HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Packet 1.17.19IowaCity
Planning&ZoningCommission
FormalMeeting
Thursday,January17,2019
7:00PM
EmmaHarvatHall–CityHall
DepartmentofNeighborhood
and
DevelopmentServices
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
January 17, 2019
Formal Meeting – 7:00 PM
Emma Harvat Hall
Iowa City City Hall
410 E. Washington Street
AGENDA:
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
4. Rezoning / Development Items:
Discussion of an application, submitted by Anderson Construction LLC, for a rezoning of
approximately 0.15 acres of property located at 2130 Muscatine Avenue from Community
Commercial (CC-2) zone to High Density Single-Family Residential (RS-12) zone. (REZ18-
00025).
5. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: January 3, 2019
6. Planning & Zoning Information
Update on the Johnson County/Iowa City Fringe Area Conflict Resolution Review Committee
meeting related to the proposed fringe area rezoning of 11.34 acres from County A-Agriculture
to County R-Residential located on the south side of American Legion Road SE and west of
Wapsie Avenue SE.
7. Adjournment
If you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact Anne Russett, Urban
Planning, at 319-356-5251 or anne-russett@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time
to meet your access needs.
Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings
Formal: February 7 / February 21 / March 7
Informal: Scheduled as needed.
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Jesi Lile, Associate Planner
Item: REZ18-00025 Date: January 17, 2019
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Owner: University of Iowa Community Credit Union
PO Box 800
North Liberty, IA 52317
319-530-9390
chriscampbell@urbanacres.com
Applicant: Ben Anderson
Anderson Construction, LLC
3880 Owl Song Lane
Iowa City, IA 52245
720-277-5681
ben@anderson-construction.info
Requested Action: Rezoning from Community Commercial (CC-2) to
High Density Single Family Residential (RS-12)
Purpose: To allow residential development
Location: 2130 Muscatine Avenue
Location Map:
2
Size: 6,750 square feet / 0.155 acres
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant office space, Community Commercial
(CC-2)
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Single Family Detached Dwellings; Low
Density Single Family Residential (RS-5)
South: Seamstress & Single Family Detached
Dwellings; Community Commercial (CC-
2) & Low Density Single Family
Residential (RS-5)
East: Pharmacy Retail Store; Community
Commercial (CC-2)
West: Single Family Detached Dwellings; Low
Density Single Family Residential (RS-5)
Comprehensive Plan: General Commercial
District Plan: General Commercial, Central Planning District
Neighborhood Open Space District: N/A
File Date: December 18, 2018
45 Day Limitation Period: February 1, 2019
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant, Anderson Construction, has requested a rezoning from Community
Commercial (CC-2) to High Density Single Family Residential (RS-12). The total project site is
6,750 square feet and currently houses an abandoned building, formerly used as Frantz Pest
Control. The property is currently bank-owned due to foreclosure and likely in need of serious
repair. Due to the small size of the lot, the redevelopment of the site to another commercial
use is difficult due to current requirements related to drive-widths, parking, setbacks from
adjacent residential uses, and other requirements. The applicant is proposing to rezone to
High Density Single Family Residential (RS-12), which would allow the development of a
single-family home or duplex. The applicant has not provided a concept plan for the site, but
conveyed to staff that the following options are being explored: 1) demolition of the existing
building and development of a duplex, 2) hiring a consultant to conduct an intensive survey
of the site to determine historic significance and potentially seeking funding for a historic
rehab (if the property is historic), and 3) renovation of the existing structure to a residential
use.
The applicant has indicated that they will not use the Good Neighbor Policy.
ANALYSIS:
Current Zoning: Under the current Community Commercial (CC-2) zoning, this lot could
potentially be used for office spaces, eating establishments, retail, general community
service uses, specialized education centers, or religious/private group assembly. The CC-2
3
zone also allows multi-family above the first floor through the special exception process.
The maximum height in the CC-2 zone is 35 feet and the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is
1.0.
Proposed Zoning: The applicant has requested a rezoning to High Density Single Family
Residential (RS-12), which allows detached single-family dwelling as a permitted use, while
other duplexes, attached single-family dwellings, and group households are provisionally
allowed. The maximum height in the RS-12 zone is 35 feet.
Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The Iowa City Comprehensive Plan identifies this
area for General Commercial development. However, the plan also includes the following
land use goals that support the development of this property as residential:
x Identify areas and properties that are appropriate for infill development.
x Ensure that infill development is compatible and complementary to the
surrounding neighborhood.
x Provide appropriate transitions between high and low-density development and
between commercial areas and residential zones.
This rezoning would allow for the redevelopment of the former Frantz Pest Control
building and would provide for more residential options in the neighborhood in close
proximity to a commercial hub. Furthermore, the project site is adjacent to existing
residential land uses. The rezoning to a higher intensity, single-family residential zone
would provide a more appropriate transition to the commercial node to the east.
This lot is located in Subarea B of the Central District. Density and demand for housing
from University students is not as intensive in this area of the Central District, but there is
demand for housing for families as there are many schools in close proximity. The
following plan goals related to housing and quality of life support the proposed rezoning:
x Goal 1: Promote the Central District as an attractive place to live by encouraging
reinvestment in residential properties through the district and by supporting new
housing opportunities.
x Goal 3: Remove obstacles to reinvestment in neighborhoods.
The proposed rezoning would result in additional residential development in the
neighborhood. The current commercial zoning is a barrier to redevelopment and
investment in this property due to the size of the lot and existing regulations. This lot is
not suitable for commercial infill development as parking requirements and street
setbacks would take up much of the usable space. The surrounding residential area is
zoned Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5); however, the land area of the
property does not meet the minimum lot size requirements of that zone. Rezoning to RS-
12 ensures the site meets the minimum lot size requirements for single-family and duplex
development. The rezoning will allow reinvestment and additional housing opportunities
in the community.
This lot is also part of the Towncrest Urban Renewal Area, and any renovation of the
existing building or redevelopment of the site will be subject to staff Design Review and
the design guidelines laid out in the Towncrest Urban Renewal Design Plan Manual. The
manual lays out the desired look of the Towncrest area and identifies specific acceptable
4
building materials.
Compatibility with neighborhood: To the north, west, and southwest, this lot is
surrounded by single family homes zoned Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5).
To the east and south, this lot is surrounded by Community Commercial (CC-2) (see
attachment 2). The rezoning from Community Commercial (CC-2) to High Density Single
Family Residential (RS-12) would allow for a transition between the two zones.
Historic buildings: According to assessor’s data, the current building was built in 1900.
Although the existing building was built at the turn of the 20th Century, staff does not
have an intensive survey for the site, and therefore, does not know whether or not the
building is historically significant. Staff has communicated with the applicant on the
process required to make that determination. Specifically, the applicant would need to
hire a historian to conduct an intensive survey of the site to determine its historic
significance, if any.
