-use trail that runs along the north side of Highway 1. There are plans to extend a similar trail south along the east side of Riverside Drive, and over time as improvements are made sidewalks will be added along other frontages. The curb cuts that are proposed with this application do not preclude future sidewalks being installed along the highway or within the frontage road setback. Walz stated that one of the improvements to the site is the narrowing of the curb cut to the west of the drive-through. This will help to slow traffic as it enters the site. With regard to the number of stacking spaces, right now there is adequate space for six cars to stack between the service window (which faces out towards Highway 1) and the entry to the drive-through. Additional cars could stack along the private parking aisles before reaching the frontage road. Walz noted that coffee service drive-throughs generate the highest peak hour demand in terms of queuing, so it is important to have adequate stacking space. However, peak hours are generally limited to the early morning when most businesses in the shopping center are not open to the public. She reviewed the on-site signage and pavement markings shown in the site plan to indicate direction of vehicular travel, pedestrian crossings, stop signs, no entrance areas, and other controls to ensure safe vehicular and pedestrian movement. Directional arrows and other pavement markings are provided including a stop bar and "do not enter" marking at the exit of the drive-through. She reviewed a criterion for drive-through lanes and service windows to be located on a nonstreet-facing facade, unless the applicant can demonstrate that a street- facing location is preferable for the overall safety and efficiency of the site, does not conflict with adjacent uses, or pedestrian access. Walz noted that within the context of the larger shopping center and its parking area, the location of the drive allows it to be fully separated from parking aisles and drives, thereby minimizing conflicts with other users of the site. Additionally the distance and the screening provided along the right of way will not disrupt pedestrian areas or future pedestrian areas, and staff feels this is a preferable location for the structure and the service windows. Staff recommended that 50% of required landscape screening be evergreen to provide a year round screen. She showed that reviewed the required setbacks and how those were satisfied. Walz noted that in this proposal there is only one drive-through lane. The streetscape is in a major throughway in the City and doesn't have the sore pedestrian friendly streetscape that is in other areas. Overall with the construction of the restaurant and drive-through there will actually Board of Adjustment February 14, 2018 Page 3 of 10 be less paved area in the shopping center than there is currently. The applicant has proposed a single drive-through lane with one order board and service window, however if in the future they propose to add additional order boards there is adequate space in the area. She noted that all of the lightening will be reviewed as part of the permitting process and will have to meet City standards for being downcast, etc. With regards to loudspeakers or intercoms they must be located and directed to minimize disturbance to adjacent uses, since this area is not adjacent to a residential zone and the location is already a busy intersection noise shouldn't be an issue. Walz did not review all the general standards, they are listed in the staff report, and stated that they draw from the specific standards especially with regards to making the site safer (again with narrowing the drive) and provided separation between the parking rows and between the drive-through lane and other vehicular use areas. Staff recommends approval of EXC18-00001, a special exception to allow a drive-through facility for an eating establishment in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone, at 51 South Riverside Drive, subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with site plan submitted with the following additional changes: o Along the north and east frontages, required S2 landscape screen must include 50% evergreen species. Chrischilles asked about one of the curb cuts and if there would be any advantage to making that curb cut an exit only. Walz said it appropriate for the curb cut to be two-way to allows people who are coming to the restaurant to bypass the rest of the shopping center parking area. She noted there is ample room for cars to stack without blocking the public right-of-way or frontage road. Parker asked about the site plan and that it currently is not planned for pedestrian traffic. Walz confirmed that there are currently no sidewalks along either right-of-way and that sidewalks are constructed it will be the responsibility of the DOT and City (not the property owner). Sidewalk construction is a future goal but would not happen until the intersection at Riverside and Highway 1 is re-reconstructed. This will create curb ramps and pedestrian signals. Chrischilles opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to come forward. Thomas McInerney (1208 Marcy Street) noted that the shopping center and parking layout have been the same since its construction in 1965 and one of the major issues with adding sidewalks is that the Eagles Club building actually extends onto the State owned right-of-way. He added that this proposal will reduce the amount of pavement and add additional green space to assist with the stormwater runoff. Parker asked if there was any stormwater detention or retention located on the property. McInerney said since the construction of the buildings and parking lot 50 years ago it drains directly into the river, and because they are building the new structure on an existing parking lot they are not required to meet the current retention standards per Code. They feel however by adding more green space they will be able to slow down the water runoff and offer more opportunity for infiltration. Chrischilles closed the public hearing. Weitzel stated he is satisfied that the general and specific criteria are met. Board of Adjustment February 14,2018 Page 4 of 10 Parker asked what the requirements for stormwater retention were. Walz stated that the applicant is correct, being that they are not subdividing this lot or changing it in any way it is not required to come into compliance with what is now the current standards. If the property were subdivided that may trigger compliance. Walz noted that with the construction of the restaurant site they are actually reducing the amount of pavement and bringing the larger parking area closer to compliance with the parking design standards also reduces the amount of paving. Adding more green space will also slow water runoff and provide some opportunity for filtration. Parker asked if there could be any additions to this proposal that would include a pedestrian walkway, knowing that some improvements are on the horizon. Walz said there is adequate space for sidewalks to be built directly along the highway as well as along the frontage street. Both those options are on DOT property and those improvements should be made when the intersection is reconstructed to better ensure the safety of folks crossing the highway. However, if the Board wanted to improve the pedestrian situation within the shopping center, a pedestrian route from the shopping center to the restaurant may be appropriate. Hall agreed that there will be pedestrian traffic from the shopping center to the coffee shop so having a designated pedestrian route would be beneficial. Walz said the Board could add that as a condition to the special exception. Parker asked if the Board could add a condition regarding stormwater improvements in the parking lot. Walz said there would need to be a rational nexus between the stormwater and drive-through, which is the focus of this special exception. The site improvements are actually reducing the amount of hardscape and so it would be difficult to argue that the restaurant was having a negative impact on drainage. Chrischilles noted he is of the opinion that everything looks fine. Weitzel moved to approve EXC18-00001, a special exception to allow a drive-through facility for an eating establishment in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone, at 51 South Riverside Drive, subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with site plan submitted with the following additional changes: o Along the north and east frontages, required S2 landscape screen must include 50% evergreen species. o A dedicated pedestrian route should established between the restaurant and the shopping center as part of the parking area improvements. Parker seconded the motion. Weitzel stated that regarding agenda item EXC18-00001 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report of February 14, 2018, and conclude the general and specific criteria are satisfied. With regards to specific standard 14-4C-2K point 2 in the staff report, to provide for safe pedestrian movement, because this property will be a draw to pedestrians from the shopping area we should require a safe pedestrian route. Unless amended or opposed by another Board member, he recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report as our findings with acceptance of this proposal. A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0. Board of Adjustment February 14,2018 Page 5 of 10 Chrischilles stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC18-00002: Discussion of an application submitted by Prestige Properties LLC for a special exception for reductions in the principal building setback requirements for property located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone located at 408 S. Gilbert Street. • Walz showed the location map, explaining the surrounding zoning, which is RM-44 to the east, south and north sides. On the west side of the street, the property was formerly part of the Central Business Support Zone and now is part into the Riverfront Crossings-Gilbert Street Subdistrict. Much of the area, although not all, is mixed-use so it allows for the commercial on the ground floor and residential uses above. The CC-2 zone is intended for uses that draw from across the community, located along major thoroughfares and typically requires and generates lots of parking demand. Walz noted that the buildings to the west that are part of the Riverfront Crossings Zone front directly onto the sidewalk, with no setback, creating an urban zone. Eventually if the residential zones surrounding the area redevelop they too would be redeveloped with more of an urban, pedestrian orientation. The building in this application has a long history, and the building and property are is rather unusual shape and orientation to the street. Walz stated that with regards to setback standards the City needs to look at what the intents of the setback standards are. They are to maintain light, air and separation for fire protection and access for firefighting equipment. It is also to provide opportunities for privacy between buildings, to reflect the general building scale and placement of structures in the neighborhood, to promote a reasonable physical relationship between buildings and residences, and to provide flexibility inside the building so it is compatible with other buildings in the vicinity. In this situation one side of the building faces Ralston Creek so setbacks won't apply, on the north side they are proposing to build to 3 feet from the adjacent property line. On the west side of the property they are asking to reduce the setback from 10 feet to 1'10", which is similar to what is in the Riverfront Crossings Zone across Gilbert Street. In staffs view the request is not out of character for the area or out of intent for what the setback standards are intended to do. The next standard talks about any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to the extent practical. Walz explained that it is an unusual use in this building, and the site is in some ways actually unique for that use as it is a use that requires a lot of square footage for maintaining all their paper records onsite at all times, they are also acquiring new freezers for storage, what they are proposing is to expand the existing building by building a steel support structure that is independent of what the building is now and that is why they are seeking to encroach into the setback. Currently the entrance to the building is off the parking area but they will reorient the building so the main entrance will be off the sidewalk facing Gilbert Street, which is what the City requires in the Riverfront Crossings Zone and Downtown Zones. Walz showed images of the proposed building changes. Walz stated that a 10-foot setback is typically required between parking areas and the sidewalk, with S2 (low) landscape screening to separate and screen vehicle areas from pedestrian areas. Currently, portions of the parking area are separated from the public sidewalk with a metal fence (non-solid). Staff recommends that where the minimum parking area set back cannot be met, Board of Adjustment February 14,2018 Page 6 of 10 the applicant should provide a low masonry wall 2 1/2 -3 feet in height with addition to shrubs. Staff recommends approval of EXC18-00002, an application for a reduction in the principal building setbacks from 10 feet to 1'10"for the front (west), and from 5 feet to 3 feet for the side (north) for property located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 408 Gilbert Street subject to substantial compliance with the site plan submitted and the additional condition: • Parking areas shall be screened from Gilbert Street to the required S2 standard, with a low 2 -3 foot masonry wall with additional landscaping. Final plan to be approved by planning staff. Parker asked about the addition of the low masonry wall and what it is to achieve. Walz explained in the footnote on the bottom of page 5 of the staff report discusses what is required for S2 screening and one option is a low wall. It will accomplish two things: in places where there is an inadequate setback and screening a low wall will provide a screen from the view of the cars and headlights, and provide a physical barrier between vehicles and pedestrians. Chrischilles asked what kind of barrier would be on the north side. Walz said along the west face of the parking area (north side of the parking area) there are currently wire fences where a low wall would be placed, and then also