Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-11-16 ResolutionItem Number: 6.c. r � � At + at1Mw��al +•ate_ CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 16, 2021 1. Resolution to issue Cigarette Permit to Kwik Trip, Inc., dba Kwik Star #1142, 1907 Keokuk St. ATTACHMENTS: Description Cigarette Resolution Prepared by: City Clerk's Office, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5043 Resolution Number: 21-272 Resolution to Issue Cigarette Permits Whereas, the following firms and persons have made an application and paid the taxes required by law for the sale of cigarettes, tobacco, nicotine and vapor products. Now, Therefore, be it Resolved by The City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, That: the applications be granted and the City Clerk is hereby directed to issue a permit to the following named persons and firms to sell cigarettes, tobacco, nicotine and vapor products: Kwik Star 111142 - 1907 Keokuk St.. Passed and approved this 16th day of Nove4ber Mayor Pro Tem pproved by Attest: ity Clerk City Attorney's Office It was moved by Weiner and seconded by Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes: X X X X X Nays: 2021 Absent: Bergus X Mims Salih Taylor X Teague Thomas Weiner the to , C, Item Number: 7.b. AL CITY OF IOWA CITY =�c�- COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution approving the City Street Finance Report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. Prepared By: Nicole Davies, Assistant Finance Director Reviewed By: Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director Fiscal Impact: If not approved and submitted by December 1, 2021 the City could risk losing annual Road Use Tax funding. For fiscal year 2022, this is budgeted at $9,163,300. Recommendations: Staff: Approval Attachments: FY21 Street Finance Report Resolution Executive Summary: Iowa Code section 312.14 requires all cities to submit the City Street Finance Report (SFR) to the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) by December 1 of each year. In accordance with Iowa Code section 312.15, the Iowa DOT must notify the state treasurer of each city not in compliance with this requirement. Once notified, the state treasurer will withhold the Road Use Tax (RUT) funds allocated to the city until the city complies. If a city has not filed its report by March 1 of the following year, RUT funds shall not be allocated to that city and all funds withheld under this provision shall revert to the street construction fund of the cities. Background /Analysis: The City Street Finance Report is required to include revenues and expenditures in the Road Use Tax Fund, and any other funds that have revenues and expenditures for street purposes only and Debt Service which includes bonds, notes and loans for only street related revenues and expenditures for any debt service payments. Road Use Tax receipts for the City of Iowa City for fiscal year 2020 were $10,156,379. Expenditures covered by RUT funds totaled $10,214,221 including $2,795,836 transferred to capital projects funds for street/bridge construction, $1,177,250 for traffic control and street lighting and $920,582 for street cleaning and snow removal. Other funds' receipts were $23,790,841. This includes the streets/bridges portion of General Obligation debt of $6,805,365, property taxes of $8,385,767, federal grants of $1,370,772 and transfers in from the Road Use Tax Fund of $3,202,908. Other funds' expenditures were $24,885,644, including expenditures for street/bridge construction totaling $14,302,184 and debt service payments of $7,574,783. The street/bridge construction was comprised of various projects such as Pavement Rehabilitation projects in the amount of $2,379,439, the McCollister Blvd from Gilbert to Sycamore project in the amount of $3,229,847 and the Burlington & Madison Intersection project in the amount of $2,018,117. ATTACHMENTS: Description FY21 Street Finance Report Resolution 6010WADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Expenses Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM Page 1 of 10 General Fund Streets (001) Road Use (110) Other Special Revenues Debt Service (200) Capitial Projects (300) Utilities (600 & UO) Grand Total Salaries - Roads/Streets $86,622 $1,756,902 $320,450 $71,784 $2,235,758 Benefits - Roads/Streets $671,238 $29,968 $701,206 Training & Dues $620 $620 Building & Grounds Maint. & Repair $24,652 $24,652 Vehicle & Office Equip Operation and Repair $62,763 $62,763 Operational Equipment Repair $15,368 $15,368 Other Maintenance and Repair $92,626 $92,626 Engineering $2,254,747 $2,254,747 Insurance $160,000 $160,000 Legal $44,196 $44,196 Printing $881 $6,339 $7,220 Rents & Leases $782,457 $782,457 Technology Expense $121,705 $121,705 Other Professional Services $534 $67,040 $67,574 Other Contract Services $19,610 $262,352 $281,962 Chemicals $10,505 $10,505 Page 1 of 10 6010WADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM � no General Fund Streets (001) Road Use (110) Other Special Revenues Debt Service (200) Capitial Projects (300) Utilities (600 & UO) Grand Total Minor Equipment Purchases $1,573 $1,573 Other Equipment $386 $386 Office Supplies $760 $2,812 $3,572 Operating Supplies $263,548 $263,548 Postage & Safety $10,051 $99 $10,150 Other Supplies $131,373 $72,061 $203,434 Vehicles $617,701 $617,701 Heavy Equipment $65,751 $65,751 Other Capital Equipment $117,078 $115,401 $232,479 Land Purchase $12,000 $12,000 Right -of -Way $92,211 $92,211 Bridges & Culverts $1,576,873 $1,576,873 Street - New Roadway $3,138,857 $3,138,857 Street - Preservation $2,388,787 $2,388,787 Street - Safety/ Environment $3,591,554 $263,118 $3,854,672 Other Capital Outlay $2,753 $153,061 $155,814 Principal Payment $6,642,498 $73,452 $6,715,950 Interest Payment $932,285 $19,721 $952,006 Transfer Out $204,233 $3,202,908 $606,751 $1,004,722 $5,018,614 Parking $785,899 $785,899 Page 2 of 10 6010WADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM Total $290,855 $10,214,221 $927,201 $7,574,783 $14,039,066 Page 3 of 10 $2,053,739 $35,099,865 General Fund Road Other Debt Capitial Utilities Grand Streets Use Special Service Projects (600 & UO) Total (001) (110) Revenues (200) (300) Street Lighting $465,047 $465,047 Traffic Control/Safety $712,203 $712,203 Snow Removal $567,642 $567,642 Depreciation & Building $45,011 $45,011 Utilities Accounting/Recording $3,386 $3,386 Street Cleaning 1 $352,940 $352,940 Total $290,855 $10,214,221 $927,201 $7,574,783 $14,039,066 Page 3 of 10 $2,053,739 $35,099,865 6010WADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Revenue Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM Total $290,855 $10,967,819 $927,201 $7,574,783 $12,944,263 Page 4 of 10 $2,053,739 $34,758,660 General Fund Road Other Debt Capitial Utilities Grand Streets Use Special Service Projects (600 & UO) Total (001) (110) Revenues (200) (300) Levied on Property $204,233 $606,751 $7,574,783 $8,385,767 Interest $59,285 $59,285 Federal Grants $721 $1,370,051 $1,370,772 State Revenues - Road $10,156,379 $10,156,379 Use Taxes Other State Grants - IDOT $328,788 $328,788 Local Contributions $6,740 $6,740 Charges/fees $203,968 $632,361 $1,790,621 $2,626,950 Proceeds from Debt $6,805,365 $6,805,365 Transfer In $86,622 $606,751 $320,450 $3,741,673 $263,118 $5,018,614 Total $290,855 $10,967,819 $927,201 $7,574,783 $12,944,263 Page 4 of 10 $2,053,739 $34,758,660 6010WADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Bonds/Loans Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM Page 5 of 10 Bond/Loan Description Principal Balance As of 7/1 Total Principal Paid Total Interest Paid Principal Roads Interest Roads Principal Balance As of 6/30 2012 GO Bonds $1,980,000 $975,000 $42,113 $459,908 $19,865 $1,005,000 2013 GO Bonds $2,560,000 $835,000 $45,723 $367,400 $20,118 $1,725,000 2014 GO Bonds $3,950,000 $950,000 $101,075 $549,385 $58,452 $3,000,000 2015 GO Bonds $4,150,000 $785,000 $83,000 $487,642 $51,560 $3,365,000 2016 GO Bonds $5,875,000 $930,000 $127,150 $698,337 $95,477 $4,945,000 2017 GO Bonds $7,040,000 $940,000 $154,063 $549,900 $90,127 $6,100,000 2018 GO Bonds $7,260,000 $840,000 $217,800 $653,940 $169,557 $6,420,000 2019 GO Bonds $8,410,000 $905,000 $173,000 $363,444 $69,476 $7,505,000 2020 GO Bonds $12,145,000 $3,600,000 $512,450 $2,512,542 $357,653 $8,545,000 Public Works Facility Internal Loan $948,119 $73,452 $19,721 $73,452 $19,721 $874,667 2021 GO Bonds $11,325,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,325,000 Page 5 of 10 QIGWADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Equipment Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM Description Model Year Usage Type Cost Purchased Status Compact Pickup Chevrolet Colorado 4x4 Crew Cab 2019 Purchased $28,759 No Change 1/2 Ton Pickup Ford F150 XL 4x4 Crew Cab 2018 Purchased $31,145 No Change Street Paint Machine EZ -Liner AL-120EZ 2017 Purchased $54,566 No Change Street Paint Machine Graco Linelazer 5900 2017 Purchased $7,750 No Change 38720 GVWR Dump Truck Freightliner 108SD 2018 Purchased $159,601 No Change Concrete Drill EZ Drill 210B 2017 Purchased $12,054 No Change Air Compressor Sullivan Palatek D185PIZ4 2018 Purchased $18,946 No Change Track Excavator Case CX145D-SR 2018 Purchased $156,163 No Change 1/2 Ton Pickup Ford F150 XL 2018 Purchased $28,745 No Change Sign Truck Ford F550 2017 Purchased $127,149 No Change 38720 GVWR Dump Truck Freightliner 108SD 2017 Purchased $175,099 No Change 38720 GVWR Dump Truck Freightliner 108SD 2017 Purchased $152,625 No Change Message Board Trailer Ver -Mac PCMS-548 2016 Purchased $15,250 No Change 1/2 Ton Pickup Ford F150 4x2 2014 Purchased $24,042 No Change 13700 GVWR Utility Ford F350 4x2 2015 Purchased $43,412 No Change Skidloader Bobcat S650 2014 Purchased $42,111 No Change 14000 GVWR Flatbed Ford F350 4x4 2015 Purchased $47,260 No Change 13700 GVWR Flatbed Ford F350 4x2 2015 Purchased $37,873 No Change Endloader Case 621 F 2013 Purchased $120,644 No Change 13700 GVWR Flatbed Ford F350 4x2 2015 Purchased $38,844 No Change 14000 GVWR Flatbed Ford F350 4x4 2015 Purchased $49,116 No Change Page 6 of 10 QOJUWADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM n Model Year 1/2 Ton Flatbed Ford F150 4x2 2014 Purchased $24,685 No Change 37240 GVWR Dump Truck Freightliner 108SD 2014 Purchased $118,334 No Change 37240 GVWR Dump Truck Freightliner 108SD 2014 Purchased $118,334 No Change 37240 GVWR Dump Truck Freightliner 108SD 2014 Purchased $118,334 No Change Crack Sealer Craftco SS 1250 2018 Purchased $40,274 No Change Loader Backhoe John Deere 310SL 2019 Purchased $101,691 No Change 38000 GVWR Dump Truck Freightliner 108SD 2019 Purchased $153,123 No Change Planer Bobcat 24PLA 2019 Purchased $17,047 No Change Street Sweeper Elgin Pelican Dual 2018 Purchased $210,039 No Change Vibratory Roller Wacker Neuson RD12A-90 2019 Purchased $13,899 No Change 500 Ib Concrete Breaker Stanley MB05 2019 Purchased $6,350 No Change 37240 GVWR Dump Truck Freightliner 108SD 2014 Purchased $118,334 No Change 37240 GVWR Flusher Truck Frieghtliner 108SD 2014 Purchased $121,016 No Change Endloader Case 721 F 2012 Purchased $127,750 No Change Asphalt Pothole Patcher Falcon 2T 1 Burner 2012 Purchased $20,036 Traded 550 Ib Concrete Breaker Stanley MB05502 2012 Purchased $5,990 No Change John Deere Motor Grader 772CH 2000 Purchased $130,000 No Change Aerial Platform International Elliott 4700 2001 Purchased $101,129 No Change Concrete Saw Target Pro 35 III 2004 Purchased $8,584 No Change Air Compressor Ingersol P185CWJD 1998 Purchased $11,200 No Change Air Compressor Ingersol P185CWJD 1993 Purchased $11,200 No Change Craftco Magnum Spray Asphalt Patcher 2004 Purchased $50,645 Sold 38000 GVWR Dump Truck/Freightliner M2106V 2010 Purchased $105,000 No Change Page 7 of 10 QIGWADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM Description Model Year Usage Type Cost Purchased Status 38000 GVWR Dump Truck/Freightliner M2106V 2010 Purchased $105,000 No Change 38000 GVWR Dump Truck/Freightliner M2106V 2010 Purchased $105,000 Sold 38000 GVWR Dump Truck/Freightliner M2106V 2010 Purchased $105,000 Sold 38000 GVWR Dump Truck/Freightliner M2106V 2010 Purchased $105,000 No Change 38000 GVWR Dump Truck/Freightliner M2106V 2010 Purchased $105,000 Sold Vibratory Roller Bomag BW120AD4 2009 Purchased $33,840 No Change 19,500 GVWR 1-1/2 Ton Basket Truck Ford F550 2010 Purchased $80,629 No Change 13200 GVWR Utility Chevrolet 3500 2016 Purchased $42,362 No Change Skidloader/Bobcat T650 2019 Purchased $35,003 No Change 1 Ton Utility Cargo Van Ford E350 KUV 2016 Purchased $34,076 No Change Street Sweeper Elgin Pelican Dual 2015 Purchased $187,000 No Change 108 SD FREIGHTLINER MUNI DUMP TRUCK 2021 Purchased $169,069 New 108SD FREIGHTLINER MUNI DUMP TRUCK 2021 Purchased $168,646 New 108SD FREIGHTLINER MUNI DUMP TRUCK 2021 Purchased $168,841 New MB05S02 STANLEY CONCRETE BREAKER 2021 Purchased $6,330 New DURAPATCHER P2 CIMLINE 2020 Purchased $83,215 New TD6DRMVAH SPAULDING HOOKLIFT HOT BOX 2020 Purchased $77,889 New 4 TON FALCON ASPHALT HOT BOX 2020 Purchased $35,449 New V5900 GRACO LINELAZER PAINT STRIPER 2020 Purchased $8,425 New Page 8 of 10 GOIGWADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Street Projects Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM Page 9 of 10 Final Price Iowa Avenue Bridge Repair $128,025 $183,143 Minturn, Inc. Traffic Calming 2020 $79,114 $74,577 LL Pelling Asphalt Resurfacing 2019 $1,472,981 $1,186,522 LL Pelling Page 9 of 10 6010WADOT City Street Finance Report Fiscal Year 2021 Bureau of Local Systems Ames, IA 50010 Summary Iowa City 11/4/2021 10:41:18 AM Resolution Number: Execution Date: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 Signature: Nicole Davies Page 10 of 10 General Fund Road Other Debt Capitial Utilities Grand Streets Use Special Service Projects (600 & UO) Total (001) (110) Revenues (200) (300) Begining Balance $0 $2,590,165 $0 $0 $18,704,000 $150,000 $21,444,165 SubTotal Expenses (-) $86,622 $7,011,313 $320,450 $7,574,783 $14,039,066 $1,049,017 $30,081,251 Transfers Out (-) $204,233 $3,202,908 $606,751 $1,004,722 $5,018,614 Subtotal Revenues (+) $204,233 $10,361,068 $606,751 $7,574,783 $9,202,590 $1,790,621 $29,740,046 Transfers In (+) $86,622 $606,751 $320,450 $3,741,673 $263,118 $5,018,614 Ending Balance $0 $3,343,763 $0 $0 $17,609,197 $150,000 $21,102,960 Resolution Number: Execution Date: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 Signature: Nicole Davies Page 10 of 10 -7,b Prepared by: Nicole Davies, Assistant Finance Director, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240,319-356-5088/5065 Resolution No. 21-273 Resolution approving the City Street Finance Report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. Whereas, the State of Iowa under Iowa Code Section 312.14 requires all cities to submit the Street Finance Report (SFR) to the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) by December 1 st of each year. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that the City Street Finance Report for the period beginning July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021, be approved. Passed and approved this 16th day of _ Attest:) *Cilerk City Attor e ice - 11/04/21 It was moved by Weiner and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes: Nays: Absent: x Bergus x Mims x Salih x Taylor x Teague x Thomas x Weiner Item Number: 7.c. AL CITY OF IOWA CITY =�c�- COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution amending the AFSCME and Administrative pay plans by deleting the position of Climate Action Coordinator from AFSCME grade 15 and adding it to Administrative grade 28. Prepared By: Rachel Kilburg, Assistant City Manager Karen Jennings, Human Resources Administrator Reviewed By: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Fiscal Impact: The maximum annual impact is an increase in General Fund expenditures of approximately $24,099. Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Resolution Executive Summary: To better serve the needs of the Office, approval of this resolution will reclassify the vacant Climate Action Coordinator position from the AFSME pay plan, grade 15, to a division head position in the Administrative/Confidential pay plan, grade 28. This position will assume supervisory and budgetary responsibilities in addition to coordination and management of implementing the City's Climate Action & Adaptation Plan and emission reduction goals. Background /Analysis: In the Accelerating Iowa City's Climate Actions Report (100 Day Climate Report) issued on November 14, 2019, and during the presentation of the FY2021 budget, the City Manager presented a plan to establish an Office of Climate Action and Outreach within the City Manager's Office, including 3.0 FTE to undertake implementation of the City's climate action goals: 1.0 FTE Climate Action Coordinator, 1.0 FTE Engagement Specialist, and 1.0 FTE Analyst. The Coordinator position was vacated in October 2020 and has remained unfilled as the City navigated COVI D-19 financial impacts. Since then, the Office has operated with an Engagement Specialist and filled the Analyst position in September 2021. Upon re-evaluating the Coordinator position job description and Office operations at the current staffing level, budgetary responsibility and supervision of the Office staff were deemed necessary additions to the Coordinator position duties. Additional responsibilities of the Coordinator will include coordination and management of implementing the City's climate actions and emission reduction goals, serving on community work groups and committees, and staffing the Climate Action Commission, among other duties. This resolution reclassifies the Coordinator position to a division head to include supervisory and budgetary responsibilities. The FY 2022 Adopted Budget and authorized compensation and pay plan authorized the Climate Action Coordinator in the AFSCME pay plan, grade 15. The proposed resolution amends the current AFSCME and Administrative pay plans by deleting the position of Climate Action Coordinator from AFSCME grade 15 and adding it to Administrative grade 28 to implement the reclassification to division head. The maximum annual impact is an increase in General Fund expenditures of approximately $24,099 and the minimum annual impact is $1,667. With approval of this resolution, staff will update the corresponding pay plans and post the Climate Action Coordinator position. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution 1,G Prepared by: Rachel Kilburg, Assistant City Manager, 410 E. Washington St, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5012 Resolution Number 21-274 Resolution amending the AFSCME and Administrative pay plans by deleting the position of Climate Action Coordinator from AFSCME grade 15 and adding it to Administrative grade 28. Whereas, Resolution No. 21-111, adopted by the City Council on May 4, 2021, established a classification and compensation plan for AFSCME employees; and Whereas, Resolution No. 21-112, adopted by the City Council on May 4, 2021, established a classification and compensation plan for Administrative, Confidential and Executive employees; and Whereas, it was determined that the needs of the Office would be better served by reclassifying the vacant Climate Action Coordinator position to a division head position that can assume division supervisory and budget responsibilities. Now Therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa that: The AFSCME pay plan be amended by deleting the position of Climate Action Coordinator from grade 15. The Administrative pay plan be amended by adding the position of Climate Action Coordinator to grade 28. Passed and approved this 16th day of Novemb r 20 21 Mayor Pr Tem Attest: ity Clerk It was moved by Weiner adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: Approved :L' City Attor y's Office (Jennifer Schwickerath — 11/10/21) and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be NAYS: ABSENT: X Bergus X Mims x Salih X_ Taylor X Teague x Thomas x Weiner Item Number: 7.d. AL CITY OF IOWA CITY =�c�- COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution adopting the procedural rules of the Board of Adjustment and rescinding Resolution No. 18-195. Prepared By: Susan Dulek, Ass't. City Attorney Reviewed By: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk Fiscal Impact: none Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: Board of Adjustment recommended approval 4-0 at its 10/13/21 meeting. Council Rules Committee approved the amendment at its 11/2/21 meeting. Attachments: Board of Adjustment minutes 10/13/21 Redlined Procedural Rules Council Rules Committee minutes 11/2/21 Resolution Amended Procedural Rules Executive Summary: The Board of Adjustment (BOA) approved two amendments to its procedural rules (i.e., by-laws). One is to expand the public notification requirements and the second is to allow the chair to move or second a motion. The amended procedural rules are not effective until approved by the City Council. The Council Rules Committee recommends approval. Background /Analysis: The BOA procedural rules currently require providing written notice to nearby property owners within a 300 foot radius. Consistent with Council direction for planning and zoning matters, staff recommended to the BOA that the distance be increased to 500 feet and adding a requirement that such letters be sent to all non -duplicative individual occupants (when available on the City Assessor's website). The second proposed amendment is to remove the provision prohibiting the Chair from making or seconding a motion. No other City Board or Commission other than the Planning and Zoning Commission has such a prohibition in its by-laws. There is no such prohibition in state law or Robert's Rules. The current procedural rules were approved in Resolution No. 18-195. ATTACHMENTS: Description redlined rules minutes PROCEDURAL RULES Iowa City Board of Adjustment October 2021 ARTICLE I. AUTHORITY: The Iowa City Board of Adjustment shall have that authority which is conferred by Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa; City Code Title 14, Chapter 7, entitled "Administration," Article A, entitled "Board of Adjustment," and through the adoption of these procedural rules stated herein. ARTICLE II. MEMBERSHIP: Section 1. Qualifications. The Board of Adjustment shall consist of five (5) members appointed by the City Council. All members of the Board shall be residents of Iowa City, Iowa. A majority of the members of the Board shall be persons representing the public at large and shall not be involved in the business of purchasing or selling real estate. Section 2. Compensation. Members shall serve without compensation, but may be reimbursed for expenses incurred for travel outside the city on designated Board business. Such expenses must be submitted to the City Manager. Section 3. Orientation for New Members. Prior to the first regular meeting following their appointment, each new member shall be shall be given an orientation briefing by City staff and be provided with the Board's procedural rules and other information that may be useful to Board members in carrying out their duties. The City Zoning Chapter and the Comprehensive Plan are available on line. Section 4. Absences. Three consecutive unexplained absences of a Board member from regular Board meetings may result in a recommendation to the City Council from the Board to discharge said member and appoint a new Board member. Members shall be removable for cause by the City Council upon written charges after a public hearing. Section 5. Vacancies. Any vacancy on the Board because of death, resignation, long-term illness, disqualification, or removal shall be filled for the unexpired term by the City Council after at least thirty (30) calendar days of public notice of the vacancy as required by law. Section 6. Terms. Members shall be appointed for terms of five years. No members shall be appointed to succeed themselves. However, a member appointed to fill an unexpired term with one year or less remaining may also be appointed concurrently for one full five (5) year term. Section 7. Resignations. Resignation should be submitted in writing to the Board Secretary, who will transmit the resignation to the City Council with copies to the City Manager, the Director of Neighborhood and Development Services, and the Board Chairperson, preferably at least sixty (60) days prior to the date of intended departure. Section 8. Temporary Alternate. An alternate member, if available, shall be appointed as provided herein, to replace a member who is unable to participate in an appeal of an administrative decision due to a conflict of interest. Any person who has served as a member of the Board within the 5 years preceding the filing of the appeal, and who represents the public at large and is not involved in the business of purchasing or selling real estate, shall be qualified to serve as an alternate. When the member has recused himself/herself due to a conflict and the date of hearing before the Board has been set, the Secretary of the Board shall notify all such persons and the first to agree to serve as the alternate is hereby appointed to do so. ARTICLE Ill. OFFICERS: Section 1. Number. The officers of the Board shall be a Chairperson and a Vice -Chairperson, each of whom shall be elected by a majority vote of the members of the Board. The Board Secretary shall be a staff person, who is appointed by the Director of Planning and Community Development. Section 2. Election and Term of Office. The Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson shall be elected annually at the first regular meeting of the Board each year. Section 3. Vacancies. A vacancy in the office of Chairperson or Vice -Chairperson because of death, resignation, removal, disqualification, or other cause shall be filled by election from the members of the Board for the unexpired portion of the term. Section 4. Chairperson. The Chairperson shall, when present, preside at all meetings, call special meetings, and in general perform all duties incident to the office of a Chairperson, and such other duties as may be prescribed by the members from time to time. Such Chairperson may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses. Section 5. Vice -Chairperson. When the Chairperson is absent or abstaining, the Vice -Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson and shall have all the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chairperson. Section 6. Acting Chairperson. In the absence and/or due to the abstention of both the Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson, the remaining three-member Board may elect a member to serve as Acting Chairperson. The Acting Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson and when so acting shall have all the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chairperson. Section 7. Secretary. The appointed staff person, who serves as the Board's Secretary, shall be responsible for maintaining the office of the Board, receiving and filing Board decisions and orders, posting and publishing notices as required by law, and for maintaining minutes and other records of the Board's proceedings. ARTICLE IV. APPLICATIONS: Section 1. Application Forms. Any application for a request or appeal to the Board of Adjustment shall be filed with the City Clerk on forms provided by the Secretary of the Board. The Secretary's office is located in the Department of Neighborhood and Development Services. Forms are available in the office of the City Clerk and on the City's website. In the appropriate cases, the Building Inspector shall transmit to the Secretary all documents constituting a record, upon which the Board shall act. Section 2. Application Submittal. Appeals to the Board shall be filed with the City Clerk within a reasonable time period, not to exceed thirty (30) calendar days after the action appealed from, and shall specify the grounds for such appeal. An appeal from a decision by the Building Inspector to issue a building permit shall not be deemed to have been filed within a reasonable time if such appeal is filed more than ten (10) business days after construction work pursuant to such permit is observable from adjacent properties of the public right-of-way or ten (10) business days after an alleged violation of the zoning code is similarly observable. Applicants may appeal an approval or a denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission within a conservation district by filing a letter with the City Clerk within ten (10) business days after a Resolution of Denial is filed by the Commission. Section 3. Application Filing Fee. The applicant shall complete the required forms, providing all information requested on the form, and any additional information as requested by the Secretary of the Board. A filing fee shall be paid upon presentation of the application. Application fees are established by resolution of the City Council. Section 4. Party of Interest. Requests for a variance or special exception must be filed on behalf of the real party in interest, such as the owner or contract purchaser. Section 5. Case Number. An application filed according to the above procedure shall be given a case number within five (5) business days of the filing date. Case numbers will be assigned according to the order in which applications are received. ARTICLE V. NOTICE: Section 1. Notice Letters. No less than seven (7) business days prior to the public hearing, the Secretary of the Board shall send notice by mail to all property owners of record, and to all non - du ficative individual occupants when available on the City Assessor's website). within 33500 feet of the subject property. Such notice shall include a description of the action requested along with the time and location of the meeting. The applicant shall be formally notified of the time and place of the hearing, in writing, by the Secretary of the Board. Section 2. Newspaper Notice. Notice of the time and place of public hearings shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation not more than twenty (20) calendar day nor less than seven (7) business days prior to the hearing. It shall contain the street address or location of the property and a brief description of the nature of the application or appeal. Section 3. Notice Sign. No less than seven (7) business days prior to the public hearing, the Applicant shall post a sign on or near the property upon which the application is being made, and shall remove the sign immediately following the public hearing on the application. The sign will be provided to the applicant(s) by the Board Secretary. ARTICLE VI. HEARING: Section 1. Regular Hearings. Hearings will be held as needed at a regular time and place to be set by the members of the Board. Section 2. Special Hearings. Special hearings or meetings of the Board may be called by the Chairperson and shall be called by the Chairperson or Vice -Chairperson at the request of three (3) or more members of the Board. Section 3. Place of Hearings. All hearings and meetings of the Board shall be open to the public and shall be in a place accessible to people with disabilities. Section 4. Quorum. Three members of the Board shall constitute a quorum. Section 5. Applicant Representation. The applicant may, at the time of the public hearing, appear on their own behalf and be represented by agent and/or counsel. The applicant or their representative may present oral argument and testimony; witnesses, including experts; and may submit written evidence and exhibits in the form of statements, photos, charts, or other relevant evidence. In the absence of the applicant or their representative(s), the Board may proceed to act on the matter based on the information provided. Section 6. Briefs. The Board may request written briefs for legal argument. Applicants may submit written briefs if they so choose. Section 7. Conduct of Hearing. Order and decorum shall be maintained at the hearing by the Chairperson of the Board of Adjustment, so as to allow an orderly presentation of evidence wherever possible. The Chair may swear witnesses and direct order of testimony. The Chair shall avoid testimony that is overly redundant. The Chair may provide for recesses during the deliberation, as appropriate. Any Board member who has a legal conflict of interest shall recuse him/ herself from the decision- making process. A member who has a legal conflict of interest or otherwise elects to recuse him/herself due to a perceived conflict of interest shall state the reason for recusal prior to discussion of the matter under consideration and may choose to leave the meeting room for the duration of the proceedings for that application. Section 8. Hearing Order. The order of hearing shall be as follows: 1. Staff presentation of the facts of the case and recommendation to the board. 2. Statement by proponents of the application. 3. Statement by opponents of the application. 4. Rebuttal by proponents and then by opponents. 5. General discussion by the Board. Section 9. Board Deliberation. After all parties have been heard, the public hearing will be declared closed so that the Board may deliberate the case. The Board must state findings of fact and conclusions of law. These facts and legal conclusions must be set forth in writing as required by Iowa law. The Board may request additional comments from the participants. An application may be deferred or withdrawn at the request of the applicant at any time before a decision is made by the Board. Section 10. Board Motions. Motions may be made and seconded by any member of the BoardetheF than the Gh ,;r Motions are always made in the affirmative, approving the requested action. Section 11. Board Voting. After a motion and discussion, the Board shall be polled for votes. A board member may abstain from voting, which is a non -vote. The concurring vote of three (3) members of the Board shall be required to uphold an appeal, to decide in favor of a special exception, or to grant a variance. Voting on Board decisions will be by roll call and will be recorded by yeas and nays. Proxy votes are not allowed. Section 12. Legal Advisor. The City Attorney or a designated representative shall act as legal counsel to the Board. Section 13. Conduct of Meetings. Except as otherwise provided herein, Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised shall be used to conduct Board hearings and meetings. ARTICLE VII. RECORDS: Section 1. Record of Hearings. Audio recordings shall be made for all hearings and such recordings shall be kept for a period of no less than six (6) weeks. Minutes shall be produced from such recordings, and forwarded to the City Council after approval by the Board or the Secretary of the Board. All minutes shall be maintained by the Secretary of the Board, and shall also be on file at the City Clerk's office. The applicant may request a court reporter at the applicant's own expense. Section 2. Case Files. The Secretary of the Board shall keep a file of all cases, including forms and additional information. Said file shall be a public record and available for public inspection during business hours. Copies may be made available upon request, at cost. Section 3. Transcript. Upon request, a transcript or the audio recording of the Board's deliberation will be made, at cost to the requestor. In the case of an appeal to district court there is no charge for the transcript. ARTICLE VIII. DECISIONS: Section 1. Whenever possible, decisions by the Board shall be made at the same hearing wherein the testimony and presentation of evidence are considered. Section 2. Formal decisions shall be made in writing, setting forth findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by Iowa law. Section 3. Each decision shall be filed with the City Clerk within a reasonable time after the Board hearing, and shall be stamped by the Clerk to indicate the date and time of filing. The Clerk will forward the decision to the Johnson County Recorder's Office, for recording at the city's expense. Section 4. A copy of said decision shall be forwarded by the Secretary of the Board to the applicant, the Building Inspector, the City Attorney's Office, and any Attorney of Record within a reasonable time after filing with the City Clerk. Section 5. Reconsideration: Upon written request, the Board may reconsider a decision on a special exception or variance application. A request for reconsideration must be made within ten (10) business days of the meeting at which a vote on the application was originally taken and shall articulate and be based on evidence that was not presented or was unavailable at the time of the original hearing. A motion to reconsider must be made at the subsequent meeting by a member of the Board who voted on the prevailing side. If a motion to reconsider is approved, the application will be placed on the agenda of the next meeting in order to satisfy the requirement for public notice and hearing. No decision may be reconsidered more than once. Appeals to the Board may not be reconsidered. ARTICLE IX. AMENDMENTS TO THE PROCECURAL RULES. Section 1. A concurring vote of three (3) of the members of the Board shall be necessary to amend these procedural rules. Such proposed amendments shall be presented in writing at any regular meeting or at any special meeting called for that purpose. Amendments shall go into effect upon approval by the City Council. CITY COUNCIL RULES COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES November 2, 2021 Helling Conference Room 4:19 PM Committee Members Present: Mayor Pro Tem Salih, Council member Taylor Staff Members Present: Assistant City Attorney Dulek, City Clerk Fruehling Review by-laws/procedural rule changes: Board of Adjustment Assistant City Attorney Dulek summarized the recommended changes as follows: 1. Improve the notification of area residents by increasing the radius to 500 feet from 300 feet and mailing letters to residents of multi -family units if independently listed in the City Assessor's database. 2. Allowing the Chair to make a motion and to second motion. The Rules Committee recommended approval of the by-laws as amended. Meeting adjourned 4:23 PM I,d Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Ass't City Attorney, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319)356-5030 RESOLUTION NO. 21-275 Resolution adopting the procedural rules of the Board of Adjustment and rescinding Resolution No. 18-195. Whereas, the Board of Adjustment approved amending its procedural rules (i.e., bylaws) to expand the public notification requirements and to allow the chair to move or second a motion; and Whereas, the procedural rules provide that they are not effective until approved by the City Council; and Whereas, the Council Rules Committee has reviewed the proposed amendment to the procedural rules and has recommended adoption; and Whereas, the current procedural rules were approved in Resolution No. 18-195. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa that: 1. The attached Procedural Rules of the Board of Adjustment are approved and adopted by the City Council. 