Traffic implications: The proposed rezoning is a downzoning from CC-2 to RS-12, and
therefore, will not impact traffic significantly. There is only enough room for a single-
family home or a duplex, which will keep traffic counts consistent with current uses as
residential areas typically see less traffic than commercial areas.
Access and street design: This corner lot currently has vehicular access from both 2nd
Avenue and Muscatine Avenue. There are no existing sidewalks on the property. Staff
proposes as a condition of the rezoning that redevelopment or renovation of the site
requires installation of 5-foot sidewalks on both the Muscatine Avenue and 2nd Avenue
frontages.
Neighborhood Open Space: The City’s neighborhood open space requirement applies to
residential subdivisions, commercial subdivisions containing residential uses, and
planned developments. Since this lot will not be subdivided, Neighborhood Open Space
requirement do not apply.
Storm water management: The property has access to the City’s storm water
management system. The storm water design will be reviewed at the site plan review
stage.
Infrastructure fees: There will be no required sanitary sewer or water tap-on fees as this
site already has sanitary sewer and water.
SUMMARY: This small, 0.155-acre lot is not suitable for commercial infill development, as
parking requirements and street setbacks would take up much of the usable space. Rezoning
to high-density single-family residential would conform with the rest of the block and provide
a transition to the commercial properties across the street. Because this is infill development,
there are no concerns with traffic increases and no associated infrastructure or open space
fees.
NEXT STEPS: Upon recommendation by the Planning & Zoning Commission, the rezoning
will go to the City Council for final review and approval. Upon approval by the City Council,
the developer will be subject to staff Design Review due to the location of the site in the
Towncrest Urban Renewal Area and Site Plan review prior to the issuance of building
5
permits.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the approval of REZ18-00025, a proposal to
rezone approximately 0.15 acres of property located at 2130 Muscatine Avenue from
Community Commercial (CC-2) to High Density Single Family Residential (RS-12) subject to
the following condition:
1. The developer will be required to install 5-foot sidewalks along the Muscatine Avenue
and 2nd Avenue frontages upon redevelopment of the site or renovation of the existing
building. This will be required prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Zoning Map
Approved by: __________________________________________________________
Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JANUARY 3, 2019 – 7:00 PM – FORMAL MEETING
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Max Parsons, Mark
Signs, Billie Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT: Phoebe Martin
STAFF PRESENT: Ray Heitner, Sara Hektoen, Jesi Lile, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Jamie Thelan, Alex Carrillo, Kelcey Patrick-Ferree, John Yapp
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 6-0 (Martin absent) the Commission recommends approval of SUB18-00016, an
application submitted by IC Housing Group, LLC for a preliminary plat of Tegler Second, an 8.56
acre, 2-lot residential subdivision with 1 outlot for future development located at 4643 Herbert
Hoover Highway, subject to the revisions.
By a vote of 6-0 (Martin absent) the Commission recommends approval of REZ18-
00024/SUB18-00017, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID-RM to
OPD/RS-5, OPD/RM-12, and OPD/P-1 and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development
Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 20-lot, 18.03-acre residential subdivision located east of
Gilbert Street subject to the following conditions:
1.The development be built as proposed in the preliminary plat, with one 36-plex building
located on Lot 2, 21 townhouse-style units built between Lots 2 and 3, and 15 detached
single family and two attached single-family housing units be built on Lots 4 – 20. The
development substantially conform to the elevations provided for the 36-plex multifamily
residential building and the townhouse style family multifamily buildings.
2.The final plat include details regarding the square footage and description of amenities for
designated private open space on Lot 2.
3.That the City Forester would review and approve the tree replacement and protection plan
prior to issuance of the final plat. This plan shall cover both plans to plant replacement trees
throughout the development and plans to protect and preserve healthy and mature trees in
or near the ravine from construction activity (to the greatest possible extent).
4.At the time of final platting, the development agreement will specify that roof drains and
gutters for Lots 5-16 will be required to drain towards the storm sewer drains on Toby Circle.
5.Construction of a 5 foot wide sidewalk along the western frontage (east side of South Gilbert
Street) of the development prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
6.Installation of curb ramps at the area where City Transportation Planning staff has
designated as appropriate to accommodate an uncontrolled crosswalk prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy.
7.Dedication of a landscape easement, with proposed tree plantings to be approved by the
City Forester, along the southern property boundary in Lot 1 at the time of final platting.
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page2of18
By a vote of 6-0 (Martin absent) the Commission recommends approval of REZ18-00022, an
application submitted by Allen Development, for a rezoning from ID-RP to CH-1 for
approximately 3.2 acres of property located at the northwest corner of Moss Ridge Road and
Highway 1 subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, closure and removal of the access
road off of Highway 1.
2. No building permit shall be issued for the subject property until the City Council
approves a final plat that conforms to the proposed zoning boundaries and a
landscaping plan approved by the City Forester.
3. General conformance with the concept plan only in that a principal building must occupy
the corner of Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1.
4. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, installation of a 10-foot wide sidewalk
along Highway 1, as well as a pedestrian crossing across Moss Ridge Road and
pedestrian ramps on the northern and southern portions of Moss Ridge Road.
CALL TO ORDER:
Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (SUB18-00016):
Discussion of an application, submitted by IC Housing Group, LLC, for a preliminary plat of
Tegler Second, an 8.56 acre, 2-lot residential subdivision with 1 outlot for future development
located at 4643 Herbert Hoover Highway.
Lile began the staff report noting the applicant, IC Housing Group, LLC is requesting approval of
the preliminary plat for Tegler Second Subdivision, a 2-lot subdivision, which includes 2 multi-
family residential lots and 1 outlot for future development located at 4643 Herbert Hoover
Highway but the address will change to Rochester Avenue as the area is developed. The IC
Housing Group has a purchase agreement in place for the property. On December 4, 2018 the
City Council passed an ordinance to conditionally rezone the property to Low Density Multi-
Family Residential (RM-12) and Medium Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-20). The southern
portion of the property remains Interim Development – Single Family Residential (ID- RS). The
three conditions imposed by the conditional rezoning ordinance are:
1. City Council approval of a final plat that generally conforms to the street layout shown in the
concept plan
2. The owner agrees to construct a north/south street to City standards such and agrees to
dedicate this street to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit
3. A detailed landscaping plan must be approved by the City Forester to ensure noise and wind
buffering from Herbert Hoover Highway, and development must be done in accordance with
the approved plan.
Lile showed an overview of the three part project, in phase A there will be construction of an
affordable family apartment building with 36 units, they have been awarded funding from the
Iowa Finance Authority, in addition there is $700,000 from The Housing Trust Fund and
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page3of18
$200,000 from the City. Phase B will be an affordable senior housing project with 52 units
and phase C is for future development.