another low wall along the other sides of the parking as well. The zoning code (S2 standards) allow the low walls may be broken periodically to allow for a tree or shrub to add greenery. Parker asked about a wall as opposed to using trees and shrubbery as screening due to the proximity to Ralston Creek and vegetation rather than masonry wall would help filter runoff water that will be going into Ralston Creek. Walz said that the Board should review the standards and can recommend whatever they deem appropriate to serve the purpose of the setback. Chrischilles asked about the parking requirements for this property. Walz said they meet the parking requirements for the use. Weitzel asked if the City had any responsibility to the Federal storage requirement for the record keeping. Walz said it is not the City's responsibility, it is the occupants responsibility. The applicant is adding flood-proofing to the building to better secure of the improvements. Walz added that this is a difficult site, it is not the most attractive building right now so the improvements to the building will make it more attractive. However the use does rely on foot traffic and does rely on being in a location that is close to campus. The business's demand for square footage may them from being closer to campus where square footage costs more. This odd lot could be used for many other things, some of which the City and public may not want (i.e. fast food). The investments to improve the building for the current occupant is providing a long-term solution allowing the use to stay in the location. While it is a private use, it does provide a sort of public good as it is used for donations for public health benefit. Chrischilles opened the public hearing. Mike Oliveira (General Manager, Prestige Prosperities) thanked Walz for her help with this application and preparing materials for the Board. He said the manager from the local Bio-Test Plasma Center is also here tonight and can answer questions as well. Bio-Test has been at this location for eight years, Oliveira purchased the building about nine years ago, and then previous Board of Adjustment February 14, 2018 Page 7 of 10 tenant moved their operations to Coralville. When Bio-Test was brought on board Oliveira said they did renovate the building to Bio-Test's specifications and the center today employs about 45 full-time people. There is high traffic at the center and a lot is pedestrian traffic. The Bio- Test Corporation came to Oliveira to find a solution to an issue they were having with their freezers, at one time when there was a government plasma shipping ban the freezer became overloaded. In order to fix that freezer, they will need to add another freezer in the center that is operated in parallel. The freezers cost just under$1 million apiece and there are currently two in the facility. It is a big investment for Bio-Test to add another freezer in order to stay in this location. Bob Carlson (CDT Architects) explained as the building is set up now the lower level is where the donation area is and also the processing area with the freezers. Since the government requires them to keep all paper records onsite they will run out of current space. The lower level of the building is also one inch below the City defined flood level, so there needs to something done to protect from that. What they felt was best from an architectural standpoint was to clear everything out of the lower level and move it all to a third floor that will be the same footprint as the rest of the building. They would then pour a new basement floor to get it above the flood level so it could be used as one large storage area for their record storage needs. They will also add an elevator that would serve all three levels, and additional exit for fire safety. When constructing the third floor they can then keep all operations of the center up and running during construction. The building was originally built when Iowa City had a cable car system in the early 1900's and this building was where repair of cable cars was done, and that is why the building is of such a unique shape. Carlson shared the construction materials they will use and options for finishing. Dan Rohwer (Bio-Test Plasma Center Manager) said they do approximately 46,000 procedures per year at their center. Last year they paid over$3 million in wages and donor fees. With the addition of the elevator it will help with donor health and safety. Also because of the strict regulations they have on record storage (they need to keep records for 40 years, but after 2 years can be moved offsite) so they really do need more storage. Oliveira reiterated the plans that Carlson shared with regards to flood prevention planning and the uniqueness of the building. He reiterated that this use was a benefit to the neighborhood and use had a high traffic count. Carlson spoke regarding adding shrubbery, noting that years ago there was a line of shrubs along the sidewalk there up to the creek and a series of sexual assaults had occurred in that exact area by the bridge, so the shrubs were removed at the request of the police. He would not want to see anything placed there that someone could hide behind and harm others. Chrischilles closed the public hearing. Weitzel doesn't see any problems with this application and feels it meets the criteria and doesn't feel there are any other requirements to add. Parker also doesn't have any further requirements to add. As a side note, he suggested perhaps Oliveira could consider adding a plaque to the building to discuss the history of the building. Hall is fine with requiring the masonry wall and not having just plants. Board of Adjustment February 14,2018 Page 8 of 10 Chrischilles feels everything is in order. Parker moved to approve EXC18-00002, an application for a reduction in the principal building setbacks from 10 feet to 1'10"for the front (west), and from 5 feet to 3 feet for the side (north) for property located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 408 Gilbert Street subject to substantial compliance with the site plan submitted and the additional condition: • Parking areas shall be screened from Gilbert Street to the required S2 standard, with a low 2 -3 foot masonry wall with additional landscaping. Final plan to be approved by planning staff. Seconded by Hall. Parker stated that regarding agenda item EXC18-00002 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report of February 14, 2018, and conclude the general and specific criteria are satisfied. Unless amended or opposed by another Board member, he recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report as our findings with acceptance of this proposal. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0. Chrischilles stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office. BOARD DISCUSSION: Walz handed out the annual City survey for current Commission and Board members to gather information on representation. Parker requested information on the City's Stormwater Management requriement and Walz said she would provide that information from the code. ADJOURNMENT: Hall moved to adjourn the meeting. Parker seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENDANCE RECORD 2017-2018 NAME TERM EXP. 1/11 4/12 5/10 6/14 7/12 10/11 12/11 1/10 2/14 CHRISCHILLES,T. GENE 1/1/2019 X X X X X X X X X GOEB, CONNIE 1/1/2020 X X X X O/E X X X X HALL, RYAN 1/1/2023 -- -- -- — -- -- -- — X PARKER, BRYCE 1/1/2022 X O/E X X O/E X X X X SOGLIN, BECKY 1/1/2018 X X X X X X X -- -- WEITZEL,TIM 1/1/2021 X X X X X X X X X KEY: X=Present O=Absent O/E=Absent/Excused —=Not a Member 03-29-18 IP13 MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBUARY 15, 2018—7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING • E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Mark Signs MEMBERS ABSENT: Max Parsons, Jodie Theobald STAFF PRESENT: Wendy Ford, Sara Hektoen, Karen Howard, Stan Laverman, Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: John Yapp, Kevin Digmann, Nick Psihayos RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ18-0006/SUB18-0001, an application submitted by Allen Homes, Inc. for a rezoning and Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Lindeman Subdivision Part Eight, a 39-lot, 20.24-acre residential subdivision located in the OPD-5/OPD-8 zone located South of Lower West Branch Road and North of Anna Street. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of the amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, and Chapter 17-5, Housing Code. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends to forward a written recommendation to the City Council stating that the Foster Road Urban Renewal Plan conforms to the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, and conforms with the general plan for the development of the City of Iowa City. CALL TO ORDER: Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. DEVELOPMENT ITEM/REZONING ITEM (REZ18-00006/SUB18-00001): Discussion of an application submitted by Allen Homes, Inc. for a rezoning, Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Lindeman Subdivision Part Eight, a 39-lot, 20.24-acre residential subdivision with 36 single family lots and 41 townhouse style multifamily dwellings located in the OPD- 5/OPD-8 zone located South of Lower West Branch Road and North of Anna Street. Miklo showed an aerial of the area. This area was annexed into the City in 2001 and zoned RS- 5 (Low Density Single Family Residential) and RS-8 (Medium Density Single Family Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 2 of 21 Residential). In 2002 in was rezoned and a preliminary plat was approved for the Lindemann Subdivision, the rezoning was to Planned Development Overlay (OPD) to address the sensitive areas on the property which included wetlands and a stream corridor. At that time this portion of the property was platted as an outlot for future development and although it has the Planned Development Overlay designation there wasn't a specific plan approved or plat approved for this portion of the property. Miklo said that the current application is to amend the zoning to approve a specific Planned Development Overlay Plan and also to approve the preliminary plat for the property. Miklo stated that the western part of the property zoned RS-5 would contain single family lots, the center of the property that contains the stream corridor and associated wetlands, is partially zoned OPD-5 and partially zoned OPD-8 and would be dedicated to the City for park land and wetland preservation. The eastern portion zoned RS-8 and has the OPD over it will contain several single family lots plus townhouses that would be clustered in the northeast area. That will be due to transferring some of the areas from the sensitive areas over to this area. Miklo noted that the staff report reviews all the conditions and criteria to be reviewed for Planned Development Overlay and staff finds that this application meets those conditions and criteria. Miklo reiterated that the sensitive areas are being set aside into an outlot, there is a buffer reduction requested along the west side where normally a 100 foot buffer would be required, but they are asking in places for the buffer to be reduced down to 25 feet but would be 100 feet in other areas. Miklo explained that in this area the wetland was previously disturbed for the extension of a sewer line through the area and this portion does meet the test for wetland buffer reduction. Stormwater management is provided through a regional management system in Scott Park, however they will be installing storm sewer and directing the storm sewer towards the creek or existing storm sewer systems in the adjacent streets. Miklo stated there are infrastructure fees associated with this application including a watermain extension fee, a sanitary sewer tap-on fee, and fees towards the improvements to Lower West Branch Road. Staff did receive a revised plat for this application this week and all the technical questions identified by the City Engineers have been satisfied. Staff recommends approval of REZ18- 0006/SUB18-0001, an application submitted by Allen Homes, Inc. for a rezoning and Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Lindeman Subdivision Part Eight, a 39-lot, 20.24-acre residential subdivision located in the OPD-5/OPD-8 zone located South of Lower West Branch Road and North of Anna Street. Freerks asked about the 3.5 acres of private common open space. Miklo noted that is a mistake, the 3.5 acres is the entire lot and the private open space is just the center which is roughly half an acre. Freerks questioned if there were any steep or critical slopes in this area. Miklo replied that there are no regulated slopes that require review. Hensch asked about the buffer in the wetlands area. Miklo stated that the ordinance requires a 100 foot buffer from any jurisdictional wetland, but if the wetland is not associated with endangered species, unique wetland plants, doesn't contain water for long periods throughout Planning andZoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 3 of 21 the year, and is not associated with the stream corridor then the applicant can seek a buffer reduction. Miklo noted that the eastern part of this wetland is associated with the stream corridor and will contain the full buffer but the western portion where they are seeking the reduction is outside the stream corridor. Therefore the City is allowed to reduce the buffer down to 25 feet, however the Commission can choose to require the full buffer. Staff felt it was a reasonable request given the wetland has already been modified for the sanitary sewer installation. Hensch asked if the Commission doesn't approve the reduction, how the plan would be altered. Miklo said if the reduction was not granted the cul-de-sac would have to be pulled back further west so there would be fewer lots. Dyer pointed out there are two cul-de-sacs in this plan and it seems like an awfully long drive to get to the one on the west. Miklo said they had looked at that and the other option was to go through the wetland to connect the cul-de-sac or continue north to Lower West Branch Road and Staff felt it is more important in this situation to protect the wetlands than to connect the streets. He added it is less than 900 feet which is the City maximum for cul-de-sac length. If there weren't already other lots established in the area there may have been other options. Freerks asked how the wetlands buffer preservation will happen when on private lots. Miklo said those will be placed into a conservation