2. Resolution No. 18-195 is rescinded. Passed and approved this 16th day of November , 2021. Mayor Pr Tem Attest: City Cle k Approved By: City Attorne s Ice (Sue Dulek — 11/05/21) Resolution No. 21-275 Page 2 It was moved by Weiner and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Bergus x Mims x Salih x Taylor x Teague x Thomas x Weiner PROCEDURAL RULES Iowa City Board of Adjustment November 2021 ARTICLE I. AUTHORITY: The Iowa City Board of Adjustment shall have that authority which is conferred by Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa; City Code Title 14, Chapter 7, entitled "Administration," Article A, entitled "Board of Adjustment," and through the adoption of these procedural rules stated herein. ARTICLE II. MEMBERSHIP: Section 1. Qualifications. The Board of Adjustment shall consist of five (5) members appointed by the City Council. All members of the Board shall be residents of Iowa City, Iowa. A majority of the members of the Board shall be persons representing the public at large and shall not be involved in the business of purchasing or selling real estate. Section 2. Compensation. Members shall serve without compensation, but may be reimbursed for expenses incurred for travel outside the city on designated Board business. Such expenses must be submitted to the City Manager. Section 3. Orientation for New Members. Prior to the first regular meeting following their appointment, each new member shall be shall be given an orientation briefing by City staff and be provided with the Board's procedural rules and other information that may be useful to Board members in carrying out their duties. The City Zoning Chapter and the Comprehensive Plan are available on line. Section 4. Absences. Three consecutive unexplained absences of a Board member from regular Board meetings may result in a recommendation to the City Council from the Board to discharge said member and appoint a new Board member. Members shall be removable for cause by the City Council upon written charges after a public hearing. Section 5. Vacancies. Any vacancy on the Board because of death, resignation, long- term illness, disqualification, or removal shall be filled for the unexpired term by the City Council after at least thirty (30) calendar days of public notice of the vacancy as required by law. Section 6. Terms. Members shall be appointed for terms of five years. No members shall be appointed to succeed themselves. However, a member appointed to fill an unexpired term with one year or less remaining may also be appointed concurrently for one full five (5) year term. Section 7. Resignations. Resignation should be submitted in writing to the Board Secretary, who will transmit the resignation to the City Council with copies to the City Manager, the Director of Neighborhood and Development Services, and the Board Chairperson, preferably at least sixty (60) days prior to the date of intended departure. Section 8. Temporary Alternate. An alternate member, if available, shall be appointed as provided herein, to replace a member who is unable to participate in an appeal of an administrative decision due to a conflict of interest. Any person who has served as a member of the Board within the 5 years preceding the filing of the appeal, and who represents the public at large and is not involved in the business of purchasing or selling real estate, shall be qualified to serve as an alternate. When the member has recused himself/herself due to a conflict and the date of hearing before the Board has been set, the Secretary of the Board shall notify all such persons and the first to agree to serve as the alternate is hereby appointed to do so. ARTICLE III. OFFICERS: Section 1. Number. The officers of the Board shall be a Chairperson and a Vice - Chairperson, each of whom shall be elected by a majority vote of the members of the Board. The Board Secretary shall be a staff person, who is appointed by the Director of Planning and Community Development. Section 2. Election and Term of Office. The Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson shall be elected annually at the first regular meeting of the Board each year. Section 3. Vacancies. A vacancy in the office of Chairperson or Vice -Chairperson because of death, resignation, removal, disqualification, or other cause shall be filled by election from the members of the Board for the unexpired portion of the term. Section 4. Chairperson. The Chairperson shall, when present, preside at all meetings, call special meetings, and in general perform all duties incident to the office of a Chairperson, and such other duties as may be prescribed by the members from time to time. Such Chairperson may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses. Section 5. Vice -Chairperson. When the Chairperson is absent or abstaining, the Vice - Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson and shall have all the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chairperson. Section 6. Acting Chairperson. In the absence and/or due to the abstention of both the Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson, the remaining three-member Board may elect a member to serve as Acting Chairperson. The Acting Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson and when so acting shall have all the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chairperson. Section 7. Secretary. The appointed staff person, who serves as the Board's Secretary, shall be responsible for maintaining the office of the Board, receiving and filing Board decisions and orders, posting and publishing notices as required by law, and for maintaining minutes and other records of the Board's proceedings. ARTICLE IV. APPLICATIONS Section 1. Application Forms. Any application for a request or appeal to the Board of Adjustment shall be filed with the City Clerk on forms provided by the Secretary of the Board. The Secretary's office is located in the Department of Neighborhood and Development Services. Forms are available in the office of the City Clerk and on the City's website. In the appropriate cases, the Building Inspector shall transmit to the Secretary all documents constituting a record, upon which the Board shall act. Section 2. Application Submittal. Appeals to the Board shall be filed with the City Clerk within a reasonable time period, not to exceed thirty (30) calendar days after the action appealed from, and shall specify the grounds for such appeal. An appeal from a decision by the Building Inspector to issue a building permit shall not be deemed to have been filed within a reasonable time if such appeal is filed more than ten (10) business days after construction work pursuant to such permit is observable from adjacent properties of the public right-of-way or ten (10) business days after an alleged violation of the zoning code is similarly observable. Applicants may appeal an approval or a denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission within a conservation district by filing a letter with the City Clerk within ten (10) business days after a Resolution of Denial is fled by the Commission. Section 3. Application Filing Fee. The applicant shall complete the required forms, providing all information requested on the form, and any additional information as requested by the Secretary of the Board. A filing fee shall be paid upon presentation of the application. Application fees are established by resolution of the City Council. Section 4. Party of Interest. Requests for a variance or special exception must be filed on behalf of the real party in interest, such as the owner or contract purchaser. Section 5. Case Number. An application filed according to the above procedure shall be given a case number within five (5) business days of the filing date. Case numbers will be assigned according to the order in which applications are received. ARTICLE V. NOTICE: Section 1. Notice Letters. No less than seven (7) business days prior to the public hearing, the Secretary of the Board shall send notice by mail to all property owners of record and to all non -duplicative individual occupants (when available on the City Assessor's website), within 500 feet of the subject property. Such notice shall include a description of the action requested along with the time and location of the meeting. The applicant shall be formally notified of the time and place of the hearing, in writing, by the Secretary of the Board. Section 2. Newspaper Notice. Notice of the time and place of public hearings shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation not more than twenty (20) calendar day nor less than seven (7) business days prior to the hearing. It shall contain the street address or location of the property and a brief description of the nature of the application or appeal. Section 3. Notice Sign. No less than seven (7) business days prior to the public hearing, the Applicant shall post a sign on or near the property upon which the application is being made, and shall remove the sign immediately following the public hearing on the application. The sign will be provided to the applicant(s) by the Board Secretary. ARTICLE VI. HEARING: Section 1. Regular Hearings. Hearings will be held as needed at a regular time and place to be set by the members of the Board. Section 2. Special Hearings. Special hearings or meetings of the Board may be called by the Chairperson and shall be called by the Chairperson or Vice -Chairperson at the request of three (3) or more members of the Board. Section 3. Place of Hearings. All hearings and meetings of the Board shall be open to the public and shall be in a place accessible to people with disabilities. Section 4. Quorum. Three members of the Board shall constitute a quorum. Section 5. Applicant Representation. The applicant may, at the time of the public hearing, appear on their own behalf and be represented by agent and/or counsel. The applicant or their representative may present oral argument and testimony; witnesses, including experts; and may submit written evidence and exhibits in the form of statements, photos, charts, or other relevant evidence. In the absence of the applicant or their representative(s), the Board may proceed to act on the matter based on the information provided. Section 6. Briefs. The Board may request written briefs for legal argument. Applicants may submit written briefs if they so choose. Section 7. Conduct of Hearing. Order and decorum shall be maintained at the hearing by the Chairperson of the Board of Adjustment, so as to allow an orderly presentation of evidence wherever possible. The Chair may swear witnesses and direct order of testimony. The Chair shall avoid testimony that is overly redundant. The Chair may provide for recesses during the deliberation, as appropriate. Any Board member who has a legal conflict of interest shall recuse him/ herself from the decision-making process. A member who has a legal conflict of interest or otherwise elects to recuse him/herself due to a perceived conflict of interest shall state the reason for recusal prior to discussion of the matter under consideration and may choose to leave the meeting room for the duration of the proceedings for that application. Section 8. Hearing Order. The order of hearing shall be as follows: 1. Staff presentation of the facts of the case and recommendation to the board. 2. Statement by proponents of the application. 3. Statement by opponents of the application. 4. Rebuttal by proponents and then by opponents. 5. General discussion by the Board. Section 9. Board Deliberation. After all parties have been heard, the public hearing will be declared closed so that the Board may deliberate the case. The Board must state findings of fact and conclusions of law. These facts and legal conclusions must be set forth in writing as required by Iowa Law. The Board may request additional comments from the participants. An application may be deferred or withdrawn at the request of the applicant at any time before a decision is made by the Board. Section 10. Board Motions. Motions may be made and seconded by any member of the Board. Motions are always made in the affirmative, approving the requested action. Section 11. Board Voting. After a motion and discussion, the Board shall be polled for votes. A board member may abstain from voting, which is a non -vote. The concurring vote of three (3) members of the Board shall be required to uphold an appeal, to decide in favor of a special exception, or to grant a variance. Voting on Board decisions will be by roll call and will be recorded by yeas and nays. Proxy votes are not allowed. Section 12. Legal Advisor. The City Attorney or a designated representative shall act as legal counsel to the Board. Section 13. Conduct of Meetings. Except as otherwise provided herein, Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised shall be used to conduct Board hearings and meetings. ARTICLE VII. RECORDS: Section 1. Record of Hearings. Audio recordings shall be made for all hearings and such recordings shall be kept for a period of no less than six (6) weeks. Minutes shall be produced from such recordings, and forwarded to the City Council after approval by the Board or the Secretary of the Board. All minutes shall be maintained by the Secretary of the Board, and shall also be on file at the City Clerk's office. The applicant may request a court reporter at the applicant's own expense. Section 2. Case Files. The Secretary of the Board shall keep a file of all cases, including forms and additional information. Said file shall be a public record and available for public inspection during business hours. Copies may be made available upon request, at cost. Section 3. Transcript. Upon request, a transcript or the audio recording of the Board's deliberation will be made, at cost to the requestor. In the case of an appeal to district court there is no charge for the transcript. ARTICLE VIII. DECISIONS: Section 1. Whenever possible, decisions by the Board shall be made at the same hearing wherein the testimony and presentation of evidence are considered. Section 2. Formal decisions shall be made in writing, setting forth findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by Iowa law. Section 3. Each decision shall be filed with the City Clerk within a reasonable time after the Board hearing, and shall be stamped by the Clerk to indicate the date and time of filing. The Clerk will forward the decision to the Johnson County Recorder's Office, for recording at the city's expense. Section 4. A copy of said decision shall be forwarded by the Secretary of the Board to the applicant, the Building Inspector, the City Attorney's Office, and any Attorney of Record within a reasonable time after filing with the City Clerk. Section 5. Reconsideration: Upon written request, the Board may reconsider a decision on a special exception or variance application. A request for reconsideration must be made within ten (10) business days of the meeting at which a vote on the application was originally taken and shall articulate and be based on evidence that was not presented or was unavailable at the time of the original hearing. A motion to reconsider must be made at the subsequent meeting by a member of the Board who voted on the prevailing side. If a motion to reconsider is approved, the application will be placed on the agenda of the next meeting in order to satisfy the requirement for public notice and hearing. No decision may be reconsidered more than once. Appeals to the Board may not be reconsidered. ARTICLE IX. AMENDMENTS TO THE PROCECURAL RULES. Section 1. A concurring vote of three (3) of the members of the Board shall be necessary to amend these procedural rules. Such proposed amendments shall be presented in writing at any regular meeting or at any special meeting called for that purpose. Amendments shall go into effect upon approval by the City Council. (Adopted Reso. No. 21-275) Item Number: 7.e. 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY ��.:. -dry in � at COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution authorizing the procurement of Website Development Services for the City of Iowa City. Prepared By: Shannon McMahon, Communications Coordinator Reviewed By: Rachel Kilburg, Assistant City Manager Eric Goers, City Attorney Fiscal Impact: $72,301.25, available in the Communications Division operating budget, General Fund account #10210200-432080. Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Resolution, Granicus Agreement Executive Summary: Initiation of a City of Iowa City website redesign was identified as a priority objective in the City Council's 2020-2021 Strategic Plan. On March 17, 2021, a Request for Proposal: #21-38, Development of the City of Iowa City's primary website was posted to the City of Iowa City website and thirteen responsive proposals were received. An Evaluation Committee reviewed each proposal and its compliance with the specifications. Based on a thorough review of the proposals, interviews, and reference checks, the evaluation committee selected Granicus to perform the service. This resolution authorizes procurement of website development services from Granicus at a total contracted cost of $72,301.25. Background /Analysis: Initiation of a City of Iowa City website redesign was identified as a priority objective in the City Council's 2020-2021 Strategic Plan. On March 17, 2021, a Request for Proposal: #21-38, Development of the City of Iowa City's primary website was posted to the City of Iowa City website. Proposals were due by 2:30 p.m., April 21, 2021. Thirteen responsive proposals were received and these proposals were distributed to an Evaluation Committee. The Evaluation Committee individually reviewed each proposal and its compliance with the specifications. Based on a thorough review of the proposals, interviews and reference checks, the evaluation committee chose Granicus to receive the award. The redesign project will allow for a comprehensive redevelopment and implementation of the City of Iowa City website and the development and implementation of a web -based content management system (CMS). The redesign will enhance the user experience, simplify content management, and provide improved access to information and customer service to the community. The new design will also meet ADA compliance standards, quality design, and visual appeal. This resolution will provide required authorization to procure the services from Granicus at a total contract cost of $72,301.25. Upon approval of this resolution, staff will engage Granicus to begin the project and anticipate project completion within 9 to 12 months. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution Agreement Prepared by: Shannon McMahon, Communications Coordinator, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5058 Resolution No. 21-276 Resolution authorizing the procurement of Website Development Services for the City of Iowa City Whereas, a Request for Proposal was released to solicit the procurement of the Development of the City of Iowa City's primary website; and Whereas, thirteen responsive proposals were received for these services; and Whereas, the evaluation committee has selected Granicus; and Whereas, the City's purchasing policy requires City Council to approve purchases for Professional and consultant services over $60,000; and Whereas, the City expects to expend approximately $72,301.25.00 for the procurement of the Development of the City of Iowa City's primary website; and Whereas, funds for this purchase are available in the budget under account #10210200-432080; and Whereas, approval of this purchase is in the public interest. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that: 1. The proposed Master Subscription Agreement with Granicus, attached hereto, is approved. 2. The City Manager is authorized to sign the Agreement with the vendor and take whatever steps are necessary to effectuate future purchases including any amendments or renewals of said agreement. Passed and approved this 16th day of Mayor Attest: *CiCleLrk-' 2021 Approved by City Atto e -11 /05/2021 I,tl Resolution No. 21-276 Page 2 It was move by Weiner and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes: Nays: x Absent: Bergus x Mims Salih Taylor x Teague Thomas Weiner Master Subscription Agreement This Master Subscription Agreement ("Agreement) is made and entered into as of the latter date of the signatures below ( the "Effective Date") by and between the City of Iowa City ("Client") and Granicus, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company d/b/a Granicus ("Granicus"). Client and Granicus may each be referred to herein as "Party" or collectively as "Parties". 1. Definitions. In addition to terms defined elsewhere in this Agreement, the following terms shall have the meaning specified: "Agreement Term" means the total time covered by the Initial Term and all Extension Terms for each Order or SOW under this Agreement, further specified in Section 7.1. "Extension Term" means any term that increases the length of the Initial Term of this Agreement or an Order Term of an Order or SOW. "Granicus Products and Services" means the products and services made available to Client pursuant to this Agreement, which may include Granicus products and services accessible for use by Client on a subscription basis ("Software -as -a -Service" or "SaaS"), Granicus professional services, content from any professional services or other required equipment components or other required hardware, as specified in each Order or SOW. "Initial Term" shall have the meaning specified in Exhibit A or Order or SOW between Granicus and Client for the first duration of performance that Client has access to Granicus Products and Services. "Order" means a written order, proposal, or purchase document in which Granicus agrees to provide and Client agrees to purchase specific Granicus Products and Services. "Order Term" means the then -current duration of performance identified on each Order or SOW, for which Granicus has committed to provide, and Client has committed to pay for, Granicus Products and Services. "Statement of Work" or "SOW" means a written order, proposal, or purchase document that is signed by both Parties and describes the Granicus Products and Services to be provided and/or performed by Granicus. Each Order or SOW shall describe the Parties' performance obligations and any assumptions or contingencies associated with the implementations of the Granicus Products and Services, as specified in each Order or SOW placed hereunder. "Support" means the ongoing support and maintenance services performed by Granicus related to the Granicus Products and Services as specified in each Order or SOW placed between the Parties. 2. Ordering and Scope 2.1. Ordering Granicus Products and Services. The Parties may execute one or more Order or SOW related to the sale and purchase of Granicus Products and Services. Each Order or SOW will generally include an itemized list of the Granicus Products and Services as well as the Order Term for such Granicus Products and Services. Each Order or SOW must, generally, be signed by the Parties; although, when a validly -issued purchase order by Client accompanies the Order or SOW, then the Order or SOW need not be executed by the Parties. Each Order or SOW shall be governed by this Agreement regardless of any pre-printed legal terms on each Order or SOW, and by this reference is incorporated herein. Denver. CO St. Paul. MN Washington. DC United Kingdom 800.314.0147 800.314.0147 800.314.0147 144.0845.4672972 2.2. Support. Basic support related to standard Granicus Products and Services is included within the fees paid during the Order Term. Granicus may update its Support obligations under this Agreement, so long as the functionality purchased by Client is not materially diminished. 2.3. Future Functionality. Client acknowledges that any purchase hereunder is not contingent on the delivery of any future functionality or features. 2.4. Cooperative Purchasing. To the extent permitted by law and approved by Client, the terms of this Agreement and set forth in one or more Order or SOW may be extended for use by other municipalities, school districts and governmental agencies upon execution of an addendum or other duly signed writing setting forth all of the terms and conditions for such use. The applicable fees for additional municipalities, school districts or governmental agencies will be provided by Granicus to Client and the applicable additional party upon written request. 3. Use of Granicus Products and Services and Proprietary Rights 3.1. Granicus Products and Services. The Granicus Products and Services are purchased by Client as subscriptions during an Order Term specified in each Order orSOW. Additional Granicus Products and Services may be added during an Order Term as described in Section 2.1. 3.2. Permitted Use. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Granicus hereby grants during each Order Term, and Client hereby accepts, solely for its internal use, a worldwide, revocable, non-exclusive, non-transferrable right to use the Granicus Products and Services to the extent allowed in the relevant Order or SOW (collectively the "Permitted Use"). 3.2.1. Data Sources. Data uploaded into Granicus Products and Services must be brought in from Client sources (interactions with end users and opt -in contact lists). Client cannot upload purchased contact information into Granicus Products and Services without Granicus' written permission and professional services support for list cleansing. Granicus certifies that it will not sell, retain, use, or disclose any personal information provided by Client for any purpose other than the specific purpose of performing the Services outlined within this Agreement. 3.2.2. Passwords. Passwords are not transferable to any third party. Client is responsible for keeping all passwords secure and all use of the Granicus Products and Services accessed through Client's passwords. 3.2.3. Content. Client can only use Granicus Products and Services to share content that is created by and owned by Client and/or content for related organizations provided that it is in support of other organizations but not as a primary communication vehicle for other organizations that do not have a Granicus subscription. Any content deemed inappropriate for a public audience or in support of programs or topics that are unrelated to Client, can be removed or limited by Granicus. 3.2.3.1. Disclaimers. Any text, data, graphics, or any other material displayed or published on Client's website must be free from violation of or infringement of copyright, trademark, service mark, patent, trade secret, statutory, common law or proprietary or intellectual property rights of others. Granicus is not responsible for content migrated by Client or any third party. 3.2.4. Advertising. Granicus Products and Services shall not be used to promote products or services available for sale through Client or any third party unless approved in writing, in advance, by Granicus. Granicus reserves the right to request and review the details of any agreement between Client and a third party that compensates Client for the right to have information included in Content distributed or made available through Granicus Products and Services prior to approving the presence of Advertising within Granicus Products and Services. 3.2.5. Granicus Subscriber Information for Communications Cloud Suite only 3.2.5.1. Data Provided by Client. Data provided by Client and contact information gathered through Client's own web properties or activities will remain the property of Client ("Direct Subscriber'), including any and all personally identifiable information (PII). Granicus will not release the data without the express written permission of Client, unless required by law. 3.2.5.2. Granicus shall not disclose the client's data except to any third parties as necessary to operate the Granicus Products and Services (provided that the client hereby grants to Granicus a perpetual, noncancelable, worldwide, nonexclusive license to utilize any data, on an anonymous or aggregate basis only, that arises from the use of the Granicus Products and Services by the client, whether disclosed on, subsequent to, or prior to the Effective Date, to improve the functionality of the Granicus Products and Services and any other legitimate business purpose including the right to sublicense such data to third parties, subject to all legal restrictions regarding the use and disclosure of such Information). 3.2.5.3. Data Obtained through the Granicus Advanced Network 3.2.5.3.1. Granicus offers a SaaS product, known as the Communications Cloud, that offers Direct Subscribers recommendations to subscribe to other Granicus Client's digital communication (the "Advanced Network"). When a Direct Subscriber signs up through one of the recommendations of the Advanced Network, that subscriber is a "Network Subscriber' to the agency it subscribed to through the Advanced Network. 3.2.5.3.2. Access to the Advanced Network is a benefit of the GovDelivery Communications Cloud subscription with Granicus. Network Subscribers are available for use only on the GovDelivery Communications Claud while Client is under an active GovDelivery Communications Cloud subscription. Network Subscribers will not transfer to Client upon termination of any Granicus Order, SOW or Exhibit. Client shall not use or transfer any of the Network Subscribers after termination of its Order, SOW or Exhibit placed under this Agreement. All information related to Network Subscribers must be destroyed by Client within 15 calendar days of the Order, SOW or Exhibit placed under this Agreement terminating. 3.2.5.3.3. Opt -In. During the last 10 calendar days of Client's Order Term for the terminating Order, SOW or Exhibit placed under this Agreement, Client may send an opt -in email to Network Subscribers that shall include an explanation of Client's relationship with Granicus terminating and that the Network Subscribers may visit Client's website to subscribe to further updates from Client in the future. Any Network Subscriber that does not opt -in will not be transferred with the subscriber list provided to Client upon termination. 3.3. Restrictions. Client shall not: 3.3.1. Misuse any Granicus resources or cause any disruption, including but not limited to, the display of pornography or linking to pornographic material, advertisements, solicitations, or mass mailings to individuals who have not agreed to be contacted; 3.3.2. Use any process, program, or tool for gaining unauthorized access to the systems, networks, or accounts of other parties, including but not limited to, other Granicus Clients; 3.3.3. Use the Granicus Products and Services in a manner in which system or network resources are unreasonably denied to other Granicus clients; 3.3.4. Use the Services as a door or signpost to another server. 4 3.3.5. Access or use any portion of Granicus Products and Services, except as expressly allowed by this Agreement or each Order or SOW placed hereunder; 3.3.6. Disassemble, decompile, or otherwise reverse engineer all or any portion of the Granicus Products and Services; 3.3,7. Use the Granicus Products and Services for any unlawful purposes; 3.3.8. Export or allow access to the Granicus Products and Services in violation of U.S. laws or regulations; 3.3.9. Except as expressly permitted in this Agreement, subcontract, disclose, rent, or lease the Granicus Products and Services, or any portion thereof, for third party use; or 3.3.10. Modify, adapt, or use the Granicus Products and Services to develop any software application intended for resale which uses the Granicus Products and Services in whole or in part. 3.4. Client Feedback. Client assigns to Granicus any suggestion, enhancement, request, recommendation, correction or other feedback provided by Client relating to the use of the Granicus Products and Services. Granicus may use such submissions as it deems appropriate in its sole discretion. 3.5. Reservation of Rights. Subject to the limited rights expressly granted hereunder, Granicus and/or its licensors reserve all right, title and interest in the Granicus Products and Services, the documentation and resulting product including all related intellectual property rights. Further, no implied licenses are granted to Client. The Granicus name, the Granicus logo, and the product names associated with the services are trademarks of Granicus or its suppliers, and no right or license is granted to use them. 4. Payment 4.1. Fees. Client agrees to pay all fees, costs and other amounts as specified in each Order or SOW. Annual fees are due upfront according to the billing frequency specified in each Order or SOW. Granicus reserves the right to suspend any Granicus Products and Services should there be a lapse in payment. A lapse in the term of each Order or SOW will require the payment of a setup fee to reinstate the subscription. All fees are exclusive of applicable state, local, and federal taxes, which, if any, will be included in the invoice. It is Client's responsibility to provide applicable exemption certificate(s). 4.2. Disputed Invoiced Amounts. Client shall provide Granicus with detailed written notice of any amount(s) Client reasonably disputes within thirty (30) days of the date of invoice for said amount(s) at issue. Granicus will not exercise its rights under 4.1 above if Client has, in good faith, disputed an invoice and is diligently trying to resolve the dispute. Client's failure to provide Granicus with notice of any disputed invoiced amount(s) shall be deemed to be Client's acceptance of the content of such invoice. 4.3. Price Increases. Any price increases not negotiated in advance shall be provided by Granicus to Client at least thirty (30) days prior to the end of the Order Term. 5. Representations, Warranties and Disclaimers 5.1. Representations. Each Party represents that it has validly entered into this Agreement and has the legal power to do so. 5.2. Warranties. Granicus warrants that it takes all precautions that are standard in the industry to increase the likelihood of a successful performance for the Granicus Products and Services. 5.3. Disclaimers. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 5.2 ABOVE, EACH PARTY HEREBY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY NATURE WHATSOEVER WHETHER ORAL AND WRITTEN, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, TITLE, NON -INFRINGEMENT, AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 5 GRANICUS DOES NOT WARRANT THAT GRAN ICUS PRODUCTS AND SERVICES WILL MEET CLIENT'S REQUIREMENTS OR THAT THE OPERATION THEREOF WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE. 6. Confidential Information 6.1. Confidential Information. It is expected that one Party (Disclosing Party) may disclose to the other Party (Receiving Party) certain information which may be considered confidential and/or trade secret information ("Confidential Information"). Confidential Information shall include: (i) Granicus' Products and Services, (ii) non-public information if it is clearly and conspicuously marked as "confidential" or with a similar designation at the time of disclosure; (iii) non-public information of the Disclosing Party if it is identified as confidential and/or proprietary before, during, or promptly after presentation or communication and (iv) any information that should be reasonably understood to be confidential or proprietary to the Receiving Party, given the nature of the information and the context in which disclosed. Subject to applicable law, each Receiving Party agrees to receive and hold any Confidential Information in strict confidence. Without limiting the scope of the foregoing, each Receiving Party also agrees: (a) to protect and safeguard the Confidential Information against unauthorized use, publication or disclosure; (b) not to reveal, report, publish, disclose, transfer, copy or otherwise use any Confidential Information except as specifically authorized by the Disclosing Party; (c) not to use any Confidential Information for any purpose other than as stated above; (d) to restrict access to Confidential Information to those of its advisors, officers, directors, employees, agents, consultants, contractors and lobbyists who have a need to know, who have been advised of the confidential nature thereof, and who are under express written obligations of confidentiality or under obligations of confidentiality imposed by law or rule; and (e) to exercise at least the same standard of care and security to protect the confidentiality of the Confidential Information received by it as it protects its own confidential information. If a Receiving Party Is requested or required in a judicial, administrative, or governmental proceeding to disclose any Confidential Information, it will notify the Disclosing Party as promptly as practicable so that the Disclosing Party may seek an appropriate protective order or waiver for that instance. 6.2. Exceptions. Confidential Information shall not include information which: (i) is or becomes public knowledge through no fault of the Receiving Party; (ii) was in the Receiving Party's possession before receipt from the Disclosing Party; (iii) is rightfully received by the Receiving party from a third party without any duty of confidentiality; (iv) is disclosed by the Disclosing Party without any duty of confidentiality on the third party; (v) is independently developed by the Receiving Party without use or reference to the Disclosing Party's Confidential Information; or (vi) is disclosed with the prior written approval of the Disclosing Party. 6.3. Storage and Sending. In the event that Granicus Products and Services will be used to store and/or send Confidential Information, Granicus must be notified in writing, in advance of the storage or sending. Should Client provide such notice, Client must ensure that Confidential Information or sensitive information is stored behind a secure interface and that Granicus Products and Services be used only to notify people of updates to the information that can be accessed after authentication against a secure interface managed by Client. 6.4. Return of Confidential information. Each Receiving Party shall return or destroy the Confidential Information immediately upon written request by the Disclosing Party; provided, however, that each Receiving Party may retain one copy of the Confidential Information in orderto comply with applicable laws and the terms of this Agreement. Customer understands and agrees that it may I not always be possible to completely remove or delete all personal data from Granicus' databases without some residual data because of backups and for other reasons. 7. Term and Termination 7.1. Agreement Term. The Agreement Term shall begin on the date of the initial Order or SOW and continue through the latest date of the Order Term of each order or SOW under this Agreement, unless otherwise terminated as provided in this Section 7. Each Order or SOW will specify an Order Term for the Granicus Products and Services provided under the respective Order or SOW. Client's right to access or use the Granicus Products and Services will cease at the end of the Order Term identified within each Order or SOW, unless either extended or earlier terminated as provided in this Section 7. 7.2. Effect of Termination. If the Parties agree to terminate this Agreement and an Order or SOW is still in effect at the time of termination, then the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall continue to govern the outstanding Order or SOW until termination or expiration thereof. If the Agreement is terminated for breach, then unless otherwise agreed to in writing, all outstanding Orders or SOWS shall immediately terminate as of the Agreement termination date. Unless otherwise stated in this Agreement, in no event shall Client be entitled to a refund of any prepaid fees upon termination. 7.3. Termination for Cause. The non -breaching Party may terminate this Agreement upon written notice if the other Party is in material breach of this Agreement and fails to cure such breach within thirty (30) days after the non -breaching Party provides written notice of the breach. A Party may also terminate this Agreement immediately upon notice if the other Party: (a) is liquidated, dissolved, or adjudged to be in a state of bankruptcy or receivership; (b) is insolvent, unable to pay its debts as they become due, makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors or takes advantage of any law for the benefit of debtors; or (c) ceases to conduct business for any reason on an ongoing basis leaving no successor in interest. Granicus may, without liability, immediately suspend or terminate any or all Order or SOW issued hereunder if any Fees owed under this Agreement are past due pursuant to Section 4.1. 7.4. Rights and Obligations After Termination. In the event of expiration or termination of this Agreement, Client shall immediately pay to Granicus all Fees due to Granicus through the date of expiration or termination. 7.5. Survival. All rights granted hereunder shall terminate upon the latter of the termination or expiration date of this Agreement, or each Order or SOW. The provisions of this Agreement with respect to warranties, liability, choice of law and jurisdiction, and confidentiality shall survive termination of this Agreement and continue in full force and effect. S. Limitation of Liability 8.1. EXCLUSION OF CONSEQUENTIAL AND RELATED DAMAGES. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL GRANICUS BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, WHETHER AN ACTION IS IN CONTRACT OR TORT AND REGARDLESS OF THE THEORY OF LIABILITY, EVEN IF A PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. FURTHER, GRANICUS SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR: (A) ERROR OR INTERRUPTION OF USE OR FOR LOSS OR INACCURACY OR CORRUPTION OF CLIENT DATA; (B) COST OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS, SERVICES OR TECHNOLOGY; (C) LOSS OF BUSINESS; (D) DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF ACCESS TO OR INABILITY TO ACCESS THE SERVICES, SOFTWARE, CONTENT, OR RELATED TECHNICAL SUPPORT; OR (E) FOR ANY MATTER BEYOND GRANICUS' REASONABLE CONTROL, EVEN IF GRANICUS HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF ANY OF THE FOREGOING LOSSES OR DAMAGES. 8.2. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. EXCEPT FOR GRANICUS' DUTIES UNDER SECTION 9.1., IN NO INSTANCE SHALL EITHER PARTY'S LIABILITY TO THE OTHER PARTY FOR DIRECT DAMAGES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT (WHETHER IN CONTRACT OR TORT OR OTHERWISE) EXCEED SEVENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($75,000). IN NO INSTANCE SHALL EITHER PARTY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY LOST PROFITS OR OTHER DAMAGES, INCLUDING INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR ANY OTHER DAMAGES, HOWEVER CAUSED. 9. Indemnification 9.1. Indemnification by Granicus. Granicus will defend Client from and against all losses, liabilities, damages and expenses arising from any claim orsuit by a third party unaffiliated with either Party to this Agreement ("Claims") and shall pay all losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, judgments, awards, interest, civil penalties, and reasonable expenses (collectively, "Losses," and including reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs), to the extent arising out of any Claims by any third party that Granicus Products and Services infringe a valid U.S. copyright or U.S. patent issued as of the date of the applicable Order or SOW. In the event of such a Claim, if Granicus determines that an affected Order or SOW is likely, or if the solution is determined in a final, non -appealable judgment by a court of competent jurisdiction, to infringe a valid U.S. copyright or U.S. patent issued as of the date of the applicable Order or SOW, Granicus will, in its discretion: (a) replace the affected Granicus Products and Services; (b) modify the affected Granicus Products and Services to render it non -infringing; or (c) terminate this Agreement or the applicable Order or SOW with respect to the affected solution and refund to Client any prepaid fees for the then - remaining or unexpired portion of the Order or SOW term. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Granicus shall have no obligation to indemnify, defend, or hold Client harmless from any Claim to the extent it is based upon: (i) a modification to any solution by Client (or by anyone under Client's direction or control or using logins or passwords assigned to Client); (ii) a modification made by Granicus pursuant to Client's required instructions; or (iii) Client's use of any Granicus Products and Services other than in accordance with this Agreement. This section 9.1 sets forth Client's sole and exclusive remedy, and Granicus' entire liability, for any Claim that the Granicus Products and Services or any other materials provided by Granicus violate or infringe upon the rights of any third party. 9.2. Indemnification by Client. Client shall defend, indemnify, and hold Granicus harmless from and against any Claims, and shall pay all Losses, to the extent arising out of or related to (a) Client's (or that of anyone authorized by Client or using logins or passwords assigned to Client) use or modification of any Granicus Products and Services; (b) any Client content; or (c) Client's violation of applicable law. 9.3. Defense. With regard to any Claim subject to indemnification pursuant to this Section 9: (a) the Party seeking indemnification shall promptly notifythe indemnifying Party upon becoming aware of the Claim; (b) the indemnifying Party shall promptly assume sole defense and control of such Claim upon becoming aware thereof; and (c) the indemnified Party shall reasonably cooperate with the indemnifying Party regarding such Claim. Nevertheless, the indemnified Party may reasonably participate in such defense, at its expense, with counsel of its choice, but shall not settle any such Claim without the indemnifying Party's prior written consent. The indemnifying Party shall not settle or compromise any Claim in any manner that imposes any obligations upon the indemnified Party without the prior written consent of the indemnified Party. 10. General 10.1. Relationship of the Parties. Granicus and Client acknowledge that they operate independent of each other. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed or construed to create a joint venture, partnership, agency, or employee/employer relationship between the Parties for any purpose, including, but not limited to, taxes or employee benefits. Each Party will be solely responsible for the payment of all taxes and insurance for its employees and business operations. 