Lile showed the preliminary plat, it is divided into three lots, there will be the development of a
north/south public street (Nex Avenue) that will connect with Rochester Avenue (Herbert Hoover
Highway). Lot 1 is located south of Rochester Avenue and west of Nex Avenue, vehicular
access to this lot will be provided by Nex Avenue. Lot 1 also includes a temporary fire vehicle
turnaround as Nex Avenue is stubbed off at the start of Outlot A, there is also a dry bottom
detention basin at the south side of the property line. Lot 2 is located south of Rochester Avenue
and east of Nex Avenue, Nex Avenue will also provide vehicular access to lot 2. Outlot A
currently contains one single family home with driveway access off Rochester Avenue. There
are plans for a second dry bottom detention basin between outlot A and lot 2 on the east side of
the property. Nex Avenue will be stubbed off at the beginning of outlot A with a temporary fire
turnaround. With the eventual development of outlot A, Nex Avenue is planned to connect to the
east/west roads south of the property. The applicant has requested to temporarily keep the
residence on outlot A to be used as a rental property with plans to house their construction
manager during the project timeline. Currently the house is on well water and septic sewer. City
Staff is open to allowing the residence to remain subject to a few requirements:
1. Public Works staff must approve a phasing plan for how the applicant will provide safe
access to the house during construction. These plans must be submitted along with the
construction drawings at final platting. The construction plans must also identify access to the
structure after completion of the roadway, Nex Avenue.
2. At a set date to be finalized in the subdivider’s agreement, the dwelling must be demolished
or connected to City water and sewer. This date will be set based on the anticipated
construction timeline and is expected to be in March 2020.
The Northeast District Plan encourages an interconnected transportation system, there are existing
8 foot sidewalks along Rochester Avenue and the preliminary plat shows 5 foot sidewalks on both
sides of Nex Avenue that will connect to the existing sidewalks on the south side of Rochester
Avenue. Lile noted there is also access to transit within a half mile of the proposed subdivision.
As per the conditional zoning agreement, the new street (Nex Avenue) will be built to City
standards. This development will not cause a significant increase in traffic in the area, Rochester
Avenue has the capacity to handle about 15,000 vehicles per day and is currently under 5,000.
The Northeast District Plan also calls for increasing neighborhood areas for open space, a
subdivision of this size requires the dedication of 0.40 acres of public open space or fees in lieu
of. The Parks and Recreation Department has determined that fees are appropriate in lieu of
neighborhood open space dedication. The fee will be equivalent to the fair market value of 0.40
acres of property. This requirement will need to be addressed in the legal papers for the final
plat.
The subject area includes 12,326 square feet of steep slopes and 1,754 square feet of critical
slopes in this subdivision, all of which, will be impacted during various phases of construction.
The critical slopes are located on Outlot A, but will be impacted by the development of the dry
bottom detention basin. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance allows for the development of storm
water management facilities within sensitive areas. The applicant has submitted a preliminary
stormwater management plan that proposed two dry bottom detention basins in order to deal
with storm runoff. In September 2018 the applicant held a good neighbor meeting where one
neighbor expressed concerns with construction site runoff and storm water management but
there has been no further correspondence since then.
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page4of18
Lile noted in the staff report the Commission received, the sanitary sewer was listed as a
deficiency due to depth issues however these have been mostly resolved with the remaining
details to be worked out in the construction drawings.
The applicant also provided a concept plan for phase A and phase B, it is just a concept and
details will need to be refined in the site plan stage. The applicant also provided some updated
elevations from what was seen at the rezoning meeting, which are also subject to change during
the site plan stage.
Lile noted as per the conditional zoning agreement the applicant submitted a detailed
landscaping plan for approval by the City Forester, overall he liked the design and plant diversity
and composition, the one comment made was to replace red pine with something else (and he
gave suggestions for that) as red pine does not do well in hot and humid areas.
Staff recommends that SUB18-00016, an application submitted by IC Housing Group, LLC for a
preliminary plat of Tegler Subdivision, a 2-lot residential subdivision with an outlot identified for
future development located on 7.41-acres of land at 4643 Herbert Hoover Highway be approved.
Lile noted next steps will be upon approval of the proposed preliminary plat, the applicant will be
required to submit an application for a final plat to subdivide the land into lots. The final plat will
be reviewed and approved by City Council. After the subdivision stage, the applicant will submit
a site plan for staff review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
Baker asked if this was the only review the Zoning Commission will have of this project. Hektoen
noted that the rezoning of the property came before the Commission. Baker questioned the
width of Nex Avenue at 20 feet. Russett noted she believes it is 28 feet, and the applicant can
clarify. Hensch noted the application says 26 foot road with apron. Baker asked if it can be
widened in the future. Lile said it just means it is a bit wider where Nex Avenue connects with
Rochester Avenue, but there is no turning lane. Baker shared concern once Nex Avenue is
connected to the roads to the south. Baker questioned the traffic counts on Rochester Avenue
and if it included the entire length of Rochester Avenue. Lile said the counts are for the area
where this development will be happening. Baker noted the language for the senior housing
states “most likely seniors” and wondered if that has been solidified into absolutely will be senior
housing. Lile stated the applicant is proposing senior housing. Russett noted the applicant is
submitting an application to the Iowa Finance Authority for funding to build an affordable housing
senior complex but the zoning on the site would allow senior or multi-family. Hektoen noted
senior housing is permitted in the RM-20 zone, Russett reiterated the applicant is looking for the
financing. Baker noted the neighbor concern about runoff was addressed but questioned if that
neighbor informed of improvement to the plan. Russett said the neighbor would have received a
letter in the mail. Signs noted that neighbor was at the previous Planning and Zoning meeting
where the rezoning of this property was discussed.
Dyer noted the senior housing building will be further from the city transit than the affordable
housing building.
Hensch noted his concern regarding stormwater runoff and if the City Engineer had signed off on
the plan. Lile noted they are working on a few final details of the plan.
Dyer asked when outlot A is developed in the future would it come back before the Commission.
Hektoen noted it would because it would require a rezoning.
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page5of18
Townsend asked about paying a fee-in-lieu for the neighborhood open space and noted with that
many residents, whether they are seniors or not, shouldn’t there be some open space. Russett
noted the neighborhood open space requirements provide an option to either providing the public
open space on the site or the fee-in-lieu to go to the City’s park system, so in this case the
money would go towards the public park systems. There will still be private open space in the
development, not public. The application is showing a private open space on property with
amenities for children, a playground area and benches for seating.
Parsons asked what the setback of the building on lot A from Rochester Avenue will be. Russett
replied it will be 40 feet.
Baker asked for clarification on the width of the road (Nex Avenue) as it connects to Rochester
Avenue and it will remain 26 feet wide, so what is a road apron of 70 feet will widen to allow for
sufficient traffic movement. Russett said Public Works and Transportation would have to answer
that question, she believes it is just the general design that is approved for a 26 foot wide road,
as it gets closer to the intersection it needs to be widened to make for easier turning movements.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Jamie Thelan (3665 10th Avenue, Waite Park, MN) is the CEO of IC Housing Group, LLC and
wanted to give a little more detail about the development, they have been in business for about
27 years, they develop multifamily and commercial developments including hotels, their main
office is in Minnesota although they have properties Cedar Rapids, Coralville and Indianola.