easement. Freerks opened the public discussion. John Yapp (Allen Homes, Inc.) stated the plan includes single-family and townhouse properties, and the single family lots will be slightly smaller than lots to the south as they are a bit narrower but is balanced by the large amount of open space in the development. There will be a little over five acres donated to the City and little over half an acre in the courtyard of the townhouse lot. The overall density is a little over four units per acre. Yapp noted they held a neighborhood meeting a couple weeks ago, some of the concerns of the neighbors were what the townhouses would look like. Another concern was the lot sizes on the Lindemann cul-de-sac so they adjusted their plans and made two of the lots slightly bigger(lots 7 & 8). Yapp stated they are including the trail that will extend to Lower West Branch Road and complete the trail system from Lower West Branch Road to Court Street. As Miklo noted they are requesting a reduction in the wetland buffer along the west side of the wetlands which is in an area previously disturbed by the sewer line and in an area where the trail will be. He added that it is not disturbing the wetland, just reducing the buffer. Yapp noted that this area was previously farm wetland and does not contain the types of plants or wildlife that would disallow reducing the buffer. Yapp stated they do have interconnected streets except for as noted the two cul-de-sacs and that was to avoid crossing the creek and disturbing the wetland. Anna Drive, the street just to the south, does provide a bridge over the creek. Yapp stated that MMS Consultants did produce a water pressure study to show the water pressure is adequate for this development (which was another concern raised at the neighborhood meeting). Another concern from the neighbors was the lack of Century Link service on the north end of Lindemann Drive specifically. Yapp and Jesse Allen met with a representative from Century Link yesterday to discuss this project and the existing areas to the south and will work with them to bring fiber to the neighborhood. Century Link is very reluctant to install copper or phone line because the number of customers that use that is dropping off, but they are willing to invest in fiber. Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 4 of 21 Yapp next showed images of the townhouse styles they are proposing. They feel they will have variation in the townhomes both vertically and horizontally with the roof lines, stoops, how far back the front doors are, sizes of the townhouses, and changes in colors. He showed an example of the courtyard in the middle of the property. There is also variety in the backs of the units, some have decks over the garages with patio doors that go into the units, some will be smaller and instead of a deck there is a three-season room next to the garage. Dyer asked in the courtyard if there would be any amenities. Yapp replied they will include a gazebo and seating and grilling areas and have submitted a concept plan with those amenities. Hensch asked about the wetland buffer and if the wetland area buffer could be larger if those adjoining lots were decreased a bit. Yapp replied it is a balancing act in trying to meet City Code, goals of the Comprehensive Plan and also trying to meet approval of neighbors. In this case a couple of the lots were smaller and several neighbors requested the lot size be increased to be more consistent with others on the street. Signs asked if Scott Park water retention area flooded over Scott Boulevard in the past. Miklo stated he doesn't believe Scott Boulevard ever flooded over, it has been full with water but has not gone over the street. Martin confirmed that she lived in the area in 2008 and it did not go over the street. Hensch asked if there has been water issues with the neighborhood to the south. Miklo is not aware of any issues. Freerks closed the public hearing. Signs moves to recommend approval of REZ18-0006/SUB18-0001, an application submitted by Allen Homes, Inc. for a rezoning and Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Lindeman Subdivision Part Eight, a 39-lot, 20.24-acre residential subdivision located in the OPD-5/OPD-8 zone located South of Lower West Branch Road and North of Anna Street. Martin seconded the motion. Hensch noted that it probably doesn't make a difference on this application but shared an overall concern of reducing wetlands buffers as it was also part of another recent application and the idea of the buffer is to slow down water and keep areas intact. He shared concerns about water quality, erosion and wet neighborhoods. Freerks agreed but was happy to see the exchange of land to the City in this proposal and that will help to protect the wetlands. Dyer added her concern about building on the narrowed buffer. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. REZONING ITEM (REZ18-00003): Discussion of an application submitted by Hodge Construction for a rezoning of approximately 1.1 acres from Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone to Riverfront Crossings - Central Crossings (RFC-CX) zone for property located at 225 & 225 IA E. Prentiss Street. Miklo began the staff report noting the location of the property as south of Prentiss Street and east of Ralston Creek, it is currently zoned Intensive Commercial which does not allow any Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 5 of 21 residential uses in that zone, so rezoning this property will increase the development potential and value of this property considerably. The area is within the Riverfront Crossings District and within the Central Crossings Subdistrict and that would apply if this is rezoned. The area to the north is the South Downtown Subdistrict of the Riverfront Crossings area which allows for larger buildings and higher density. The idea is density and scale of buildings will step down as we move to the south including this property. Miklo explained that the Form-Based Code has a series of standards to require that the buildings have a smaller scale and with step backs on the upper floors of the buildings, again to create more of a human scale as compared to the South Downtown District. Miklo said this particular property as noted is adjacent to Ralston Creek, which is identified in the Form-Based Code as a pedestrian street, or open space, both on the Plan and in the Code. Miklo stated that when they first received the Plan there was no indication where the floodway is and the floodway is the point at which the 30 foot setback is required and a pedestrian street will be within that area. Miklo said that he did receive a call from the applicant this morning indicating that the blue line on the proposal represents the floodway. The City does need verification of that and needs a drawing with elevation points on it so the City Engineers can verify the floodway. Miklo pointed out that the concept plan that is submitted with this application is just a concept plan and the Commission is not approving this particular plan and it is subject to change and if that blue line is the floodway then the concept plan would need to change because there is a 30 foot setback required from that floodway for the pedestrian street and the creek buffer. Staff is recommending approval of this realizing that there may be some changes in this Plan to adhere to the Form-Based Code requirements and the requirement for the pedestrian street and the setback. Staff is recommending approval be conditioned on improvement of the pedestrian street to the center line of the right-of-way, which may entail some work on the creek bank itself, the City Engineers would plan to meet with the applicant to determine the extent of those improvements. Freerks asked about the 30 feet noting that the property line doesn't encompass the creek or all of the sidewalk, that 30 feet buffer isn't necessarily from the property line its 30 feet from the floodway. Miklo confirmed that was correct. Freerks said that there are potentially lots of things that may change with this application and the concept is not very clear. There are a lot of unanswered questions at this point. They need to know where the flood plain lies so they can know how the building will lay out. Freerks is concerned because the concept drawing doesn't have a set back on the fourth floor, and a step back is required by the code. Freerks reviewed the Riverfront Crossings Plan and Code which require the step back. The Commission approved Whistler Place just in December on South Dubuque street and that developer included the step backs on the fourth level in their plan. Freerks stated that what she is seeing in the application doesn't really mesh with concepts and some of the needs the City has put forward, so she is interested in hearing a little more about it. Hensch asked Miklo to clarify the definition of floodway versus terms they regularly hear like 100 year flood plain or 500 year flood plain. Miklo explained that floodway is a channel by FEMA regulations cannot be built upon, a flood plain can be built upon if it meets certain conditions. Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 6 of 21 The floodway will carry floodwater, a flood plain will store floodwater. Hensch asked in the Riverfront Crossings area what are the goals for Ralston Creek and development along Ralston Creek. Miklo stated there is a section in the Staff Report to describe the goals. The goal is to improve Ralston Creek, to turn it into an amenity rather than current situation where a lot of buildings turn their back to the creek. The idea illustrated in the Plan is to have a small park here and that is why the Code requires a pedestrian street in this particular area. Freerks noted that this would be a huge increase in what the owner is able to do with this property so she expects compliance with the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan and Form Based Code. The applicants concept for amenities along the creek seem just like a slab of cement. Something better can be done along there. Freerks is making these points early because while they are not improving the concept plan, just the rezoning, this item will never come before the Commission again. Miklo stated that once the Commission would approve the zoning the placement and design of the buildings would be reviewed by the Form-Based Code Committee which is basically the Design Review Committee which is made up of staff. Freerks asserted she is uncomfortable with that sometimes, noting they have asked a lot more from other developers and it seems like they need to be consistent. Signs stated he agrees with Freerks in that they spent a lot of time talking about this district, and talking about the green spaces and look of the buildings and articulation and all those things. He would agree all he sees with this concept is a large block sitting on a piece of land. Freerks added they might not even get that because they don't know where the flood way is located and therefore where the building be located. These are issues she would like to see answered. Signs agrees, the pedestrian street as shown in the renderings here doesn't look terribly welcoming to him, there is a large concrete terrace deck shown on the east side facing the creek, a couple trees popped in there, it just doesn't feel like what he believes the goal of area is supposed to feel like. Dyer stated the building drawings make it looks like a prison, at least the part facing Prentiss Street. She added that it disturbs her that the Commission gets conceptual drawings which don't necessarily have anything to do with reality and then the Commission never sees what is approved, and the conceptual drawings don't meet their requirements. She noted if you compare the site plan to the image from the Riverfront Crossings District it is like an entirely different vision, and the Riverfront Crossings District Plan is what the Commission approved. In that example there is a curving sidewalk, a central stopping place. It bothers her that we would accept something far short of what the Master Plan shows. Freerks asked if there were any more questions for Staff. She acknowledged the applicant and told them they will get their chance to speak not to feel defeated, the Commission just wanted to lay out their concerns and go forward from there. Freerks opened the public discussion and asked the applicant to step forward, sign in and state their name. Kevin Dicamann (Hodge Construction) asked Miklo to show some photos of existing conditions at Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 7 of 21 this location. Miklo said he did not have those on the computer in this presentation. Freerks said she looked online and has been by there many times so knows what it looks like now. Digmann asked to walk the Commission through this project because they have built similar buildings on the corner to the west. He pointed to the building at the bottom of Dubuque Street, the bottom left one, it is an L shape, actually revers L shape, and that building exists today and if anyone has driven by it they have received a lot of positive comments on it. The building in the middle is the very building similar to this project, looks pretty similar, none of the buildings are exactly alike but they use a lot of similar materials and characteristics. Freerks asked if they have a setback on the fourth floor. Digmann said they do have a small one and when they met with Staff they got a variance on how deep the setback had to be because the problem is, you have to understand when you build a building it is efficient to do a corridor down the center, you get units on both sides. So all of a sudden when you say you have to set one side so far back, it totally blows the floor plans, it blows the costs go up so much more because the structural systems become so different, it is easy to say this is what you should do but in reality it is very difficult and very expensive to do. Digmann noted that in the first two buildings they talk about some changes in materials, they really stick out, if they look at the one picture you can see how on the top floor it really is a big change in materials without a setback, there actually is a setback but it's only a few feet not the ten feet the Code asks for, which is what they did in the second building. And then the third building on Dubuque Street he pointed out they are working with The Housing Fellowship to do an affordable housing piece there, they have applied for State tax credits, so all these buildings will have similar characteristics