10.2. Headings. The various section headings of this Agreement are inserted only for convenience of reference and are not intended, nor shall they be construed to modify, define, limit, or expand the intent of the Parties. 10.3. Amendments. This Agreement may not be amended or modified except by a written instrument signed by authorized representatives of both Parties. 10.4. severability. To the extent permitted by applicable law, the Parties hereby waive any provision of law that would render any clause of this Agreement invalid or otherwise unenforceable in any respect. In the event that a provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid or otherwise unenforceable, such provision will be interpreted to fulfill its intended purpose to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, and the remaining provisions of this Agreement will continue in full force and effect. 10.5. Assignment. Neither Party may assign, delegate, or otherwise transfer this Agreement or any of its rights or obligations hereunder, either voluntarily or by operation of law, without the prior written consent of the other Party (such consent not to be unreasonably withheld); provided, however, that either Party may assign this Agreement without the other Party's consent in the event of any successor or assign that has acquired all, or substantially all, of the assigning Partys business by means of merger, stock purchase, asset purchase, or otherwise. Any assignment or attempted assignment in violation of this Agreement shall be null and void. 10.6. No Third -Party Beneficiaries. Subject to Section 10.5 this Agreement is binding upon and insures solely to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective permitted successors and assigns; there are no third -party beneficiaries to this Agreement. 10.7. Notice. Other than routine administrative communications, which may be exchanged by the Parties via email or other means, all notices, consents, and approvals hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given upon: (a) personal delivery; (b) the day of receipt, as shown in the applicable carrier's systems, if sent via FedEx, UPS, DHL, or other nationally recognized express carrier; (c) the third business day after sending by U.S. Postal Service, First Class, postage prepaid, return receipt requested; or (d) sending by email, with confirmed receipt from the receiving party. Either Party may provide the other with notice of a change in mailing or email address in which case the mailing or email address, as applicable, for that Party will be deemed to have been amended. The mailing and email addresses of the Parties are as follows: 10.8. Force Majeure. Any delay in the performance by either Party hereto of its obligations hereunder shall be excused when such delay in performance is due to any cause or event of any nature ATTN: Address: Contracts 408 St. Peter Street Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102 Phone: (651) 757-4154 Email: contracts@granicus.com 10.8. Force Majeure. Any delay in the performance by either Party hereto of its obligations hereunder shall be excused when such delay in performance is due to any cause or event of any nature ATTN: Purchasing Address: 410 E Washington ST Iowa city IA 52240 Phone: 319-356-5075 Email: Theresa-vanatter@iowa- city.org 10.8. Force Majeure. Any delay in the performance by either Party hereto of its obligations hereunder shall be excused when such delay in performance is due to any cause or event of any nature whatsoever beyond the reasonable control of such Party, including, without limitation, any act of God; any fire, flood, or weather condition; any computer virus, worm, denial of service attack; any earthquake; any act of a public enemy, war, insurrection, riot, explosion or strike; provided, that written notice thereof must be given by such Party to the other Party within twenty (20) days after occurrence of such cause or event. 10.9. Choice of Law and Jurisdiction. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted under the laws of the State of Iowa, without reference to the State's principles of conflicts of law. The Parties expressly consent and submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts of Johnson County, IA. 10.10. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, together with all Orders or SOWS referenced herein, sets forth the entire understanding of the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersedes any and all prior oral and written understandings, quotations, communications, and agreements. Granicus and Client agree that any and all Orders or SOWS are Incorporated herein by this reference. In the event of possible conflict or inconsistency between such documents, the conflict or inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: (1) the terms of this Agreement; (2) Orders; (3) all other SOWS or other purchase documents; (4) Granicus response to Client's request for RFI, RFP, RFQ; and (5) Client's RFI, RFP, RFQ. If Client issues a purchase order, Granicus hereby rejects any additional or conflicting terms appearing on the purchase order or any other ordering materials submitted by Client. Upon request, Granicus shall reference a purchase order number on its invoices, provided, however, that Client acknowledges that it is Client's responsibility to provide the corresponding purchase order information (including a purchase order number) to Granicus upon the creation of such a purchase order. Client agrees that a failure to provide Granicus with the corresponding purchase order shall not relieve Client of its obligations to provide payment to Granicus pursuant to Section 4.1 above. 10.11. Reference. Notwithstanding any other terms to the contrary contained herein, Client grants Granicus the right to use Client's name and logo in Client lists and marketing materials. 10.12. Injunctive Relief. Granicus is entitled to obtain injunctive relief if Clients use of Granicus Products and Services is in violation of any restrictions set forth in this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized representatives on the Effective Date as set forth above. By: roocusqn.a by; Qk.A (riSh" t A~& By: (Authorized Signature) Signature) Name: Ana Cristina Carrera Name: Geoff Fruin (Print or Type Name of Signatory) (Print or Type Name of Signatory) Title: Contracts Manager Title: 11/16/2021 Date: 10/29/2021 (Execution Date) Attachments: Exhibit A (Granicus Proposal) Date: (Execution Date) Approved By City Attorney's Office R Exhibit A: Granicus Proposal GRAN ICUS 408 Saint Peter Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102 United States ORDER DETAILS THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE Granicus Proposal for Iowa City IA Prepared By: Dalton Lemert Phone: Email: dalton.lemert@granicus.com Order #: Q-151826 Prepared On: 09/08/2021 Expires On: 10/01/2021 Order Form Prepared for Iowa City IA ORDER TERMS Currency: USD Payment Terms. Net 30 (Payments for subscriptions are due at the beginning of the period of performance.) Period of Performance: The term of the Agreement will commence on the date this document is signed and will continue for 60 months. Order #: Q-151826 Prepared: 09/08/2021 Page i of 8 cR A N i Cu s Order Form Iowa City IA PRICING SUMMARY The pricing and terms within this Proposal are specific to the products and volumes contained within this Proposal. Order #: Q-151826 Prepared: 09/08/2021 Page 2 of 8 Solution Billing Quantity/Unit One -Time Fee Frequency govAccess - Website Design and Milestones - 1 Each $20,400.00 Implementation - Innovator 40/20/20/20 Content Migration - Up to 500 Pages of Milestones - I Each $2,400.00 Migration Total 40/20/20/20 Advanced UX Analysis Package Milestones - 40/20/20/20 I Each $3,000.00 govAccess Developer Toolkit Set-up & Upon Delivery I Each $2,400.00 Config govAccess Developer Toolkit Technical Upon Delivery I Each $1,000.00 Training =: SUBTOTAL: $29,200.00 ° 111`6e Solution Bound quantity/Unit Frequency govAccess Developer Toolkit Annual ]Each $0.00 (Subject to Discount) govAccess - Maintenance, Hosting, & Licensing Fee - Core Annual 1 Each $0.00 (Subject to Discount) SUBTOTAL: $0.00 Order #: Q-151826 Prepared: 09/08/2021 Page 2 of 8 FUTURE YEAR PRICING govAccess Developer Toolkit Period of Performance` --� Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 $5,600.00 $5,880.00 $6,17 Order Form Iowa City IA $6,482. govAccess - Maintenance, $4,400.00 $4,620.00 $4,851.00 $5,093.55 Hosting, & Licensing Fee - Core $10,500.00 $11 Order #: Q-151826 Prepared: 09/08/2021 Page 3 of 8 PRODUCT DESCRIPTIONS Order Form Iowa City IA Solution Description govAccess - Website Design govAccess Website Design and Implementation - Innovator provides a and Implementation - citizen focused website and includes: Innovator • UX consultation, which may include one (1) or more of the following: • One (1) site analytics report • One (1) heatmap analysis • One (1) internal stakeholder survey • Modular homepage wireframe based on predefined building blocks • Fully responsive design • Custom mobile homepage or standard mobile responsive homepage • Video background or standard rotating image carousel (switchable at any time) • One(]) customer experience feature -Choose from Granicus' library that includes service finder or data visualization banner • Programming/CMS implementation • Migrate up to 200 webpages • Up to five (5) forms converted into the new CMS • One (1) day of web -based training Content Migration - Up to 500 Includes the migration of up to 500 pages of content Pages of Migration Total govAccess Developer Toolkit The govAccess Developer Toolkit puts control back in the hands of technical staff while providing content contributors the ease of use and speed to adapt. Agencies can quickly and easily create new digital experiences for constituents across any device which can grow with the organization. The Developer Toolkit solution provides agencies with microsite management while maintaining consistent branding within with a single web platform. The Developer Toolkit includes core functionality such as: • Microsite Builder • Design Studio • Content SDK Order #: Q-151826 Prepared: 09/08/2021 Page 4 of 8 GRAN ICUS Order Form Iowa City IA , Solution ^'' _'.i" Descrlptiori`•' _ �^;r," � ,, govAccess - Maintenance, The govAccess Maintenance, Hosting, and Licensing plan is designed to Hosting, & Licensing Fee - Core equip the client with the technology, expertise and training to keep the client's website relevant and effective over time. Services include the following: • Ongoing software updates • Unlimited technical support (6:00 AM - 6:00 PM PT, Monday - Friday) • Access to training webinars and on -demand video library • Access to best practice webinars and resources • Annual health check with research -based recommendations for website optimization • DDoS mitigation • Disaster recovery with 90 -minute failover (RTO) and 15 -minute data replication (RPO) Advanced UX Analysis Includes an in-depth User Experience (UX) Analysis of the client's website, Package which may include: • Advanced Site Analytics: Identify and analyze top pages for desktop and mobile, entrance and exit pages • Online Community Surveys: Conduct and analyze the results of a stakeholder survey and a community survey • Heatmap Analysis: Capture and analyze heat maps and eye tracking maps • Recorded User Testing: Conduct remote video user testing for five (5) users on five (5) tasks • Comprehensive Report: Deliver a report outlining key insights and recommendations for layout, navigation, content and design for the new website which will serve as a guide for the rest of the design and development process Order #: Q-151826 Prepared: 09/08/2021 Page 5 of 8 G GRAN I CUS Order Form Iowa City A Solution Dei�drllption Y govAccess Developer Toolkit Implementation includes: Set-up & Config - Installing Developer Toolkif in govAccess CMS • Quality assurance (OA) testing • Access to online training documentation around advanced account functions and capabilities • Access to an implementation consultant for up to 30 days following installation govAccess Developer Toolkit Provides a balance of Product knowledge and industry best practices to a Technical Training specific audience. Sessions are delivered by product experts via videoconferencing technology. Order #: Q-151826 Prepared: 09/08/2021 Page 6 of 8 G+ GRANICUS Order Form Iowa City IA TERMS & CONDITIONS Link to Terms: httos://Rranicus cpm/odfs/Master Subscription Agreement odf This quote is exclusive of applicable state, local, and federal taxes, which, if any. will be included in the invoice. It is the responsibility of Iowa City IA to provide applicable exemption certificate(s). Granicus certifies that it will not sell, retain, use, or disclose any personal information provided by Client for any purpose other than the specific purpose of performing the services outlined within this Agreement. Any lapse in payment may result in suspension of service and will require the payment of a setup fee to reinstate the subscription. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, Granicus reserves the right to adjust pricing at any renewal in which the volume has changed from the prior term without regard to the prior term's per-unit pricing. Client will be eligible to request a basic redesign credit for one (1) govAccess main website after completing year four (4) of this uninterrupted five (5) year Agreement. Client must request the basic redesign credit prior to the end of the initial term. The redesign will be available after payment of the annual invoice for year four (4) of the Agreement. The basic redesign credit will only be available if there are no outstanding govAccess invoices at the time the request is made. Any termination of the Agreement prior to the end of the initial term renders the basic redesign credit offer null and void. Granicus will not develop a sitemop or new content as an included part of any free redesign work, but will assist the Client in transferring existing content into the new design. The basic redesign credit will be equivalent to either: A template selected from the then -current Granicus best practices library, or; A dollar credit not to exceed $8.000.00 applied towards a custom redesign of one (1) existing main website • The first year's Annual Fees) listed as "Subject to Discount" is listed at no cost to the Client to allow time for design and implementation. In order to receive the first year pricing, Client's award must include all of the One -Time Fees, Annual Fees for New Subscriptions, and Remaining Penod(s) outlined in this quote. The Agreement, Order Term, and Annual Fees begin upon the date of document signature or award. Subsequent Annual Fees for Remaining Period(s) will be due on each annual anniversary of the Agreement. Upon the Agreement's fiat anniversary, Client will be responsible for paying the Annual Fees listed for Year 2. • Billing Frequency Notes (Milestones - 40/20/20/20(: An initial payment equal to 40% of the total; A payment equal to 20% of the total upon Granicus' delivery of the draft homepage design concepts to the client; A payment equal to 20% of the total upon implementation of the main website into the VCMS on a Granicus-hosted development server; and A payment equal to 20% of the total upon completion; provided, however that the client has completed training. If the client has not completed training, then Granicus shall invoice the client at the earlier of: completion of training or 21 days after completion. Order #: 0-151826 Prepared: 09/08/2021 Page 7 of 8 BILLING INFORMATION Order Form Iowa City IA Billing Contact: Theresa Vanatter BilBng Address:41 O E Washington Street I BIIBng Email: theresa-vanatterC�iowa-city.org Purchase Order Required? [ ]-No X -Yes PO Number: If PO required____ filling Phone: RFP21 38 319-356-5075 If submitting a Purchase Order, please Include the following language: The pricing, terms, and conditions of quote Q-151826 dated 09/08/2021 are incorporated into this Purchase Order by reference and shall take precedence over any terms and conditions included in this Purchase Order. AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE By signing this document, the undersigned certifies they have authority to enter the agreement. The undersigned also understands the services and terms. Iowa City IA Signature: j Name: Geoff Fruin Title: - -- -- - -- --------- — - --- City Manager Date: November 16, 2021 Order #: Q-151826 Prepared: 09/08/2021 Page 8 of 8 Item Number: 7.f. AL CITY OF IOWA CITY =�c�- COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution authorizing the procurement of playground equipment for the Pedestrian Mall Playground Project. Prepared By: Marri VanDyke, Civil Engineer Reviewed By: Juli Seydell Johnson, Parks and Recreation Director Jason Havel, City Engineer Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Geoff Fruin, City Manager Fiscal Impact: $345,652.23 available in the Ped Mall Playground Project account #R4383. Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Rendering Resolution Executive Summary: This agenda item approves the purchase of playground equipment and shade structures for the Pedestrian Mall Playground Project. The purchase price of the selected equipment is $345,652.23. A down payment of $29,641.15 will be required for the custom equipment. Background /Analysis: The Ped Mall playground is nearing the end of its useful life and replacement parts are being discontinued, making repairs and replacements difficult. The City of Iowa City hired Confluence to create a conceptual design for the playground, and this design was finalized after receiving public input from an online survey. The City then issued a request for quote for the supply of playground equipment that best matched the conceptual design. Submittals were reviewed by a steering committee made up of City staff and representatives of the Iowa City Downtown District. The design submitted by GameTime, partnered with Cunningham Recreation, was selected. A formal construction project will be bid at a later date for removal of the existing playground and installation of the new equipment. Construction for the Ped Mall Playground Project is anticipated for Spring 2022. ATTACHMENTS: Description Rendering Resolution _." - wn�� Ago Lz�;t �f� WR Al i - Ir E r dr a -+er, rl ' 3 Awd 1.� Prepared by: Marri VanDyke, Engineering Division, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319)356-5044 Resolution number 21-277 Resolution authorizing the procurement of playground equipment for the Pedestrian Mall Playground Project Whereas, the City of Iowa City hired Confluence to create a conceptual design for the Ped Mall playground; and Whereas, the conceptual design was finalized after receiving public input from an online survey; and Whereas, the City issued a request for quote for the supply of playground equipment that best matched the conceptual design; and Whereas, the design submitted by Game -rime partnered with Cunningham Recreation was selected by a steering committee; and Whereas, the purchase price of the selected equipment is $345,652.23, which exceeds the City Manager's spending authority of $150,000, thus requiring City Council approval; and Whereas, a down payment of $29,641.15 will be required for custom equipment; and Whereas, funds for this purchase are available in the Pedestrian Mall Playground account #R4383; and Whereas, approval of this procurement is in the public interest. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that: 1. The proposed procurement as described is approved. 2. The City Manager is authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to effectuate the purchase. Passed and approved this 16th day of Nov em er 2021. Mayor Pro/ em L Approved by 11-7 Attest: �J lQi ILI —---C' y Clerk City Attorn 's Office — 11/10/21 Resolution No. 21-277 Page 2 It was moved by Weiner and seconded by 'Taylor the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Bergus X Mims g Salih g Taylor g Teague x Thomas X Weiner Item Number: 7.g. 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY in � at COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution accepting the work for the Madison Street Jordan Well Plugging Project. Prepared By: Scott Sovers, Assistant City Engineer Reviewed By: Jason Havel, City Engineer Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Geoff Fruin, City Manager Fiscal Impact: None Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Engineer's Report Resolution Executive Summary: Work on the project was recently completed by Lynch's Excavating, LLC. of West Branch, Iowa, in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications. The Engineer's Report and Performance and Payment bonds are on file with the City Engineer. • Project Estimated Cost: $ 78,000.00 • Project Bid Received: $ 65,968.50 • Project Actual Cost: $ 83,058.54 There was one change order on the project for additional material to fill an unexpected cavern discovered below the bottom the well casing pipe. Background /Analysis: This project generally included the demolition of an existing building housing the well and pump, as well as the plugging and proper abandonment of the City's Jordan Well located at the intersection of Madison Street and Davenport Street. ATTACHMENTS: Description Engineer's Report Resolution ENGINEER'S REPORT November 3, 2021 City Council Iowa City, Iowa Re: Madison Street Jordan Well Plugging Project Dear City Council: I hereby certify that the construction of the Madison Street Jordan been completed by Lynch's Excavating, LLC. of West Branch, Iowa with the plans and specifications prepared by Shive-Hattery. e r rn p� CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 - 1826 (319) 356 - 5000 (319) 356 - 5009 FAX www.icgov.org Well Plugging Project has in substantial accordance The project was bid as a unit price contract and the final contract price is $ 83,058.54. There was one change or extra work order for the project as describe below: 1. Additional material to fill unexpected large cavern below the bottom the well casing pipe. $ 17,090.04 I recommend that the above -referenced improvements be accepted by the City of Iowa City. Sincerely, Jason Havel, P.E. City Engineer -7,� Prepared by: Scott Sovers, Asst. City Engineer, Engineering Division, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240, (319)356-5142 Resolution No. 21-278 Resolution accepting the work for the Madison Street Jordan Well Plugging Project Whereas, the Engineering Division has recommended that the work for construction of the Madison Street Jordan Well Plugging Project, as included in a contract between the City of Iowa City and Lynch's Excavating, Inc. of West Branch, Iowa, dated June 15, 2021, be accepted; and Whereas, the Engineer's Report and the performance, payment and maintenance bond have been filed in the City Engineer's office; and Whereas, funds for this project are available in the Water Fund account # 73730120; and Whereas, the final contract price is $83,058.54. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that said improvements are hereby accepted by the City of Iowa City, Iowa. Passed and approved this 16th day of Nove Attest: City Clerk eve 2021 Mayor PoTem Approved by City Attg ey's Office (Sara Greenwood Hektoen -11/09/21) It was moved by Weiner and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes: Nays: Absent: X Bergus x Mims X Salih X Taylor x Teague X Thomas X Weiner Item Number: 7.h. 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY ��.:. -dry in � at COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution accepting the work for the Asphalt Resurfacing 2018 — US Hwy 6 (N. Riverside Drive) — Rocky Shore to Sturgis Corner Drive Project. Prepared By: Scott Sovers, Assistant City Engineer Reviewed By: Jason Havel, City Engineer Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Geoff Fruin, City Manager Fiscal Impact: None Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Engineer's Report Resolution Executive Summary: Work on the project was recently completed by LL Pelling Company of North Liberty, Iowa in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications. The Engineer's Report and Performance and Payment bonds are on file with the City Clerk. • Project Estimated Cost: $ 3,200,373.00 • Project Bid Received: $ 3,853,886.69 • Project Actual Cost: $ 3,632,169.78 There were four change orders on this project, which generally included storm sewer intake repairs and replacements, conversion of an overhead electrical service to underground, and asphalt pavement incentive and disincentive payments. Background /Analysis: This was a joint Iowa Department of Transportation and City of Iowa City maintenance project that generally included asphalt resurfacing along Hwy 6 in Iowa City from Rocky Shore Drive to Sturgis Corner Drive. Work on this project also included storm sewer intake top and throat reconstruction, storm intake replacement, repair of curb and gutter as needed, and replacement of curb ramps to current ADA standards. ATTACHMENTS: Description Engineer's Report Resolution ENGINEER'S REPORT viii p- � '� wwrmA® CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 - 1826 (319) 356 - 5000 (319) 356 - 5009 FAX www.icgov.org November 4, 2021 City Clerk Iowa City, Iowa Re: Asphalt Resurfacing 2018 — US Hwy 6 (N. Riverside Drive) — Rocky Shore to Sturgis Corner Drive Project Dear City Clerk: I hereby certify that the construction of the Asphalt Resurfacing 2018 — US Hwy 6 (N. Riverside Drive) — Rocky Shore to Sturgis Corner Drive Project has been completed by LL Pelling Company of North Liberty, Iowa in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications prepared by the City. The project was bid as a unit price contract and the final contract price is $ 3,632,169.78. There were four (4) change or extra work orders for the project as described below: Change Order Description Net Contract Change 1. Storm sewer intake repairs. $9,120.00 2. Electrical transformer pad and service cut over. $15,697.00 3. New storm sewer intake and traffic signal conduit and wiring reroute. $14,027.00 4. Thermoplastic pavement markings and asphalt pavement incentive and disincentive payments. ($59,551.71) TOTAL ($20,707.71) I recommend that the above -referenced improvements be accepted by the City of Iowa City. Sincerely, Jason Havel, P.E. City Engineer Prepared by: Scott Sovers, Assistant City Engineer, Public Works, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5142 Resolution No. 21-279 Resolution accepting the work for the Asphalt Resurfacing 2018 — US Hwy 6 (N. Riverside Drive) — Rocky Shore to Sturgis Corner Drive Project Whereas, the Engineering Division has recommended that the work for construction of the Asphalt Resurfacing 2018 - US Hwy 6 (N. Riverside Drive) - Rocky Shore to Sturgis Corner Drive Project, as included in a contract between the City of Iowa City and LL Pelling Company of North Liberty, dated June 6, 2018, be accepted; and Whereas, the Engineers Report and the performance, payment and maintenance bond have been filed in the City Clerk's office; and Whereas, funds for this project are available in the Annual Pavement Rehabilitation account # S3824; and Whereas, the final contract price is $3,632,169.78. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that said improvements are hereby accepted by the City of Iowa City, Iowa. Passed and approved this 16th day of November 2021 Mayor Pro T m Approved by Attest: 7 City Jerk City Att ney's Office (Sara Greenwood Hektoen - 11 /09/21) It was moved by Weiner and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes: Nays: Absent: x Bergus x Mims x Salih x Taylor x Teague x Thomas x Weiner Item Number: 7.i. 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY ��.:. -dry in � at COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution accepting the work for the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, trail, and paving public improvements for General Quarters — Part Three, and declaring public improvements open for public access and use. Prepared By: Josh Slattery, Civil Engineer Reviewed By: Jason Havel, City Engineer Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Geoff Fruin, City Manager Fiscal Impact: None Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Engineer's Report Resolution Executive Summary: General Quarters — Part Three is a 7.79 -acre subdivision consisting of 30 residential lots located east of Sycamore Street and south of Dickenson Lane. General Quarters — Part Three extended Sherman Drive to loop back around to Sycamore Street and extended Farragut Lane to the south property line. Background /Analysis: The construction of the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, trail, and paving public improvements for General Quarters — Part Three have been completed in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications on file with the Engineering Division of the City of Iowa City. ATTACHMENTS: Description Engineer's Report Resolution e r � wiyrmA®i CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 - 1826 (319) 356 - 5000 ENGINEER'S REPORT (319) 356 - 5009 FAX www.icgov.org November 8, 2021 Honorable Mayor and City Council Iowa City, Iowa Re: General Quarters — Part Three Dear Honorable Mayor and Councilpersons: I hereby certify that the construction of the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, trails, and paving public improvements for General Quarters — Part Three have been completed in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications on file with the Engineering Division of the City of Iowa City. The required maintenance bonds are on file in the City Clerk's Office for the sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water main improvements constructed by Maxwell Construction, Inc. of Iowa City, Iowa and for the paving improvements constructed by Streb Construction Co., Inc. of Coralville, Iowa. I recommend that the above -referenced improvements be accepted by the City of Iowa City. Sincerely, (::;Z' Jason Havel, P.E. City Engineer I,1 Prepared by: Josh Slattery, Engineering Division, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5149 Resolution No. 21-280 Resolution accepting the work for the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, trail, and paving public improvements for General Quarters — Part Three, and declaring public improvements open for public access and use Whereas, the Engineering Division has certified that the following improvements have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the Engineering Division. Sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water main improvements for General Quarters - Part Three, as constructed by Maxwell Construction, Inc. of Iowa City, IA. Paving improvements for General Quarters - Part Three, as constructed by Streb Construction Co., Inc. of Coralville, IA. Whereas, the maintenance bonds have been filed in the City Clerk's office; and Whereas, the City of Iowa City has notified those contractors listed previously of the date on which it will consider acceptance of the aforementioned public improvements; and Whereas, the traffic control signs have been installed. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that said improvements are hereby accepted by the City of Iowa City, Iowa and that all dedications and public improvements previously set aside as not being open for public access are hereby formally accepted and declared open for public access and use. Passed and approved this 16th day ofvember 12021 Mayor Pro em Approved y Attest: �^ G�1�1 Cerk City AttorneYj ice (Sara Greenwood Hektoen-11/10/21) It was moved by Weiner and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes: Nays: Absent: X Bergus X Mims Salih X Taylor X X Teague X Thomas X Weiner Item Number: 7.j. 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY in � at COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution accepting the work for the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, street paving, trail, and certain sidewalk public improvements for Community View — Part Two Subdivision, and declaring public improvements open for public access and use. Prepared By: Josh Slattery, Sr. Civil Engineer Reviewed By: Jason Havel, City Engineer Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Geoff Fruin, City Manager Fiscal Impact: None Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Engineer's Report Resolution Executive Summary: Community View — Part Two Subdivision is a 11.57 -acre subdivision consisting of 40 residential lots located north of Community View — Part One and west of Windsor West — Part Three. Community View — Part Two Subdivision extended Aiden Street north to Winnsboro Drive and completes the loop of Winnsboro Drive. Background /Analysis: The construction of the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, street paving, trail, and certain sidewalk public improvements for Community View — Part Two Subdivision have been completed in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications on file with the Engineering Division of the City of Iowa City. ATTACHMENTS: Description Engineer's Report Resolution ►r i SAW CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 - 1826 (319) 356 - 5000 ENGINEER'S REPORT (319) 356 - 5009 FAX www.icgov.org November 8, 2021 Honorable Mayor and City Council Iowa City, Iowa Re: Community View — Part Two Subdivision Dear Honorable Mayor and Councilpersons: I hereby certify that the construction of the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, street paving, trails, and certain sidewalk improvements for Community View — Part Two Subdivision have been completed in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications on file with the Engineering Division of the City of Iowa City. The required maintenance bonds are on file in the City Clerk's Office for the sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water main improvements constructed by Maxwell Construction, Inc. of Iowa City, Iowa and for the paving improvements constructed by Streb Construction Co., Inc. of Coralville, Iowa. I recommend that the above -referenced improvements be accepted by the City of Iowa City. Sincerely, Jason Havel, P.E. City Engineer Prepared by: Josh Slattery, Engineering Division, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5149 Resolution No. 21-281 Resolution accepting the work for the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, street paving, trail, and certain sidewalk public improvements for Community View — Part Two Subdivision, and declaring public improvements open for public access and use Whereas, the Engineering Division has certified that the following improvements have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the Engineering Division. Sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water main improvements for Community View - Part Two Subdivision, as constructed by Maxwell Construction, Inc. of Iowa City, Iowa. Paving improvements for Community View - Part Two Subdivision, as constructed by Streb Construction Co., Inc. of Coralville, Iowa. Whereas, the maintenance bonds have been filed in the City Clerk's office; and Whereas, the City of Iowa City has notified those contractors listed previously of the date on which it will consider acceptance of the aforementioned public improvements; and Whereas, the traffic control signs have been installed. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that said improvements are hereby accepted by the City of Iowa City, Iowa and that all dedications and public improvements previously set aside as not being open for public access are hereby formally accepted and declared open for public access and use. Passed and approved this 16th day of Mayor G Attest: City Jerk It was moved by Weiner adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes X X X X 2021 �/(o Tem _ Ap/pr ed by G City A rney's Office (Sara Greenwood Hektoen - 11/10/21) and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be Nays: Absent: Bergus x Mims Salih Taylor X Teague Thomas Weiner -7'A Item Number: 7.k. November 16, 2021 Resolution approving the final plat of Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision - Part II, Iowa City, Iowa. (SUB21-0011) ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report Final Plat Resolution STAFF REPORT To: City Council Prepared by: Joshua Engelbrecht, Planning Intern and Anne Russett, Senior Planner Item: SUB21-0011 Date: November 3, 2021 Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision - Part II GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Property Owner: Contact Person: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Location Map: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning Surrounding Land Use and Zoning MMS Consultants 1917 S. Gilbert St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319-351-8282 Pepperwood Properties LLC 755 Mormon Trek Blvd. Iowa City, IA 52246 Caleb Wilson, Southgate Companies cwilson(a)southgateco.com Approval of a final plat To allow the re -subdivision of lots 5 & 6 and a portion of Outlot A of Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision. West of Broadway St. South of Highway 6E r: ab � ,vim � 16 Laiku 40 1.16 acres Commercial CC -2 — Community Commercial North: RS -5 — Low Density Single Family Residential, Highway 6 South: CC -2 — Community Commercial East: CC -2 — Community Commercial RM -44 — High Density Multi -Family Residential West: CC -2 — Community Commercial Comprehensive Plan: Neighborhood Open Space District File Date: 60 Day Limitation Period: 2 Southeast District Plan SE3 August 9, 2021 Applicant waived 60 -day limitation period. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicant, MMS Consultants, on behalf of Pepperwood Properties LLC has submitted a final plat application for Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision — Part Two. The 1.16 -acre project site is a re- subdivision of Lots 5, 6 and a portion of outlot "A" of the Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision, located west of Broadway St. and south of Highway 6 E. The site, which currently houses a commercial building, will undergo a change in ownership after the re -platting is complete. In 2006, Southgate Development Company, Inc submitted a preliminary and final plat (SUB06- 00018/SUB06-00019) for Pepperwood Plaza, an 11 -lot subdivision with one outlot. The Plaza was established in 1986 and was designated as a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District in 2003. At the time 6 of the lots contained existing structures and the remaining lots were intended for future development or shared parking between businesses. ANALYSIS: The final plat of Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision — Part II is in general compliance with the subdivision regulations. Legal papers are currently being reviewed by staff. It is anticipated that these documents will be approved prior to the November 16, 2021 Council meeting. Traffic Implications: The final plat will combine Lots 5 and 6 and a portion of Outlot "A" into Lot 1 of the Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision — Part II. The re -plat does not impact access to existing lots. Specifically, access to other Lots, including Lot 4 and Lot 3 of the Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision is still provided via Outlot A. Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The subject property does not contain any environmentally sensitive features. Storm Water Management: Storm water management infrastructure currently exists on the site and no improvements will be needed as part of the re -plat. Storm water is collected by a storm sewer that drains into the Highway 6 system which conveys the stormwater to the Iowa River. NEXT STEPS: Once the final plat and legal documents are approved, the applicant can begin applying for building permits. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of SUB21-0011, the final plat of Pepperwood Plaza — Part II, a 1.16 - acre, re -subdivision of lots 5 and 6 and a portion of outlot A of Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision located west Broadway St., and South of Highway 6 E. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Final Plat Approved by: Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services POR COUNTY RECORDER'S USE BE 1\4 - BE 1\4 SECralm 15-77ON-IR LOCATION: SUBDIVIDER: LOTS 5 AND 6 AND A PORTION OF OUTLOT 'A'OF PEPPERWOOD PROPERTIES LLC PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION IN THE NORTHEAST 755 MORMON TREK BOULEVARD QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, IOWA CITY, IOWA 52246 TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE FIFTH oa 1 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, SUBDIVIDERS ATTORNEY: CRYSTAL K. RATES IOWA Q LOT 1 123 N. LINN STREET, SUITE 300 '� 50,563 SF 1.16 AC IOWA CITY, IOWA 52245 LAND SURVEYOR: PROPRIETOR OR OWNER'. -CONGRESSIONAL SECT1014 ONES RICHARD R. NOWOTNY P.L.S - RIGHT -OF -WAV LINES MMS CONSULTANTS INC. PEPPERWOOD PROPERTIES LLC 1917 SOUTH GILBERT STREET 755 MORMON TREK BOULEVARD IOWA CITY, IOWA, 52240 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52246 PHONE: 319-3515282 — — - EASEMENT LINES, 'MOTH & PURPOSE NOTED DOCUMENT RETURN INFORMATION: EXISTING EASEMENT LINES. PURPOSE NOTED R GATE OF SURVEY: LAND SURVEYOR - MEASURED DIMENSIONS 07-06-2021 -CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER \ \_ FOUND s\a' HE 1\4 e HE 1\4 / \ YELLOW P ASTIC JU LS lL�i a OOO JV CSCS� II II etJYV`WUV1'I / LS CAP 8155 / B 9 . \ 7 / 7 / B M 9 W / •SS / p[ ppERWOOD PLAZA SCJ o MWWOM / IN ALGLRPANGE WITH HIE PAT THERELE RELaEPEP IN RAT tBQC % AT PAGE W OF T11E RFLLRPS GF T11E J.RM GgM1Y REGORPERS LFFILE. LOT 4 / x V N6326' 25.58• 25.52' 11 \ 11 p p5�p�1LS11 O 0115� unu 11 I \ ' / / .' a9'0T15" R-30.00'(R)(M) L -4.72(M) 4.70' T=2.37' C -4.72'(A) 4.69 ------ CB-N86'23'287W I �g71S)" I FOUND 5\8" 1 REBAR W\ YLS n I I N CAPP 81165C % -\, r -_•TAI 9_.' ?