They do developments and find their own sites for multifamily and hotels, do the construction,
they are their own general contractor, own architect and also manage their properties. As the
Staff reported there is Lot 1, Lot 2 and Outlot A, the first phase is a 36 unit proposed building, on
lot 2 is a proposed 52 unit senior housing development and outlot A is being held for future
development. With regards to building design on the first building they are pretty far along, they
have secured most of their funding for that building, and will start construction in March or April,
he showed a rendering of the building as well as some pictures of common areas that are typical
in these developments (fitness room, community room, and leasing office onsite), all the units will
have patios or decks, full appliance packages including washers and dryers, walk-in closets,
secure access and it will be an elevator building. Thelan noted this is an affordable housing
project with mixed income (some units will be market rate). There will be 6 one-bedroom units,
12 two-bedroom units and 18 three-bedroom units so it is really designed for families. There are
mixed income restrictions, some units at 30%, some at 40%, some at 60% and some at market
value. That equates to a rental range in each of the three types of units. Thelan showed
concepts of phase 1 and the open space areas including a children’s playground area, grills, and
picnic tables.
Thelan noted the building concept for phase 2 is really just a concept at this time, they are
proposing a senior development and they are making an application to Iowa Finance Authority
for an affordable senior project, if that gets funded a senior affordable project is the plan. The
building design for the senior project will be similar to the multifamily building, it won’t be exactly
the same but will try to match the design concepts and the amenities will be similar. The senior
building will all be two-bedroom units, each unit approximately 870 square feet, and a mix of 40%
and 60% and some market units. He noted in the senior building they opened in Coralville last
year they included a gazebo, elevated planting beds, and other outdoor areas and hope to add
those to this proposed concept as well.
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page6of18
Hensch asked if they do not get the funding for the senior housing development would it then
become a mixed income unit like the one on lot 1. Thelan said they would look at that, with the
senior project they get a density bonus so they would have to see the impact of that, but that is
likely although it would be less units than the 52 proposed for the senior development.
Hensch asked about the issues raised regarding stormwater runoff, Thelan noted they have
worked with MMS Consultants (their civil engineer) and all concerns have been addressed
though design and will meet the City requirements.
Dyer asked if there is any open green space that will not be concrete of children tile area.
Thelan said there is green space on Rochester Avenue, lawn space between the sidewalk and
the building, as well as some green space on the south side.
Baker asked if they do not get the funding for the senior housing and instead build a multifamily
would they change from all two-bedroom units to a mix of one, two and three. Thelan confirmed
if they went to a family housing development it would more mirror phase 1.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Parson moved to recommend approval of SUB18-00016, an application submitted by IC
Housing Group, LLC for a preliminary plat of Tegler Second, an 8.56 acre, 2-lot residential
subdivision with 1 outlot for future development located at 4643 Herbert Hoover Highway,
subject to the revisions.
Townsend seconded the motion.
Dyer shared a concern of all the space being used up by buildings and concrete, not much green
space and there is no nearby park space.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0 (Martin absent).
REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ18-00024/SUB18-00017):
Discussion of an application, submitted by Bedrock, LLC, for a rezoning of approximately
18.03 acres from Interim Development Multi-family Residential (ID-RM) zone to Planned
Development Overlay/Low Density Single-family Residential (OPD/RS-5) zone, Planned
Development Overlay/Low Density Multi-family Residential (OPD/RM-12) zone and
Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone and a preliminary plat of Cherry Creek subdivision, a 20- lot,
18.03 acres subdivision located east of S. Gilbert Street and south of Waterfront Drive.
Heitner presented the staff report and noted an earlier version of this application was first
presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission in the spring, this is a second iteration of this
application. The application is submitted by Bedrock, LLC with the intention of creating a 20-lot
residential subdivision with one lot being reserved for a future use of a City fire station. Heitner
showed aerial views of the subject property, the property is currently privately held however the City
does have a purchase agreement for Lot 1 of the subdivision with intent to construct a City fire
station at a later date. Heitner showed an overview of the proposed zoning, Lot 1 would be P-1, the
southeast area is proposed as OPD/RS-5, and the remainder of the area would be OPD/RM-12.
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page7of18
Heitner stated at the meeting on the previous application, June 21, 2018, the Commission voted
6-1 to recommend the application to the City Council, with the following conditions:
1. That the City Forester would review and approve the tree replacement and protection
plan prior to issuance of the final plat.
2. At the time of final platting, the development agreement will specify that roof drains and
gutters for Lots 5-16 will be required to drain towards the storm sewer drains on Toby
Circle.
3. That the applicant will contact with an archaeologist approved by the state to complete a
study or excavation plan prior to any additional grading on the property.
At the City Council’s second hearing for the application on September 4th, 2018, the motion
recommending approval of the application failed due to a 3-3 vote from the Council. Dissenting
opinions included concerns about increased traffic and density to this neighborhood, and a
general lack of social infrastructure in the development.
The application now has been resubmitted with a few major changes and Staff is recommending
the original conditions from the first submission still stand with this new application. The current
iteration of the application includes a preliminary plat and sensitive areas development plan, in
addition to the request to rezone the land. The current application has made a few notable
changes. The second 36 dwelling-unit multi-family building, formerly located on Lot 1, has been
removed from this application. The City of Iowa City is a co-applicant on the rezoning application
for Lot 1 to be rezoned to Neighborhood Public (P-1). The current application has also removed
all structures from the Lot 1 area to make way for a grading plan that will make the lot relatively
flat and ready for future development.
Heitner stated the in terms of compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, The South District Plan
encourages development of neighborhoods with a mix of housing types to allow for housing
options. The Plan indicates that property along the east side of Gilbert Street, south of the
railroad, may be appropriate for town-home or other small lot or duplex development. Additional
density may be considered for projects that add a unique housing element or that enhance
housing diversity for the South District or that otherwise contribute to the connectivity of
neighborhoods or enhance visibility and street access to public parks and other open space. It is
believed the extension of Cherry Avenue will provide an important east-west connection allowing
neighbors more direct access to Gilbert Street and the parks and trails located to the west of
Gilbert Street. The Plan also identifies this area as appropriate for planned overlay development
to protect the wooded slopes in the area, and the future land use map in the Comprehensive
Plan identifies this area as appropriate for residential density at a rate of 2-8 dwelling units per
acre.
Heitner next showed an overview of the subdivision layout, the proposed subdivision will connect
Cherry Avenue with the S. Gilbert St. A new street, Toby Circle, will be built with two points of
access off of Cherry Avenue. The subdivision will transition from the single family housing that
exists to east to gradually more dense multifamily, townhouse style along Cherry Avenue with
the 36-plex multifamily building to the very west of the development. Staff has reviewed all width
and frontage for all zones and all are compliant.