to what this is. If they have driven by they will notice the look of this building does look and feel a lot like what exists there today. Digmann stated the challenge with this site is the creek they can't really do underground parking, they are doing at-grade parking, so the first level for the most part along the creek and alley really is a parking area, they have tried on Prentiss Street to make a big statement for what the building looks like as you enter. As far as the buffer, although they haven't gotten the exact engineering documents, this was designed by the engineer who laid this out for the floodway with the 30 foot buffer, hence why the building is cocked at a little bit of an angle. They also wanted to keep it as close to that side as they can, so obviously there is a little bit of a buffer between the existing buildings that are going up on Dubuque Street. So they are trying to keep it as close to the 30 foot buffer so that you don't have one side with all kinds of space and another smack up against the alley looking at the other buildings. So they are thinking of the residents. Digmann noted with the patio area, they did met with staff and talked about this with the idea to try to create that pedestrian street and some activities and try to create it so it is a common amenity for all of the people there as far as being able to have this outdoor patio area with some steps that come down. Digmann pointed out they never know what the future of the creek will be, there is a railroad track, and he doesn't think there is any near-term plans to have any sort of underpass cut through that railroad track. Digmann said as far as the pedestrian street, traffic in this project will all be going to Prentiss Street, there is nothing going south on this project, and as he stands here today he doesn't think there ever will be but that can change. Digmann stated that they have to start somewhere, and it gets so expensive to draw concepts before even finding out if they can go to the next level. He talked with Miklo today and understands the challenges, and they talked about meeting down at the creek to figure out what they need to do along the creek to enhance it and make it better. Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 8 of 21 Digmann added as far as the building goes, it is there and he encourages all the Commission to go drive by and see what exists today. He noted because they have to raise the parking, it is really a three-story building and then the parking. Digmann also pointed out if they go around the top corner of the parking garage that was just built in that area it is a four story building and has no setback at all on the fourth floor. He's not saying "they didn't have to do it, we shouldn't have to do it" they are trying to comply. He had Miklo show images of the concept and how they are trying to make the big statement on Prentiss Street because they are looking at it with no other context and other buildings around so you can see a lot more of the building than you will on the ground, but going down Prentiss Street you are going down a pretty steep driveway, there is actually a single-family home sitting on the right side of the alleyway which you don't see, and the building will angle back to the south as you go back. Looking at the images, the top floor does have some setback and a big change in materials and cornice around there to give it more of that impression. Freerks asked if Digmann's other buildings in Riverfront Crossings have a 10 foot setback. Digmann confirmed they do not, they had a conversation about reducing the setback due to the change in materials, and the perception that when you look at it, it is not that visible because of what surrounds it. Miklo clarified that the building on the corner does have a 10 foot setback. Digmann said it is a 10 foot setback on the north side of the building but not on the pedestrian street, Dubuque Street. Digmann added that on the other building, the center one, that is where they went five stories and put a setback on the fifth story which is not all the way to 10 feet. Digmann stressed that everyone has to understand that it's not about just not trying to do it, he would do it in a second, it's just how it changes the floor plans and how expensive it gets to build to do that. Dyer stated there is no guarantee that they can build what they want. The Code requires a 10 foot set back, there is no guarantee you can build something that doesn't have a 10 foot setback. She said other developers have figured out how to do it. Freerks added if they want the height you have to go by Code and she is puzzled by how two buildings have appeared now that don't meet Code and now being asked about a third one. Digmann didn't want to argue but then how did the City get one built right across the street with the parking ramp that has zero setback. Freerks asked if Miklo or Howard if they wanted to address that. Howard replied that the Sabin Townhomes are the liner building for the municipal parking garage there so those units are only 20 feet deep and if a 10 foot setback was done on a liner building like that the units would only be 10 feet deep. Freerks remembers talking about that. Howard noted there is a specific adjustment for liner buildings like that which allows that to occur. Also for that building it was allowed because it was hiding a parking structure which is not a particularly pleasant thing to see so the building was allowed to be as tall as the parking structure so it would hide the structure from visibility from the street. Digmann noted that is the same situation as they are getting into with their building. You have a corridor down the middle and two equal size units on each side for all floors until you get to the top floor and with a corridor down the middle on side also has to come in so far and basically are taking what might be a 20 foot unit and sizing it back 10 feet. And working with staff they understand there may be some situations where it may work, have change in materials, really make it stand out, and have some leeway on some of that stuff. Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 9 of 21 Freerks asked which staff he worked with on this design. Digmann said he worked with John Yapp and Doug Boothroy. Digmann also said they could have a long set of stairs coming out of second floor units but then it feels like that whole area is just for residents to have stairs down there, this way it becomes a common amenity for all the units. Freerks understands that but feels it is more what can be done with it to make it more desirable for people to want to spend time out there. She acknowledges that is more detailed oriented, for her the big thing is the setback, it is Code, it is what they ask other developers to do, and it seems unfair to her that some people are required to meet Code and other people are not for no good reason really. Freerks stated they did change some language in December but they tried to be very specific about that so if for some reason you absolutely couldn't meet the Code there was a good reason not just that it made it easier. She doesn't think that is what anyone here had in mind. Dyer added that the building could be designed quite differently and meet that requirement. Digmann doesn't disagree. He isn't here to debate this, he is just trying to move it forward that is a corner building where clearly from both angles you can kind of see the setback. He is saying for a building like this, to say every building has to be this way, there should always be cases where maybe it just doesn't make as much sense in one case as it does in another. Freerks commented that it seems to her that there are three out of four here where the case is being made that the setback is not needed on this block and she has concerns about it. The goal of Riverfront Crossings is to have smaller scale buildings in this district. Signs stated that was the concern, they keep seeing exceptions, exceptions, exceptions and a lot of time and effort, City resources and community input went into developing this district and the requirements in this district and they continually see request for exceptions and then pretty soon you have a block where three out of four of the buildings don't meet the Code and it gets very frustrating when they know what has gone into these Codes and it gets set aside. Digmann wanted to make the statement that the Commission is not here to approve the no setback, they are here to approve the zoning so they have to comply with the rules right. And then that will be up to City staff. Freerks interjected that then somebody in City staff has approved that twice to reduce the setback and she has concern about that. Digmann stated that the voice of that decision needs to go through City staff, he understands that the Commission does not like to see this but again he is not asking them to approve no setback, he is just asking them to rezone this property to what is in the Riverfront Crossings Code, in the map it says here is what we want to do, this is a start of what we want to do, we understand we have to subject to conditional zoning agreement which they will have to negotiate with the City. Freerks agreed but stated that they will get through the Commission but then get what they want from the City because whoever they are talking to is allowing this to happen. She doesn't know how this is happening but to her something is going on where they are continuing not even meeting the basic standards. Signs stated that while the Commission can't comment on the design, well we can comment on it, but to Digmann's point not decide on design. However Signs is more than happy to defer this application until the Commission gets more answer as to why the designs aren't being done correctly after they leave this desk. There does come a point where they just have to say it needs to stop and you may have just reached that point. Dyer noted that other developers are having to meet these requirements. Digmann stated he is not asking to do away with the setback. Freerks and Dyer interjected that yes he is. Digmann Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 10 of 21 pointed out this is a conceptual drawing, the application is for rezoning, and the Commission is not to approve the design. Freerks pointed out the with the Whistler project they did get a design and approved the rezoning with some great detail to the design, they actually talked about how many square foot of open space would be on the roof so there were things that were adhered to that. Digmann asked why they can't go on record tonight to say it is approved subject to the setback per the City Code. Martin said to back up just a little bit, she totally gets that they are here to do a rezoning however once Riverfront Crossings went through and they started getting applications historically they have set a precedent that they wanted to see more complete drawings, more substantial, not just concepts, that has been happening for the last couple of years. Freerks said that they are giving so much more by allowing this kind of upgrade to the zoning and so they have required that people show them more, it's not a typical South Johnson Street. Martin added that setback aside, they want to see more. Digmann understands and stated that when they send their plans in for design review, it's not a whole lot different than the concepts, it's not angled images, it's straight-on images, so what he is hearing is if he came back next month or whenever and that top floor was setback 10 feet we'd be fine. Freerks replied maybe or maybe not. She added that they've talked about amenities along the walkway so it is inviting. What they want to see is something that is of a higher caliber, it needs to be better than what you'd see normally, it is what they are expecting in the Riverfront Crossings. If you look through the Riverfront Crossings you can see all kinds of visuals that show the variations people use so there is something that is very different. Freerks added that the waterway is important, the flood area that is a key point to how the building is going to lay out on the lot and that will in turn play out in what kind of building you can build, how wide it can be. Digmann said that is what they have done, that is why the blue line is there. Freerks said they don't know for sure and that is why it needs to be checked by the engineers. Dyer said there is no engineering drawings, there is nothing to do with elevation of the land. Freerks stated they are not trying to pick on Digmann they just want some of the basics, he is not meeting what other developers are giving the Commission. Digmann stressed that his point is the Commission is saying there is a Riverfront Crossings Code out there that is to be followed. Freerks confirmed. Digmann said the Commission is also not happy that City staff is giving leeway on any of this. Freerks stated that is not what she said. Digmann stated that isn't it the City staff's job to enforce what is in the Code with the design. Freerks stated she will not debate that right now, it is a conversation they may have later in the meeting regarding what is occurring, it is an ongoing problem with minimums not being met, what she is asking of Digmann is interest in the flood area, more specifics on how the building is going to be laid out, and the fact that there is not the basic requirement for setback on the fourth floor. Hektoen added that the Commission does have the authority to impose conditions to satisfy public needs created by the rezoning, there is a lot of language in the Comprehensive Plan upon which you can formulate. Freerks added they can require many things if they want to. Hensch stated he actually thinks they are pretty close, the building at the corner of Prentiss Street and Dubuque Street is pretty great. Just stick with what the Riverfront Crossings is asking and the one paragraph in the staff report about Ralston Creek development, if the intent or spirit Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 11 of 21 of that is followed for that area in front of the creek he thinks they are really close. The point is perhaps that they are trying to draw the line about fewer exceptions. Digmann doesn't have a problem with that he feels that if it's in the book, and this is what the zone is, then it is, and then it's up to staff or whoever and he doesn't have to spend a lot of money, more money than he's already spent, to try to come in here to see if the Commission will approve something. Dyer explained that he knows what the rules