• n I I N E 5 ---I- ---- ----r / OUdOT "A" w Q i oa 1 oQ o LOT 6 m y`t' I q I LOT 5 Q LOT 1 embossed with "MMS ) '� 50,563 SF 1.16 AC ,y - PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES FOUND 5\8 FOUND REBAR W\ K. NAIL YELLOW PLASTIC FOUND 5\6T \ REBAR W\ d \ LS CAP 8165 PLAZA e E Z ---I- ---- ----r 0 OUdOT "A" w o; OF OUTLOT "A" OF PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION I LOT 5 embossed with "MMS ) oe - CUT "X" UNLESS NOTED OTHER'MSE d \ LS CAP 8165 FINAL PLAT PEPPERWOOD PLAZA / E R) ---I- ---- ----r 0 OUdOT "A" w 6 AND A PORTION OF OUTLOT "A" OF PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION I (5/8" Iran Pin w/ yellow, pliustie LS Cop FINAL PLAT PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION - PART II 0 A RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 5 AND 6 AND A PORTION OF OUTLOT "A" OF PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA Notes on this plat are not intended to create any vested Private interest in any stater) use ted private i Covenant or create any third party beneficiaries to any noted use restriction or covenant. SW 1`4 SW 1\4 SECTION 14 T79N 160 0 5 25 50 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=50' LEGEND AND NOTES ® - CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, FOUND ® - CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, REESTABLISHED 0 - CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, RECORDED LOCATION • - PROPERTY CORNER(S), FOUND (vs noted) O - PROPERTY CORNERS SET (5/8" Iran Pin w/ yellow, pliustie LS Cop embossed with "MMS ) ® - CUT "X" UNLESS NOTED OTHER'MSE - PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES -CONGRESSIONAL SECT1014 ONES --------- - RIGHT -OF -WAV LINES — - CENTER LINES - LOT LINES, INTERNAL - LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED — — — — — — — — — - EASEMENT LINES, 'MOTH & PURPOSE NOTED --------- --- EXISTING EASEMENT LINES. PURPOSE NOTED R - RECORDED DIMENSIONS M - MEASURED DIMENSIONS C22-1 -CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER UNLESS NOTED OTHERWSE ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET AND HUNDREDTHS DESCRIPTION - PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION - PART II LOTS 5 AND 6 AND A PORTION OF OUTLOT "A" OF PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Beginning at the Northeast Comer of Lot 6 of Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision, to Iowa City, Iowa, in accordance with the 1\4 ' �� 1\4 \ Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 52 at Page 60 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence ccc�E� r�rryp \� S20°46'O3"W, along the East Line of said Lot 6, a distance of 211.40 feet, to the Southeast Comer thereof, and a Point on Kw SEC O II0 N \ the Easterly Line of Auditor's Pamel 2021042, in accordance with the Recorded Plat thereof; Thence S35°52'32'W, along said Easter) Line 42.22 feet to the Northeast Comer of Lot 5 of said Pe erwood Plaza Subdivision Thence Y PP 51•3u106104xe1i►i►11016 auU-OlP41 t, along me test Line or saga LOT O, a Distance or 4o.90 rear, ro me 30UTneasT korner mereor I Bence \ S89°08'18"04, along the South Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 143.30 feet; Thence Northwesterly, 4.72 feet, along said South Line on a 30.00 foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly, whose 4.72 foot chord bears N86°23'28"W, to the Southwest Comer thereof; Thence N00°54'20"W, along the West Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 99.09 feet, to the \T Northwest Corner thereof; Thence N63°26'49"E, along the North Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 25.58 feet, to the / Southwest Corner of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042; Thence NO6°14'44"W, along the Westerly Line of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042, a distance of 14.76 feet; Thence N20°45'37"E, along said Westerly Line, 223.27 feet, to the Northwest / Corner of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042; Thence S69°11'57"E, along the North Line of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042, and the North Line of said Lot 6, a distance of 158.52 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision - / Part II contains 1.16 Acres (50,563 square feet), and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. L07 3 PARR OF BLOCK I N D A WERMAN CEHYER IN AGGORPANGE WITH THE RAT T1IERELF RE IN PAT Nb 2 AT PGE � GE THE REGORPs LF THE XHNSON GO,NTY �6 LFFILE Y REBAR W\ \ YELLOW PLASTIC YND y�.LS CAP 8165 41 OU'rn 0'r II /AT IILDJLS W 1 W - Exlsrwa AccEx 15Q.;1r _ N , 111 D D D D D 0 D I I [IT IC; ppLE;aU9OOD pdQ9PQ 9MQUHW191UH1 1 IN ALGLRPANGE WITIP T11E RAT THERELP RE(.LRGEP IN PAT � sR AT PAPE I ev GF THE REGORPS GF TEE J211N50N ( PFY RE(ORGC-R5 GTTINE II II 1 LOY a I Q Signed before me this doy of _ ,20 Notory Public, in and for the Store of Iowa. PLAT/PLAN APPROVED by the City of Iowa City City Clerk Dale: UTILITY EASEMENTS, AS SHOWN HEREON, MAY OR MAY NOT, INCLUDE SANITARY SEWER LINES, AND/OR STORM SEWER LINES, AND/OR WATER LINES; SEE CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR DETAILS. UTILITY EASEMENTS, AS SHOWN HEREON, ARE ADEQUATE FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE FACILITES REQUIR- ED BY THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES: MIDAMERICAN ENERGY CO. Dale: CENTURYLINK Date: MEDIACOM Date: CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 www.mmsconsultants.net Data I Revieion 07-15-2021 PER RRN REVIEW - RLW 08-18-2021 PER CITY REVIEW - LUSS 08-30-2021 PER CITY REVIEW - LSS 10-12-2021 AMENDED AUDITORS PARCEL 2021042-LSS FINAL PLAT PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION - PART II LOTS 5 AND 6 AND A PORTION OF OUTLOT "A" OF PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC Date: 07-13-2021 Dealgrc1 by. Flekl Book NG. DMW 1316 Drown by: scale: RLW 1"=50' GFccked by: Sheet No. RRN Pro)ect No. 'I IOWA CITY 11318-001 �, 1 NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT FOUND 318" PIPE auU-OlP41 t, along me test Line or saga LOT O, a Distance or 4o.90 rear, ro me 30UTneasT korner mereor I Bence \ S89°08'18"04, along the South Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 143.30 feet; Thence Northwesterly, 4.72 feet, along said South Line on a 30.00 foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly, whose 4.72 foot chord bears N86°23'28"W, to the Southwest Comer thereof; Thence N00°54'20"W, along the West Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 99.09 feet, to the \T Northwest Corner thereof; Thence N63°26'49"E, along the North Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 25.58 feet, to the / Southwest Corner of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042; Thence NO6°14'44"W, along the Westerly Line of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042, a distance of 14.76 feet; Thence N20°45'37"E, along said Westerly Line, 223.27 feet, to the Northwest / Corner of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042; Thence S69°11'57"E, along the North Line of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042, and the North Line of said Lot 6, a distance of 158.52 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision - / Part II contains 1.16 Acres (50,563 square feet), and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. L07 3 PARR OF BLOCK I N D A WERMAN CEHYER IN AGGORPANGE WITH THE RAT T1IERELF RE IN PAT Nb 2 AT PGE � GE THE REGORPs LF THE XHNSON GO,NTY �6 LFFILE Y REBAR W\ \ YELLOW PLASTIC YND y�.LS CAP 8165 41 OU'rn 0'r II /AT IILDJLS W 1 W - Exlsrwa AccEx 15Q.;1r _ N , 111 D D D D D 0 D I I [IT IC; ppLE;aU9OOD pdQ9PQ 9MQUHW191UH1 1 IN ALGLRPANGE WITIP T11E RAT THERELP RE(.LRGEP IN PAT � sR AT PAPE I ev GF THE REGORPS GF TEE J211N50N ( PFY RE(ORGC-R5 GTTINE II II 1 LOY a I Q Signed before me this doy of _ ,20 Notory Public, in and for the Store of Iowa. PLAT/PLAN APPROVED by the City of Iowa City City Clerk Dale: UTILITY EASEMENTS, AS SHOWN HEREON, MAY OR MAY NOT, INCLUDE SANITARY SEWER LINES, AND/OR STORM SEWER LINES, AND/OR WATER LINES; SEE CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR DETAILS. UTILITY EASEMENTS, AS SHOWN HEREON, ARE ADEQUATE FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE FACILITES REQUIR- ED BY THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES: MIDAMERICAN ENERGY CO. Dale: CENTURYLINK Date: MEDIACOM Date: CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 www.mmsconsultants.net Data I Revieion 07-15-2021 PER RRN REVIEW - RLW 08-18-2021 PER CITY REVIEW - LUSS 08-30-2021 PER CITY REVIEW - LSS 10-12-2021 AMENDED AUDITORS PARCEL 2021042-LSS FINAL PLAT PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION - PART II LOTS 5 AND 6 AND A PORTION OF OUTLOT "A" OF PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC Date: 07-13-2021 Dealgrc1 by. Flekl Book NG. DMW 1316 Drown by: scale: RLW 1"=50' GFccked by: Sheet No. RRN Pro)ect No. 'I IOWA CITY 11318-001 �, 1 Ftf, Doc ID: 031711550030 Type: GEN Kind: SUBDIVISION Recorded: 12/03/2021 at 11:12:01 AM Fee Amt: $152.00 Page 1 of 30 Johnson County Iowa Kim Painter County Recorder ffie*-J• j STATE OF IOWA ) }SS JOHNSON COUNTY } P I CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City. Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX WWW -kgov[o rg I, Kellie K. Fruehling, City Clerk of Iowa City, Iowa, do hereby certify that the Resolution attached hereto is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. 21-282, which was passed by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at a regular meeting held on the 16th day of November 2021, all as the same appears of record in my office. Also attached are the final legal documents for Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision — Part II, Iowa City, Iowa. Dated at Iowa City, Iowa, this 2-n�day of l c r , 2021. Kellie IC. Fruehling City Clerk fres subdivision Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (SUB21-0011) Resolution No. 21-282 Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision — Part II, Iowa City, Iowa. Whereas, the Owner, Pepperwood Properties, LLC, filed the final plat of Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision - Part II, a 1.16 acre re -subdivision of the Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision consisting of one commercial lot located south of Highway 6 E and west of Broadway Street in Iowa City, Iowa, Johnson County, Iowa; and Whereas, said subdivision in located on the following -described real estate in Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, to wit: LOTS 5 AND 6 AND A PORTION OF OUTLOT "A" OF PEPPERWOOD PLAZA SUBDIVISION IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Beginning at the Northeast Corner of Lot 6 of Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision, to Iowa City, Iowa, in accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 52 at Page 60 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S20°46'03"W, along the East Line of said Lot 6, a distance of 211.40 feet, to the Southeast Corner thereof, and a Point on the Easterly Line of Auditor's Parcel 2021042, in accordance with the Recorded Plat thereof; Thence S35°52'32"W, along said Easterly Line, 42.22 feet, to the Northeast Corner of Lot 5 of said Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision; Thence S00°50'41 "E, along the East Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 43.96 feet, to the Southeast Corner thereof; Thence S89°08'18"W, along the South Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 143.30 feet; Thence Northwesterly, 4.72 feet, along said South Line on a 30.00 foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly, whose 4.72 foot chord bears N86°23'28"W, to the Southwest Corner thereof; Thence N00054'20"W, along the West Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 99.09 feet, to the Northwest Corner thereof; Thence N63°26'49"E, along the North Line of said Lot 5, a distance of 25.58 feet, to the Southwest Corner of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042; Thence N06°14'44"W, along the Westerly Line of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042, a distance of 14.76 feet; Thence N20o 45' 37„ E, along said Westerly Line, 223.27 feet, to the Northwest Corner of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042; Thence S69'11 1'57"E, along the North Line of said Auditor's Parcel 2021042, and the North Line of said Lot 6, a distance of 158.52 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said Pepperwood Plaza Subdivision - Part II contains 1.16 Acres (50,563 square feet), and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. Whereas, the Neighborhood and Development Services Department and the Public Works Department examined the proposed final plat and subdivision, and recommended approval; and Whereas, said final plat and subdivision are found to conform with Chapter 354, Code of Iowa (2021) and all other state and local requirements. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that: 1. The said final plat and subdivision located on the above-described real estate be and the same are hereby approved. Resolution No. 21-282 Page 2 2. The City accepts the dedication of easements as provided by law 3. The Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, are hereby authorized and directed, upon approval by the City Attorney, to execute all legal documents relating to said subdivision, and to certify a copy of this resolution, which shall be affixed to the final plat after passage and approval by law. The City Clerk shall record the legal documents and the plat at the office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa at the expense of the owner. Passed and approved this 16th _ day of Mayor Prq/Tem 2021 Appr4 d by Attest:.. 4itlerkCity At ey's Office JJJ (Sara Greenwood Hektoen — 11/09/21) It was moved by Weiner and seconded by Ta for the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes: Nays: Absent: X _ Bergus X Mims X _ Salih X_ Taylor x Teague X Thomas Weiner Item Number: 8.c. �r p- CITY OE IOWA CITY www.iogov.org November 16, 2021 Motion setting a public hearing for December 14, 2021 to consider a petition to establish the South District Self Supported Municipal Improvement District within the City of Iowa City, Iowa. ATTACHMENTS: Description Petition Map Evaluative Report from P&Z Notice of Public Hearing PETITION To establish the South District Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District (SSMID) pursuant to Chapter 386 of the Code of Iowa. We, the undersigned, being owners of the property within the SSMID boundaries described herein, hereby petition the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 386 of the Code of Iowa (the "Acf) as follows: 1. To establish by ordinance a Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District in Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa: a. The name of which shall be the "South District Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District" (herein referred to as the "Proposed District'), b. A description of boundaries and map of the Proposed District is attached hereto as Exhibit A. c. The purposes of which shall be the undertaking of actions authorized by the Act and the performance of administration, redevelopment, and revitalization of the Proposed District, as authorized by the Act, any and all of which actions and improvements are intended to benefit the property, businesses, and residents within the Proposed District, including, but not limited to, activities that expand the mix of businesses, increase consumer traffic, enhance beautification and landscaping, and expand civic opportunities within the district. 2. To establish an operation fund for the Proposed District and levy an annual tax (the "Operation Tax") upon the property defined in the Act (excluding property assessed as residential property for property tax purposes) at a maximum levy rate not to exceed five dollars ($5) per one thousand dollars ($1,000) assessed value for a period of five (5) years, commencing with the levy of taxes for collection in the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2022 for the purpose of : (a) paying the administrative and operational expenses of the Proposed District, as defined and authorized in the Act, and (b) paying part or all of the maintenance expenses of "improvements' or "self-liquidating improvements" as defined in the Act with respect to the Proposed District. 3. It is the intent of this Petition that the operation taxes levied and collected on behalf of the Proposed District shall be expended for new, additional, or enhanced services within the Proposed District, and that the City shall not diminish the type and extent of governmental services currently provided. 4. This Petition is not requesting any amount of levy for either a Debt or Capital Fund. 5. To disburse annually all amounts collected in the Operation Fund, for one or more of the following purposes, at such times and under such conditions as shall be recommended to the City Council by a SSMID Advisory Board composed of an executive committee of a board of directors (as described in Section 6). a. Development and management of activities in support of marketing, business retention and attraction, including, but not limited to: L Database establishment ii. Space referrals and assistance iii. Marketing activities, including media and advertising campaigns and communication materials iv. Miscellaneous business support services V. Establishment and promotion of special events, festivals, and activities vi. Support of urban design and policy development that would enhance the activities within the SSMID; b. Physical or other improvements designed to enhance the image and appearance of the Proposed District, including, but not limited to: i. Lighting Improvements ii. Seasonal and decorative enhancements iii. Signage and banners iv. Landscaping V. Central market development vi. Maintenance/Repairs; c. To hire an Executive Director and, if needed, other support staff who will work for a non-profit Board of Directors to manage the work of the South District SSMID Board and to fulfill the intent of this Petition. 6. It is the intent of this Petition that the City of Iowa City enter into an Operating Agreement with the South District Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District Board (herein referred to as the 'Board"). This Proposed Board will be formed and described in the Operating Agreement. All SSMID levy monies shall be appropriated to the Proposed Board for the management and operation of the District. From time to time, the City of Iowa City may provide additional revenue to the Board for the purposes of the management and operation of the District. a. The Board shall establish itself as a 501 (c)(6) non-profit organization. The Board of Directors will be established as described below after passage of the ordinance in order to effectuate an Operating Agreement with the City of Iowa City and establishment of its bylaws. Once the Operating Agreement is established, the receipt of the first SSMID levy reimbursement from the City shall commence. i. Board membership shall consist of voting members: 1. Two from property owners or their representatives from a single property within the Proposed District that has an assessed value in excess of 1.0% of the total assessed value of property within the district boundaries. 2. Two from property owners or their representatives from a single property within the Proposed District that has an assessed value less than 1.0% of the total assessed value of property within the district boundaries. 3. Two from business owners within the Proposed District that lease more than 3,000 square feet of commercial space. 4. Two from business owners within the Proposed District that lease less than 3,000 square feet of commercial space. 5. Two from residents of the South District Neighborhood Association. 6. One from the Pepperwood Plaza parking association. ii. Board membership may consist of up to four (4) other stakeholders of the Proposed District as voting members of the Board. iii. Board membership may consist of ex -officio non-voting members from community development agencies and partners, such as: 1. Black Voices Project; 2. Johnson County Interfaith Coalition; 3. LULAC; 4. Iowa City Area Business Partnership; 5. Iowa City Area Development Group; and 6. City of Iowa City. iv. Board membership shall include the Executive Director as an ex -officio non-voting Board member. V. It is the intent of this Petition that no revenues produced through property taxes imposed specifically for the Proposed District or tax increment financing revenues attributable to the operation tax levy on properties in the Proposed District shall be spent by the City Council without the approval of the Board. b. The initial Board shall be appointed by a diverse group of stakeholders that will include four (4) persons representing: 1. Southgate; 2. South District Neighborhood Association; 3. Multicultural Development Center of Iowa; and 4. MidwestOne Bank. It is the further intent of this Petition that, notwithstanding the fact that the Proposed District is located within the boundaries of a Tax Increment Finance District which has been created by the City, an amount of funds which would be derived from the annual SSMID levy of the Operation Tax against property within the Proposed District if the Proposed District were not located within such Tax Increment Finance Districts shall be made available annually for the services, improvements, and activities set out in this Petition, and that the City should take all actions necessary to accomplish this purpose, including, if necessary, allocation to these services, improvements and activities of a portion of the incremental property taxes which are attributable to properties within the Proposed District. These allocations may be from the SSMID levy or other sources. EXHIBIT A South District SSMID 1505 1536 1511 1515 Plum St yoIt 1519 1523 1535q1615 rY,1000, 1527 1531 'n a U i 655 ' 1907 1906 T 907 T� Euclid Ave 1600 1601 1007 �n 1946 111 1911 Y 1913 1601 1911 Y v°, 1609 1602 1917 Y 1610 1613 in 1604 1921 Downey pr 1622 548 612 1624 0 1608 63 1614 203; �4 Olympic Ct 1927 1926 1630 1629 1612 609 1929 1620 545 1623 a 1624 Archer Ove 1933 5461937 1630 851 610 Pepperwood Place 851 Mall Southgate Ave 547 603 2010 611 2018 P_epperwood Ln_ lst,q` e 2030 817 2018 2001 2033 2030 825 2nd.- 2017 2040 2018 in Y 2048 802 820 845 2018 2051 a 2050 806 a a 2018 2103 2119 Y n 2018 This map is intended to serve as an aid in graphic representation only. This information is not warranted or accuracy or other purposes. 15 831 845 p0 0.1 0.1 T 907 T� Euclid Ave 1600 1601 1007 1946 111 1911 1913 1601 1104 1606 1609 1602 1917 1610 1613 in 1604 1605 Downey pr 1622 1621 3 1606 1607 1624 0 1608 Ir , ' 1614 203; �4 1623 001615 1610 1630 1629 1612 1619 1620 1614 1623 a 1624 Archer Ove 1627 1630 985 / 1901 1901 1901 851 1067 in T 1059 ; 1055 1051 1049 m 1045 1027 925 947 159 1030 W Cross Park Ave 1W 923 1015 1037 1053 0.3 Miles 1904 1100 ' 1102 1102 1102 102 110 1926 I 10� 1946 111 1911 1913 1956 1915 1917 1958 2003 2005 1960 2009 2011 W+ E 1115 2010 2020 Ir , ' 203; �4 CITY OF IOWA CITY DESCRIPTION FOR SOUTH DISTRICT SSMID BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1, PART OF BLOCK 2 BRAVERMAN CENTER, IOWA CITY, IOWA ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 20, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1, AND ITS NORTHWESTERLY EXTENSION TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF BROADWAY STREET; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF BROADWAY STREET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CROSS PARK AVENUE; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY EXTENDED NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CROSS PARK AVENUE, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 17, OF A PORTION OF BLOCK 1, BRAVERMAN CENTER, IOWA CITY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 31, PAGE 137 IN SAID RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 17 AND LOT 16, OF SAID A PORTION OF BLOCK 1, BRAVERMAN CENTER, IOWA CITY, IOWA, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 16; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 16 AND ITS WESTERLY EXTENSION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTERLINE OF KEOKUK STREET; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF KEOKUK STREET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF BPAVERMAN CENTER, LOT 2 OF BLOCK l AND BLOCKS 5,6 AND 7, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 8, PAGE 69 IN SAID RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 8, BLOCK 7 OF SAID BRAVERMAN CENTER; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 8, BLOCK 7 OF BRAVERMAN CENTER AND ITS NORTHERLY EXTENSION TO THE CENTERLINE OF SOUTHGATE AVENUE; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SOUTHGATE AVENUE TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 60 FEET OF LOT 4 OF BLOCK 5 OF THE RESUBDIVISION OF PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 5 AND 6, BRAVERMAN CENTER, PARTS 1 AND 2, IOWA CITY, IOWA ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 19, PAGE 93 IN SAID RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY EXTENDED LINE AND ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE WEST 60 FEET OF LOT 4 OF BLOCK 5 AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 5 OF BLOCK 5 OF SAID RESUBDMSION OF PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 5 AND 6, BRAVERMAN CENTER, PARTS 1 AND 2, TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF OLYMPIC COURT; THENCE NORTH TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF OLYMPIC COURT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WEST LINE OF LOT 6 OF BLOCK 5 OF SAID RESUBDIVISION OF PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 5 AND 6, BRAVERMAN CENTER, PARTS 1 AND 2; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6 OF BLOCK 5 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 OF BLOCK 5 OF THE RESUBDIVISION OF PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 5 AND 6, BRAVERMAN CENTER, PARTS 1 AND 2; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6 OF BLOCK 5 OF THE RESUBDIVISION OF PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 5 AND 6, BRAVERMAN CENTER, PARTS 1 AND 2, TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2020034, CITY OF IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 64, PAGE 135 IN SAID RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2020034 AND ITS NORTHERLY EXTENSION, TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE EAST BOUND LANE OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 6; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF THE EAST BOUND LANE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 6, TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE EAST LINE OF PART OF BLOCK 2, BRAVERMAN CENTER, IOWA CITY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 20 IN SAID RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENDED LINE AND ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF PART OF BLOCK 2, BRAVERMAN CENTER, IOWA CITY, IOWA TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1, PART OF BLOCK 2, BRAVERMAN CENTER, IOWA CITY TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Owner(s) Name Signature of Address of Property Assessed Value (Printed) Owner(s) or in Proposed SSMID Authorized Representative T yw��a e��a 1907 3 Y 1911 v°, Y 1921 54c 612 63 Olympic Ct 1927 609 1929 545 1933 546 1937 610 Southgate Ave 1906 South District SSMID 505 1511 1515 Plum St 1519 1523 1527 1531 1535 1539 c m U 1611 1615 907 1104 Downey pr in C, 1620 a o✓ 1624 1630 1100 1926 985 1901 1901 1901 1102 1102 851 1102 1102 Pepperwood 1904 Place 851 yo! 110 Mall 851 1067 — �ywoo ae1Va 1059 3 Euclid Ave 1926 110 1600 1601 1007 \ 2018 1049 m 1601 1606 1609 1602 []1605 1610 1613 in 1604 825 1622 1621 3 1606 v 1607 1624 0 1608 2018 1623 0°1610 1615 1630 1629 1612 1619 2005 1614 1614 1623 2018 Arc 1627 Q 2018 2103 2119 Y 1104 Downey pr in C, 1620 a o✓ 1624 1630 1100 1926 985 1901 1901 1901 1102 1102 851 1102 1102 Pepperwood 1904 Place 851 yo! 110 Mall 851 1067 — �ywoo ae1Va 1059 3 2010 1926 110 547 611 \ 2018 1049 m Pepperwood Ln 1st,41, 2030 817 2018 2001 2033 2030 825 2nd P 2017 1027 1915 2040 2018 925 947 59 1030 1958 2003 in 2005 Y 2048 802 820 845 2018 2051 c 2050 806 0 Q 2018 2103 2119 Y D 2018 Cross Park Ave This map is intended to serve as an aid in graphic representation only. This information is not warranted or accuracy or other purposes. 15 831 845 10 0.1 0.1 1055 1926 110 1051 ° 1049 m 1946 111 1045 1911 1956 1913 1027 1915 1917 925 947 59 1030 1958 2003 2005 1960 2009 0 2011 W�E llllllVVVVVVrrrrrrffffff Cross Park Ave 2010 2020 r S 923 1015 1037 1053 203,� wr® m; 0.3 Miles C. 1OWACiTv t =�, -4 CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM �., To: City Council From: Mike Hensch, Chair, Planning & Zoning Commission Date: November 5, 2021 Re: Evaluative Report on a Proposed South District Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District (SSMID) Council recently forwarded a petition by property owners within the South District, requesting the creation of the South District Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District (SSMID) as defined by Iowa Code Chapter 386. To be considered by P&Z, the SSMID petition must be signed by at least 25% of the property owners (within the district) representing at least 25% of the assessed value of the proposed district. Staff confirmed the petition meets these two thresholds containing the signatures of 25% of the property owners representing 27.2% of the assessed value within the proposed district. Next, Iowa Code requires P&Z to review the petition for its merit and feasibility and make an evaluative report to the City Council. After the review at its meeting on November 4, 2021, the P&Z Commission recommended approval and forwarding this review to the City Council for their further consideration of the South District SSMID. The following is a review and our determination of the proposed South District SSMID's merit and feasibility. 1. Does the property in the proposed district meet all of the criteria established in Section 386.3(1)? • The South District Self Supported Municipal Improvement petition appears to meet the minimum requirements of Iowa Code Section 386.3(1), which states that a district shall: 1) be compromised of contiguous property, zoned for commercial or industrial uses and be located wholly within the boundaries of the city, 2) be given a descriptive name containing the words "self-supporting municipal improvement district", and 3) be comprised of property related in some manner. • The Proposed District is comprised of contiguous property zoned for commercial use and is within the boundaries of the City of Iowa City. The petition states that the Proposed District is entitled "South District Self Supported Municipal Improvement District." Finally, the property within the Proposed District is related in that it is physically located in Iowa City, is contiguous, and serves as a commercial hub for the community. 2. Does the petition submitted is sufficiently clear and contains the requisite number of signatures from property owners representing the necessary assessed value of all the taxable property within the proposed district? November 8, 2021 Page 2 • The Proposed District petition provides detailed explanations of the proposed operations of the SSMID and the requirements of SSMID property owners. Staff has reviewed the petition and verifies the signatures of at least twenty-five percent of all the owners of property within the proposed district have signed the petition, and that these signatures together represent ownership of property with an assessed value of at least twenty-five percent of the assessed value of all of the property in the proposed district per Iowa Code Section 386.3(2)(a). 3. Does the petition sufficiently describe the boundaries of the district or provide a consolidated description of the property contained therein? • The petition provides a legal description of the boundaries of the Proposed District, and a map indicating the parcels of land included within the Proposed District. 4. Is a maximum rate of tax that may be imposed upon the property within the district and the purposes for which it may be levied set forth? • The Proposed District petition establishes a maximum tax rate of $5 per $1,000 of assessed value. This meets the requirement of Iowa Code Section 386.3(2)(d). The petition states the purpose of the tax is to provide new, additional or enhanced services within the Proposed District. 5. Is the purpose of the district is adequately described, as well as any improvements or other project activities that may be the subject of the petition? As stated in Item 4, the petition states that the purpose of the Proposed District is to provide for new, additional or enhanced services within the Proposed District. In particular, revenues collected for the Proposed District Operating Fund may be used for the following: o Development and management of activities in support of marketing, business retention and attraction, including, but not limited to database establishment, space referrals and assistance, marketing activities, including media and advertising campaigns and communication materials, miscellaneous business support services, establishment and promotion of special events, festivals, and activities, support of urban design and policy development that would enhance the activities within the SSMID. o Physical or other improvements designed to enhance the image and appearance of the Proposed District, including, but not limited to lighting improvements, seasonal and decorative enhancements, signage and banners, landscaping, central market development, and maintenance/repairs. November 8, 2021 Page 3 o To hire an Executive Director and, if needed, other support staff who will work for a non-profit Board of Directors to manage the work of the South District SSMID Board and to fulfill the intent of this Petition. 6. Does the proposed district or improvements conflict in any way with any existing laws, plans or City policies, including comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, local or regional development plans or programs, local, state or federal laws or regulations or other established special districts? • The operational functions and marketing that can occur under the Proposed District do not appear to conflict with any existing laws, plans or policies. The Proposed District overlaps with the existing Highway 6 Commercial Urban Renewal Area, which sunsets in 2025. As proposed, the SSMID petition does not conflict with the goals or purposes of the Highway 6 Commercial Urban Renewal Area. The proposed SSMID district falls into the newly established Highway Commercial Urban Revitalization Area which allows for a three-year 100% property tax exemption on eligible improvements to building value. Property owners continue to pay 100% of their tax bill on the original value. Tax exemptions through this program must be approved by City Council. • It is noted in the petition the intention that, notwithstanding the fact that a part of the proposed SSMID district is located within the Highway 6 Commercial TIF district, the amount of funds which would be derived from the annual SSMID levy from properties within the TIF district be made available annually for the SSMID activities and that the City take all actions necessary to accomplish this purpose, including the allocation of a portion of the incremental property taxes which are attributable to properties within the proposed district. 7. Are the taxes proposed sufficient to pay the anticipated costs or other expenses? The revenue generated from the proposed SSMID would be approximately $104,000 per year. This amount would be sufficient to hire the Executive Director, and to cover costs associated with marketing campaigns, operational costs, and projects in the Proposed District. 8. Is the formation of the district is consistent with or in furtherance of other identifiable City policies or goals? • Iowa City's Comprehensive Plan notes the importance of thriving retail centers for sustaining residential neighborhoods and employment centers. Neighborhood commercial areas can provide a focal point and gathering place and be within convenient walking distance for the residents in the immediate area. November 8, 2021 Page 4 The South District Plan states a goal to encourage and support residents, neighborhood organizations, and business and property owners to advocate for the continued improvement of Southside neighborhoods in keeping with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically noted is a goal to improve aesthetic appearance of commercial areas along Highway 6 and other commercial streets within the district. • The Proposed District petition states that one of the purposes of the SSMID is to provide physical enhancements, or beautification, to improve the image and appearance of the Proposed District. The review by the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the petition meets the requirements of Iowa Code Chapter 386, and that: • the operational activities (as defined in Iowa Code Section 386.8) of the Proposed District are appropriate in relation to existing laws, plans and policies, and • that the means to implement the proposal appear reasonably calculated to accomplish the Proposed District objectives. Notice of public hearing Notice of public hearing by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, considering a petition to establish a self -supported municipal improvement district within the City of Iowa City, Iowa Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at 6:00 p.m., on December 14, 2021 in The Center, 22 S. Linn Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider the creation of a Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District within the city limits. Pursuant to Chapter 386 of the Code of Iowa, herein "Act", a Petition has been filed with the City Council requesting that the City establish a Self -Supported Improvement District as contemplated by Chapter 386 of the Code. The name of the proposed District shall be the "South District Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District". The property to be included in the proposed South District Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District (SSMID) is located within the Pepperwood Plaza area, and currently zoned CC -2 and CI -1, generally south of Highway 6 West, north of Cross Park Avenue, along both sides of Keokuk Street and west of Broadway St, excepting Casey's, which is also included. Said property is legally described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of lot 1, part of block 2 Braverman Center, Iowa City, Iowa according to the plat recorded in plat book 7, page 20, in the Records of the Johnson county recorder's office; Thence northwesterly along the southerly line of said lot 1, and its northwesterly extension to a point on the centerline of Broadway Street; Thence south along said centerline of Broadway Street to its intersection with The easterly extension of the northerly right-of-way line of cross park avenue; Thence west along said easterly extended northerly right-of-way line and Along the northerly right-of-way line of cross park avenue, to the southeast corner of lot 17, of a portion of block 1, Braverman Center, Iowa City, Iowa, according to the plat recorded in plat book 31, page 137 in said recorder's office; Thence north along the east line of lot 17 and lot 16, of said a portion of block 1, Braverman Center, Iowa City, Iowa, to the northeast corner of said lot 16; Thence west along the northerly line of said lot 16 and its westerly extension to Its intersection with the centerline of Keokuk Street; Thence north along said centerline of Keokuk Street to its intersection with the South line of Braverman Center, lot 2 of block 1 and blocks 5,6 and 7, according to The plat recorded in plat book 8, page 69 in said recorder's office; Thence west along said south line to the southwest corner of lot 8, block 7 of said Braverman Center; Thence north along the west line of said lot 8, block 7 of Braverman Center and its northerly extension to the centerline of Southgate Avenue; Thence west along said centerline of Southgate Avenue to its intersection with the southerly extension of the east line of the west 60 feet of lot 4 of block 5 of The resubdivision of portions of blocks 5 and 6, Braverman Center, parts 1 and 2, Iowa City, Iowa according to the plat recorded in plat book 19, page 93 in said Recorder's office; Thence north along said southerly extended line and along said east line of the West 60 feet of lot 4 of block 5 and along the west line of lot 5 of block 5 of said Resubdivision of portions of blocks 5 and 6, Braverman Center, parts 1 and 2, to its Intersection with the southerly right-of-way line of Olympic court; Thence north to a point on the northerly right-of-way line of Olympic court, said Point being on the west line of lot 6 of block 5 of said resubdivision of portions of Blocks 5 and 6, Braverman Center, parts 1 and 2; Thence north along the west line of said lot 6 of block 5 to the northwest corner Of said lot 6 of block 5 of the resubdivision of portions of blocks 5 and 6, Braverman Center, parts 1 and 2; Thence east along the north line of said lot 6 of block 5 of the resubdivision of portions of blocks 5 and 6, Braverman Center, parts 1 and 2, to its intersection With the west line of auditor's parcel 2020034, City of Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, according to the plat recorded in plat book 64, page 135 in said recorder's Office; Thence north along said west line of auditor's parcel 2020034 and its northerly extension, to its intersection with the centerline of the east bound lane of U.S. Highway 6; Thence southeasterly, along said centerline of the east bound lane of U.S. Highway 6, to its intersection with the northerly extension of the east line of part of block 2, Braverman Center, Iowa City, Iowa, according to the plat Recorded in plat book 7, page 20 in said recorder's office; Thence south along said northerly extended line and along said east line of part of block 2, Braverman Center, Iowa City, Iowa to the southeast corner of lot 1, Part of block 2, Braverman Center, Iowa City to the point of beginning. The purposes of the proposed South District SSMID shall be the undertaking of actions authorized by the Act and include, additional or enhanced services within the district and administration of operational expenses for actions intended to benefit the property within the proposed South District SSMID which include developing and managing business retention, attraction, marketing, special events and activities, making physical or other improvements designed to improve the image and appearance and hiring an Executive Director to execute the program of work. The City will continue the type and extent of governmental services currently provided and the work of the South District SSMID will provide new and enhanced services. The maximum rate of tax which is requested to be imposed and to be levied annually shall not exceed $5.00 per $1,000.00 of taxable value of the "property' in any one year in addition to all other taxes. The proposed levy shall be distributed to the operation fund. All residents may appear and be given an opportunity to express their views for or against the proposed establishment of a self -supported municipal improvement district. Copies of the proposed ordinance and a map of the proposed Iowa City Downtown SSMID area are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk Item Number: 8.d. 