Heitner noted that because this is a planned development zone there are specific criteria outlined
in Article 14-3A of the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance.
1. Density and Design of the Planned Development will be compatible with and/or
complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and scale,
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page8of18
relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout.
2. The development will not overburden existing streets and utilities.
3. The development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values and privacy
of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development.
4. The combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the underlying
zoning requirements or from City street standards will be in the public interest, in
harmony with the purposes of this Title, and with other building regulations of the City.
With the issue of density, the Comprehensive Plan identifies this particular area as appropriate
for residential density 2-8 dwelling units per acre, both in the proposed RS-5 and RS-12 this
application is well within the 2-8 dwelling units per acre. With respect to land use, mass and
scale, Heitner showed renderings of the proposed buildings to show scale, the single family
homes, townhouses and the 36-plex. The design of the buildings conform to the City’s design
standards. Concerning private open space, the applicant has dedicated 0.08 acres of private
open space to the west of the 36-plex building on Lot 2, the space will include some playground
equipment and outdoor dining space. The applicant will pay fees-in-lieu for public open space,
due to the steep slopes and woodlands it would be challenging to provide the public open space.
Heitner next discussed the traffic circulation, the extension of Cherry Avenue will improve
connectivity and a needed access point onto Gilbert Street. There was some concerns about
increased traffic along Cherry Avenue, both the intersections with Toby Avenue and Cherry
Circle will have traffic calming circles to help control traffic speeds, also street widths will be
tapered down to about 28 feet in width to help reduce speeds in that area. Concerning streets
and public utilities, Heitner stated Public Works Staff has confirmed existing water and sanitary
sewer structure has sufficient capacity to accommodate this development, onsite stormwater
management will be necessary for this development and two large detention basins located in
the ravine along the north property boundary will be created.
Concerning views, light and air, property values and privacy Staff does find the single family
homes to the west of the Pepperwood Subdivision will provide a sensible transition from the
singe family detached housing that exists there to gradually denser housing. The 36-plex
building on Lot 2 will be built down-slope from the existing Pepperwood Subdivision. Staff is
recommending as a condition of the rezoning the developer dedicate a 20-foot wide landscaping
easement along the southwest corner of Lot 1 to help screen the future fire station from the
properties to the south. Regarding pedestrian facilities, Staff is recommending as a condition of
the rezoning the developer put in a 5-foot wide sidewalk along the development’s entire western
frontage (the east side of Gilbert Street). Staff is also recommending as a condition the
developer install curb ramps at the area where the City intends to put a crosswalk across South
Gilbert Street to connect to Napoleon Park. With respect to protected slopes, there will be
stormwater detention facilities located within the ravine along the north boundary line of the
property, the development will require some grading on protected slopes, however the
stormwater detention basins will be designed to correct current erosion taking place in the ravine
and prevent future erosion as well. Heitner noted the plan does call for removal of about 85% of
the non-buffered woodlands in the RS-5 area, because of this the applicant is being required to
plant 234 replacement trees in the area, and the applicant will meet the minimum woodland
retention requirement in the RM-12 area of 20%.
Heitner noted in the initial application it was discussed that the applicant pursue an archeological
study of the site, the applicant has worked with a firm recommended by the State Archaeologist
to conduct a supervised excavation of the site and that excavation and study determined there
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page9of18
were no human burials observed and no additional archeology work was necessary for this
development.
Heitner showed the preliminary landscape plan for the subdivision.
A second good neighbor meeting was held on the subdivision proposal on November 27, 2018,
there were about 15 area residents at the meeting and attendees addressed mix degrees of
support and opposition for the project. Some of the major areas of concern included general
concern over neighborhood density, a lack of usable open space, and safety concerns for
pedestrians using an uncontrolled crosswalk across South Gilbert Street. To this point Staff has
not received any correspondence from neighbors.
Next steps: Pending approval from this Commission it would go forth for City Council review and
approval, at the time of final platting a sensitive areas development plan would be reviewed by
City Staff as well as a major site plan review.
Staff recommends approval of REZ18-00024/SUB18-00017, an application submitted by
Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID-RM to OPD/RS-5, OPD/RM-12, and OPD/P-1 and a
Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 20-lot,
18.03-acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to the following
conditions:
1.The development be built as proposed in the preliminary plat, with one 36-plex building
located on Lot 2, 21 townhouse-style units built between Lots 2 and 3, and 15 detached
single family and two attached single-family housing units be built on Lots 4 – 20. The
development substantially conform to the elevations provided for the 36-plex multifamily
residential building and the townhouse style family multifamily buildings.
2.The final plat include details regarding the square footage and description of amenities for
designated private open space on Lot 2.
3.That the City Forester would review and approve the tree replacement and protection plan
prior to issuance of the final plat. This plan shall cover both plans to plant replacement trees
throughout the development and plans to protect and preserve healthy and mature trees in
or near the ravine from construction activity (to the greatest possible extent).
4.At the time of final platting, the development agreement will specify that roof drains and
gutters for Lots 5-16 will be required to drain towards the storm sewer drains on Toby Circle.
5.Construction of a 5 foot wide sidewalk along the western frontage (east side of South Gilbert
Street) of the development prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
6.Installation of curb ramps at the area where City Transportation Planning staff has
designated as appropriate to accommodate an uncontrolled crosswalk prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy.
7.Dedication of a landscape easement, with proposed tree plantings to be approved by the
City Forester, along the southern property boundary in Lot 1 at the time of final platting.
Hensch recalled when the Commission approved the last rezoning on this area that conditions 5
and 6 were discussed at length and happy to see those included again in the conditions.
Signs asked if Cherry Street will allow for street parking in front of the townhouses. Russett said
Staff would have to look into that and report back but thinks at least one side would allow street
parking. Signs noted if not allowed, then there isn’t really any guest parking for the townhouses.
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page10of18
Hektoen noted that in the first condition it is recommended the development being built as in the
preliminary plat but the pedestrian facilities mention building designs, visible doors and windows
and a variety of materials, is that by operation of Code or should that be added as a condition.
Does the Code require those design elements and should they be added to the condition of
rezoning. Right now there is nothing tying the developer to the proposed elevations so if needs
to be added this is the time. Russett said the first condition was clarified to state the condition is
related to the proposed plans in terms of the design of the layout of the lots but also tie it to the
elevations to the townhomes and multifamily building.
Parsons asked where the current nearest fire station is located. Hensch said likely Fire Station 1
downtown or the one by Sycamore Mall.
Baker noted this failed at the Council level last time and one of the concerns was a lack of social
infrastructure, what was the particular concern. Heitner said there were walkability concerns and
lack of communal gathering spaces and front porches. Baker asked when the proposal of a fire
station become a factor in this application. Russett noted it was not part of the original application
last spring nor what went before Council in September. Baker asked if Council approved that
location for a fire station prior to this current application coming before Planning & Zoning.