are. Hensch concurred, the Code is there and this representation presented tonight doesn't reflect the Code. Dyer added that other developers invest a good deal more in their presentations to Planning and Zoning. Digmann apologized and noted he did meet with staff on this, although they were prior staff, and this was the feedback they got to move forward. Freerks feels if they put a little more energy into making something a little more exceptional, especially the way that public area is just not a slab of cement because having this be very pedestrian friendly, especially utilizing the creek area, and then just going by the Code in terms of Riverfront Crossings and having that setback is very important. Digmann asked what her definition of pedestrian friends is. What kind of amenities do you look for that make if more pedestrian? Freerks said there is no rail even there. Digmann said it would have a railing around it. Martin said the Comprehensive Plan will contain an image of what was in mind for the area so something along that vision. Dyer suggested townhouses along there, saying it would be more appealing. Freerks asked what the limitation period was on this. Miklo said they have until March 12, so it can be deferred until the next meeting. Freerks stated they can get to a point here, she acknowledged that Digmann has done lots of great things around town so don't feel defeated, but what was presented tonight doesn't even meet the minimum. Hensch stated that he applauds the desire for trying to do improvements along Ralston Creek, he likes that people are taking it seriously as an ecological feature rather than a drainage ditch, and unfortunately since you are one of the first developments to incorporate along Ralston Creek you are going to be held as the example of how to do it right. Freerks said they should be excited to see what they can do there. Digmann said they will work on the setback and see what they can do on the pedestrian space. Dyer also requested more information on the topography of the land and how the building will set into it and the flood plain. Freerks stressed for Digmann to talk to Miklo as he is a great resource, and the Commission likes his ideas generally. Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to recommend approval of deferring REZ18-00003 until the next meeting. Martin seconded the motion. Martin commented about three thoughts she has on this. She understands builders wanting "here's the Code, here's the stamp, here's what you build" but this is the opportunity, especially in Riverfront Crossings to make sure that they are holding people to a standard to beautify our city and we don't want everything to look the same. She understands from a developer's point of view the cost concern, but that is not the Commission's concern, their concern is the integrity of preservation of this community. Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 12 of 21 Signs goes back to the fact that the Code is there, and it is very specific in the Riverfront Crossings District and this isn't it. Freerks added if there is anything in the language that they changed recently that is making this happen...will discuss at the end of the meeting because she has specific questions on things she would like to have answered. Howard said the language updated at the last meeting was with regard to upper level step backs allowed by a minor adjustment to any district of Riverfront Crossings and did give quite a bit more leeway to what could be adjusted by staff. Miklo added that there is some criteria that is has to meet and if the step back is not there, there has to be other design features to visually break up the mass of the building. Freerks wondered if maybe that is the problem, that people think they can just doll up the top level with another color or cornice and actually that is not at all what they had in mind and if they are in anyway confusing people they maybe need to revisit that because that was not the intention when they made that change. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning, to address changes to state law regarding occupancy of residential dwellings. Howard shared the PowerPoint regarding the changes, it is quite lengthy because there are a lot of little changes happening to the zoning ordinance. In January 2018 the state legislature changed State Code to prohibit any municipality to enforce any regulation that limits occupancy of rental property based on the existence of familial relationships. Howard noted that it a common way to address occupancy across the United States so it has been a little bit of a struggle for a lot of communities across the state of Iowa, particularly the cities that have large colleges or universities. Freerks asked if other states are also making this change. Howard said she is not aware of any other state having this kind of restriction imposed by the state legislature. Howard stated the City Council considered a number of changes in December that addressed the Housing Code and specifically made some changes there. The goals for the recent changes to the Housing Code and Zoning Code are to establish a balance between the short- term rental opportunities for students and long-term housing options for more permanent residents in the city and try to come up with alternative means that they used to be able to rely on a specific formula of how many people could live within a single-family house or duplex unit. Howard recapped the Housing Code changes because they do not come before the Planning & Zoning Commission but she wanted to make them aware of them. These changes include a cap on the number of single family and duplex rentals allowed in neighborhoods close to the UI campus. The City set up a rental permit district and there are certain number of those districts that exceeded the rental permit allowance of the 30% cap on the number of rental units in each districts. So for many of the areas that are close to campus far exceed that 30% cap so no more new rental permits shall be issued in those districts, with some exceptions. That was the big change in the Housing Code. Additionally the City established a limit on the amount space within a dwelling that can be used as bedrooms, and a requirement for a minimum amount of Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 13 of 21 shared living space (living, dining, kitchen areas) within the dwelling based on the number of bedrooms in the unit. The idea here is for single-family residences and duplexes that are supposed to be single-family in character not be chopped up and lose shared living space to make more bedrooms. Finally, a number of other requirements and enhanced enforcement procedures were added to improve the safety and security of dwelling units in anticipation that occupancies will increase. Howard moved onto the Zoning Code changes and began with a little background on how they organized the residential use categories in the Zoning Ordinance. Right now there are two types of residential units in Iowa City, "Household Living Uses" or"Group Living Uses." Household Living Uses are single-family homes, duplexes, multi-family buildings and a small group of these would be the group households. Howard noted that they are changing nothing with regards to the group households (Systems houses, group homes, elder group homes) that have very specific definitions in the State Code and the Iowa City Code mirrors the State Code. Therefore any changes do not affect the group homes. Group Living uses are larger in scale group living environments (nursing homes, group care facilities, rooming houses, fraternal group living). The distinction between Household Living and Group Living is that members of a household live together as a single housekeeping unit, people are living together as a unit and sharing responsibilities and expenses of the household and all areas of the home are open to all members of the household. GroupLiving Use such as a rooming house, individuals have their own private living space and do not typically share household expenses, supplies, vehicles, and the like. Howard explained that there are different zoning requirements for these different residential uses. The City had to change the definition of household however, by eliminating the typical means of defining a "household"(by familial status), it is much more difficult to determine whether a use is a Single Family Use or whether it is a rooming house. Before the City could use a specific number and if it went beyond that number of unrelated people it would no longer be classified as a single-family house. With that going away, it become grayer and the City will need to rely on other methods to prevent overcrowded conditions and inappropriately scaled dwellings intended solely to maximum residential occupancy without regard to the character, livability or long term stability of the neighborhood. Howard addressed the changes to the Zoning Code proposed in the Staff Report: 1. Because they have changed the definition of Household over the years, it used to allow for up to five unrelated people to live together in certain zones, and then it was reduced down to a limit of three. Over those years because there were exiting units those rental permits were "grandfathered." Since there will no longer be a stated limit on the number of unrelated persons within a unit, there is no longer a need to grandfather existing rental occupancies, so these sections of the zoning code should be deleted. 2. There is a cross reference in each of the Occupancy Sections in the Zoning Ordinance to the Housing Code because now the two Codes will work together to regulate occupancy. 3. They have amended the parking requirement for single-family and duplexes. Previously they were partly related to the number of unrelated persons living in the household and that is changed to number of adults in a household because children don't drive and it made sense to regulate the number of parking spaces required with the number of adults. This will keep the parking requirements similar to what they are today for single- family and duplexes uses. Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 14 of 21 4. A change to the occupancy standard is proposed for accessory apartments, deleting reference to the household definition that was tied to familial status and establishing an occupancy limit of two individuals. Note that accessory apartments are only allowed on owner-occupied properties and are limited to one bedroom. Martin asked how come the City can limit that occupancy but not the others. Howard said it is complicated when talking about individuals because of children versus adults. The accessory apartments are a secondary use to a single-family owner-occupied house. 5. There is a change to the rear setback requirements for single-family and duplex uses, but is applied only to certain zones in the Central and Downtown Planning Districts, which are the zones closest to The University of Iowa campus, most affected by the student market. It is also the areas where there are more traditional neighborhood patterns, gridded street patterns, similar block sizes, similar lots sizes, alleys in most situations, etc. This is something that was recommended by the form-based code consultants, Opticos, after looking at what was happening in the community. People were taking single-family homes and adding onto the back and extending them out to take up a large part of the rear yard which is not typical for the pattern of development in these single-family neighborhoods. Howard did note there are some RS-5 areas in these districts but they are limited to such changes due to the historical overlay on these districts. Martin asked if someone was to remove one of the back duplex parts of one of those houses, could they build a garage at that back end, with the new setback requirement in place. Howard said because most of those homes have an alley in the back, the typical pattern would be for a detached garage which will have its own setback. If they were to build an attached garage it would have to fit within the new setback requirement as it is measured as part of the house. They can attach a detached garage to a house with a breezeway. 6. The side setback for multi-family and group living uses is increased to 10 feet to be consistent with the standard in Riverfront Crossings. This will ensure that there is at least 20 feet between multi-family buildings on abutting lots. Similarly, the rear setback in the PRM Zone is changed to be consistent with the standard in the Riverfront Crossings District. The current standards have resulted in the close spacing of multi-family buildings, such as along S. Johnson and S. Van Buren Streets, creating crowded conditions and concerns about privacy, safety, and livability for residents. 7. The number of bedrooms in attached single family and duplex units is limited to 4. This is a clear and objective standard that will be easy to administer and will help to control occupancy to a reasonable level for these housing types. 8. To mirror the change made in the Housing Code, the minimum bedroom size in multi- family uses is increased from 70 square feet to 100 square feet. Bedrooms that exceed 225 square feet or with any dimension greater than 16 feet will be counted as two or more bedrooms. This will help control parking issues as well. 9. A new minimum open space requirement is proposed for all household types, including single family, duplexes, multi-family and group living uses. For multi-family and group Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 15 of 21 living uses, the open space requirement mirrors the requirement and standards currently applied in the Riverfront Crossings District at 10 square feet per bedroom, but not less than 400 square feet. For detached single family uses, a minimum of 500 square feet of usable open space is required in the rear yard. For duplexes, 300 square feet of usable open space per unit is required in the rear yard. For attached single family (zero lot line and townhouses), 150 square feet of open space is required in the rear yard. To provide relief in cases for unusually constrained lots or lots with little rear yard space, such as reverse corner lots, infill lots, oddly shaped lots, and similar, an option to request a minor modification to these standards is provided. Freerks asked if there is any language regarding if the open space can be impervious surfaces. Howard said it is stated that the open space for single-family homes and duplexes has to be in the rear yard and pervious surfaces, it cannot be paved, patios and decks will not be counted towards open space. 