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY ��.:. -dry in � at COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution setting a public hearing on November 30, 2021 on the project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the Highway 1 Water Main Replacement Project, directing City Clerk to publish notice of said hearing, and directing the City Engineer to place said project manual on file for public inspection. Prepared By: Joe Welter, Sr. Civil Engineer Reviewed By: Jason Havel, City Engineer Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Geoff Fruin, City Manager Fiscal Impact: $460,000 available in the Hwy 1 (Hawk Ridge to Walmart) Water Main Replacement - Account #W3313 Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Location Map Resolution Executive Summary: This agenda item sets the public hearing, which begins the bidding process for the Highway 1 Water Main Replacement Project. The project corridor is along the northside of Highway 1 between Westport Plaza (Walmart Entrance) and Hawk Ridge Drive. The project generally includes: approximately 1,600 feet of water main, fittings, valves, hydrants, restoration of the multiuse trail pavement, and seeding. Background /Analysis: The existing water main system (1990 vintage) has experienced many main breaks due to corrosive soils. As this main is a transmission main, breaks cause large pressure losses and disruptions within the distribution system. Replacement of this main with new materials will provide reliability and resiliency. Throughout the project, trenchless installation methods will be used to minimize disturbances to the multiuse trail, the highway ditches, and other surface features. Despite this, the project will disturb portions of the right-of-way during construction, and these areas will be repaved or hydroseeded following water main construction. Watersmith Engineering of Muscatine, Iowa designed this project and is assisting the City staff during bidding, letting, and construction. Watersmith Engineering estimated the cost of the project as $460,000. ATTACHMENTS: Description Location Map Resolution e gg COLL lip lh ;Lila' r r � �.� r+, r, WW ;e ; V�� R , Prepared by: Joe Welter, Public Works, 410 East Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa 52240, (319) 356-5144 Resolution No. 21-283 Resolution setting a public hearing on November 30, 2021 on the project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the Highway 1 Water Main Replacement Project, directing City Clerk to publish notice of said hearing, and directing the City Engineer to place said project manual on file for public inspection. Whereas, funds for this project are available in the Hwy 1 (Hawk Ridge to Walmart) Water Main Replacement - Account #W3313. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that: A public hearing on the project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the above- mentioned project is to be held on the 30th day of November, 2021, at 6:00 p.m. in the Assembly Room at The Center, 28 S Linn Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk. 2. If City Council does not meet in person due to the health and safety concerns from COVID- 19, the council meeting will be an electronic meeting using the Zoom Meetings. For information on how to participate in the electronic meeting, see www.icgov.org/councildocs or telephone the City Clerk at (319) 356-5043. 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish notice of the public hearing for the above-named project in a newspaper published at least once weekly and having a general circulation in the City, not less than four (4) nor more than twenty (20) days before said hearing. 4. A copy of the project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the above-named project is hereby ordered placed on file by the City Engineer in the office of the City Clerk for public inspection. Passed and approved this 16th day of Novemb 2021 Mayor P Tem Approved by Attest: Lo )22�2 ILL. ___Z/t� — City lerk City A orney's Office (Sara Greenwood Hektoen –11/10/21) It was moved by Weiner and seconded by 'Taylor the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes: Nays: Absent: X Bergus X Mims X Salih X Taylor X Teague X Thomas X Weiner Item Number: 8.e. AL CITY OF IOWA CITY =�c�- COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution setting a public hearing on November 30, 2021 on project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the Access Control Upgrade Project, directing City Clerk to publish notice of said hearing, and directing the City Engineer to place said project manual on file for public inspection. Prepared By: Ethan Yoder, Civil Engineer Reviewed By: Jason Havel, City Engineer Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Geoff Fruin, City Manager Fiscal Impact: The estimated cost for this project is $155,000.00. Funds are available in the Access Control Upgrade account #G4725. Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Resolution Executive Summary: This item begins the bidding process for the Access Control Upgrade Project. This project generally includes upgrades for door access control across three facilities: the Wastewater Treatment Plant, City Hall, and the Water Plant. Background /Analysis: This project will install new, and upgrade existing, control access points in the Wastewater Treatment Plant, City Hall, and the Water Plant. Project Timeline: Public Hearing /Approve Project Manual — November 30, 2021 Bid Letting — December 17, 2022 Award Date — January 4, 2022 Construction Start — January 2022 Final Completion — Spring 2022 ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution Prepared by: Ethan Yoder, Engineering Division, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240,(319)356-5145 Resolution No. 21-284 Resolution setting a public hearing on November 30, 2021 on project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the Access Control Upgrade Project, directing City Clerk to publish notice of said hearing, and directing the City Engineer to place said project manual on file for public inspection. Whereas, funds for this project are available in the Access Control Upgrade account # G4725. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that: A public hearing on the project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the above-mentioned project is to be held on the 30th day of November, 2021, at 6:00 p.m. in the Assembly Room at The Center, 28 S Linn Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk. 2. If City Council does not meet in person due to the health and safety concerns from COVID-19, the council meeting will be an electronic meeting using the Zoom Meetings. For information on how to participate in the electronic meeting, see www.icgov.org/councildocs or telephone the City Clerk at (319) 356-5043. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish notice of the public hearing for the above-named project in a newspaper published at least once weekly and having a general circulation in the City, not less than four (4) nor more than twenty (20) days before said hearing. 4. A copy of the project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the above-named project is hereby ordered placed on file by the City Engineer in the office of the City Clerk for public inspection. Passed and approved this 16th day of Novem er 2021 M or Pro Tem 1 J � Approve'd by Attest: City Clerk City Att rney's Office —11/10/21 It was moved by Weiner adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes X X X X and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be Nays: Absent: Bergus X Mims Salih Taylor Teague Thomas Weiner Item Number: 11.a. �r CITY OE IOWA CITY www.iogov.org November 16, 2021 Resolution to amend the Comprehensive Plan and approve a 28E Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. (CPA21-0003) ATTACHMENTS: Description Planning and Zoning Commission Memo & Attachments Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Resolution with Appendices t �CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: October 7, 2021 To: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Ray Heitner, Associate Planner, Neighborhood & Development Services Re: Update to the Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City (CPA21-0003) Introduction The City of Iowa City's Fringe Area Agreement (Attachment A) with Johnson County has been in place since October 13, 2006 and is used to establish the policy direction for City and County review of land use development applications, such as rezonings, subdivisions, and annexations within the City/County Fringe Area. The Fringe Area Agreement enables both the City and the County to cooperate for their mutual benefit through coordinated land use planning. Such policies are necessary to more effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development, and to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features. The County regulates land use for land outside of city limits. However, State law allows cities to establish a two-mile extraterritorial area, known as the Fringe Area, beyond city boundaries for the purpose of reviewing and approving subdivisions. State law also grants cities the authority to require that subdivisions within the Fringe Area adhere to the City's subdivision regulations, unless the City establishes alternative standards set forth in an agreement between the City and the County. Adopted in 2006, the existing agreement has not kept up with amendments to both City and County comprehensive plans. Based on the land use policies in the recently adopted County Comprehensive Plan, there are inconsistencies between the policy direction identified in the plan and the Fringe Area Agreement. These inconsistencies have resulted in conflicts. In December 2018, the Johnson County Board of Supervisors submitted a letter to the City Council (Attachment B) requesting that the City Council direct staff to review the current Fringe Area Agreement and coordinate with County staff on the development of a new Fringe Area Agreement. Staff has since been coordinating with County Planning staff and working towards an updated Fringe Area Agreement. This memo includes the following sections: 1. Existing Fringe Area Agreement: An overview of the layout of the existing Agreement's development and administrative policies is provided. Table 1 provides a comparison of how policies are currently implemented inside and outside of the City's Growth Area. 2. Proposed Fringe Area Agreement: The proposed Agreement will reduce current land use policy conflicts between the existing Agreement and the County's Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, adopted in 2018. The Agreement accomplishes this goal by replacing older, more specific land use policy direction within the Fringe Area with direction from the City and County Comprehensive Plans. 3. Summary Comparison: This memo also includes a summary of major changes between the existing and proposed Agreements. 4. Analysis & Justification: This section includes a summary of a build -out analysis and a justification for expansion of the City's Growth Area. The build -out analysis revealed that there is sufficient capacity within the City limits and Growth Area, at a higher density build September 30, 2021 Page 2 out, to accommodate projected population and employment gains through the year 2045. However, in addition to this finding, rationale for the inclusion of five new areas into the City's Growth Area is also provided. 5. Comprehensive Plan Consistency Analysis: The memo concludes with an overview of how an updated Fringe Area Agreement meets the approval criteria for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. Existina Frinae Area Aareement The majority of the existing Fringe Area Agreement consists of two major sections. One section details development policy within the Fringe Area, while the other section details administrative policies. A few general development standards are highlighted in the beginning of the Development Policies section of the Agreement. These standards discourage any development within the Fringe Area that conflicts with wetlands, floodplain, and non -erodible soil. The standards further elaborate on the need to meet or exceed the County's water and wastewater system minimum standards. Finally, the standards encourage cluster development which may preserve environmentally sensitive land and farmland. The remaining portion of the Development Policies section provides geographically specific policy direction for three different areas, and whether those areas are located inside or outside of the City's Growth Area. Fringe Areas A, B, and C in the existing Agreement are further divided into two categories — land within Iowa City's Growth Area and land outside the City's Growth Area. The City's Growth Area defines the City's potential corporate limits and was established with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 2013. It includes land that for the purposes of long-range planning, is projected to be annexed and serve the City's growth need for 30-40 years. Per the existing Agreement, the Fringe Area is fixed, and does not adjust as land is annexed and the City grows. Table 1 outlines how development projects are reviewed per the Fringe Area Agreement. Proposed Fringe Area Agreement The proposed Fringe Area Agreement (Attachment C) provides more process -oriented direction as to which entity (City or County) will be reviewing each type of development review application, depending on whether subject properties lie within or outside of the Growth Area. The proposed Agreement also gives the City additional review authority within its Growth Area, while allowing the County more control for development applications occurring outside of the City's Growth Area. This proposed dynamic is described in more detail below. General Procedures The proposed Agreement contains the following five general policies which will be implemented throughout the Fringe Area: • Applicants must simultaneously file development applications with the County and the City. • Pursuant to the requirements of the Fringe Area Agreement, the County shall not hold a public hearing on any matter subject to City review, comment, recommendation. • Official review, comment, recommendation, or approval by the City shall be in writing. • The City must provide in writing any reasons for an application denial. • The County may proceed with a public hearing on an application, should the City not meet the stated timelines for comment, review, or approval. Policies within the Growth Area With exceptions for specific subareas, the City's Comprehensive Plan and District Plans will serve as the basis for the City's recommendations to the County for Future Land Use Map Amendments September 30, 2021 Page 3 and Rezonings within the Growth Area. As the City looks to update its District Plans in the coming years, it is expected that the Comprehensive Plan and District Plans will incorporate more policy direction toward future land use guidance in the Growth Area. Staff is recommending that the City's Growth Area be expanded as part of this Agreement. The proposed expansion areas are discussed in the Analysis & Justification portion of this memo. Subarea Policv Direction within the Growth Area The Agreement includes five subareas (maps of these areas are included in Attachment C) each having its own land use policy direction. These are areas where City and County planners determined more guidance was needed. The proposed policy direction for each subarea is as follows: Subarea #1: Located south of Highway 1 and along the future route 965 corridor, the County's Comprehensive Plan has identified this area as appropriate for residential, commercial, and industrial. Due to City staff's concerns with commercial and industrial development occurring outside of the City's corporate limits, staff is proposing to expand the City's Growth Area to include this area. The proposed agreement states that Subarea #1 shall develop in accordance with the Future Land Use Map of the County's Comprehensive Plan as opposed to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Although development can follow the County's Comprehensive Plan in this area, any subdivisions will be required to comply with the City's Urban Design Standards. 2. Subarea #2: Located south of Highway 218 and Riverside Drive, Subarea #2 may attract commercial uses due to its highway adjacency and positioning as a southern gateway to the Iowa City area. Similar to Subarea #1, City staff has proposed to expand the City's Growth Area to include Subarea #2. This will ensure that all subdivisions within this area comply with the City's Urban Design Standards even though development may align with the Future Land Use Map of the County's Comprehensive Plan, which identifies a Commercial growth area. 3. Subarea #3: Subarea #3 is located north of Highway 6 and near Taft Avenue. Once land within the City's Industrial Park is fully occupied, the land use policy vision for this area is additional commercial and industrial development following annexation into the City. Land in Subarea #3 shall remain as open space or agricultural land use until annexed by the City. 4. Subarea #4: Subarea #4 is located to the west of the Herbert Hoover Highway and 1-80 interchange. This interchange acts as an eastern gateway to the Iowa City area and contains prime interstate access. A portion of Subarea #4 is appropriate for certain commercial development and a portion should remain agricultural in nature. The map of this subarea included in the Agreement identifies land that shall develop in alignment with the County's Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan, which identifies this area as appropriate for Commercial and Highway Commercial land uses. For the remainder of land within this area, rezonings to other zones besides Agriculture are not allowed. 5. Subarea #5: Subarea #5 is located to the north of 1-80, and east of Highway 1. Subarea #5 is intended to provide a buffer between non-residential uses to the south and County Residential uses to the north. Land in Subarea #5 shall remain as open space or agricultural land use until annexed by the City. Urban Desian Standards within the Growth Area Any subdivision development within the City's Growth Area will be required to conform to the City's Urban Design Standards (i.e. City's subdivision regulations). The standards ensure that development can be adapted to City infrastructure upon annexation. The Standards detail requirements pertaining to aspects of development such as drainage, utility connections, fire September 30, 2021 Page 4 safety, erosion control, landscape preservation, and vehicle and pedestrian circulation. The submission of detailed construction drawings at the preliminary plat stage showing how package sanitary sewer treatment systems and common wells can adapt to City infrastructure upon annexation is required. The Agreement also notes that the subdivision will be reviewed against the City's Comprehensive Plan. Table 1 below outlines the proposed review processes for development applications within the Growth Area. Table 1. Processes within the City's Growth Area Policies Outside of the Growth Area Table 2 below outlines the proposed review processes for development applications outside of the Growth Area. Table 2. Processes Outside of the City's Growth Area Future Land Use Map Amendments Rezonings Preliminary Plats Final Plats Site Plans City Recommendation Recommendation Review & No review or Administrative Processes to County based to County based approve based approval. Will review and and on FAA & City on FAA & on City Urban coordinate comment to Comprehensive Comprehensive Design any County of Plan. Plan. Standards and dedication of projects more & City Comprehensive necessary than 2 acres in Comprehensive Plan. easements compliance Plan. or with certain necessary infrastructure criteria from Standards. easements with County. 18-3-2 of City or Code. County Final action based Final action Final action Solely Final action Processes on City based on City based on City reviewed & based on City County recommendation recommendation, approval, City approved by comment and Solely reviewed and County FAA, & County Urban Design County. Will County Code. reviewed & Comprehensive Comprehensive Standards, & forward Plan. Plan. County applications Comprehensive to City for Plan. notification purposes. Policies Outside of the Growth Area Table 2 below outlines the proposed review processes for development applications outside of the Growth Area. Table 2. Processes Outside of the City's Growth Area Future Land Use Map Amendments Rezonings Preliminary Plats < 3 Lots Preliminary Plats > 3 Lots Finals Plats Site Plans City Submission of No review, No review Staff review No review or No review, Processes a staff opinion recommendation, or approval. and approval. recommendation, to County or approval. comment to Will or approval. based on FAA County, coordinate & City based on any Comprehensive City's Rural dedication of Plan. Design necessary Standards. easements or infrastructure with County. County Final action Solely reviewed Solely Final action Solely Solely reviewed Processes based on City & approved by reviewed & based on reviewed & & approved by September 30, 2021 Page 5 Outside of the Growth Area rezonings, subdivisions, and site plans all entail either administrative or no review at all by the City. Future Land Use Map amendments will require a City staff recommendation to the County. Preliminary plats for subdivisions with more than three lots will require staff review and comment to the County's Planning and Zoning Commission, based on the City's Rural Design Standards. All other applications require no review by the City. While the City has an active interest in staying informed of development that is taking place within the Fringe Area, development applications happening outside of the Growth Area are less likely to have a near-term impact on the City's urban form and functionality since these lands are unlikely to be annexed into the City for several decades, if ever. This is especially true as the City looks to implement development strategies that prioritize growth via infill development and a focus toward development within the City's Growth Area. Given this context, City staff feels comfortable forgoing its current rights to review certain development applications that will occur outside of the City's Growth Area. reement Review & Effective Period The proposed Agreement will be reviewed every five years. At any time between five-year reviews, either the Chair of the County Board of Supervisors or the Mayor of the City may initiate review of the policies of the Agreement by contacting the other party to this Agreement. Either party may terminate the Agreement by providing written notification to the other party, accompanied by an approved resolution of the governing body directing such termination, sent by registered mail. Annexation of property by the City will not automatically adjust the boundaries established by this Agreement. The Agreement will become effective upon acceptance and execution by all Parties and shall be in effect for 10 years after the date of execution of this Agreement. The Agreement will be automatically renewed for one five-year period unless the County or City objects to such renewal prior to the renewal date. The Agreement may be modified or extended by the written mutual consent of both Parties. Summary Comparison of Malor Changes between the Existing and Proposed Agreements Attachment D summarizes the major changes between the existing and proposed Agreement. The major changes are as follows: • The existing Agreement includes general development standards pertaining to the avoidance of sensitive areas and clustering development. This language was not carried over into the proposed Agreement since development in the unincorporated area will need to comply with the County's sensitive areas ordinance. • The existing Agreement outlines specific land use policy direction by assigning land use policies to specific geographic areas within the Fringe Area (Fringe Areas "A", "B", and "C"). The proposed Agreement states that the City's Comprehensive Plan is the guiding policy document for development within the Growth Area, with some specific exceptions, and allows the County to review and approve most items outside of the Growth Area. staff opinion, County. Will approved City approved by County, based FAA & County forward by County. comment & County. Will on County Code. Comprehensive applications to County forward Plan. City for Code. applications notification to City for purposes. notification County purposes. Comprehensive Plan to be used for guidance. Outside of the Growth Area rezonings, subdivisions, and site plans all entail either administrative or no review at all by the City. Future Land Use Map amendments will require a City staff recommendation to the County. Preliminary plats for subdivisions with more than three lots will require staff review and comment to the County's Planning and Zoning Commission, based on the City's Rural Design Standards. All other applications require no review by the City. While the City has an active interest in staying informed of development that is taking place within the Fringe Area, development applications happening outside of the Growth Area are less likely to have a near-term impact on the City's urban form and functionality since these lands are unlikely to be annexed into the City for several decades, if ever. This is especially true as the City looks to implement development strategies that prioritize growth via infill development and a focus toward development within the City's Growth Area. Given this context, City staff feels comfortable forgoing its current rights to review certain development applications that will occur outside of the City's Growth Area. reement Review & Effective Period The proposed Agreement will be reviewed every five years. At any time between five-year reviews, either the Chair of the County Board of Supervisors or the Mayor of the City may initiate review of the policies of the Agreement by contacting the other party to this Agreement. Either party may terminate the Agreement by providing written notification to the other party, accompanied by an approved resolution of the governing body directing such termination, sent by registered mail. Annexation of property by the City will not automatically adjust the boundaries established by this Agreement. The Agreement will become effective upon acceptance and execution by all Parties and shall be in effect for 10 years after the date of execution of this Agreement. The Agreement will be automatically renewed for one five-year period unless the County or City objects to such renewal prior to the renewal date. The Agreement may be modified or extended by the written mutual consent of both Parties. Summary Comparison of Malor Changes between the Existing and Proposed Agreements Attachment D summarizes the major changes between the existing and proposed Agreement. The major changes are as follows: • The existing Agreement includes general development standards pertaining to the avoidance of sensitive areas and clustering development. This language was not carried over into the proposed Agreement since development in the unincorporated area will need to comply with the County's sensitive areas ordinance. • The existing Agreement outlines specific land use policy direction by assigning land use policies to specific geographic areas within the Fringe Area (Fringe Areas "A", "B", and "C"). The proposed Agreement states that the City's Comprehensive Plan is the guiding policy document for development within the Growth Area, with some specific exceptions, and allows the County to review and approve most items outside of the Growth Area. September 30, 2021 Page 6 • New to the proposed Agreement, the City Council will review and provide a recommendation to the County for County Future Land Use Map Amendments proposed within the City's Growth Area. • In the proposed Agreement, the City Council will only review and provide a recommendation to the County on rezonings within the Growth Area, not outside the Growth Area. Per the current agreement, the City currently reviews rezonings both inside and outside the Growth Area. • Unlike the current agreement which only requires review of subdivisions of 3 or more lots, the proposed Agreement requires that the City review all subdivisions within the City's Growth Area. The City's Urban Design Standards (i.e. City's subdivision standards) will still be applicable to future development within the Growth Area. • The proposed agreement states that subdivisions consisting of less than three lots that take place outside of the City's Growth Area will only be reviewed by the County. The City will provide a staff review of subdivisions greater than three lots that occur outside of the Growth Area and forward comments to the County. The City's Rural Design Standards will still apply to subdivisions outside the Growth Area. The current agreement requires a full review of subdivisions outside the Growth Area. • The existing Agreement states that development not requiring subdivision, but that is greater than two acres in size, shall be subject to the review procedures of the City and County. The proposed Agreement adds more specificity to this section by stating that site plans that are greater than two acres in size that are located within the City's Growth Area will be subject to an administrative review to certain items from the City's Development Standards. Site Plans occurring outside of the City's Growth Area will be reviewed by the County. • The existing Agreement states that subdivisions and development projects in the Growth Area which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be cluster developments with a minimum of 50% of the development designated for an outlot for open space, agriculture, or future development upon annexation. The proposed Agreement removes this language since the City's Comprehensive Plan will guide development policy within the Growth Area. A few of the City's District Plans, such as the Southeast and South District Plans, provide greater detail on how larger, undeveloped areas of land within the Growth Area may develop. The direction from some of these Plans calls for location and intensity of development that might otherwise be set aside for open space under the existing Agreement. • The existing Agreement allows for conflicts between the City and County over proposed subdivisions, rezonings, or annexations to be reviewed by a committee, comprised of members of the City Council, Board of Supervisors, and staff to negotiate a resolution before final action is taken. This provision has not been carried forward in the proposed Agreement. Analysis and Justification Build Out Analvsis In the early stages of planning for an updated Fringe Area Agreement, City staff conducted an analysis on the need to expand the City's Growth Area, in the form of a build -out analysis for the City and Growth Area. The build -out analysis (Attachment E) is an estimate of Iowa City's ability to accommodate population and employment growth within the city limits and Growth Area through the year 2045. A methodology of the build -out analysis is attached to this memo (Attachment F). To summarize, staff found that with a high-density build -out within the city limits and Growth Area, there would be little need to expand the City's existing Growth Area. At a high degree of infill development, the analysis estimated that there is enough land within the city limits and Growth Area to accommodate over 61,000 people. The Johnson County MPO's 2045 population projection estimated an increase of 22,000 new residents from 2017 population estimates. A summary of these projections can be seen below in Table 3. September 30, 2021 Page 7 Table 3. Build -Out Analysis Residential Growth Projections (2045) The results from the build -out analysis are highly dependent on continued high-density residential growth and development within the City's Riverfront Crossings area, as about 65% of all future residential growth from the analysis is projected to come from this area. It is reasonable to assume that available land within the Riverfront Crossings area will not maximize its allowable development capacity by the year 2045. Should demand for peripheral growth continue, the analysis estimated that the City's Growth Area can accommodate over 23,000 new residents over 4,552 acres that are planned for residential growth. This projection alone is greater than the 22,000 new residents from the MPO's 2045 population growth forecast for Iowa City. With respect to commercial growth and overall employment, the analysis estimated that enough land was available to accommodate over 20,000 new jobs within the City limits with an additional 18,000 new jobs in the Growth Area. The MPO estimates that between 2017 and 2045, Iowa City will see an increase of approximately 23,000 new jobs. These projections are summarized below in Table 5. Furthermore, current employment data shows that about 40% of all Iowa City jobs take place on University of Iowa campus property. If this ratio stays consistent in 2045, the city will have to absorb about 14,000 new jobs outside of the University campus. While the estimated job capacity available within the Growth Area is largely concentrated on capacity within potential future industrial and office park areas, a capacity of over 16,000 jobs exists within the City's commercial, downtown, and Riverfront Crossings zones. Furthermore, as office park development continues its pre -pandemic decline, and as more places of business utilize hybrid work from home formats, it is expected that the City will have sufficient land capacity for future employment needs. Table 4. Build Out Analysis Employment Growth Projections (2045) Est. Dwelling Units Est. Population Increase MPO Projections 10,794 22,285 City Limits Build Out 16,379 37,756 City Growth Area Build Out 10,175 23,771 Total City+Growth Area Capacity 26,554 61,527 The results from the build -out analysis are highly dependent on continued high-density residential growth and development within the City's Riverfront Crossings area, as about 65% of all future residential growth from the analysis is projected to come from this area. It is reasonable to assume that available land within the Riverfront Crossings area will not maximize its allowable development capacity by the year 2045. Should demand for peripheral growth continue, the analysis estimated that the City's Growth Area can accommodate over 23,000 new residents over 4,552 acres that are planned for residential growth. This projection alone is greater than the 22,000 new residents from the MPO's 2045 population growth forecast for Iowa City. With respect to commercial growth and overall employment, the analysis estimated that enough land was available to accommodate over 20,000 new jobs within the City limits with an additional 18,000 new jobs in the Growth Area. The MPO estimates that between 2017 and 2045, Iowa City will see an increase of approximately 23,000 new jobs. These projections are summarized below in Table 5. Furthermore, current employment data shows that about 40% of all Iowa City jobs take place on University of Iowa campus property. If this ratio stays consistent in 2045, the city will have to absorb about 14,000 new jobs outside of the University campus. While the estimated job capacity available within the Growth Area is largely concentrated on capacity within potential future industrial and office park areas, a capacity of over 16,000 jobs exists within the City's commercial, downtown, and Riverfront Crossings zones. Furthermore, as office park development continues its pre -pandemic decline, and as more places of business utilize hybrid work from home formats, it is expected that the City will have sufficient land capacity for future employment needs. Table 4. Build Out Analysis Employment Growth Projections (2045) Attempting to maximize development within the City's existing limits and Growth Area is a strategy that further supports several Comprehensive Plan and Climate Action Plan goals. By pursuing compatible infill development, the City will look to consume less land and slow outward growth. Infill development has also proven to be less costly to construct and maintain public infrastructure and less costly to provide and maintain necessary City services such as garbage collection, snow removal, and emergency response. Furthermore, an infill development strategy helps to preserve farmland around the City's periphery. The City's Climate Action Plan stresses the importance of increasing compact and contiguous development as a way of reducing the number of vehicle miles traveled. Potential Growth Area Expansion While the build -out analysis indicates that developable land within the city and in the City's Growth Area should be able to accommodate anticipated population and job growth by 2045, there are additional factors that staff considered when it analyzed the need to expand the City's Growth Area. In addition to growth demand results from staff's build -out analysis, the following factors were also considered: Employment Increase MPO Projections 23,615 City Limits Build Out 20,002 Growth Area Build Out 18,373 Total City Limits+Growth Area 38,375 Attempting to maximize development within the City's existing limits and Growth Area is a strategy that further supports several Comprehensive Plan and Climate Action Plan goals. By pursuing compatible infill development, the City will look to consume less land and slow outward growth. Infill development has also proven to be less costly to construct and maintain public infrastructure and less costly to provide and maintain necessary City services such as garbage collection, snow removal, and emergency response. Furthermore, an infill development strategy helps to preserve farmland around the City's periphery. The City's Climate Action Plan stresses the importance of increasing compact and contiguous development as a way of reducing the number of vehicle miles traveled. Potential Growth Area Expansion While the build -out analysis indicates that developable land within the city and in the City's Growth Area should be able to accommodate anticipated population and job growth by 2045, there are additional factors that staff considered when it analyzed the need to expand the City's Growth Area. In addition to growth demand results from staff's build -out analysis, the following factors were also considered: September 30, 2021 Page 8 • Potential current or future gateways into the City. • Highway adjacency and access. • Planned commercial or industrial future land uses in Johnson County. • Sewerability. • Adjacency to areas envisioned for residential or commercial development, per the City's Comprehensive Plan. • Preservation of sensitive areas. • Other factors that might promote future land development. Given these additional points of analysis, City staff identified five separate area where it recommends expansion of the City's Growth Area (See Figure 1). Figure 1. Iowa City Current and Proposed Growth Areas Area #1 (Area near Highway 1 & Sharon Center Road) The first area is located southwest of Iowa City along Highway 1 (outlined in black in Figure 2). This area is currently designated in the County's Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map for Residential, Commercial, and Intensive Commercial development. Non-residential growth for those areas shown in red and purple in Figure 2, is of high concern to Staff. First, a rezoning of these areas to commercial and industrial County zoning designations would present a stark conflict of potential uses next to the existing agricultural, and planned residential, land use and zoning designations. Second, the City has generally tried to direct commercial and industrial growth into the City limits to encourage more efficient development. This is done to take advantage of existing utilities and services that these more intense land uses often require, in addition to curbing urban sprawl and leapfrog development. Staff is proposing to include this area in the City's Growth Area, which will allow the City to be more involved in land use decisions and better ensure these planning principals are followed. September 30, 2021 Page 9 The residential areas shown in Figure 2 lie directly south from the Rohret South Subarea from the City's Southwest District Plan. The Rohret South Subarea will be developable upon extension of the Abbey Lane trunk sewer west of Route 218, which is included in the City's capital improvement program for construction in 2023. Due to the adjacency of this area with the Rohret South Subarea, including it in the City's Growth Area would better ensure a smooth transition between City and County development. Specifically, inclusion in the Growth Area would mean that development must comply with the City's Urban Design Standards, which includes standards related to storm water, streets, and other public utilities. The Southwest District Plan envisions street connectivity from the Rohret South Subarea continuing southward. The area has limited sensitive areas and prime highway adjacency that will make it attractive for development once it is sewerable. Furthermore, the area will be a fitting southwestern gateway into Iowa City for those traveling northbound on Highway 1. Note that while the area north of Highway 1 is intended for inclusion into the Growth Area, it will not be included in Subarea #1 per the Agreement. It is the City's preference to have this portion of land develop in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as opposed to the County's Comprehensive Plan. This distinction can be seen in the proposed Fringe Area Agreement. However, the entire area identified as the expanded Growth Area would be required to comply with the City's Urban Design Standards (i.e., subdivision standards). Figure 2. Area 1 0 0.125025 0.5 0.75 Area #2 (Area South of Highway 218 and Riverside Drive) The second area, shown in Figure 3, is located south of Iowa City (south of Riverside Drive). The current Fringe Area Agreement identifies this area as appropriate for rural, agricultural uses. The County recently approved an amendment to its Future Land Use Map that designates this area as appropriate for commercial development. A rezoning of this property to County Commercial was approved by the Johnson County Board of Supervisors in March of 2020. September 30, 2021 Page 10 Figure 3. Area 2 0 00750 Is _> .., Like Area 1, staff has concerns about commercial development taking place outside of the City limits. Because of its highway adjacency, commercial development of this area is highly attractive. A rezoning to County Commercial would allow the area to develop with an array of retail and service-oriented uses. Staff feels it is prudent to include this land into the City's growth area so that commercial development in this area is limited until it is annexed into the City. City water and sanitary sewer are only available to properties upon annexation. Although the proposed Agreement identifies that development can occur consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan, any subdivision of land in this area will require compliance with the City's Urban Design Standards. A water main is located to the immediate east, where the southernmost property within the City limits has water service. The area is sewerable per the City's long-term sewer master plan, but the nearest sanitary line is located over 1 mile away near Colonial Lanes bowling alley. It is possible that extension of this sanitary line might open the area between Area 2 and the City limits for future redevelopment. Area #3 (Area North of Highway 6 through Taft Avenue) The third area is north of Highway 6, along both sides of Taft Avenue. This area, shown in Figure 4, would allow for the expansion of the City's Industrial Park should the need arise in the future. September 30, 2021 Page 11 Figure 4. Area 3 Area #4 (Area Near Herbert Hoover Hiahwav and 1-80 Area 4 is located east of Iowa City at the intersection of Herbert Hoover Highway and 1-80 (shown in red and transparent white, outlined in black in Figure 5). The County's Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map has identified this area as appropriate for highway commercial. Capital improvements to Taft Avenue are planned; however, construction is not anticipated for another five to 10 years. Once these improvements are completed, land to the east of Taft Avenue (which is currently in the City's Growth Area) will become more desirable for residential development. The area shown in red in Figure 5 is only'/2 mile east of the current Growth Area limit. As the Taft Avenue corridor develops, and as residential growth continues eastward, the Herbert Hoover Highway interchange with Interstate 80 might be a logical place for commercial or highway commercial development. For the sake of directing anticipated future commercial growth into the city limits, incorporating this area into the city limits makes sense. The subarea maps included in the Fringe Area Agreement (Attachment C) indicates where staff feels that future commercial development may be appropriate. All parts of the subarea outside of these highlighted areas should remain agricultural/open space land until the Fringe Area Agreement is further revised. A portion of this area is already zoned for County commercial land uses and development would be able to occur in compliance with the existing zoning designation. Staff is proposing to include this area in the City's Growth Area, which will allow the City to be more involved in land use decisions and would require that subdivisions comply with the City's Urban Design Standards. September 30, 2021 Page 12 Figure 5. Area 4 IV., t•. 