Hektoen replied that Council has approved a purchase agreement for that plot of land for a future
proposed fire station. The purchase agreement is contingent on the approval of the rezoning
and re-platting of this land. Baker noted the current application has removed all structures from
Lot 1 to make way for a grading plan that will make the lot relatively flat and ready for future
development, and if that lot was to be made relatively flat for future private development, would
there be any environmental issues raised, or is the fact the City is going to use that land remove
any environmental concerns. Heitner said any environmental review would be the same
regardless of if it is a public or private use.
Baker questioned the 234 replacement trees and if they were mandatory to be in that one area,
the RS-5 zone. Heitner confirmed that was correct, it is part of the Zoning Code that there be a
minimum woodland retention requirement that must be met. The RS-5 zone is 50% and since
the proposal is to remove 85% of the trees, the developer must replace them. Baker asked
when those trees would have to be planted. Heitner said it will take some time for the trees to
grow, but they will be planted at the time of development of the houses. Baker asked if there
was any discussion to allow the developer to use that number of trees to be place anywhere on
the entire development. Russett said that could be considered as part of the landscaping plan,
the current landscaping plan shows where they plan to plant all 234 trees and has been reviewed
by the City Forester and can be placed throughout the development.
Baker asked about the private shared open space on page 7 of the Staff Report “As shown in the
revised plat, the developer has identified 0.08 acres of private open space” and he noted that
seems like a very small space and wanted to know what the square footage of 0.08 acres is.
Parson replied it is 3850 square feet. Heitner noted that is also from the City Code and is
formula based on number of units in the zone, which is the minimum required. Baker asked if
the Commission is able to require more. Hektoen said the Commission can impose conditions to
satisfy public needs that are being directly created by the rezoning. One would have to articulate
a public need to require more private open space.
Signs noted there is a whole lot of sloped land outside of the area where the structures will be
that is open space.
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page11of18
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Alex Carrillo (373 Windmill Place) is the project coordinator for Bedrock, LLC. He first thanked
City Staff, Heitner and Russett, for working with them on this application. He touched on some of
the highlights, he noted the 36-plex on the south side of the original application was a point of
contention with City Councilors and some of the neighbors, so it seemed like the best place to
make a change. It was good to work with the City and identify a need for a future fire station
here. Removing that 36-plex from the plans is a significant reduction in the density of the
development. With regards to the open space, the 0.08 acre space is the space where they felt
they could add some amenities for the condominium building, but there will remain a couple
acres along the north side of the property that will be woodland forever, it is not usable space
because of the ravine and slope but it will be nice for the homes to overlook woodlands.
Additionally Napoleon Park is across the street for lots of open space, a safe identified crosswalk
is being constructed, which was again a concern from the first proposal. Carrillo next discussed
the scale of the 36-plex and they feel it is very appropriate sized building for this area due to the
fact of the slope of the land and will be an effective transition from Gilbert Street to the residential
neighborhood and Pepperwood Subdivision. Lastly he touched on some of the materials they
plan to use on the buildings plus the concept for a play structure by the 36-plex. They will use a
Rosetta stone for the retaining wall along the north side.
Dyer asked if there was any doorway from the back of the 36-plex building, Carrillo said there
was, so they can get right out to the open space.
Baker asked the number of bedrooms per unit in the 36-plex, Carrillo said there would be both
one-bedroom and two-bedroom units. Baker asked if there was an estimated time of completion.
Carrillo said they would like to start in the spring, first putting in the street and infrastructure, then
onto the single family homes and townhomes, it would likely be a couple years before the 36-
plex was built. Baker thanked Carrillo for his patience and willingness to work with the City and
neighbors on reconfiguring this project.
Kelcey Patrick-Ferree (652 Sandusky Drive) came forth to oppose this rezoning effort, her
husband spoke at the last meeting in opposition as well. She noted she is sad to be here
opposing this, the developers have been very nice, but she lives in this neighborhood and they
don’t. She thought they would see substantial changes to the proposal after it was rejected by
the City Council, and adding the fire station does not meet the substantial changes she was
expecting to see. She does appreciate they held a second good neighbor meeting, it was a good
discussion but still no changes after the discussions. Patrick-Ferree said she does not feel the
City Council’s objections were addressed nor were the neighborhood’s objections addressed, it
is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and her neighborhood is getting negative attention
due to all the concentration of services in one small area. She doesn’t feel the pedestrian
crossing at Gilbert Street is adequate, it goes north on Gilbert Street when all the things people
will want to get to will be south on Gilbert Street, the park, the animal shelter and overall the
protected crossing is in the wrong location. She also doesn’t feel there is enough open space for
the 36 unit apartment building. She heard the earlier discussion on that and how the
Commission may not be able to do anything about that and she thinks there is an overall lack of
infrastructure in the area. She was at the City Council meeting and sidewalks were addressed,
crosswalks were addressed and open space was addressed and the changes made to this
proposal do not address any of those objections or concerns. One of the big impacts the
neighborhood was concerned about was the impact on the schools, the schools in this area are
all very high FRL (Free or Reduced Lunch), the School Board just recently redistricted to try to
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page12of18
address some of that and took her children’s school from just over 70% FRL to just under 70%
FRL. Adding more low-income housing to this area will cause more problems. 36 unit apartment
buildings are low-income housing whether the developer intends them to be or not. The
developer is saying it will be condos but Patrick-Ferree is concerned the condos will be
purchased and rented out like apartments just like in other complexes. Low-income housing, the
average renter wage in Johnson County is $9.25 per hour and the mean renter household
income is $28,115. A family with two or more children quality for Free or Reduce Lunch at that
income level. It appears this development will be about 70% renter housing, the townhouse and
apartments will likely be rental housing, and she is concerned about the high potential of rental
housing in this area. Another concern she has about the Gilbert Street crossing is the University
of Iowa has been doing studies about the capability of children under the age of 14 to judge
traffic and an unprotected intersection is not going to adequately protect children who are going
to try to cross Gilbert Street. Her three-year old loves to go to Napoleon Park and the animal
shelter and she is concerned as he gets older and his ability to judge traffic to cross an
unprotected intersection. She is also skeptical of the claim that Sandusky Drive is not going to
see increased traffic, there have been traffic studies and she invites the Commission to postpone
their decision on this to look at those traffic studies. Patrick-Ferree said she believes this
proposal is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, she read the Staff report and it quotes a
portion of the Comprehensive Plan that talks about having multifamily housing in this area, but
the specific multifamily housing the Comprehensive Plan calls for in this area is a small
apartment building of 3-10 units, not a 36 unit apartment building. She is frustrated the City is
ignoring its own inclusionary zoning efforts anytime a developer brings forth a proposal. As far
as the negative publicity goes, the Press-Citizen recently printed an article called “Cluster of
Social Services Providers call South East Iowa City Home”. She drives by all these providers
every day, just as she drives by this proposed development site every day. She noted she does
have to go all the way around and the Cheery Creek extension will only save her about 4
minutes, so not very much. She is concerned about adding a fire station to this area and adding
even more services to a part of town already getting negative publicity. On Nextdoor.com the
comments about the nearby HyVee is disgusting. Therefore, for all of these reasons she very
strongly encourages the Commission to vote against recommending the rezoning of this project
to the City Council.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Hektoen noted they have seen two different sets of elevations (July and November) and need to
make sure which set of elevation drawings that should be used and are referred to in condition
number 1. Russett said it is the elevations included in the Staff report, the updated ones from
November.