10.There is a use classification system in the Zoning Ordinance that helps identify the criteria and characteristics of each use category and so they have amended the descriptions of the residential use category to provide a little more clarity on what is meant by single-family home or Household Living. For household living, added language introduces the term "single housekeeping unit". In the "exceptions" section of Household Living, it also clarifies that if there is more than one residential lease issued per dwelling unit or if there are locks installed on bedroom doors that create de facto rooming units where an individual resident can prevent other residents from entering his/her private room, then the use is classified as a Group Living Use. 11. In the definitions chapter of the Zoning Code, in addition to amending the definition of "household" so it no longer has anything about family status and added the reference to "single housekeeping unit". They also added a definition of"adult" to persons age 18 or over and clarified the definitions of"roomer," "rooming house", "rooming unit," and "farm dwelling." 12. In addition to the zoning code changes, the Council will be asked to add several clauses to the Housing Code (Chapter 17-5), that address occupancy limits for single family and duplex uses that do not meet the minimum parking or open space standards in the zoning code. If someone is coming in for a new rental permit, changing from an owner- occupied to a rental, the unit will be reviewed and must be in compliance with the open space and parking requirements. And finally, a clause is proposed to clarify that for existing single family and duplex rental units where the percentage of bedroom space within the unit exceeds 35%, the use of those bedrooms may continue, but no additional bedroom space may be added unless the unit is brought into full compliance with the standard. Staff recommends amending Title 14, Zoning Code, and Chapter 17-5, Housing Code, as described in the staff memo and as indicated on the attached pages of the memo. Freerks asked moving forward how will this all be calculated, will it only be for new permit requests. Howard confirmed that is true, that in cases of zoning changes all previous permits are grandfathered in, it is only if someone is asking for something new. Laverman noted that information on these changes can be found on the City's website and Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 16 of 21 YouTube channels under rental permit caps. Freerks asked about cottages, and Howard said that clause was just for Riverfront Crossings and is likely not to be an issues as Riverfront Crossings will more high density. Freerks had a comment about the minor modification for open space requirements and has concerns about abuse of that requirement, but is glad that notification will be given to neighbors if a minor modification is applied for. Howard said there is a distinction for minor modifications. In the Riverfront Crossings Code it is called a minor adjustment, and that is done through an administrative review committee, but the minor modification is set up for the whole Zoning Code and a hearing date is set and notice given to surrounding property owners. It is still staff administering the hearing and making the decision but there is an opportunity for public input. Martin asked if the notifications go to the renters that are nearby. Miklo doesn't believe so, just to the property owners. Freerks suggested a notification sign put in the yard as well so people would know. Miklo believes they do put signs up and will check on that. Freerks questioned Amend Chapter 17-5. Howard noted that she did hand out at the beginning of the meeting a sheet that would substitute the language that was in the Staff Report in the agenda packet. They realized there was a sentence that was in the first paragraph that should have been in the last paragraph where they are talking about new rental permits. The City didn't want to make so that someone that had an existing rental permit, that didn't meet the open space requirement, loses their permit but to let them know they cannot enlarge. Freerks also asked about the bedrooms not exceeding the 35% being subject to administrative review. Howard explained that there needed to be a change for reasonable exceptions. Freerks opened the public hearing. Nick Psihavos (UI Student) is interested in the Code changes and what the goals of the Commission and Planning Department looking for with neighborhoods and how to integrate students and families and obtain good relationships between homeowners and renters. Freerks stated that none of this can guarantee good relationships, but good rules and regulations can help facilitate it. Hektoen gave Savois a copy of the Code which explains the problem and the goals as a good resource. Howard noted that in general the City is trying to keep a balance in these neighborhoods that are single-family in character and close to the University. Miklo also added the City Zoning Code does have areas where the allowance for higher density is allowed, the problem is when you introduce a large number of people into a lower density there are issues (with parking, nuisances, traffic, etc.). Dyer stated that another objective is so families can live closer to the University and downtown as well. Freerks closed the public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 17 of 21 Hensch moved to recommend approval of the amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, and Chapter 17-5, Housing Code, as described in the staff memo and as indicated on the attached pages of the memo including the amendment that was distributed at this evenings meeting. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed 5-0. Freerks read a statement of appreciation for Karen Howard who was leaving her position in Iowa City to take a new position in Cedar Falls, Iowa. URBAN RENEWAL ITEM: Discussion of Proposed Foster Road Urban Renewal Plan located between North Dubuque Street and Prairie du Chien. Wendy Ford (City of Iowa City Economic Development Coordinator) stated that at the last meeting on February 6, 2018, the City Council approved a resolution of necessity which starts the process to establish an Urban Renewal Area and a TIFF District. This particular one is the Foster Road Urban Renewal Area and Ford showed a map of the area. It is just south of I-80, east of Dubuque Street, and west of Prairie du Chien. The City has been working with the developers in this area who desire to build the road connecting Dubuque Street to Prairie Du Chien in order to be able to develop the rest of the properties. The developers, as forecasted in the North District Plan, are seeking financial assistance from the City to build the road. The City can assist in the development of this road, and sees the public benefit to this road as being a connector between Dubuque Street and Prairie Du Chien to facilitate better transportation, better emergency responses, and access by and to other neighborhoods. Ford noted there are many public benefits in this project. Ford showed the area which will be developed as recently approved in a Planning & Zoning meeting, and noted that this development and street connection are in line with the Comprehensive Plan and that is why it was approved for rezoning. Ford explained that the Tax Increment financing aspect of this project depends on the pieces of the project along Foster Road (a series of townhomes and a larger senior living building). The Tax Increment that those projects would create then would generate the revenue that would assist in the cost sharing of the road from Dubuque Street to Prairie du Chien. Ford explained that the charge of the Commission make a recommendation to the Council about whether this Urban Renewal Area fits within and complies with the Comprehensive Plan. This is one step to happen before a March 20 hearing, the other step is that the City holds a taxing consultation with representatives from the County and School District to talk about the implications of the TIF on budgets. Hensch asked the length of Foster Road extension. Ford said she believes it is around 1500 feet. Hensch asked because the estimated cost is $4 million and that seems extravagant. Ford explained it includes all the public infrastructure that goes along with the construction of the road (water, sewer, stormwater). Hensch asked about eligibility of the TIF, what it is based on. Ford replied that all TIF Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 18 of 21 districts must be based on some finding of blight or economic development or slum situation and in this case it is an economic development area. It is the only instance in which the Iowa Code allows the use of TIF in an economic development (non-blighted) area for non- LMI residential development and it comes with two distinct conditions not applicable to other Urban Renewal Areas. One is that it only lasts 10 years. The second requirement is that for the City to be able to TIF generated by those buildings the City has to split the increment that comes out of that (in this case 45% and 55%). The 45% being equivalent to Johnson County that qualifies as LMI, and put that 45% into the affordable housing fund. The other 55% can be used for the cost sharing elements of this project. Freerks asked where the other TIF districts are in the City. Ford said there are 12 districts, there are several that go along the industrial area that is lined by railroad on the north end and Highway 6 on the south end (Proctor& Gamble area out towards Highway 6), there is another one at Highway 6 and includes the Pepperwood Plaza area, one at Towncrest, the large one is the City/University Urban Renewal Area which encompasses both downtown and Riverfront Crossings, Riverside Drive Urban Renewal Area, Moss Ridge and finally Sycamore Mall/First Avenue. Ford noted that not all of them are active and a couple have never been tapped for Tax Increment Financing at all, they are just set up to be ready. Freerks opened the public discussion. Seeing no one, Freerks closed the public discussion. Signs moved to forward a written recommendation to the City Council stating that the Foster Road Urban Renewal Plan conforms to the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, and conforms with the general plan for the development of the City of Iowa City. Hensch seconded the motion. Hensch stated in general he is not a fan of TIFs because as an example this project may bring 100 students to this area to attend Iowa City Schools but for 10 years no money will be going to the School District, however he does feel the public good is very strong here by the development of this road as there is a severe need for it. He also is encouraged by seeing the funding that will go into affordable housing. Freerks said that TIFs often get a bad rap because they are so often abused but she has seen the numbers before and Iowa City is very careful in the way that they use TIFs and not abuse them, so she is in favor. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 18, 2018 Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes of January 18, 2018 Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 19 of 21 PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Freerks wanted to discuss the items that are being approved that don't meet Code. This evening the gentleman said he had a couple of buildings that didn't have step backs that fall in the area where they are required. Freerks acknowledged they made that change to the Code in October and was unsure how far along those buildings were when that Code change was approved, it he took advantage of that. Hektoen said she was not aware of the timing. Martin believed those buildings were pretty much done. Freerks is concerned then how this happened because it is clearly laid out in the Code. Freerks would like to follow through on this. They have also talked about landscaping not being installed in commercial areas as required and some of the issues with that and this seems to be even a bigger issue to her if Code is not being met and some type of waiver is occurring. It is important to her that the City of Iowa City ask the same of each applicant as they come forward and for people to be able to anticipate and be able to understand what they are required to do. Martin would like to at least have a clear explanation as to why something was adjusted. She acknowledges there may be a variance of some degree on something at some point but what was the give and take for that variance. Freerks noted that the City just gave that valve to them, it wasn't there before so she is puzzled why this occurred. What she is thinking is if they could just back up through Riverfront Crossings she is interested in seeing if anyone is not using the setbacks and is also interested in how people are utilizing the language, or if it has even been used. She would like to follow up on that. All Commissioners agreed. Miklo clarified that Freerks was asking for a report on any previous minor modifications and noted it may take some time to put together. Hektoen said it would be more in the minor adjustment category opposed to minor modifications. Freerks said if there are issues or they see a flood of things that haven't or are not meeting Code they need to think about how they can fix it, whether it is the language or what it is. Martin asked if a building is built and has received its certificate of occupancy but is later on realized to have not been in compliance with Code and there is nothing in writing to explain why that happened, is there anything that can be done or does the developer just plead ignorance. Hektoen said the City can cite the developer for not meeting the Zoning Code and they would receive a municipal infraction. Hektoen said it would all depend on the violation. Freerks said it appears that someone is giving a green light to these things, it appears that way because otherwise these projects wouldn't be getting off the ground, or into the ground. Code is Code. Dyer stated it seems as if there is an objective, not just in Riverfront Crossings, to fill up every single inch of space with building rather than articulate them nicely along the landscape and there is no guarantee you can use up every inch of space. Miklo suggested that over the next several months whenever there is a minor adjustment after it's been approved, staff could inform the Commission of what's been done. Freerks would love