0 007915 ) i 045 06 Area #5 (Area East of Highway 1, south of Rapid Creek Road NE) Area 5, shown in Figure 6, is north of Iowa City, east of Highway 1 and south of Rapid Creek Road NE. The County's Future Land Use Map has identified this area as appropriate for residential use. However, the western two-thirds of the subarea is currently zoned County Agricultural. This area should remain as agricultural or open space land to transition the commercial office and research park uses in the city limits to the south, from the existing larger lot residential uses in the County to the north. September 30, 2021 Page 13 Figure 6. Area 5 InEFFso,, ��� WK 11,r^IIIJ.IT ��� Miles 6 0.075 0.15 0.3 6.45 0.6 Comprehensive Plan Analysis o�o,e�eal �e_aro��a.ea. i,t__F��;= owa cM aouna�ry Johnson County Future La d Use aesionation o ,eNanon oe�lopmene Fringe re _ == '7 , The Iowa City Comprehensive Plan serves as a land -use planning guide by illustrating and describing the location and configuration of appropriate land uses throughout the City, providing notification to the public regarding intended uses of land; and illustrating the long-range growth area limit for the City. An update to the Fringe Area Agreement is an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Plan amendments must provide evidence that the request meets the approval criteria in Section 14 -8D -3D. 14 -8D -3D Approval Criteria: Comprehensive Plan amendments must include evidence that the following approval criteria are met: 1. Circumstances have changed and/or additional information or factors have come to light such that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. The County updated its Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map in 2018, which created several new residential growth areas within the County. The two largest and most problematic areas with respect to enforcement of the existing Agreement, can be found along American Legion Road SE, just west of Wapsi Avenue SE, and north and south of Highway 1 SW, just west of the southwest city limits. The existing Agreement calls for Agricultural uses for many of the properties that fall within these areas of the updated County Future Land Use Map. Over time, the City has had to acknowledge that requests for future rezonings to County Residential to match the County's Comprehensive Plan no longer align with the policy direction of the existing Agreement. It is in the public's interest to update the Agreement to limit these policy discrepancies going forward. Additionally, as the City has continued to grow, new public infrastructure projects are planned to accommodate areas of new growth on the City's periphery. Funding is currently in place for September 30, 2021 Page 14 improvements to Taft Avenue between American Legion Road and Lower West Branch Road. These improvements are in response to residential growth to the west of Taft Avenue. As the City's Capital Improvement Program notes, complementary infrastructure improvements to American Legion Road and the Scott Boulevard trunk sewer expansion will likely give way to enhanced development in this portion of the Taft Avenue corridor. It is expected that as development continues eastward, Taft Avenue will become an important north -south corridor between Herbert Hoover Highway (leading to 1-80) and Highway 6 SE. With this potential for an enhanced Taft Avenue corridor under consideration, the City is recommending the addition of two different areas to the City's Growth Area. Area #3, near Taft Avenue and Highway 6, and Area #4, near Herbert Hoover Highway and 1-80. It is possible that both of these locations could accommodate increased commercial and/or industrial development in the future. Planning and design work is underway for a sanitary trunk sewer extension along Abbey Lane from Burry Drive to the west side of Highway 218. Completion of this sewer extension will allow for development within the watershed west of Highway 218. While much of this watershed is within the City's existing Growth Area, it is in the City's interest to allocate additional land to the south that the County has deemed appropriate for residential growth into the City's Growth Area. By incorporating this portion of land into the City's Growth Area, any future residential development will be required to meet the City's Urban Design Standards, thereby having a more seamless transition at the time of future annexation. It is in the public's interest to ensure that the areas undergoing the above-described infrastructure improvements experience a broader comprehensive planning effort so that the City's larger development goals and objectives are met. 2. The proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or provisions of the comprehensive plan, including any district plans or other amendments thereto. Since the existing Agreement was passed in 2006, the City has updated its Comprehensive Plan (2013) and two District Plans (Southeast — 2011; South — 2015). While many of the Comprehensive Plan's broader goals pertaining to how the City grows are reflected in the existing Agreement (i.e. preservation of sensitive areas, open space, promotion of infill development, etc.), the South and Southeast District Plans have evolved to incorporate more detailed neighborhood designs within the existing Growth Area. The direction and detail provided in these plans results in a level of urban form and density that is at a higher level than what the existing Agreement prescribes, given the existing Agreement's direction to preserve 50% of developed land as open space, agricultural land, and/or future development. In the Southeast District Plan, the Eastside Growth Area details a village -like residential neighborhood, containing a variety of housing types, including townhouses and multi -family residential housing. Likewise, the proposed update to the South District Plan to accommodate form -based land use designations, allows for a variety of house -scale "missing middle" housing types that engender increased density within a larger house setting. The City wishes to implement form -based zones and standards in other portions of the Growth Area as well. Currently, the City's Northeast District Plan contains a large amount of undeveloped land within the area inside the City's Growth Area, west of Taft Avenue SE. The Northeast District Plan currently calls for traditional neighborhood development with a neighborhood commercial center on the portions of this land that are detached from sensitive areas. It is expected that this area will be studied for potential form -based code implementation when the Northeast District Plan is updated. It is also possible that as the Southwest District Plan is updated, there may be opportunities to implement form -based zones in certain portions of the Weber Subarea of the existing Southwest District Plan. These opportunities will be further studied once the City conducts its update of this Plan. The proposed Agreement, which will allow for the City's Comprehensive Plan to guide development within the Growth Area (with the exception of the subareas), will implement several goals and policies from the City's Comprehensive Plan in the previously described areas that are September 30, 2021 Page 15 positioned for new residential development. The Plan calls for annexing and rezoning undeveloped areas to plan for the development of sustainable neighborhoods. Many district plans include future land use maps that include more details on how land within the City's Growth Area could develop. These maps often include a variety of housing types, interconnected street networks, commercial nodes, and areas envisioned for open space. In addition, staff is currently updating two District Plans and anticipates updating more Plans in the future. The City's larger development strategy of taking an analytical approach to expanding the City's Growth Boundary, expanding the Boundary only as necessary, satisfies an overall Comprehensive Plan goal to encourage compact, efficient development that is contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods. By guiding new peripheral development to the City's Growth Area, the updated Agreement discourages sprawl and preserves prime farmland. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed the Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. Attachments Attachment A. Existing Fringe Area Agreement Attachment B. Letter from Johnson County Board of Supervisors Attachment C. Proposed Update to the Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City Attachment D. Outline of Major Changes between the Existing and Proposed Agreements Attachment E. Build -out Analysis Attachment F. Build -out Methodology Attachment G. Updated Comprehensive Plan (page 18) Approved by: .� • Sl Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services Attachment A. Existing Fringe Area Agreement Prepared by: Robert Miklo, PCB, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5232 RESOLUTION NO. 6— i s RESOLUTION AMENDING THE IOWA CITYIJOHNSON COUNTY FRINGE AREA POLICY AGREEMENT WHEREAS, Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa (2005) enables two or more local governments to enter into agreements to cooperate for their mutual advantage; and WHEREAS, Iowa City and Johnson County entered into an agreement in 1996 (Resolution No. 96-239) establishing policies for the development of land within the extraterritorial area of Iowa City; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan includes the Fringe Area Policy Agreement; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of Johnson County and the City of Iowa City to update Fringe Area policies for the orderly growth and development within the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, Johnson County and the City of Iowa City mutually agree that such policies are necessary to more effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development and to protect and preserve the extraterritorial area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: The City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa hereby accepts and agrees to the amended policies regarding annexation, zoning and subdivision review for the various designated areas included in the attached Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County, Iowa and Iowa City, Iowa; and 2. The City Council of the City of Iowa City hereby incorporates the amended Fringe Area Policy Agreement into the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa hereby authorizes the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest to the attached 28E Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City establishing land use policies for the two-mile extraterritorial jurisdiction of Iowa City, for recordation as provided by law upon execution by Johnson County. Resolution No. 06-318 Page 2 Passed and approved this 3rd day of n r har 20—o.Ci. CORPORATE SEAL MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Approved. Office It was moved by Bailey and seconded by Vnnriarhnof the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: PpdadMresMnge28E.d0c NAYS: ABSENT: Bailey Champion Correia Elliott O'Donnell Vanderhoef Wilburn FRINGE AREA POLICY AGREEMENT BETWEEN JOHNSON COUNTY AND IOWA CITY WHEREAS, Chapter 354, Code of Iowa (2005) allows the City of Iowa City to establish an extraterritorial area, known as the fringe area, within two miles of the city boundaries for the purpose of reviewing and approving subdivisions; and WHEREAS, Chapter 354 further grants the City the authority to require that subdivisions within the fringe area adhere to the City's subdivision standards and conditions, unless the City establishes altemative standards and conditions for review and approval of subdivisions via a 28E agreement between the City and the County; and WHEREAS, Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa (2005) enables two or more local governments to enter into agreements to cooperate for their mutual advantage; and WHEREAS, the Johnson County Land Use Plan adopted December 31, 1998 calls for the preparation and adoption of development plans and agreements between the County and the City regarding the municipality and its environment; and WHEREAS, the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan Update adopted in December, 1997 outlines the extent of urban development expected within the next 20 years; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of Johnson County (the "County") and the City of Iowa City (the "City") to establish policies for the orderly growth and development within the City's fringe area; and WHEREAS, Johnson County and the City of Iowa City mutually agree that such policies are necessary to more effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development and to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. FRINGE AREA DEVELOPMENT POLICIES The parties accept and agree to the following development policies regarding annexation, zoning, and subdivision review for the Iowa City fringe area as authorized by Chapter 354, Code of Iowa (2005). Purpose: The Fringe Area Policy Agreement is intended to provide for orderly and efficient development patterns appropriate to a non -urbanized area, protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and environmentally sensitive features, direct development to areas with physical characteristics which can accommodate development, and effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development. In light of these objectives, the City and the County examined the development capabilities of the Iowa City fringe area and determined that development within this fringe area is to occur in accordance with a) the Land Use Plan attached to this Agreement, b) development standards contained in Section B of this agreement, and c) the fringe area development policies contained in Section C of this Agreement. The development policies of this Agreement are intended to be consistent with the policies of the adopted Johnson County Land Use Plan and the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan. IP41 A. Land Use Plan The Land Use Plan, attached to this Agreement as Attachment 1, illustrates the land use patterns for the fringe area. B. Development Standards The following general standards apply to unincorporated development in the fringe area. 1. Discourage development in areas which conflict with the Johnson County Land Use Plan which considers CSR (Corn Suitability Rating), high water table, wetlands, floodplain, non -erodible soil, and road suitability. 2. Protect the public health by requiring developers to meet or exceed minimum standards for water and wastewater systems in all developments within the Iowa City Fringe Area pursuant to Johnson County Public Health Department Regulations. 3. Encourage cluster development which preserves large tracts of open space including environmentally sensitive areas and farm land, results in compact development which requires less infrastructure, and is more efficient for provision of services. C. Fringe Area Development Policies The parties agree to apply the following fringe area development policies. FRINGE AREA A 1. Land within Iowa City's Growth Area. Land in Area A which is presently zoned for residential development, and within Iowa City's growth area, may develop in conformance with existing zoning, provided subdivisions and development projects shall conform to City Urban Design standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. Developments which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served by a package sanitary sewage treatment plant and common wells, with sanitary sewer and water collection and distribution systems which are constructed to City standards and can be connected to municipal systems upon annexation. Subdivisions and development projects which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be cluster developments with a minimum of 50% of the development designated as an outlot for open space, agriculture, or future development upon annexation. Prior to annexation, any zoning changes in Iowa City's projected growth area shall be consistent with the City's adopted land use plan. 2. Land outside Iowa City's Growth Area but in the County's North Corridor. Residential uses are the preferred use in this area. Any re -zonings in this area will be considered on the basis of conformity with the Johnson County Land Use Plan and other related policies. On a case-by-case basis, proposals to rezone land in this area to RS -3 (one dwelling unit per three acres of lot area) may be considered. RS zoning will be considered if the application to rezone includes a concept plan showing a minimum of 50% of the property designated as an outlot for open space or agriculture. Development must comply with City Rural Design standards contained in Appendix A. On the balance of land outside the North Corridor, agricultural uses are preferred. -3- 3. Any development on property governed by the Iowa City/Coralville Agreement Providing for Future Annexations and Extraterritorial Review of Subdivision Plats (Sept. 1999) shall be consistent with said agreement. Such agreement shall take precedence over this Fringe Area Policy Agreement. 4. If land is annexed within Fringe Area A, the City agrees that it will not automatically extend its fringe area authority to review and approve all subdivisions, which it exercises pursuant to Iowa Code §354.9 and Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The City will review the extension of its fringe area as a result of annexation on a case-by-case basis in consultation with Johnson County. FRINGE AREA B As set forth in Iowa City's adopted growth policy, the City will likely annex land within one mile of Iowa City to the east and within two miles of Iowa City to the south in the short-range. It is therefore consistent with the purpose of this agreement that rural subdivisions within these areas of high annexation potential be required to meet City Urban Design Standards contained in Appendix A. Land within Iowa City's Growth Area. As applications are received to develop land contiguous to and within the growth limits of the city, the City will give favorable consideration to the voluntary annexation of this land and its development at an urban density in conformance with the City's adopted land use plan. Prior to annexation, any zoning changes in Iowa City's projected growth area shall also be consistent with the City's adopted land use plan. Subdivisions and development projects within Iowa City's projected growth area shall conform to City Urban Design Standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. Developments which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served by a package sanitary sewage treatment plant and common wells with sanitary sewer and water collection and distribution systems which are constructed to City standards and can be connected to municipal systems upon annexation. Subdivisions and development projects which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be cluster developments with a minimum of 50% of the development designated as an outlot for open space, agriculture, or future development upon annexation. 2. Land outside Iowa City's Growth Area. On the balance of land in Area B that lies outside Iowa City's projected growth area, agricultural uses are preferred. Until otherwise changed by amending this agreement, this area shall be restricted to those uses consistent with a Rural/Agricultural area as indicated in the Johnson County Land Use Plan, and as designated for a Rural/Agricultural area in chapter 8:1.6. Class A District of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance as amended. Farmstead splits are permitted per Chapter 8:1.6.1.4.c of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. Given the existence of commercially zoned property and the demand for commercial uses at the 1-80/Herbert Hoover Highway interchange, rezonings to County CH -Highway Commercial District of property abutting the interchange, as shown on the attached fringe area map, will be considered. However, the only uses that will be allowed will be: Auto and truck oriented uses„ Hotels, motels, and convention facilities, Office buildings and -4 - studios, restaurants, and any accessory use normally associated with the permitted principal use. All existing commercially zoned property and any properties rezoned to CH -Highway Commercial shall be subject to the City's and the County's Site Plan Review Requirements with the most restrictive standards applying in instances where the two standards differ. 3. Upon annexation of land within Fringe Area B, the City agrees that it will not automatically extend its fringe area authority to review and approve all subdivisions, which it exercises pursuant to Iowa Code §354.9 and Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The City will review the extension of its fringe area as a result of annexation on a case-by-case basis in consultation with Johnson County. FRINGE AREA C Land within Iowa City's Growth Area. Land in Area C, which is presently zoned for residential development and within Iowa City's growth area, may develop in conformance with existing zoning, provided subdivisions and development projects shall conform to City Urban Design standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. Developments which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served by a package sanitary sewage treatment plant and common wells with sanitary sewer and water collection and distribution systems which are constructed to City standards and can be connected to municipal systems upon annexation. Subdivisions and development projects which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be cluster developments with a minimum of 50% of the development designated as an outlot for open space, agriculture, or future development upon annexation. Upon annexation to Iowa City, commercial and/or industrial development is encouraged south and southwest of the Iowa City Municipal Airport as shown on the attached Land Use Plan and in the portion of Section 20 of West Lucas Township that is located in the east and south quadrants of the Highway 1 and Highway 218 interchange. It is consistent with the purpose of this agreement not to approve commercial and/or industrial developments within this area prior to annexation. As stated in the Johnson County Land Use Plan, commercial and/or industrial development will be encouraged to locate in the interchanges of paved roads. Commercial and/or industrial development will be discouraged in all other areas of Fringe Area C. As applications are received to develop land contiguous to Iowa City and within this portion of the City's growth area, the City will give favorable consideration to the voluntary annexation of this land and its development for uses consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. Land outside Iowa City's Growth Area. In the portions of Area C which are not within Iowa City's growth area and which are zoned for non-farm development, development may occur in conformance with Johnson County's Unified Development Ordinance and City Rural Design Standards. Until otherwise changed by amending this agreement, this area shall be restricted to those uses consistent with a. Rural/Agricultural area as indicated in the Johnson County Land Use Plan, and as designated for a Rural/ Agricultural area in Chapter 8:1.6 Class A District of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance as amended. Farmstead splits are permitted per Chapter 8:1.6.1.4.c of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. -5- 3. Upon annexation of land within Fringe Area C, the City agrees that it will not automatically extend its fringe area authority to review and approve all subdivisions, which it exercises pursuant to Iowa Code §354.9 and Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The City will review the extension of its fringe area as a result of annexation on a case-by-case basis in consultation with Johnson County. SECTION 11. PROTECTING AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS Any regulations in the Fringe Area Agreement will not interfere with the Right to Farm, as contained in the Code of Iowa Chapter 335.2, Farms Exempt; and as noted in the Johnson County Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 8.2, Protecting Agricultural Operations. SECTION III. ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES As a rule, zoning regulation is the county's prerogative if a county has adopted a zoning ordinance. The City, however, exercises authority over subdivision regulation in a city's fringe area. Annexation is also primarily under exclusive rule of cities. Each of these activities, however, affects both jurisdictions and produces a clear need for coordination and joint administration. To that end, the City of Iowa City and Johnson County agree to the following procedures for administration of land use regulations. A. Zoning Regulation: Zoning regulation for all unincorporated territory will remain under the authority of the Johnson County Zoning Ordinance and the provisions of Chapter 335, Code of Iowa (2005), the enabling legislation for the County's zoning powers. 2. Pursuant to Section 8:1.23 of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance, any person may request a variance to the lot area regulations of the zoning ordinance or appeal the decision of any officer of the County as that decision relates to enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The County will forward each request for rezoning of property within the Fringe Areas specified in this Agreement to the City for review and comment prior to the public hearing before the County Planning and Zoning Commission. Any zoning change will conform with the policies identified for the Area in which the property is located. 4. Properties zoned for a classification which is inconsistent with this Agreement, at the time this Agreement is executed, shall retain the rights under that zoning, unless and until such zoning is changed through due process. B. Subdivision Regulation: 1. Subdivision of land within Iowa City's fringe area will be required to conform to either City Rural Design Standards or the City Urban Design Standards in accordance with the policies specified in this Agreement. 2. Persons wishing to subdivide land within the fringe area specified in this Agreement shall be required to simultaneously file a subdivision application with both the City and the County. The City and the County shall coordinate the processing of the application to ensure concurrent review by both the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the County Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. Subdivisions of land into fewer than three lots will continue to be regulated by the County. ME C. Development prolects not reguiring subdivision: Any development projects larger than 2 acres within the City's growth area shall be subject to review by both the City and the County in accordance with the procedural requirements of each jurisdiction. D. Annexation: 1. Iowa City will annex territory only in accordance with the policy statements specified in this Agreement. 2. The City will, upon receipt, forward applications requesting annexation or severance (de - annexation) of property within the fringe area specified in this Agreement to the County for review and comment prior to consideration by the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. As -appropriate and necessary, the City may extend the two-mile extraterritorial subdivision plat review area. Prior to any such extension, the City will forward to the County a proposal which includes the extension of the City's plat review authority for any distance up to the two mile limit provided by State law. The County will have a specified time within which to respond in affirmative agreement, negatively or with an alternative proposal. The City will take the County's response under advisement when determining the extension of extraterritorial review. E. Conflict Resolution: If the City and County are in conflict over a proposed subdivision, rezoning application, or annexation that may violate this agreement, a review committee, comprised of members of the City Council, Board of Supervisors and staff, shall be established to negotiate a resolution prior to final action being taken by either body to subdivide, rezone, or annex property. SECTION IV. AGREEMENT REVIEW At any time during the term of this Agreement, either the Chair of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors or the Mayor of the City of Iowa City may initiate review of the policies of this Agreement by contacting the other party to this Agreement. Both parties to this Agreement shall consider modifications of this Agreement, as appropriate. SECTION V. EFFECTIVE PERIOD This Agreement shall become effective upon acceptance and execution by the parties, and shall be in effect for five (5) years after the date of execution of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be automatically renewed unless the County or the City objects to such renewal prior to the renewal date. SECTION VI. RECORDATION This Agreement shall be filed with the Secretary of the State of Iowa, and with the Johnson County Recorder in compliance with Chapter 28E, Code of Iowa (2005). Dated this day of o it , 2046. -7 - JOHNSON COUNTY By: Chairperson, Board of Supervisors County Attorney' 4 ce Attest: County Auditor 1 / Dated this � day of CO C_ 7 o �6 i- , 2006 CORPORATE SEAL CITY OF IOWA CITY By: Mayor Attest: ✓ IT 75 �'C_Q� City Nerk uORPORATE SEAL Approved by: City Attorney's ice ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Land Use Map for the Iowa City Fringe Area. 2. Appendix A: Definition of Standards APPENDIX A Definition of Standards City Urban Design Standards: Those standards enumerated in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City which the City imposes on any subdivision within the corporate limits of Iowa City. City Rural Design Standards: 1.0 Streets 1.1 Streets shall be designed for a minimum surface width of 22 feet. Curb and gutter will not be required. 1.2 The right-of-way for local streets without curb and gutter shall be 60 feet to enable retrofit of sewer, water, and sidewalk in the future as necessary; otherwise, the right- of-way for local streets with curb and gutter and storm sewer shall be 50 feet. The right-of-way for arterial, industrial, and collector streets for the developed area shall be determined in conjunction with the Planning and Zoning Commission. 1.3 The maximum street grade for local streets shall be 12%. 1.4 The pavement cross section for all pavements will be a 2% parabolic crown. This cross slope is equivalent to'/ -inch per foot. 1.5 The pavement slab shall be constructed of a 6" rolled stone base and a 22 -foot wide chipseal surface. 1.6 Minimum corner radii shall be 20 feet. 1.7 The minimum ditch grade shall be 1.0%. In addition, it will be necessary to place a 12 -inch diameter (minimum) culvert, either reinforced concrete pipe or corrugated metal pipe, through all drive approaches constructed over a drainage ditch. The exact size of pipe required will be a function of the area to be drained. 1.8 Drive approaches shall be hard surfaced within the right-of-way. 2.0 Water Distribution System 2.1 Well(s) shall conform to the requirements of the Johnson County Health Department and the distribution system, if installed, (water main) shall be either ductile cast iron pipe (ANSI A21.50 manufactured in accordance with ANSI A21.50) or poly vinyl chloride pipe (PVC -ASTM D1784, Type 1, Grade 1, 200 psi design stress and SDR of 17 or less). 2.2 It shall be the responsibility of the Developer's Engineer to establish a fire rating for the area being developed. Prior to plat approval, there shall be a letter of transmittal from the appropriate Fire Protection District approving spacing, location, number of fire hydrants, size of mains, pressure, etc. 2.3 Connection to the City of Iowa City Water Distribution System is subject to City Council consideration based on availability. Generally, annexation is a criterion which must be met. 3.0 Sanitary Sewer All methods of sanitation shall conform to the 1989 Johnson County Board of Health Rules and Regulations Governing On-site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems and to the 1990 Iowa City Wastewater Treatment and Disposal System Policy. 4.0 Storm Sewers 4.1 With the exception of developments located in the Old Man's Creek watershed, the City Storm Water Management Ordinance shall apply to new developments located outside the City limits of Iowa City but within the City's area of extraterritorial jurisdiction. 4.2 All storm sewers shall conform to revised Section VII (Storm Sewers) of the Design Standards for Public Works Improvements in Iowa City, Iowa. 4.3 Culverts shall be a minimum of 12 inches in diameter; either reinforced concrete pipe or corrugated metal pipe (minimum gauge 18 and corrugations 2' x '/z", 20" x %", and 3"x1") shall be used. Culverts shall conform to the Standard Specifications for Highway and Bridge Construction Series of 1977. Minimum cover over the top of culvert shall be six inches. 5.0 Underground Utilities 5.1 Whenever a subdivision shall be laid out such that a new street is required, telephone and electric utilities shall be underground. It is not intended that small subdivisions which would use an existing county road would follow this requirement since overhead utilities are probably directly adjacent to the property. ppda dmi n%d efs[an d app.d oc iohnson County December 27, 2018 Attachment B. Letter from Johnson County Board of Supervisors BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Mike Carberry, Chairperson Janelle Rettig Lisa Green -Douglass, Vice Chairperson Rod Sullivan Mayor Jim Throgmorton and City Council City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mayor Throgmorton and Iowa City City Council, Pursuant to Section IV of the existing Fringe Area Agreement (FAA) between Iowa City and Johnson County, initially adopted in 2006, please accept this as notice that the Johnson County Board of Supervisors requests leadership of the City of Iowa City to review and jointly undertake consideration of needed modifications to the FAA. In May of 2018, the Board adopted the Johnson County 2018 Comprehensive Plan. This is the second iteration of a comprehensive plan for unincorporated Johnson County since we agreed to the FAA. The 2018 plan includes a Future Land Use Map which anticipates non-agricultural development in areas of the county that were not designated as growth areas over a decade ago. This has caused—and will likely continue to cause—conflict in reviewing development requests within the Fringe Area. The language in the current FAA references land use documents in effect in 2006 and does not allow the necessary flexibility to account for evolution in comprehensive planning over time. It is important to the Board that this process be initiated in the near future and progress to completion in a timely manner. Please direct City staff to take appropriate steps to review the current Fringe Area Agreement and the City's future land use plans with a goal of both City and County staff meeting to begin initial work on a new Fringe Area Agreement no later than March 1, 2019. Sincerely, Lisa Green ouglass Vice Chairperson 913 South Dubuque Street ♦ Iowa City, Iowa 52240 ♦ 319-356-6000 ♦ www.johnson-county.com Attachment C. Proposed Update to the Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City This agreement is entered into pursuant to Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa, by and between Johnson County, Iowa, hereinafter referred to as "County," and the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City," (together, the "Parties"). Whereas, pursuant to Iowa Code Section 354.9, the City has adopted Iowa City Ordinance 15-1-4 requiring that all subdivisions located within two (2) miles of the City's corporate boundaries shall be subject to City review and approval, except for those areas exempt from such review pursuant to the Johnson County/Iowa City fringe area agreement; and Whereas, Iowa Code Section 354.9 gives the City and the County the authority to establish, by agreement, the standards and conditions applied by a city or county for review and approval of a county subdivision; and Whereas, Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa (2021) enables two or more local governments to enter into agreements to cooperate for their mutual advantage; and Whereas, pursuant to these powers, the City and County did enter into a 28E Agreement in October 2006 pertaining to the City 1 County Fringe Area and that agreement is superseded through the execution of this 28E Agreement; and Whereas, the Johnson County 2018 Comprehensive Pian for unincorporated Johnson County adopted May 17, 2018, calls for the preparation and adoption of development plans and agreements between the County and the City; and Whereas, the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2013 and associated District Plans, as amended, provide the vision and land use policy direction for growth within and around the City; and Whereas, it is in the interest of the County and the City to establish policies for the orderly growth and development within the City 1 County Fringe Area; and Whereas, the County and the City mutually agree that such policies are necessary to more effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development and to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features. Now, therefore, the parties agree as follows: Section I. Fringe Area Development Policies A. Purpose: This Fringe Area Policy Agreement is intended to provide for orderly and efficient development patterns appropriate to the fringe area, to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and environmentally sensitive features, to direct development to areas with physical characteristics that can accommodate development, and to effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development. In light of these objectives, the City and the County examined the development capabilities of the Iowa City fringe area (i.e. that unincorporated area outside the corporate limits of the City but within two (2) miles of the existing City limits, designated the "City / County Fringe Area") and determined that development within the boundaries of the City / County Fringe Area, as shown on the Fringe Area Development Map attached to this Agreement as Appendix A and incorporated by this reference, is to occur in accordance with the development policies contained in this Agreement. Development should conform to the criteria outlined in this agreement, supplemented by the adopted Johnson County Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, and/or the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, and all City and County development regulations, as applicable. B. General Policies: The following general policies apply to development in all areas of the City / County Fringe Area, as defined in Appendix A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 1. Development Applications: Where City review, comment, or approval is required herein, an applicant shall simultaneously file a development application with the County and the City. Applicants are encouraged to coordinate with City Staff prior to filing their applications. The City may begin review of Future Land Use Map amendments outside of the City's growth area prior to County receipt of an application. 2. Prior Approval: Unless the City declines to review an application, the County Planning and Zoning Commission shall not hold a public hearing on any matter subject to City review, comment, recommendation or approval pursuant to this 28E Agreement until receipt of such review, comment or approval as described in this Agreement. 3. Official Recommendation: Official review, comment, recommendation or approval by the City shall be in writing. If the action of the Council was via resolution, a copy of the resolution shall also be included. This communication may be either electronic or hard copy. 4. Reasons for Denial: For any application that is denied by the City, the City shall provide written communication to the Board of Supervisors detailing reasons for denial. 