Signs moved approval of REZ18-00024/SUB18-00017, an application submitted by
Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID-RM to OPD/RS-5, OPD/RM-12, and OPD/P-1 and a
Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a
20-lot, 18.03-acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to the
following conditions:
1.The development be built as proposed in the preliminary plat, with one 36-plex
building located on Lot 2, 21 townhouse-style units built between Lots 2 and 3, and
15 detached single family and two attached single-family housing units be built on
Lots 4 – 20. The development substantially conform to the elevations provided for
the 36-plex multifamily residential building and the townhouse style family
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page13of18
multifamily buildings.
2.The final plat include details regarding the square footage and description of
amenities for designated private open space on Lot 2.
3.That the City Forester would review and approve the tree replacement and protection
plan prior to issuance of the final plat. This plan shall cover both plans to plant
replacement trees throughout the development and plans to protect and preserve
healthy and mature trees in or near the ravine from construction activity (to the
greatest possible extent).
4.At the time of final platting, the development agreement will specify that roof drains
and gutters for Lots 5-16 will be required to drain towards the storm sewer drains on
Toby Circle.
5.Construction of a 5 foot wide sidewalk along the western frontage (east side of South
Gilbert Street) of the development prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
6.Installation of curb ramps at the area where City Transportation Planning staff has
designated as appropriate to accommodate an uncontrolled crosswalk prior to
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
7.Dedication of a landscape easement, with proposed tree plantings to be approved by
the City Forester, along the southern property boundary in Lot 1 at the time of final
platting.
Parsons seconded the motion.
Baker asked for clarification on the Comprehensive Plan language and multifamily being in the 3-
10 unit range. Heitner said the Comprehensive Plan states a desire in this area to provide a
variety of housing types and a variety of density types and that was one of the main drivers for
Staff’s initial approval of this proposal. There is a variety of housing types in this development as
well as a variety of density. Baker asked where the figure 3-10 shows up in the Comprehensive
Plan. Russett added the Comprehensive Plan also identifies a proposed density for this area.
She noted the Comprehensive Plan is a vision to guide development and the City uses their
zoning as a way to implement that vision and Staff feels the proposed development is consistent
with Comprehensive Plan due to proposed density which is in line with the Comprehensive Plan
as well as mix of housing types. Baker agrees the density of the project seems appropriate, he
is just confused about a specific figure being cited versus a more general goal being cited.
Russett said staff could look into the Plan to see if it specifically states 3-10 units, but noted the
Plan is not a regulatory document, it is a vision. Hektoen added this is a planned development
so it means concentrating density in one place so you can preserve an another area. Baker
acknowledged there has been a reduction with the elimination of the second 36-plex and he also
thinks a fires station in this area is a good thing.
Signs recalled at the first proposal of this the main concerns were density and view with
relationship to the property to the south, he feels the revised plan does a tremendous job of
addressing both those issues and he does get concerned when people bash low-income housing
and there is nothing in here that says this will be low-income, he is also concerned when there
are expectations of things staying the same. In the Pepperwood Subdivision area there are five
street stubs indicating those stubs will someday go through to an additional development. All the
plans (City, Comprehensive, District) reflect putting more development in this area. Signs noted
he was not against the first plan, but he feels this revised plan is even better in addressing a lot
of the concerns. With regards to the concerns of the schools, that should not be a concern that
drives their policy it is an issue the schools need to address.
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page14of18
Parson agreed, the main issue from the previous application was the 36-plex on Lot 1 and now
that is gone so it has alleviated any concerns he had.
Baker is still uncomfortable with the crosswalk, he cannot think of a better location for it. Signs
feels they could do one where Cherry meets Gilbert just as easily as the one proposed 500 feet
north. Russett said Public Works and Transportation Staff looked at this and while that would be
an ideal location there is a significant drop off on the western side of Gilbert Street that cannot
been seen on the aerial.
Hensch believes this is a much improved proposal, the density issue has certainly been resolved
by the removal of the other 36-plex, the fire station will be a neighborhood good, rather than
negative, and as a resident of Pepper Drive since 1993 he understands the neighborhood really
well and notes because of the concentration of group homes and social services it is in some
regards a negative but in some regards a positive.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Martin absent)
REZONING ITEM (REZ18-00022):
Discussion of an application, submitted by Allen Development, for a rezoning of approximately
3.2 acres of property located at the northwest corner of Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1 from
Interim Development-Research Park (ID-RP) to Highway Commercial (CH-1).
Russett presented the Staff report and began by showing an aerial map of the proposed project
site, located at the northwest corner of Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1. She next showed the
current zoning designations of the project site and the areas around it. The property is currently
zoned Interim Development-Research Park which allows for nonurban development such as
agriculture and very low density single family. The applicant is proposing to rezone this to
Highway Commercial and the property can be rezoned at this time due to the availability of public
infrastructure. Russett noted that based on the Comprehensive Plan this area is designated as
Office Research Development Center, this area is envisioned for office park uses based on its
close proximity to Interstate 80. This area is home to a number of the City’s major employers
and the proposed zoning to Highway Commercial is consistent with this vision in that it would
provide commercial support services in close proximity to major employers. Russett showed
some photographs of the project site. Based on data from FEMA the project site is located in the
100- year and 500-year floodplain; however, in 2015 the property owner obtained permits from
the City to fill in the site and raise it above the 500-year floodplain. Compliance with the City’s
floodplain management standards will be required at the review of the site plan. In terms of
transportation the site is accessed via Moss Ridge Road, the area is also served by the North
Dodge bus route, the closet stop is within a 15 minute walk. The City’s subdivision regulations
would require that sidewalks be installed along Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1 on the
southern and eastern frontages of the project site.
Staff is recommending a couple of conditions related to transportation, first is the closure and
removal of the access road off of Highway 1 and therefore sole access to the site would be from
Moss Ridge Road. In addition Staff is recommending the applicant install a 10-foot wide
sidewalk along Highway 1, as well as a pedestrian crossing across Moss Ridge Road to the
south and pedestrian ramps on the northern and southern portions of Moss Ridge Road. The
City will be responsible for installing pedestrian signal improvements. Russett showed a concept
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page15of18
plan of the site, and Staff recommends a condition that requires general conformance with the
concept plan in that a principal building must occupy the corner of Moss Ridge Road and
Highway 1. The concept also shows stormwater management detention facilities which would be
required at platting. Finally the concept plan shows proposed landscaping.