that, stating it just helps them better understand the Code and how things are being utilized. Planning and Zoning Commission February 15, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 20 of 21 She doesn't think it is even a punishment for anything or a check and balance, although that is a positive outcome perhaps, but thinks it is wise planning. Hensch likes what Miklo proposes because (1) he will find it educational and (2) he firmly believes there are sometimes adjustments that need to be made so he would like to learn why some of those things were done and then the Commission can consider them upfront sometimes. Signs noted that based on the application tonight it seems that there is a disconnect somewhere and he things it behooves all of them to figure out where it is. Freerks noted that they have made other people do all these things and she doesn't want Iowa City to be known as inconsistent. Dyer is also concerned that some folks come in with conceptual drawings that are intended to be close to what is planned and others rip them out of a book or something. Signs agreed that was a great observation and some applicants go above and beyond to help the Commission visualize and this one was far short of that. Freerks asked if Miklo would have time for this in the future. Miklo said once they are up to full staff, but he will advise the committee that this is a request. Freerks stressed it was a unanimous request. Miklo said as minor adjustments occur he will try to report back at the next meeting. Freerks also wants to look backwards at previous cases, Miklo said that may take a little time. Signs made record that as of last Friday he has stepped down from the role of President of the Affordable Housing Coalition due to his new work responsibilities, but he does remain on the Board. ADJOURNMENT: Signs moved to adjourn. Dyer seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 5-0. PLANNING &ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2017 - 2018 (W.S) 6/1 6/7 6115 7/6 7/20 8/3 8117 9/7 9/21 10/5 10/19 11/2 12/7 12/21 1/4 1/18 2/15 DYER, CAROLYN XX X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X FREERKS, ANN XX X X X X O/E X X X X X O/E X X O/E X HENSCH, MIKE X 0/EX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X O/E O/E X X PARSONS, MAX XX X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X O/E SIGNS, MARK XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X THEOBALD, JODIE X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X O/E X O/E KEY: X = Present O =Absent O/E = Absent/Excused = Not a Member U3-29-18 1P14 MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 1, 2018—7:00 PM —FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Jodie Theobald, Mark Signs MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sylvia Bochner, Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: Quentin Pitzen, Laureen Ipsen, Ross Nusser, Nancy Purington, Rick Stephenson, Mark Tade, Brian Vogel RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. CALL TO ORDER: Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. DEVELOPMENT ITEM SUB18-00002: Discussion of an application submitted by University Lake Partners, II for the preliminary plat of Forest Hills Estates, a 53.29-acre 5-lot subdivision with 4 residential lots and 1 commercial office lot locate south of Interstate 80 west of Prairie Du Chien Road. Miklo indicated that this item should be deferred, as Engineering is reviewing the updated plat and stormwater management plans for compliance with City codes. Freerks opened the public hearing. Quentin Pitzen (2040 Tanglewood) asked whether the commercial lot would have access through the western part of the parcel. Miklo explained that the western portion of the parcel closest to 1-80 would be an outlot for open space. The Commercial Office (CO-1) lot would be at the intersection of Prairie Du Chien Road and the extension of Foster Road. Pitzen expressed a concern that the additional traffic on Foster Road near Dubuque Street would make it difficult for residents of the neighborhood that is located on Meadow Ridge Lane, Ventura Avenue and Tanglewood Street to drive out of the neighborhood. He asked if they City and any plans for the intersection of the Dubuque Street Frontage Road and Foster Road. Miklo said he would review the question with the City Engineer and report back. Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 2 of 10 Laureen Ipsen (1710 Prairie Du Chien Road) asked about the width of the Foster Road extension. Miklo answered that it would be 36 foot wide and would have two travel lanes with protected bike lanes in each direction and sidewalks on both sides of the street. Freerks closed the public discussion. Hensch made a motion to defer SUB18-00002 to the March 15 meeting. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. REZONING ITEM REZ18-00003: Discussion of an application submitted by Hodge Construction for a rezoning of approximately 1.1 acres from Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone to Riverfront Crossings – Central Crossings (RFC-CX) zone for property located at 225 &225 '/2 E. Prentiss Street. Miklo said that the applicant has requested that this item be deferred to the March 15 meeting to allow time to revise the concept plan. Hensch made a motion to defer REZ18-00003 to the March 15 meeting. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. REZONING ITEM REZ18-00002: Discussion of an application submitted by Ross Nusser for a rezoning of approximately 1.89 acres from Planned Development Overlay/High Density Single Family Residential (OPD/RS-12) to Low Density Multifamily Residential (RM-12) located at 1705 Prairie Du Chien Road. Walz began the staff report by showing an aerial of the area and a map showing zoning of the surrounding area. She discussed the current land use and zoning and discussed the proposed RM-12 zoning, which would allow a maximum of 30 units on this property based on lot area. The applicant has not submitted a concept plan for development and it is not known whether this density can be achieved. She mentioned the potential for sensitive areas on the property and indicated the applicant does not intend to develop areas with sensitive features. She noted that the property may contain sensitive areas—slopes and or groves of trees. She discussed the North District Plan, which states that with the development of Foster Road, new development could occur in this area and this property could be redeveloped as multi-family. She then reviewed recent amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to address resident displacement. While the policy does not technically apply to this property because it has fewer than 12 units, the applicant has taken a number of steps to communicate and gather input from the residents, including contacting residents in person, holding a meeting for residents, compiling a list of Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 3 of 10 resources, offering no less than 120 days' notice for relocation, and working with the City and other sources to identify funds for relocation to assist residents. Staff recommends approval, subject to a condition that the applicant provides residents with 120 days of notice for relocation. Freerks asked whether there is a concept plan indicating what new development would be on this property. Walz indicated that this had not been submitted and applicant was still deciding how he would develop the property. This had been the topic of discussion at the Good Neighbor meeting where he gathered input from the neighbors. Martin asked whether there were notes from the neighborhood meeting. Walz said that she had attended the meeting for the neighborhood meeting for surrounding residents. Neighbors who attended had been generally supportive though they expressed concern for the residents of the trailer park. She noted that the applicant would be able to speak to the concerns heard at the meeting for residents of the property proposed for rezoning. Freerks asked what could be developed on the property under the current RS-12 zone. Walz responded that in terms of detached single-family homes, the development potential would be limited without encroaching into sensitive areas. Miklo noted that the RS-12 would allow for a small number of townhomes on lots of 3,000 square feet and duplexes on lots of 6,000 square feet. This would require an alley. Freerks opened the public hearing. Ross Nusser(applicant) spoke concerning relocation of the residents of the mobile home park and his frustration that not enough is done to ensure smooth transitions for the residents, some of whom have lived here for 30-40 years. Because of the extension of Foster Road, redevelopment of this property is likely and he is concerned that the residents could be forced to relocate with short notice if the property redevelops without a rezoning. He discussed his meetings with residents of the subject property and the surrounding neighborhood, including a good neighbor meeting. Commissioners asked for minutes from the meeting for trailer park residents, but Ross responded that none were taken. The commission asked for more information on whether they could require financial assistance for relocation of residents. Walz deferred to the City Attorney. Goers indicated that while the trailer park fell beneath the 12-unit threshold in the comprehensive plan, the spirit of the plan was to ensure that residents of affordable units such as this were accommodated fairly. So long as any assistance was in scale with the impact of the rezoning, it could be attached as a condition. Nusser noted that some of the residents were present. Commission asked him about more specific concept plans for the site. He responded that he was focused on the issue of relocation but agreed to prepare more detailed plans if deferred until the March 15th meeting. Nancy Purington (1706 Prairie Du Chien Road) spoke about her concerns about the traffic on Prairie Du Chien Road. Her property is directly across from the subject property. She reported Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 4 of 10 high speeds on Prairie Du Chien and difficulty turning into/out of her driveway. She is concerned that this may get worse when Foster Road is extended and if additional density is added on the subject property. She requested that a traffic study be conducted in this general area with information on traffic counts and speeds. She also expressed her preference that multi-family housing on the subject property not exceed 2-story because no buildings in the surrounding area are taller than 2 stories. Laureen Ipsen (1710 Prairie Du Chien Road) also spoke about traffic concerns on Prairie Du Chien, especially with the extension of Foster Road. She asked about the possibility of multi- family housing on the redeveloped site having access from Foster Road. She asked if Foster Road will be a wider street than Prairie Du Chien; staff responded that it will be (2-lanes of traffic with buffered bike lanes). She was concerned about adding density in an area with traffic issues. Curt Vanperpen (Dubuque Street) is one of the owners of the mobile home park. He said that he had not intended to give residents short notice, however, the infrastructure at the trailer park was in need of major improvement. He discussed maintenance issues related to sanitary sewer and water lines which contribute to the need to redevelop the area. He noted that a year ago the City said that the extension of Foster Road was at least seven years away and he believed he would need to make substantial upgrades to water and sewer to keep the park going. When the recent decision came to build Foster Road he realized that it was an opportunity for him to avoid making these substantial repairs. He reported making repairs to the sewer lines in December, but states that these lines are very old and could stop working in the near future, which would displace residents with little notice. He expressed concern about this relocation, but stated that continuing to maintain the mobile home park is not feasible. He noted that there was no place in Iowa City that is more affordable to live than his trailer park, but the necessary improvements would require him to raise rent. Rick Stevenson (853 St. Anne's Drive) also noted the speed and volume of traffic on Prairie du Chien Road and requested any increased density have driveway access onto Foster Road. Mark Tade (1706 Prairie du Chien Road): He noted that he lives several hundred feet from the Interstate but the sound of traffic is quite intense. He said it was not possible to hold a conversation in his back yard during the summer. He said he thought it was important to preserve any trees in the area as they offer some buffer from the noise. Miklo noted that the Foster Road rezoning preserves a large number of wooded area and that the City's subdivision regulations require a 300-foot buffer from the Interstate for new residential structures. Nusser spoke again and expressed his desire to work with residents but his need for some direction from the Commission. He indicated that the rezoning would allow him to better determine what options he could provide to assist with relocation. Several commissioners expressed the need for more information from the developer, both in terms of the proposed development and a relocation plan. Planning and Zoning Commission March 1,2018—Formal Meeting Page 5 of 10 Dyer expressed a concern that the applicant had not presented a plan for relocation or a plan for how he would develop the property. She said it makes it difficult for the Commission to make a decision when there are so many unknowns. Signs indicated that they felt they could make a better recommendation in terms of relocation plan if they had some idea from the developer and the currents residents what the needs were and what the developer felt he could reasonably afford. Commissioners acknowledged that redevelopment was a matter of time and that everyone involved was trying to be fair. Freerks stated that there was a need to know how this new development would fit into the neighborhood and that usually such re-zonings were accompanied by a concept plan of some sort. She understood that the applicant had the best of intentions and was sensitive to the neighborhood but that the Commission had been disappointed by some developments in the past and this would be the first multi-family in this neighborhood so it was important to get it right. Nusser reiterated his willingness to come forward with a plan and requested to defer to March 15. He stated that there were two issues: the redevelopment of the property and the difficult circumstance of relocating the residents and that he wished to address both. Hensch moved to recommend approval of deferring REZ18-00002 until the March 15 meeting. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. REZONING ITEM REZ17-00015: Discussion of an application submitted by Cardinal Pointe West, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 7.84 acres from Interim Development Research Development Park (IDRP)to Low Density Multifamily (RM-12) located west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and east of Deer Creek Road. Bochner stated this property is currently zoned Interim Development Research Development Park (IDRP) which is a designation given to undeveloped land when that land does not have the infrastructure necessary for development. At this time infrastructure is in place for this property so it is appropriate to rezone but the Interim Development-Research Park indicates that was a foreseen use. The proposed zoning for this lot is Low Density Multi-Family (RM-12) which allows for both high density single-family housing and low density multi-family housing to provide a diverse variety of housing options. Because of this mixture, attention to site and building design is important in this zone to ensure compatibility. The applicant has submitted a Sensitive Areas Site Plan that shows three multi-family building on this parcel which contain a total of 108 1- and 2-bedroom units (36 units per building). All three buildings will have access from a driveway off Deer Creek Road with parking provided under the building and in the surface lot located between buildings. Bochner showed images of the current state of the property and then the proposed sensitive areas site plan. The zoning ordinance indicates that multifamily buildings should be oriented with at least one facade facing a public or private street or an interior courtyard. As shown currently this proposal doesn't meet that standard but the applicant indicated they will apply for a minor modification due to sensitive features on the property and steep slopes on the Camp Cardinal Boulevard frontage. Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 6 of 10 Bochner stated that with regards to the Comprehensive Plan, this property is located within the Northwest Planning District, one of two districts for which a detailed plan has not been drafted and instead refers to the Clear Creek Master Plan which was adopted in 2002. This Master Plan indicates that the areas adjacent to Highway 218 are appropriate for office park or research uses to buffer residential uses from the noise and fumes produced by the highway. However the 1997 Comprehensive Plan recognized that with the establishment of the Oakdale Campus north of Interstate 80 there might be limited need for additional offices and research uses in this area. The plan also recognized the topographical and infrastructural limitations of the area, and therefore, supported clustered development that would result in pedestrian friendly neighborhoods with minimal disturbance of the sensitive areas. In terms of capability with the neighborhood, the majority of the property surrounding this area is currently undeveloped, there is a subdivision just north of this area that will have a mix of housing types. The proximity to Highway 218 poses compatibility issues with residential uses. Iowa City's subdivision regulations address health issues associated with noise and air pollution produced by major roadways by requiring a minimum 300' buffer between Highway 218 and residential development. Because this application is for a rezoning, rather than a subdivision, the regulation does not apply. However, a condition may be attached to the rezoning in order to address the concerns associated with the proximity to Highway 218. Staff recommends this rezoning be conditioned upon approval of a plan signed by an acoustical engineer prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that roadway noise is mitigated in the interior of the buildings for any buildings located within 300 feet of the right-of-way of the highway. This plan should include sound mitigating construction techniques, such masonry construction and sound- dampening windows, along with the planting of trees to form a buffer between the highway and buildings. Bochner noted this site has sensitive areas including steep and critical slopes and woodlands. Bochner stated that the Commission had been given revised plans that have come in after the staff report was drafted, so there have been some changes to the amount of sensitive areas that will be disrupted due to the calculations to the sensitive areas. In the new plans, 45.7% of the steep slopes on the property being disturbed, 19.6 % of critical slopes, and 29.5% of woodlands. The Sensitive Areas Site Plan includes construction limits that indicate the portion of the lot that may be developed. A landscaping plan shows where trees and shrubs will be planted within the development area. With regards to traffic implications, existing road infrastructure, which is improved to City standards up to the driveway on Deer Creek Road, will be sufficient to serve the proposed density of the development. North of the proposed driveway, Deer Creek Road is unimproved and dead ends at River Products quarry property located in Coralville. Developable land to the north will not connect into Deer Creek Road, therefore the extension of right-of-way improvements to the street and extension of sidewalk north of the driveway are not recommended by staff. In terms of parking, the site plan shows 171 parking spaces which is the minimum requirement based on the proposed number of units. The majority of these spaces will be provided in structured parking provided on the lower level of each building with the rest in a surface lot between the buildings. Bochner also noted another change in the plans that were distributed to the Commission this evening is that the fire department requires a wider driveway (minimum 26 feet) to accommodate for fire apparatus to reach the height of the proposed buildings, which has been satisfied in the updated plan. Overall, the proposed rezoning of the subject area to Low-Density Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2018—Formal Meeting Page 7 of 10 Multi-family Residential (RM-12) is appropriate provided that the applicant ensures that the effects of highway noise are mitigated for the interior of these buildings. Although the Clear Creek Master Plan designated this area for office use to buffer nearby residential uses,the Comprehensive Plan states that demand for office space may be limited and residential use may be an alternative use. Freerks asked if the Comprehensive Plan does state that residential may be another appropriate use. Bochner said the Plan says "conservation development". Miklo noted Staff can check to see exactly what the Comprehensive Plan states for that area. He knows it clearly states office use is preferred up against the highway but the previous Plan did indicate there is limited demand for such office use. Staff recommends approval of this application with the condition that sound mitigation is provided through a plan approved by an acoustical engineer prior to any building permit being approved. Freerks asked if they are providing any visitor parking. Miklo replied that they are providing the minimum parking required, but in the parking requirements in the zoning code assume that visitor parking is included in the minimums. Parsons asked if there were any planned improvements for Deer Creek Road. Miklo said staff anticipates Deer Creek Road will end at this property and all of the development in that area will be served off Kennedy Parkway. Hensch added the dust from the gravel on Deer Creek Road could be an issue for residents. Miklo said the Commission could add a condition to having to treat the unpaved road to mitigate that issue. Hensch also stated that the landscape plan doesn't hat the species of trees to be used, nor anything about shrubbery requirements. Theobald added with the number of trees and shrubs mentioned on the plan there is not enough to mitigate noise and dust issues. Martin asked about the 300 feet buffer, what is the current requirement. Miklo stated that if this were a subdivision there would be a requirement for a 300 foot buffer between any residential building and Highway 218. This is a rezoning of only one parcel so there is not automatically a 300 foot buffer, however the Commission could put a condition on the rezoning although staff is recommending other conditions to mitigate sound issues. Freerks opened the public discussion. Brian Vogel (Hall & Hall Engineers, Inc.) stated that all the buildings will look similar, and in the same color scheme with the brick and colors of the siding. The developer has agreed to use the sound mitigating materials and construction techniques, and will get an acoustical engineer in to do a study before construction and incorporate that into the building plans. Martin asked about the balconies and how the sound will be dealt with on the balconies. Vogel said the sound mitigation is for inside the buildings. Vogel stated that their landscape architect has contacted Julie Tallman at the City. With the detailed plan of materials used in the construction, there would also be a detailed landscaping plan that also needs to be approved by the City. Planning and Zoning Commission March 1,2018—Formal Meeting Page 8 of 10 Signs said that because this project is so close to the road a more detailed tree and shrubbery plan would improve the livability for the people there and help the Commission agree to this rezoning. Vogel said the existing woodlands that would be preserved would help with dust and mitigation. Freerks is concerned about this proposal and that there won't be any sustainable long-term neighborhood feel here because nobody is going to want to be that close to the interstate. She acknowledges it is a tough piece of property and reflects that is why the Comprehensive Plan laid out what is appropriate in that area. She is not saying residential cannot work, but she does have concerns, there are no amenities outside, and it appears that one is just trying to squeeze as much as they can into an oddly shaped lot with steep slopes and wooded areas right next to an interstate. She does not have problem with multi-family in that area, this proposal just brings her pause. Martin noted they have an opportunity here to help give the community that we live in something that really works and can be sustained over time. Vogel stated that the developer is trying to create affordable housing and that is why they are proposing the density. Martin asked if these will be one and two bedroom units only. Vogel confirmed that is correct. Signs noted he is not as concerned as others, noting this is a difficult parcel and there is no commercial or office that will go there as all surrounding properties are residential. Hensch agreed that this parcel is an island so to make it more inviting there does need to be a courtyard or outside amenities to attract residents to want to live there. He said he like the building design, but would like to see more variety rather than thee identical buildings. Theobald noted her concern is the sound, she lives on that side of town and quite a bit away from the interstate and can hear it at her house all night long, even with windows closed. There needs to be a windbreak line of trees. She would like to see a detailed landscape plan before approval. Martin stressed as this is near an access point to Iowa City the need to maintain the beautification of the area. Signs added he likes the building design, he thought they might want to add a trail connection or overlook at the pond, someplace for the residents to go and enjoy the view. He felt that the pond could be turned into an amenity that the project currently lacks. Dyer added that having a walking trail around the property could be one amenity, adding a playground, and it seems like if the buildings weren't so big they could be away from the 300 foot buffer zone and deal with the sound that way. Dyer also asked if there was a fire department turnaround along the driveway to the north. Miklo said the fire department did look at this and approved the layout. Miklo reiterated the direction the Commission is asking the applicant and staff to review prior to approval. (1) More of a buffer to the interstate; (2)there needs to be some form a amenity, possibility using the pond; (3) dust mitigation; (4) possibility smaller buildings to get them further away from the highway; (5) detailed landscape plan; (6) and possibility different color schemes on each building. Planning and Zoning Commission March 1,2018—Formal Meeting Page 9 of 10 Freerks noted that to make a quality community addressing these concerns are important. Signs said it is important to establish a precedent so that developers come forward with good plans. Freerks said that Commission used to get more thorough information. She realizes that staff has been limited and is down two staff people. Dyer expressed a concern that some applicants have been submitting limited information about their plans, while others submit comprehensive plans that give the sense of what will be built. The Commission agreed that it would like to see adequate information on the applications they review. Freerks closed the public discussion. Parsons moved to defer item REZ17-00015 to the March 15, 2018 meeting. Hensch seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Dyer and Hensch noted that they would not be at the March 15 meeting. Miklo noted that Martin would be attending the American Planning Association Conference in New Orleans in April. ADJOURNMENT: Theobald moved to adjourn. Parsons seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0. PLANNING &ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2017-2018 (W.S) 6/7 6/15 7/6 7/20 8/3 8/17 9/7 9/21 10/5 10/19 11/2 12/7 12/21 1/4 1/18 2/15 3/1 DYER, CAROLYN X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X FREERKS, ANN X X X X X O/E X X X X X O/E X X O/E X X HENSCH, MIKE 0/EX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X O/E X X X X X X X X X X O/E O/E X X X PARSONS, MAX X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X O/E X SIGNS, MARK X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X THEOBALD,JODIE X X X X 0/E X X X X X X X X O/E X O/E X KEY: X= Present 0 =Absent O/E =Absent/Excused --= Not a Member