5. City Processing: If an application has not received final disposition in accordance with the review and approval timelines set by City ordinances, the County Planning and Zoning Commission may proceed to conduct its public hearing on such application prior to receiving final comment, recommendation, or approval from the City. C. Policies within the City's Growth Area The following policies apply to development in the City's Growth Area shown in Appendix A. 'Growth and development within the City's Growth Area is guided by the land use policy direction of the either the City's Comprehensive Plan or the County's Comprehensive Plan as outlined in this Subsection and Subsection D which outlines the five identified subareas within the City's Growth Area. 1. Locagon: The City's Growth Area is adjacent to the current City corporate boundary and extends into Me County in varying degrees as shown on the attached Fringe Area Development Map (Appendix A). 2. Future Land Use Map Amendments: The City shall review applications for amendments to the County's Future Land Use Map for land within the City's Growth Area according to the following. City staff will make a recommendation on the proposed map amendment to Me Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission, who shall make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will make a final recommendation on the proposed map amendment to the County Planning and Zoning Commission. The City will use this Agreement and the City's Comprehensive Plan as policy documents to guide its recommendations. County will provide notice of the application within three business days from the County's annual fling deadline for project specific Future Land Use Map amendments. The City shall provide comment prior to the regularly scheduled August County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. In the event the City does not provide the County comments prior to the regularly scheduled August County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the City shall be deemed to have waived its right to review; however such review period may be extended upon coordination with County planning stat provided! City comment con be provided by the public hearing before the Boom of Supervisors. 3. Rezonings: The City shall review and make a recommendation to the Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission on applications for rezoning for land within the Cil Growth Area, in accordance with the following process. City stat will make a recommendation to the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission, who shall make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will make a final recommendation on the proposed rezoning to the County Planning and Zoning Commission. The City will use this Agreement and the City's Comprehensive Plan as the guiding policy documents informing rezoning recommendations. The County will use this agreement and the County's Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map as the guiding policy documents informing rezoning decisions. The County will also consider the City recommendation. 4. Subdivision Plate a. Preliminary Plate: A preliminary plat shall be required for any subdivision of land, as defined in section 354.2 of Iowa State Code, Mat divides a tract of land into three or more lots. The City will review all preliminary plats for subdivisions and divisions, as defined in section 364.2 of Iowa State Code, within the Growth Area, except for Farmstead splits, as detailed in section 8:1.6.A.7 and 8:1.6.L of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance, as amended. Preliminary plats shall be designed to conform to the City's Urban Design Standards, set forth in Iowa City Code Chapter 15 which may be amended from time to time in the City's sole discretion, as well as compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended. The City shall review and approve applications for preliminary plats of land within the City's Growth Area, in accordance with the following. City staff will review and make a recommendation to the City Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will consider a resolution to approve or deny the plat. Preliminary plats that gain approval from the City Council will be forwarded onto the County Planning and Zoning Commission. City Council approval of an application is required prior to any public hearing by the County Planning and Zoning Commission. City approval of preliminary plats is required, and I an application for preliminary plat fails to gain approval of Me City Council, the County will consider the application to be incomplete and will not consider the application. Where Me City has approved an application for preliminary plat, the County Board of Supervisors shall also approve or deny the plat. An application for a combined preliminary and final plat shall also be reviewed according to this provision. Developments which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served by package sanitary sewer treatment plant and common wells with sanitary sewer and water collection and distribution systems which are constructed to City standards and can be connected to municipal systems upon annexation. To ensure compliance with the City's Urban Design Standards, where a developer desires to install required improvements, which may become public upon annexation, the applicant shall provide detailed construction drawings and infrastructure plans to the City with the application for preliminary plat. The City will not approve the preliminary plat until said drawings and plans have been approved by the City Engineer. b. Final Plats: Applications for final plats shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. The County shall forward all final plat applications to City staff for notification purposes, but the City need not formally approve or deny any final plat applications. In the event Mat a final plat requires dedication of easements or installation of infrastructure to be owned and maintained by the City upon annexation, the County shall coordinate with City staff and the City Attorney's Office for such documents review and approval by Council. City staff will notify County staff when the approval of the necessary documents is finalized. 5. Site Plans: The City shall administratively review site plans for land greater than 2 acres. All site plans for land greater than 2 acres shall comply with 18-3-2F of the Iowa City Code of Ordinances, as amended. In addition, City staff will review said site plans against 18-3-2A, 18-3-2B, 18-3-2C, and 1832D of Me Iowa City Code of Ordinances. as amended, and provide comments for the County's consideration. City staff will provide comments to the County within twenty-one (21) working days of receipt of a completed application, in accordance with Title 18 of the Iowa City Code of Ordinances. The County Board of Supervisors shall not act on any site plan subject to City review pursuant to this 28E Agreement until receipt of such review, comment, or approval as described in this Agreement. D. Policies for Specific Subareas within the City Growth Area: Gmwth and development within the City's Growth Area is guided by the land use policy direction of the City's Comprehensive Plan with the exception of certain areas. Specifically, Mere are areas within the City's Growth Area identified as Subareas in Appendices B -F, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, where more specific policy direction applies. In addition to Sections B and C above, the following additional policies apply: 1. Subarea #1: Located north and south of Highway 1. This area may become ripe for development in the future, once Me area to the north is developed. Subarea #1 shall develop in accordance with the Future Land Use Map of the County's Comprehensive Plan as opposed to the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. Subarea #2: Located south of Highway 218 and Riverside Drive, Subarea #2 may attract commercial uses due to its highway adjacency and positioning as a southern gateway to the Iowa City area. This area shall develop in alignment with the Future Land Use Map of the County's Comprehensive Plan, as opposed to the City's Comprehensive Plan, which identifies a Commercial growth area. 3. Subarea 03: Subarea #3 is located north of Highway 6 near Taft Avenue. Once land within the City's Industrial Park is fully occupied, the land use policy vision for this area is additional commercial and industrial development following annexation into the City. Land in Subarea #3 shall remain as open space or agricultural land use until annexed by the City. 4. Subarea #4: Subarea #4 is located to the west of the Herbert Hoover Highway and 1-00 interchange. This interchange acts as an eastern gateway to the Iowa City area and contains prime interstate access. A portion of Subarea #4 is appropriate for certain commercial development and a portion should remain agricultural in nature. The map In Appendix E identifies land that shall develop in alignment with the County's Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan, which identifies this area as appropriate for Commercial and Highway Commercial land uses. For the remainder of land within this area, remnings to other canes besides Agriculture are not allowed. S. Subarea 05: Subarea #5 is located to the north of I-80, and east of Highway 1. Subarea 45 is intended to provide a buffer between non-residential uses to Me south and County Residential uses to the north. Land in Subarea #5 shall remain as open space or agricultural land use until annexed by the City. E. Policies Outslde the City's Growth Area The following policies apply to all areas within the 2 -mile fringe area that are outside Me City's Growth Area shown in Appendix A. 1. Location: Those areas Mat are outside of the Ciry's Growth Area but still located within Me Fringe Area are identified in Me Fringe Area Development Map (Appendix A). This land is not intended to the annexed into the City in the foreseeable future due to distance from the City's corporate limits and existing City infrastructure. 2. Future Land Use Map Amendments: The City shall administratively review and make a recommendation on applications for amendments to the County's Future Land Use Map in accordance with the following process. County staff shall notify City staff of any proposed amendments. City staff will submit a formal advisory opinion on any proposed changes to the County Planning and Zoning Commission. City staff will use the criteria from this Agreement and the City's Comprehensive Plan to guide its recommendations. Notwithstanding 1.B.2. above, the County's Planning and Zoning Commission may proceed to conduct a hearing and forward its recommendations to the County Board of Supervisors on applications for amendments to the County's Future Land Use Map if an advisory opinion from City staff has not been received by the time such applications are regularly scheduled for consideration by the County's Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. Rezonings: Applications for rezoning of land outside of the City's Growth Area shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. The County shall notify the City of any such rezoning application. County staff will use the County Comprehensive Plan and County Future Land Use Map as guidance for its recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. 4. Subdivision Plats a. Preliminary plats of fewer than three (3) lots: Subdivisions and divisions of land into fewer than three lots (including outlots) shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. b. Preliminary Plats of three (3) lots or more: Preliminary plats subdividing a tract of land into three or more lots (including outlots), shall conform to the City's Rural Design Standards (Appendix G). City staff will administratively review preliminary plats to the City's Rural Design Standards (Appendix G) and forward comments and recommendations to the County for consideration. For these applications, comments and recommendations from City staff must be received by the County prior to public hearing by the County Planning and Zoning Commission. An application for a combined preliminary and final plat shall also be reviewed according to this provision. c. Final Plats: Applications for final plats shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. The County shall forward all final plat applications to City staff for notification purposes, but the City need not formally approve or deny any final plat applications. In the event that a final plat requires dedication of easements or installation of public infrastructure to be owned and maintained by the City, the County shall coordinate with City Planning staff and the City Attorney's Office for such documents review and approval by Council. City staff will notify County staff when the approval of the necessary documents is finalized. 5. Site Plans: All site plans and development projects for land outside of the City's Growth Area shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. Section II. Agreement Review A. Agreement Review Period This Agreement shall be reviewed every five years. At any time between five-year reviews, either the Chair of the County Board of Supervisors or the Mayor of the City may initiate review of the policies of this Agreement by contacting the other party to this Agreement. Alternatively, either party may re -affirm the current agreement in writing, at which point both parties may agree to waive review of this agreement. Both parties to this Agreement shall consider modifications of this Agreement in good faith. B. Agreement Termination Either party may terminate this Agreement by providing written notification to the other party, accompanied by an approved resolution of the governing body directing such termination, sent by registered mail. Such termination shall be effective no earlier than ninety days after the mailing date of the notification. C. Boundary Changes Annexation of property by the City does not automatically adjust the boundaries established by this Agreement. Such boundaries, and the applicability of this Agreement to unincorporated territory of Johnson County, may only be changed or extended by modifying this Agreement by mutual agreement of the Parties. Section III. Effective Period This Agreement shall become effective upon acceptance and execution by all Parties, and shall be in effect for 10 years after the date of execution of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be automatically renewed for one five-year period unless the County or the City objects to such renewal prior to the renewal date. This Agreement may be modified or extended by the written mutual consent of both Parties. Section V. Recordation This Agreement shall be filed with the Secretary of the State of Iowa, and with the Johnson County Recorder in compliance with Chapter 28E, Code of Iowa (2021). [Signatures on the following page] Dated this day of 2021. JOHNSON COUNTY By: Chairperson, Board of Supervisors Attest: County Auditor Dated this day of CITY OF IOWA CITY By: _ Mayor Attest: _ City Clerk Appendices: A. Fringe Area Development Map B. Subarea #1 C. Subarea #2 D. Subarea #3 E. Subarea #4 F. Subarea #5 G. City's Rural Design Standards 2021. u a AV Aft ♦ moi: _ � 1' t ' 1''-i'';I `r c .a , rpt , ♦ - , ♦ ♦ 'i♦( p'� � ' ' _i_ � I � � i � . + f3 �, ' llb rf - - - _- + J ' � -� ` � •`��'/�!/x����_''1��T f a r . T - ' .. , , 'STT y ♦ 1 Ono �; 1 •. a -y+. _ . r.�-►- T � �, ��,.� - � • . - � _yam„ area f owth Area I y'. itside Growth Area �`► `� barea _ d _ .r "4' �' — Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographies, ONES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, A1:414 D, IGN, and the GIS User Community Created by: Joshua Engelbrecht September 2021 __ _�_______________________�____ �♦ � '4i�y' • `�- `n d ® \ \ � _ ��� � ��. [ � � �� i�, 1 �� I 13 C�9E�i7 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 September 2021 ix D: Subarea #3 Iowa City Corporate Limits _ Subarea #3 Fringe Area mi Growth Area Outside Growth Area 0 0.050.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 September I j 1 1 1 I 1 � 1 lr�m hLJ Iowa City Corporate Limits _ Subarea #5 Fringe Area _ Growth Area dix F-. Subarea #5 Outside Growth Area Mlles Created by: Joshua Engelbre 0 0.0250.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 September 2021 Appendix G City Rural Design Standards A. Streets 1. Streets shall be designed for a minimum surface width of 22 feet. Curb and gutter will not be required. 2. The right-of-way for local residential streets shall be 60 feet to enable retrofit of sewer, water, and sidewalk in the future as necessary. The right-of-way for arterial, industrial, and collector streets for the developed area shall be determined by City and County planning and engineering staff. 3. The maximum street grade for local streets shall be 12%. 4. The pavement cross section for all pavements will be a 2% parabolic crown. This cross slope is equivalent to'/4-inch per foot. 5. At a minimum, the pavement slab shall be constructed of a 6" rolled stone base and a 22 -foot wide chipseal or other paved surface. 6. Minimum corner radii shall be 20 feet. 7. The minimum ditch grade shall be 1 %. In addition, it will be necessary to place a 12 - inch diameter (minimum) culvert, either reinforced concrete pipe or corrugated metal pipe, through all drive approaches constructed over a drainage ditch. The exact size of pipe required will be a function of the area to be drained. 8. Drive approaches shall be hard surfaced within the right-of-way. B. Water Distribution System 1. Well(s) shall conform to the requirements of the Johnson County Health Department and the distribution system, if installed, (water main) shall be either ductile iron pipe (DIP) or poly vinyl chloride (PVC) pipe, - and conform with Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) Standard Specifications. 2. It shall be the responsibility of the developer's engineer to establish a fire rating for the area being developed, and to identify any infrastructure being constructed (or other means anticipated) for the purpose of fire protection. Prior to the plat approval, there shall be a letter from the appropriate Fire Protection District approving the proposed fire protection measures based on current practices. 3. Connection to the City of Iowa City Water Distribution System is subject to City Council consideration based on availability. Generally, annexation is a criterion which must be met. C. Sanitary Sewer All methods of sanitation shall conform to all current Johnson County Board of Health Rules and Regulations Governing On-site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems. D. Stormwater Management 1. Stormwater facilities shall conform to all current Johnson County stormwater management regulations and policies. 2. Storm sewer construction shall be in accordance with the Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) Standard Specifications. 3. Culverts shall be a minimum of 12 inches in diameter and reinforced concrete pipe shall be used. Culverts shall conform with the Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) Standard Specifications. Minimum cover over the top of culvert shall be six inches. E. Underground Utilities Whenever a subdivision shall be laid out such that a new street is required, telephone, cable television, internet, and electric utilities shall be underground. It is not intended that small subdivisions which would use an existing county road would follow this requirement since overhead utilities are probably directly adjacent to the property. 2 Attachment D. Outline of Major Changes Item Existing Agreement Proposed Agreement Development Emphasis on: Emphasis on: Standards/General Policies - Avoiding - Development process & wetland/floodplain application coordination. conflicts. - Meeting County water/wastewater standards. - Clustering development to preserve open space. Geographically Specific Policy Fringe Areas A, B, C -Removal of Fringe Areas A, B, C. -City Comprehensive Plan as land use policy guide within the Growth Area, with the exception of the subareas. -County review outside of the Growth Area. -Specific direction provided for identified subareas. Future Land Use Map Not specifically addressed. In Growth Area — Review by City Amendments Commission and Council, with recommendation to County. Outside Growth Area — City staff formal advisory opinion to County. Rezonings City — Reviewed by Inside Growth Area — City Commission and Council with recommendation to County. County recommendation to County. approval. County — Review and Outside Growth Area — No City review. approval. County approval. Preliminary Plats < 3 Lots Reviewed and approved by the Inside Growth Area — City and County County. Commission and Council/BOS review and approval. Outside Growth Area — Reviewed and approved by the County. Preliminary Plats > 3 Lots City and County Commission Inside Growth Area — City and County and Council/BOS review and Commission and Council/BOS review and approval. approval. Outside Growth Area — City administrative review and comment to County. County review and approval. Site Plans > 2 Acres Subject to review by City and Inside Growth Area — City administrative County in accordance with review & comment. each jurisdiction's review procedures. Outside Growth Area — Only County review. Effective Period In effect for five years, In effect for ten years, renewed for a one renewed automatically unless five-year period unless objected by objected by City/County. City/County. Conflict Resolution Review committee established No review committee. to review conflicts between the City and County on subdivision, rezoning, and annexation applications. Attachment E. Build Out Analysis f � � CITY OF IOWA CITY CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM UNESCO CITY OF LITERATl1RE Date: January 23, 2020 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Ray Heitner, Associate Planner and Anne Russett, Senior Planner, Neighborhood and Development Services Re: City/County Fringe Area Agreement Update Introduction In 2006, Iowa City and Johnson County executed a Fringe Area Agreement to establish the policies for the orderly growth and development of land within the area known as the City's "fringe area" in the County. This agreement enables both the City and the County to cooperate for their mutual benefit through coordinated land use planning. Such policies are necessary to more effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development, and to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features. In December 2018, the Johnson County Board of Supervisors submitted a letter to the City Council requesting that the City Council direct staff to review the current Fringe Area Agreement and coordinate with County staff on the development of a new Fringe Area Agreement [Attachment 1]. After discussions with City Council in February 2019, staff has been coordinating with County Planning staff and working towards an updated Fringe Area Agreement. Recently, staff received correspondence from the County indicating that the Board of Supervisors would like to set up a working group of two Supervisors, two City Council members, and staff to further discuss the update to the Fringe Area Agreement. This memo provides a general overview of the Fringe Area Agreement [Attachment 2], outlines issues with the existing agreement, and provides a summary of a build -out analysis that assesses growth potential. Rationale is then provided for consideration of five new areas into the City's growth boundary. Finally, the memo outlines some questions for Council to consider as staff finalizes its draft revisions of the Fringe Area Agreement. Overview of the Fringe Area Agreement Land use regulation is under the authority of county governments for land outside of city limits. However, State law allows cities to establish a two-mile extraterritorial area, known as the fringe area, beyond city boundaries for the purpose of reviewing and approving subdivisions. State law also grants cities the authority to require that subdivisions within the fringe area adhere to the City's subdivision regulations, unless the City establishes alternative standards set forth in an agreement between the City and the County. The Fringe Area Agreement is a component of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Its stated purpose is to: The Fringe Area Policy Agreement is intended to provide for orderly and efficient development patterns appropriate to a non -urbanized area, protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and environmentally sensitive features, direct development to area January 29, 2020 Page 2 with physical characteristics which can accommodate development, and effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development. The Agreement categorizes land into three fringe areas: Fringe Areas A, B, and C [Attachment 3]. These areas are further divided into two categories — land within Iowa City's growth boundary and land outside the City's growth boundary. The City's growth boundary defines the City's potential corporate limits and was established with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 2013. It includes land, that for the purposes of long-range planning, is projected to serve the City's growth need for 30-40 years. Per the existing agreement, the fringe area is fixed, and does not adjust as land is annexed and the City grows. Table 1 outlines how development projects are reviewed per the Fringe Area Agreement. TABLE 1. Summary of Review Authority per Fringe Area Agreement, Adopted 2006 Fringe Area Rezonings Subdivisions Commercial Zoned Properties in Fringe Area B If no Subdivision Required and Development >2 acres Inside Iowa - County has control - Review & approval - Subject to review City - Review & by both City and by both the City & Growth recommendation County County in Boundary from the City - Subject to City's accordance with subdivision each jurisdiction's regulations (Urban requirements Design Standards) Outside - County has control - Review & approval - Subject to the - No review by City Iowa City - Review & by both City and City's and County's unless associated Growth recommendation County site plan review with a rezoning Boundary from the City - Subject to Rural requirements (most Design Standards restrictive standards apply) The agreement also includes a conflict resolution policy for when the City and County disagree over a proposed subdivision, rezoning, or annexation. This conflict resolution policy was invoked in 2018 with the proposed rezoning of land located in unincorporated Johnson County south of American Legion Road and west of Wapsie Avenue SE (CZ18-00002). The Fringe Area Agreement renews automatically on an annual basis unless the City or the County object to the renewal. The agreement also includes a provision related to the review of the agreement. With the County's recent letter, the County has initiated that review. Issues with Current Fringe Area Agreement The Fringe Area Agreement has not been updated since it was adopted in 2006. Since that time the City updated its comprehensive plan (adopted 2013), and developed several new district plans. Specifically, the South District Plan and the Southeast District Plan, which abut the fringe area, were adopted in 2015 and 2011, respectively. In addition, the County has updated its comprehensive plan twice since 2006. The most recent update was in 2018. Based on the land use policies in the recently adopted County plan, there are inconsistencies between the policy direction identified in the plan and the Fringe Area Agreement. These inconsistencies will need to be addressed as the City and County work together on an updated Fringe Area Agreement. January 29, 2020 Page 3 Build -Out Summary Methods and Results To gain a better understanding of how the City may approach updates to the Fringe Area Agreement, staff conducted a build -out analysis to determine if the City's adopted land use policy and zoning designations have the capacity to accommodate the 2045 population and employment projections in the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County's Future Forward 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan. The build -out analysis is an estimate of Iowa City's ability to accommodate population and employment growth within the City limits and City's identified growth boundary (as identified in the current Fringe Area Agreement) through the year 2045. The analysis begins by establishing buildable lands within the City limits and growth boundary by compiling a record of vacant and underutilized properties. Lands that are deemed to be vacant and/or underutilized then have either a City zoning designation or land use designation from the Comprehensive Plan applied to each lot. Staff calculated the maximum build -out at the highest possible density or intensity to each lot and then applied a discount factor to account for infrastructure, parking, sensitive areas, and other site constraints. The dwelling unit density of residentially -zoned lots was converted to a population estimate. The development potential of non -residentially zoned lots was converted to an employment estimate. The total population and employment estimates were compared to the growth projections from the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County's Future Forward 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan. In short, staff found that there is sufficient capacity to accommodate population and employment growth within the City limits and current growth boundary through the year 2045. Table 1 compares the results of the build -out analysis to the 2045 growth projections. Table 1. Comparison of Build -out Results to Growth Projections Summary of Key Findings • The land currently in the City and growth boundary can accommodate an estimated increase in population of over 61,000 people, well over the projected population growth of 22,285 for 2045 in the MPO's Future Forward 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan. • Assuming an efficiency factor of 70% on each residential lot, the City and growth boundary can accommodate more than double the projected dwelling units needed. Overall, there is enough land to satisfy projected commercial growth and employment by over 14,000 jobs through 2045. Est. Building Est. Est. Dwelling Square Ft. Employment Units Est. Population City Build -out Potential: 7,419,462 20,002 16,379 37,756 Growth Boundary Build- out Potential: 7,718,510 18,373 10,175 23,771 Total Build -Out Potential: 15,137,972 38,375 26,554 61,527 JC MPO Projections (Projected Increases from 2017 to 2045 )1 n/a 23,615 10,794 22,285 'Data comes from the Johnson County Metropolitan Planning Organization's 2017 Future Forward 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan Link Summary of Key Findings • The land currently in the City and growth boundary can accommodate an estimated increase in population of over 61,000 people, well over the projected population growth of 22,285 for 2045 in the MPO's Future Forward 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan. • Assuming an efficiency factor of 70% on each residential lot, the City and growth boundary can accommodate more than double the projected dwelling units needed. Overall, there is enough land to satisfy projected commercial growth and employment by over 14,000 jobs through 2045. January 29, 2020 Page 4 Table 2 provides more detail on the build -out analysis within current jurisdictional boundaries and breaks down the non-residential and residential development potential by zoning district. Table 2. Build -Out Potential within Current City Limits Summary of Key Findings (City Limits) Assuming the University continues to employ 40% of all Iowa City workers', the City has abundant capacity to absorb projected demands in employment (through 2045). o On non -university property, Iowa City can absorb approximately 20,002 workers. o The Johnson County MPO projects an increase of 23,615 workers in Iowa City by 2045. o If the University continues to employ 40% of all Iowa City workers, Iowa City would need to absorb 14,169 workers on non -university property. o It is possible that the University might comprise a smaller proportion of Iowa City's total workforce in 2045. The City has the capacity to absorb projected gains in dwelling units and population; however, much of this capacity is dependent upon continued redevelopment of the Riverfront Crossings area. o Continued redevelopment (at current maximum base heights) is necessary to accommodate projected growth, as about 65% of all residential units are projected to come from the Riverfront Crossings area. • The analysis excluded Iowa City Local Landmarks, Local Historic Districts, and Local Conservation Districts, as well as the downtown area currently being pursued for designation in the National Register of Historic Places. With most of the downtown excluded from the analysis, there is little capacity for additional employment or residential growth. 1 Figure derived from the Johnson County MPO Long Range Transportation Plan 2017-2045. Total Est. Building Square Non -Residential Development Potential: Acres Ftg. Est. Employment Research Development Park 45.6 248,521 816 General Industrial (11) 96.2 1,047,871 2,083 Commercial Zones (CO -1, CN -1, CH -1, CI -1, CC -2) 228 4,316,853 12,434 Downtown (CB -2, 5, 10) 1.69 58,836 190 Riverfront Crossings 50 1,747,381 4,479 Total: 422 7,432,303 20,002 JC MPO Projections 2045: 23,615 Total Residential Development Potential: Acres Est. Dwelling Units Est. Population Single -Family (RR -1, RS -5, RS -8, RS -12, RNS- 12) 1,052 1,847 4,149 Multi -Family (RM -12, RM -20, RM -44, PRM) 22 167 375 Interim Development SF & MF 722 3,257 7,540 Downtown (CB -2, 5, 10) 1.69 423 976 Riverfront Crossings 50 10,648 24,631 Total: 1,848 16,379 37,756 JC MPO Projections 2045: 10,794 22,285 Summary of Key Findings (City Limits) Assuming the University continues to employ 40% of all Iowa City workers', the City has abundant capacity to absorb projected demands in employment (through 2045). o On non -university property, Iowa City can absorb approximately 20,002 workers. o The Johnson County MPO projects an increase of 23,615 workers in Iowa City by 2045. o If the University continues to employ 40% of all Iowa City workers, Iowa City would need to absorb 14,169 workers on non -university property. o It is possible that the University might comprise a smaller proportion of Iowa City's total workforce in 2045. The City has the capacity to absorb projected gains in dwelling units and population; however, much of this capacity is dependent upon continued redevelopment of the Riverfront Crossings area. o Continued redevelopment (at current maximum base heights) is necessary to accommodate projected growth, as about 65% of all residential units are projected to come from the Riverfront Crossings area. • The analysis excluded Iowa City Local Landmarks, Local Historic Districts, and Local Conservation Districts, as well as the downtown area currently being pursued for designation in the National Register of Historic Places. With most of the downtown excluded from the analysis, there is little capacity for additional employment or residential growth. 1 Figure derived from the Johnson County MPO Long Range Transportation Plan 2017-2045. January 29, 2020 Page 5 • Development of existing interim single-family and multi -family zoned parcels is projected to account for almost 20% of residential development within the city limits. Table 3 summarizes the results of the build -out analysis within the City's growth boundary. Table 3. Build -Out Potential within the Growth Boundary Summary of Key Findings (City Growth Boundary) Most of the undeveloped or underdeveloped non-residential land (81%) is planned as Industrial and Office Park. The land planned for Industrial uses is mostly in the Southeast District with some in the South Central District. The land planned for Office Park uses is all in the North Corridor north of 1-80 on either side of Highway 1. o There has been a decreasing trend in the use of suburban -style office parks and an increasing trend in bringing office jobs into more walkable, urban environments. • The land planned as Intensive Commercial is primarily south of the airport in the South Central District. Most of the residential areas (4,232 acres) are planned for densities between 1-8 dwelling units per acre. This is consistent with single-family zoning, and accounts for 79% of the residentially allocated land in the growth boundary. Total Non -Residential Uses Acres Est. Building Square Ftg. Est. Employment Office & Mixed -Use Commercial 27. 518,730 1,354 Intensive Commercial 104 1,127,090 2,053 Industrial 357 3,885,327 7,771 Office Park 201 2,187,363 7,195 Total: 688 7,718,510 18,373 JC MPO Projections 2045: 23,615 Total Residential Density Acres Est. Dwelling Units Est. Population 1 DU/Acre 2,586 1,533 3,557 2-8 DU/Acre 1,646 6,522 15,131 2-12 DU/Acre 87 422 979 8-13 DU/Acre 177 1,126 2,612 8-16 DU/Acre 36 381 884 12-24 DU/Acre 19 239 554 16-24 DU/Acre 2 23 53 Total: 4,552 10,175 23,771 JC MPO Projections 2045: 10,794 22,285 Total Public & Open Space Acres Total: 849 Summary of Key Findings (City Growth Boundary) Most of the undeveloped or underdeveloped non-residential land (81%) is planned as Industrial and Office Park. The land planned for Industrial uses is mostly in the Southeast District with some in the South Central District. The land planned for Office Park uses is all in the North Corridor north of 1-80 on either side of Highway 1. o There has been a decreasing trend in the use of suburban -style office parks and an increasing trend in bringing office jobs into more walkable, urban environments. • The land planned as Intensive Commercial is primarily south of the airport in the South Central District. Most of the residential areas (4,232 acres) are planned for densities between 1-8 dwelling units per acre. This is consistent with single-family zoning, and accounts for 79% of the residentially allocated land in the growth boundary. January 29, 2020 Page 6 • The most densely planned residential areas are in the South and Southeast districts, while the least dense area is the North Corridor (most of this area is unplanned, but due to topography and current development, it was estimated to be developed around 1 dwelling unit per acre). • There is a significant amount of land planned for either public uses or open space (848 acres), mostly in the South and Northwest districts. The Northwest District has a significant amount of public space planned east of Highway 218 and north of Rohret Road. Other Factors to Consider for Potential Growth Boundary Expansion Areas Although the build -out analysis indicates that there is enough capacity on vacant and underutilized land to accommodate the residential and employment growth projections, Council may want to consider expanding the growth boundaries for those areas likely to develop in the near future. Staff examined areas outside of the current City growth boundary that contain the following characteristics likely to foster an environment supportive of development. • Potential current or future gateways into the City; • Highway adjacency and access; • Planned commercial or industrial land uses from Johnson County; • Sewerability; • Adjacency to areas envisioned for residential or commercial development per the City's Comprehensive Plan; • Preservation of existing sensitive areas; and • Other factors that might promote future land development. Considering these factors, Staff is recommending extension of the City's growth boundary to include the following five areas [Attachment 3]: January 29, 2020 Page 7 Area 1 (Area near Hiahwav 1 & Sharon Center Road The first area is located southwest of Iowa City along either side of Highway 1 (outlined in black in Figure 1). This area is currently designated in the County's Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map for Residential, Commercial, and Intensive Commercial development. Non-residential growth for those areas shown in red and purple in Figure 1, is of high concern to Staff. First, a rezoning of these areas to commercial and industrial County zoning designations would present a stark conflict of potential uses next to the existing agricultural, and planned residential, land use and zoning designations. Second, the City has generally tried to direct commercial and industrial growth into the City limits to encourage more efficient development. This is done to take advantage of existing utilities and services that these more intense land uses often require, in addition to curbing urban sprawl and leapfrog development. Staff is proposing to include this area in the City's growth boundary, which will allow the City to be more involved in land use decisions and better ensure these planning principals are followed. The residential areas shown in Figure 1 lie directly south from the Rohret South Subarea from the City's Southwest District Plan. The Rohret South Subarea will be developable upon extension of the Abbey Lane trunk sewer west of Route 218, which is included in the City's capital improvement program for construction in 2023. Due to the adjacency of this area with the Rohret South Subarea, including it in the City's growth boundary would better ensure a smooth transition between City and County development. Specifically, inclusion in the growth boundary would mean that development must comply with the City's Urban Design Standards, which includes standards related to storm water, streets, and other public utilities. The Southwest District Plan envisions street connectivity from the Rohret South Subarea continuing southward. The area has limited sensitive areas and prime highway adjacency that will make it attractive for development once it is sewerable. Furthermore, the area would be a fitting southwestern gateway into Iowa City for those traveling northbound on Highway 1. Figure 1. Potential Growth Area Boundary Expansion — Area 1 0 125 0.25 0.5 0.75 January 29, 2020 Page 8 Area 2 (Area south of Route 218 and Riverside Drive The second area to consider adding to the City's growth boundary, outlined in black in Figure 2, is located south of Iowa City (south of Riverside Drive). The current Fringe Area Agreement identifies this area as appropriate for rural, agricultural uses. The County recently approved an amendment to its Future Land Use Map that designates this area as appropriate for commercial development. Although the area is currently zoned County Residential and Agricultural, there is a pending County Commercial rezoning application under consideration by the City and County for the southern portion of Area 2. Like Area 1, staff has concerns about commercial development taking place outside of the City limits. Because of its highway adjacency, commercial development of Area 2 is highly attractive. Should the County Board of Supervisors choose to rezone this area to County Commercial, the area will be allowed to develop with an array of retail and service-oriented uses. Staff feels it is prudent to include this land into the City's growth boundary so that commercial development in this area is limited until it is annexed into the City. In terms of City infrastructure, a water main is located to the immediate east of Area 2, where the southernmost property within the City limits has water service. The area is sewerable per the City's long-term sewer master plan, but the nearest sanitary line is located over 1 mile away near Colonial Lanes bowling alley. It is possible that extension of this sanitary line might open the area between Area 2 and the City limits for future redevelopment. Figure 2. Potential Area of Growth Boundary Expansion — Area 2 Miles 11 0.075 0.15 03 0.45 06 January 29, 2020 Page 9 Area 3 (Area north of Highway 6 to Taft Avenue) The third area to consider adding to the City's growth boundary is located southeast of Iowa City between 420th St on the north and Highway 6 on the south and west of Taft Ave (outlined in black, Figure 3). Including this area into the City's growth boundary would allow for the future expansion of Iowa City's industrial park if the need should arise. Figure 3. Potential Area of Growth Boundary Expansion — Area 3 0 0.075 0.15 0-3 0.45 0.6 January 29, 2020 Page 10 Area 4 (Area near Herbert Hoover Hiahwav & 1-80 The fourth area to consider adding to the City's growth boundary is located east of Iowa City at the intersection of Herbert Hoover Highway and 1-80 (shown in red and transparent white, outlined in black in Figure 4). The County's Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map has identified this area as appropriate for highway commercial. Capital improvements to Taft Avenue are planned; however, construction is not anticipated for another five to 10 years. Once these improvements are completed, land to the east of Taft Avenue (which is currently in the City's growth boundary) will become more desirable for residential development. The area shown in red in Figure 4 is only'/2 mile east of the current growth boundary limit. It is possible that as the Taft Avenue corridor develops, and as residential growth continues eastward, the Herbert Hoover Highway interchange with Interstate 80 might be a logical place for commercial or highway commercial development. For similar reasons, directing commercial growth into the City limits, staff feels that incorporating Area 4 into the City's Growth Boundary makes sense. A portion of this area is already zoned for County commercial land uses and development would be able to occur in compliance with the existing zoning designation. Staff is proposing to include this area in the City's growth boundary, which will allow the City to be more involved in land use decisions. Figure 4. Potential Area of Growth Boundary Expansion — Area 4 0 0.0750.45 0.3 0.115 0.6 January 29, 2020 Page 11 Area 5 (Area off Highway 1, near Rapid Creek) The fifth area to consider adding to the City's growth boundary is located north of Iowa City on either side of Highway 1 north of the 1-80 (outlined in black in Figure 5). Area 5 is designated for agricultural uses east of Highway 1 NE and for residential uses west of Highway 1 NE with an emphasis on preserving 50% of the space for open space or agricultural uses in the current Fringe Area Agreement. The County's Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map shows this entire area as appropriate for residential development. Currently, it is mostly zoned County Agricultural. Staff has recently received a residential rezoning application for a portion of this area west of Highway 1. Area 5 is bisected by Rapid Creek, and much of the area is in both the 100- and 500- year floodplain. Additionally, it is important to note that a portion of the area identified for County Residential growth overlaps with the City's current growth boundary. Staff recommends that this area be largely preserved for agricultural uses to help provide a transition from the planned commercial office and research park uses within the City limits to the south, to the larger lot residential uses in Johnson County. In revising the Fringe Area Agreement, staff recommends that the City control the amount of land that is developed for residential purposes in Area 5. Figure 5. Potential Area of Growth Boundary Expansion — Area 5 =;-A r W l = am CITY OF IOWA CITY 0 0.075 0 15 0.3 0.45 0.6 Y� Jah— C—ty Fd— Land U.. CeaWWWn �� Cmmerna� Caiv.r..mn De.wow�� . . Reee�+nMn _ Psir t Refidenva • a.o.