Staff recommends approval of REZ18-00022, an application submitted by Allen Development, for
a rezoning from ID-RP to CH-1 for approximately 3.2 acres of property located at the northwest
corner of Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1 subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, closure and removal of the access
road off of Highway 1.
2. No building permit shall be issued for the subject property until the City Council
approves a final plat that conforms to the proposed zoning boundaries.
3. General conformance with the concept plan only in that a principal building must occupy
the corner of Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1.
4. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, installation of a 10-foot wide sidewalk
along Highway 1, as well as a pedestrian crossing across Moss Ridge Road and
pedestrian ramps on the northern and southern portions of Moss Ridge Road.
Hensch asked if this site was at the far north boundary of the city limits and Russett confirmed it
was. Hensch noted the report said landscaping would be addressed at the site plan review and
his concern is this is an entryway into the City and the Commission has stressed how important
landscaping is at these entry points and he is concerned a landscaping plan was not required to
be submitted at this stage. Baker suggested adding that a landscaping plan be submitted as well
to condition #2. Russett said they could add the condition that the landscaping plan be reviewed
by the City Forester, it would still be at site plan review, but adds a second layer of review. Dyer
shared concern that the Forester really focusses on the kinds of plantings and not design.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
John Yapp (920 4th Avenue) from Allen Development came forward to reiterate a few points and
then address the comments on landscaping. They are aware this is located on a major corridor
and commuter highway and close by to Interstate 80. The City constructed Moss Ridge Road
with a signalized intersection about three years ago with the intent of spurring office park
development to the west, that hasn’t occurred yet. This particular property is isolated from the
office park to the west and to the rest of Mr. Sladek’s property to the north due to Rapid Creek
and Rapid Creek Floodway. Yapp noted this development would serve the large employment
areas to the south, not just north of Interstate 80 but south of Interstate 80, which has thousands
and thousands of employees in total. The property is currently at the north boundary of the City,
however the City does have long range plans to construct Oakdale Boulevard to the north, which
would connect to Oakdale Boulevard in Coralville and open up more of that land to the north for
development. Regarding the landscaping plan, there are two more phases where that could be
reviewed, both the preliminary plat and the site plan review. The City’s site plan process
includes the landscaping plans to be reviewed by City Engineering, City Forrester and City
Planning Staff, and they do not have any objection to that being a condition. Yapp noted they
also concur with the rest of the staff conditions.
Hensch asked how far the property is from Rapid Creek. Yapp believes it is about 100 feet from
the creek itself, the property does border the floodway of the creek. Hensch asked if the property
site was flooded in 1993 or 2008. Yapp noted that Mr. Sladek, who currently owns the property,
stated that before the property was filled it would likely have been flooded, but it has now been
filled.
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page16of18
Dyer noted this was the least developed concept plan she had seen in at least seven or eight
years and would like to know a little bit more about what is proposed for the site. Yapp said they
do not yet have any tenants for the development, they did the concept plan to show how two or
three different uses could fit on the property. Additionally they will be closing the direct access
off Highway 1 and making access from Moss Ridge Road. The types of uses they have been in
contact with include convenience store/gas station, office development and fast-casual
restaurants.
Hensch asked about the timeline for the development. Yapp said there is no specific timeline, it
will depend on attracting users to the property.
Baker asked if this rezoning would also allow for one large building as opposed to two or three
smaller buildings. Yapp said it could.
Dyer asked what the reason was from changing it from office to commercial. Yapp noted the
property is very small to be part of an office park and cut off by the rest of the larger area by
Rapid Creek, it also has highway frontage and access.
Hensch asked if the property is currently tilled. Yapp said it has been until recently, but is not
currently, not in the last five years.
Signs noted this is a pretty prominent piece of property to be seen as the entryway to the City
and was underwhelmed by the lack of green space and amount of buildings on this space. He
hopes some attention will be given to make it more open. Yapp agreed on the property itself, as
commercial property, it would not have a lot of dedicated greenspace, it would be landscaped of
course, just to the north is Rapid Creek and the Rapid Creek Corridor and it has a between a 200
and 300 foot floodway which cannot be developed so visually there will be a lot of green space
around the development.
Hensch asked about the topography on the parcel, Yapp noted it is relatively flat.
Baker discussed the landscaping plan and what the fellow Commissioners would like to see
above what the minimum is required for the site. Hensch said he just wants a review to make
sure it is not forgotten about. Townsend added that at this point they don’t know what will be
built on the site so may be difficult to know what the landscaping will look like.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Baker moves to recommend approval of REZ18-00022, an application submitted by Allen
Development, for a rezoning from ID-RP to CH-1 for approximately 3.2 acres of property
located at the northwest corner of Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1 subject to the
following conditions:
1. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, closure and removal of the
access road off of Highway 1.
2. No building permit shall be issued for the subject property until the City Council
approves a final plat that conforms to the proposed zoning boundaries.
3. General conformance with the concept plan only in that a principal building must
occupy the corner of Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1.
4. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, installation of a 10-foot wide
PlanningandZoningCommission
January3,2019
Page17of18
sidewalk along Highway 1, as well as a pedestrian crossing across Moss Ridge
Road and pedestrian ramps on the northern and southern portions of Moss Ridge
Road.
Parsons seconded the motion.
Baker suggested adding to condition 2 that a landscaping plan approved by the City
Forester.
Parsons seconded the amendment.
Hensch noted there is two water retention areas on the periphery of the property and the
developers know they cannot develop on those so there can be some landscaping decided upon
now for at least two sides of the property. He agrees not knowing what will be built can make it
difficult, but there can still be a plan for the periphery of the property.
Signs recognized the property is surrounded by a wide-open prairie and this development will
stick out like a sore thumb so if there is any way to minimize that transition to the development
from the prairie he feels that would be appropriate. He does agree that the use for the space is
probably exactly what it should be.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Martin absent).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: DECEMBER 20, 2018
Signs moved to approve the meeting minutes of December 20, 2018.
Parsons seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
None.
Adjournment:
Townsend moved to adjourn.
Parsons seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD2018 - 20193/15(W.S.)4/2 4/5(W.S)4/16 4/19 5/3 5/17 6/7 6/21 7/5 8/16 9/6 9/20 10/18 12/20 1/3 BAKER, LARRY -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X O/E X X DYER, CAROLYN O/E X O/E X X X X X O/E X O O/E O X X X FREERKS, ANN X X X X X O/E X X X ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- HENSCH, MIKE O/E X X XXXXXX XXXXXXX MARTIN, PHOEBE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E PARSONS, MAX X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X SIGNS, MARK X X X XXXXXX XXXXXXX THEOBALD, JODIE X X X X X X X X O/E ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- ‘-- -- TOWNSEND, BILLIE -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X O/E X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member