><aiw•e� m..�arr � cm.N� eo�ony January 29, 2020 Page 12 Questions for the City Council At the City Council Work session on February 4, staff would like input from Council on the build -out analysis and proposed expansions to the growth boundary. Specifically, staff is interested in Council's thoughts on the following questions: 1. Are there any concerns with the proposed expansions (Areas 1-5) to the City's growth boundary? If so, what are those concerns? 2. Are there areas that staff has not considered including in the City's growth boundary that should be considered? 3. Does Council wish to create a working group to further collaborate with the County on this endeavor prior to staff providing you with recommended policy language for the updated Fringe Area Agreement? Next Steps Staff will continue to work with County planning staff on updates to the Fringe Area Agreement. At a future meeting staff will present a draft update to the Fringe Area Agreement that outlines the proposed land use policy direction, as well as land development processes for areas within City/County fringe area. In terms of the timeline, staff hopes to have an updated Fringe Area Agreement adopted by October 2020. Attachments 1. Letter from the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, December 27, 2018 2. Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City, Adopted 2006 3. Fringe Area Map, Adopted 2006 4. Potential Areas of Growth Boundary Expansion Attachment F. Build -out Analysis Methodology Build -Out Analysis Methodology 1. Established available buildable lands. City Limits: • Using 2018 Assessor data', staff queried out vacant parcels and underutilized parcels within the city limits that had an improvement to land ratio of less than 1.0.2 o Staff removed any public parcels. ■ The analysis did include the following properties that have development potential: • Area near County Administration Building. • A portion of the Johnson County Poor Farm. o Staff removed parcels within Local Historic Districts3, Local Conservation Districts & Local Historic Landmarks). Parcels within the city limits over one acre' were queried out. These parcels were analyzed for sensitive areas. Query results were then exported into GIS. Growth Area: • Using 2018 Assessor Data, staff queried out vacant and underutilized parcels in the growth area over one acres. • Staff then queried out parcels less than or equal to two acres, and used the improvement to land ratio of less than 1.0 to determine which of these were vacant and underutilized. Parcels more than two acres in size were not subject to the improvement to land ratios of 1.0.6 o Any public or otherwise non -developable parcels' were removed. ■ Staff noted public parcels that have development potential in the near future. The following parcels were included in the build -out analysis: • Parcel Numbers: 0919402001, 0919452003, 0919401004 all owned by the City of Iowa City Sensitive Areas: • Staff used GIS and the Johnson County Property Information Viewer to determine which vacant and underutilized parcels (city and growth area) were free from natural encumbrances (wetlands, stream corridors, floodways, wooded areas). 1 At the time staff conducted its analysis, 2018 Assessor data was the most recent available data set. 2 Methodology from the previously performed Vacant and Underutilized Analysis, completed Fall of 2018, assumed that parcels with a value of less than 1.0 had a greater land value than the total value of buildings and dwellings on the parcel. 3 Included properties with historic use within the Downtown (CB -2-5) area. ' Staff determined that parcels equal to or greater than 1 acre in size would most likely have the potential to be developed for traditional residential or commercial use, and had the highest potential to encounter requirements from the sensitive areas ordinance. s Parcels in the growth area less than one acre were typically already developed or non -developable outlots. 6 Most large parcels (2 or more acres) contained farmland that had high improvement to land value ratios, with one dwelling unit and lots of open land. Large parcels were considered developable in the future as City services became available and land was annexed into the City. ' Non -developable parcels may include: park land, golf courses, or parcels with stormwater detention basins. 2 o A discount factor of 50%8 for development on land with sensitive features was applied, based on availability of developable land due to natural constraints. 2. Applied plan or zoning designations to buildable lands. City Analysis: • Based on the applicable zone, staff assigned density (DU's/acre) to each buildable residentially - zoned parcel within the City limits. • Staff determined the number of dwelling units that can be achieved for residentially -zoned parcels. o An efficiency factor of 70%9 was applied to each residential lot to determine the net developable acreage. ■ The efficiency factor accounted for additional unknown development factors such as streets, stormwater management areas, easements, open space, etc. o Staff then divided the estimated developable acreage (efficiency factor already applied) by the applicable maximum density to determine the number of dwelling units likely to be developed. • Staff determined the building square footage that could be achieved for non -residentially zoned parcels. o An efficiency factor of 80%10 was applied to each Riverfront Crossings (RFC) or CB -2, CB - 5, CB -10 lot to determine the appropriate building to land ratio. ■ The analysis assumed that parcels within the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan area will all be rezoned to the prescribed RFC zoning from the Plan. ■ Base heights for all RFC zoned parcels were applicable. No bonus heights were assumed in the analysis. ■ The analysis assumed that the ground floor of each RFC, CB -2, CB -5, and CB -10 zoned parcel will feature commercial uses. Residential uses were assumed on all upper floors. ■ In RFC and Central Business District zones, staff multiplied buildable acreage by the applicable number of floors allowed to determine the estimated amount of ground floor space for commercial purposes, and upper floor space for the estimated number of dwelling units." 8 The discount factor of 50% was used because it assumed, on average, that non -developable sensitive features would account for approximately half the parcel area. 9 An efficiency factor of 70% was proposed because an analysis of recent residential subdivisions found that on average, around 64% of land for each subdivision was developed for residential use. An adjusted average of 70% was proposed to conform with efficiency factors seen in peer literature, noting that efficiency factors around 70% were appropriate for urban settings. 10 Staff chose an efficiency factor of 80% for the RFC and CB -2, CB -5, and CB -10 zones based on recent building coverage to lot area buildout patterns in these zones. 11 Based on estimates staff has used for open space calculations in RFC zones, staff assigned a density 71 dwelling units per acre, or 1 dwelling unit per 614 square feet of space. o An efficiency factor of 25%12 was applied to Research Park, Commercial, and Industrial zones13 to determine the appropriate building to land ratio. o Staff then multiplied buildable acreage by the applicable FAR (Floor Area Ratio) for Research Park, Commercial, and Industrial zones to determine the estimated amount of commercial/industrial floor space." Growth Area Analysis: • Based on the prescribed land use designation of the Comprehensive and District Plans, staff assigned an appropriate density to each residentially-designated15 parcel in the Growth Area. Staff then assigned land use designations for all commercial, industrial, and office/research park parcels in the Growth Area. • Staff determined the number of dwelling units that can be achieved for each parcel designated for Residential uses. o An efficiency factor for 70% was applied to each residentially designated parcel to determine the net developable acreage. ■ The efficiency factor accounted for additional unknown development factors such as streets, stormwater management areas, easements, open space, etc. o Staff then multiplied the applicable maximum density by the estimated developable acreage (efficiency and sensitive area factors already applied) to determine the number of dwelling units likely to be developed. • Staff determined the building square footage that can be achieved for each parcel designated for Commercial, Industrial, or Office Park uses. o An efficiency factor of 25% was applied to each parcel designated for Commercial, Industrial, or Office Park uses to determine the appropriate building to land ratio. o Staff then multiplied the buildable acreage by the applicable FAR (Floor Area Ratio) to determine the estimated amount of commercial/industrial/office park floor space16 3. Estimated the residential and employment populations at buildout. City and Growth Area: • Staff applied the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County's population projection of 2.32 persons per dwelling17 unit to each potential residential dwelling unit. • Staff then estimated employment derived from projected commercial/industrial/office park building square footage. 12 Staff chose an efficiency factor of 25% for Commercial and Industrial zones based on recent building coverage to lot area buildout patterns in these zones. 13 Excluded RFC, CB -2, C13-5, and CB -10 zones. 14 A FAR of 1.0 was used for commercial and industrial properties located in the current fringe area. FAR's between 1.0 and 3.0 were used for commercial and industrial properties in the city, depending on the zone. 11 The City does not have a North Corridor plan or land use designations, so parcels in the North Corridor were designated a density of 1 dwelling unit per acre based on the current development in the area. 16 A FAR of 1.0 was used for commercial and industrial properties located in the current growth area based on current development patterns. "The population projection estimate was obtained from the Johnson County MPO's Future Forward, Long Range Transportation Plan 2017-2045, adopted May 2017. The figure of 2.32 persons per household unit is an estimate for Iowa City that is the projected household unit density. 4 o The estimates used were compiled by the USGBC (United States Green Building Council) from 2008 https://www. usgbc.org/d rupal/legacy/usgbc/docs/Archive/General/Docs4111. pdf. o The following job per square foot estimates were used, based off of the USGBC standards: ■ Industrial — 1 job for every 500 sq. ft. ■ Office/Research Park —1 job for every 304 sq. ft. ■ Commercial — 1 job for every 383 sq. ft. • Neighborhood Retail/Commercial — 1 job for every 588 sq. ft. ■ Ag/Industrial —1 job for every 549 sq. ft. 1s An aerial view of the eastern edge of Iowa City. An important goal of Iowa City's Comprehen- sive Plan is to manage urban growth by en- couraging compact and contiguous develop- ment. Contiguous development is more effi- cient since building on land that is adjacent to existing development and connecting into existing road and utility networks is cost and resource efficient and ensures that neighbor- hoods are not isolated. This saves money for developers, property owners, and taxpayers. Attachment G. Update to the Comprehensive Plan If the annexation is for residential development that will result in the creation of ten (10) or more new housing units, the development will support the City's goal of creating and maintaining the supply of af- fordable housing. Such support shall be based on providing affordable units equal to 10% of the total units in the annexed area with an assurance of long term affordability, preferably for a term of not less than 20 years. Income targets shall be consistent with the City's existing program requirements. How the development provides such support will vary depending on the particular circumstances of annexation, and may include, but is not limited to, transfer of lots/units to the City or an affordable housing provider; fee -in -lieu paid to the City's affordable housing fund; and/or participation in a state or federal housing program. In determining the most desirable option, preference shall be weighted toward options that help achieve better socio-economic balance among Iowa City neighborhoods and among schools in the Iowa City Community School District. An agreement committing the Owner/Developer to the affordable housing obligation, shall be required prior to annexation, and shall be further memorialized, if necessary, in a conditional zoning agreement. Fringe Area Agreement State enabling legislation permits a city to regulate the subdivision of land within two miles of the City's corporate boundaries. This area is known as the urban fringe area. Counties that enact ordinances control the land uses permitted in this same area through zoning. In the interest of managing growth and development in Iowa City's two-mile fringe area in a mutually ac- ceptable manner, Johnson County and Iowa City have agreed on the appropriate land uses and standards for development. As Johnson County and Iowa City consider rezoning, subdivision, County future land use map amendment, and certain site plan applications, considers rezoning applications and Iowa City reviews subdivisions, their decisions will be governed by the Iowa City/Johnson County Fringe Area Policy Agreement. The Agreement focuses exurban development in the area north of Iowa City, encourages development in Iowa City's growth area, and looks to achieve only upon annexation, and provides some incentive for the preservation of open space and environmentally sensitive features. The agreement has been working well to achieve the goals of both the City and County. It will be reviewed every five years, with an effective date of ten years. Although it will be reviewed periodically for updates, the implementation of the Fringe Area Agreement will likely continue without significant changes. [See Fringe Area Map in the appendix to this document.] MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 7, 2021 —7:00 PM FORMAL MEETING THE CENTER — ASSEMBLY ROOM FINAL MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Maria Padron, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Nolte STAFF PRESENT: Ray Heitner, Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 5-0 (Hensch recused) the Commission recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan on an update to the Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends setting public hearing for October 21, 2021 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Public/Private Open Space and to change the Southwest District Plan text and future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Vegetative Noise/Sight Buffer for approximately 79 acres of property located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: CASE NO. CPA21-0003: A public hearing on a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan on an update to the Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. Because of his employment with Johnson County, Hensch recused himself from this item. Heitner began the staff report by thanking the Commission for their patience as the City and County have worked together to create an updated fringe area policy agreement. City staff has been working on this for about three years now and a lot of that time was spent doing the analytical groundwork for whether the City's growth area boundary was sufficient to meet Planning and Zoning Commission October 7, 2021 Page 2 of 11 projected demand. So after a lot of collaboration with County planning staff this proposal was mutually agreed upon as being in the best interest for the City and the County. Heitner showed a map of the proposed fringe area, noting the extent of the fringe area currently and the few spots where they are noting the growth area. Regarding background on the fringe area agreements, the existing agreement has been in place since 2006 and is primarily used as policy direction for the City and County for land use development applications such as rezonings, subdivisions and annexations. There is a law within the State Code of Iowa that allows for cities to establish a two mile extra territorial area known as the fringe area beyond city boundaries for the purpose of reviewing and approving subdivisions. The main reason for an update now is there have been amendments to the City and County Comprehensive Plans that have resulted in some land use designations within those plans that doesn't necessarily mesh with the existing agreement. With the proposed agreement, the biggest structural change of the agreement is it's much more process oriented in its direction, rather than land use/geographically focused like the existing agreements. This is important as the City or County will review certain development applications as they come forth within the fringe area and are largely dependent on whether those applications take place within the City's growth area or outside of the growth area. The City and County worked toward this agreement to grant some additional review authority to the City for items that fall within the growth area, while ceding some control to the County for items outside of the growth area. There are a few exceptions to this, which they've termed as subareas which have some more specific land use policy direction. The first subarea is located just southwest of Highway 1 and 218 except for a rectangular strip to the west where it's envisioned that there'll be an extension of Highway 965. The rationale for inclusion of this subarea has to do with the existing direction from the County Comprehensive Plan showing commercial and intensive commercial uses in a portion of this subarea and it's been a long- standing policy that commercial uses are directed toward the City so that was one impetus for including this area. In addition, some projected residential growth the City is envisioned to occur to the north of Highway 1 upon provision of sewer infrastructure. Therefore, that made this an appealing area to put into the growth area. Heitner noted with that inclusion into the growth area, development for the area outlined in green on the map (just outside of the subarea, but still in the growth area) will be allowed to conform to future land use within the County's Comprehensive Plan but abide by the City's urban design standards. The second subarea is just south of Highway 218 and Riverside Drive, there's some commercial interest in this area like subarea one so that's one reason for including it in the growth area as well as devoting this subarea policy to it. Also, like subarea one staff views this as a new gateway into the City and also like subarea one development may be allowed with the County's Comprehensive Plan, which identifies commercial growth, but subdivisions will be required to conform to the City's urban design standards. The third subarea is located north of Highway 6 on both sides of Taft Avenue SE. This was included as a possible extension of the City's industrial park if that ever becomes fully occupied. In the interim, it's expected that this land will remain open space or agricultural until annexed by the City. Subarea four is in the northeast side of the City at the intersection area of Herbert Hoover Planning and Zoning Commission October 7, 2021 Page 3 of 11 Highway and 1-80. This area is again looked at as another possible prominent gateway into the City for inclusion into the growth boundary. The hatched portion in blue diagonal hashing on the map is what the City and County have agreed upon as appropriate for highway commercial development. Agricultural uses are suggested in the remaining balance of the subarea. Lastly, subarea five is located north of 1-80, east of Highway 1 at the Rapid Creek Road NE intersection. This subarea shall remain as open space until annexed by the City. There is a portion on the east side that's already developed. Heitner noted this area had started as a much larger subarea and then through some discussion with the County was shrunk down. It effectively takes the growth boundary to the southern boundary of Rapid Creek Road instead of splitting the existing lot lines like it does now. Heitner explained the urban design standards are effectively the City's subdivision regulations and any subdivision development that takes place within the growth area will have to abide by those urban design standards to ensure that development can be adapted to City infrastructure upon annexation. The urban design standards can contain more specific direction with respect to streets and circulation, layout of blocks, length of streets, stormwater drainage, how utilities are connected and so on. There is a provision within the existing agreement that was carried over to the proposed agreement regarding urban design standard development within the growth area. Generally, the City would require that construction drawings for subdivisions within the growth area must include detail regarding how the sewer treatment systems or common wells can adapt to City infrastructure upon annexation. Regarding major changes, Heitner provided a higher-level overview as the staff memo provided in the agenda packed went into more detail. The existing agreement outlines a few development standards with respect to avoiding wetland and floodplain conflicts, meeting County minimum standards for water and wastewater provision, as well as clustering developments to preserve typically 50% of land as open space. The proposed agreement is a bit more process oriented in terms of how the City or County reviews development applications inside or outside the growth area. With each the City and County's Comprehensive Plans essentially acting as the driving vehicle for review of those applications and staff was comfortable deleting the development standards based on the direction within the City and County Comprehensive Plans incorporating those goals that are emphasized in the existing agreement. Right now the existing agreement has fringe areas A, B and C, they are proposing removal of areas A, B and C and they found there wasn't a great deal of specific land use guidance in those existing areas and there was also a good amount of repetition of policy direction. Staff feels that the City's Comprehensive Plan and County's Comprehensive Plan will accomplish those development goals in a better light. In addition, the specific direction that they're suggesting is to provide for those identified subareas. One new thing to the agreement that the existing agreement doesn't really address are County Future Land Use Map amendments and this is an area where they are recommending a bit more involvement from the City with respect to Future Land Use Map amendments that happen within the growth area in particular. Staff is proposing that those be reviewed by this Commission and City Council with a recommendation to the County when they happen within the growth area and then outside of the growth area City staff would formulate an opinion to the County. Heitner stated there is a specific window with which the County receives Future Land Use Map amendments, it's about a two-month window over the summer every year. Regarding rezonings this Commission and the Council review rezonings throughout the fringe Planning and Zoning Commission October 7, 2021 Page 4 of 11 area with a recommendation ultimately to the County. With the new proposal they're proposing that is still the practice within the growth area but outside of the growth area there would be no City review on rezonings, just County approval, the City would be informed of any applications just for information purposes. For preliminary plats that involve less than three lots, those are only reviewed and approved by the County right now, this proposal is that the City and County P&Z Commissions and Council and the Board of Supervisors review and approve all the subdivisions within the growth area. The County only would review and approve those outside the growth area. For plats consisting of three lots or more, through the existing agreement the City and County both review those and that would be the same within the growth area under the new proposal. However, outside of the growth area the City would do an administrative review based on a few selected standards within the rural design standards, and then there would also be County review approval. Heitner noted the one thing they wanted to do with this updated agreement is add a bit more clarity to how site plans are reviewed. Right now, they're subject to review by both the City and County, with each jurisdiction's review procedures. In the proposed agreement for site plans in the growth area, there would be a City administrative review that would be done to a few components of the City's site plan review criteria. For site plans greater than two acres outside of the growth area, those would only be reviewed by the County. The existing agreement keeps that threshold of site plan review at two acres so they thought it made sense to just keep that threshold as well. Heitner reiterated staff conducted a thorough build out analysis to determine if and how much the existing growth boundary needed to be adjusted based on population and employment increases. Using linear population increase estimates, the Johnson County MPO projects about 22,000 new residents and 23,000 new jobs from their master plan from 2017 to 2045. Heitner noted the biggest takeaway from that build out analysis was that if they were to assume a high density build out of available land within the City limits and within the projected growth areas, there would be ample room to accommodate the anticipated new growth in residents and jobs. However, Heitner noted that the high density build out estimate does rely pretty heavily on continued redevelopment of the Riverfront Crossings area. Despite the analysis results, there were a few areas that City staff looked at as making sense for growth area expansion. One is areas that would act as potential future gateways into the City, that have prime highway adjacency and access, potential suitable for commercial or industrial use. Another area for growth is adjacent to planned residential expansion already within the growth area. Heitner stated there are five areas for growth area inclusion. The first expansion area is the general location of Highway 1, just southwest of Highway 218 and this expansion area does include some area north of Highway 1. The Johnson County future land use designation envisioned residential land use, commercial, and intensive commercial in the area. The subarea Heitner spoke about earlier is included in this area, just south of Highway 1, with the intent of following the land use policy from the County's Comprehensive Plan. The area north of Highway 1 would follow the guidance of the City's Comprehensive Plan and one of the primary reasons they are making that distinction is the area just north of there is already within the City's growth area and they suspect that upon sewer provision that area will develop first. They anticipate it might be several years, maybe decades, before that sequential development or annexation process gets south of Highway 1 so in collaborating with the County on this staff is comfortable with allowing that area south of Highway 1 to develop to the County's Comprehensive Plan and development standards. But the City wanted the area north of Highway 1 to develop to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Planning and Zoning Commission October 7, 2021 Page 5 of 11 The second expansion area for that area near Herbert Hoover Highway. This is a suitable area for expansion because of highway adjacency, there being City water and sewer just to the east of this property so it's immediately suitable expansion area. Expansion area three is additional land should it ever be needed for industrial park expansion. Expansion area four is the area at Herbert Hoover Highway and 1-80, the County's future land use map indicates these areas appropriate for commercial developments because highway adjacency and continuing the eastward development that is already happening, especially relative to the Taft Avenue corridor which will eventually be developed to the existing growth area boundary. Staff suspects as that area continues to develop there will be more of a focus on potential commercial developments. The last expansion area is that little sliver just south of Rapid Creek Road NE and expanding the growth area to the Rapid Creek Road NE boundary. Heitner noted there is some Comprehensive Plan analysis that is included with this amendment to the fringe area agreement as it is a component of the Comprehensive Plan. First that circumstances have changed and/or additional information or factors have come to light such that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. Heitner noted again that both the City and County Comprehensive Plans have been updated since the existing agreement was enacted in 2006. With the most recent update to the County Comprehensive Plan being in 2018, which then created some policy conflicts. There are some new infrastructure projects that were not accounted for in the 2006 agreements such as improvements to Taft Avenue corridor and that Abbey Lane trunk sewer which will allow for residential development in the southwest district of the City. Second point being that the proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies and/or provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, including any district plans or other amendments thereto. Heitner stated district plans have evolved over the last several years to include more detailed neighborhood design. Staff thinks in some ways this works as favorable for letting the Comprehensive Plan be the guiding policy document for these development applications within the growth area. In addition, there are a couple areas within the growth area, mainly in the southwest district and possibly in the northeast district, where the City would wish to implement form -based zones and standards from the South District. Lastly, staff really wanted to make a concerted effort to only expand the growth areas where necessary, achieving some larger overall goals of the Comprehensive Plan to encourage compact, efficient and contiguous development. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed fringe area policy agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. Regarding next steps, the County is reviewing this as well, the County Planning and Zoning Commission will consider this agreement at their meeting on October 11 and the Board of Supervisors have set a public hearing to review this agreement on October 14. Staff has received in writing a letter objecting to renew the existing agreement from the County given the progress on the proposed agreements with an expiration of the existing agreement on October 11. Pending this review, staff will request that City Council set a public hearing for November 16. Martin asked how COVID affects the numbers of the MPO build out analysis, such as when it talks about jobs, new residents and whatnot. Right now there is a large availability of jobs so is Planning and Zoning Commission October 7, 2021 Page 6 of 11 that something that they need to take into consideration because obviously things have changed. Heitner acknowledged the build on analysis was finalized pre-COVID and to his knowledge the County doesn't have any revised population projections. Martin agreed it would be hard to have those projections but perhaps there could be something noted in this new agreement that would allow for a revisit. Heitner said there is a review policy, there's language that sets aside a formal review every five years, that can be originated either by the County Board of Supervisors or the City Council. He acknowledged while they did that pretty thorough build out analysis, population changes can be pretty volatile, and he would recommend that analysis is updated fairly regularly, probably not annually, but maybe every five to 10 years. That makes sense because while they feel pretty comfortable with what they're proposing right now, in terms of capacity within the growth area, things can change pretty quickly as with COVID impacts. He noted 10 years ago nobody thought that Bozeman, Montana would be the hottest real estate market in the country, so there's all sorts of external factors that really can inflame population projection and that is why there is a mechanism where the agreement language as a whole can be revisited on a periodic basis. Hekteon added right now it says the agreement will be reviewed every five years. Martin noted early on in staff's slides they talked about all the things that are considered and they mentioned sewer on the list of things. One thing not on there, it never is, is the environmental impact. Yes there's language regarding sensitive slopes, but there's more to environment than sensitive slopes. So maybe this is the opportunity as they're dealing with so much climate change to start putting that language in about the effects of what happens and what are the studies that can be put in place as contingencies. It is important to think about how what they're doing is affecting climate change and wildlife and how that is all interconnected. Perhaps this is an appropriate time to start adding verbiage. Signs asked if there is language in the City's climate change policy document already that addresses this. Russett agreed climate action initiatives should be at the forefront of plans and ordinances and the fringe area agreement in general says that the policy direction of the City's Comprehensive Plan should be the guiding policy for the growth area so that's where they really need to have strong environmental policy language. They also need ordinances like the sensitive areas ordinance to ensure that environmental areas are protected. Similarly, the County also has a sensitive areas ordinance. The City does have a climate action plan and there are many action items in there that are related to land use and zoning, things they are working on, one of which is the form -based code. Staff is also looking at something that has been of interest to City Council which is to try to create some metric on the impacts of development on climate and see if that can be measured in some way. Padron noted when they talk about climate change they have to remember that all these organizations that focus and study sustainability, recommend that they need to be careful when they convert agricultural land into development land. One of the main concerns is because there is a food shortage worldwide because of the overpopulation. So when they talk about climate change, they also have to remember the zoning of the fringe area. Martin agreed, those are already sensitive areas, but when she also thinks about sensitive areas when someone out in the county is going to develop a new site, they have to do an archeological survey and it would make sense to have some sort of a wildlife survey or something that measures those effects. If these areas in the fringe areas become residential, commercial, or industrial how will that overtime impact those areas that aren't sensitive areas or sensitive Planning and Zoning Commission October 7, 2021 Page 7 of 11 slopes, but the other environmental impacts. If they will be redeveloping current agricultural land, they need to keep having this conversation. Russett stated if they don't think the current policies are strong enough, or if current ordinances are not strong enough, let's take a look at those. As staff has pointed out, this document is really about process and not about policy. There are some policies within the subareas, but this document is the guiding policy document for those subareas. However, if this Commission is interested in reevaluating other aspects of the plans and ordinances to address some concerns that would be appropriate. Martin asked if she would not consider that idea is a process, and not a policy even though identifying sensitive areas, and City sewer and whatnot are part of the processes. Russett replied this document is at a generally high level and if in the City's growth area development must follow the City's Comprehensive Plan and urban design standards. So if they don't like the direction provided by the Comprehensive Plan, or don't like the urban design standards, or don't think the sensitive areas ordinance is strong enough that needs to be reevaluated. Signs noted a lot of the changes were around putting in the process and taking the policy piece out of this document and referencing the County and City Comprehensive Plans. He noted if this document focuses on process, then they don't have to wait for changes, if the City makes changes in a Plan, they don't have to wait for those to update this. Processes are this and the community decides what they want the policies to be. Craig asked what happens when the fringe area of two cities abut each other, and overlap, do they just like split it down the middle. Russett imagines there'd be more negotiations. Signs recalls North Liberty and Coralville having a battle here recently and it had to go to a State commission who ultimately made the decision. Tiffin and North Liberty also got into litigation. But that is about annexation not fringe area. Hekteon stated if it's an account of municipalities fringe area within the County. The County is negotiating a 28e agreement with Iowa City, presumably, they have one with Coralville and presumably acting in good faith, so they shouldn't enter into an agreement that really shows two fringe areas overlapping. Craig asked specifically in area one, she don't quite understand why it seems like they're saying two things about it, which is they really want to have more control on the north side of the highway there and yet at the same time the commercial area is on the south side and the City doesn't really want commercial development in the county area so why not include the commercial area in the north section. Russett stated that area is the result of many conversations with County planners. They have interests and the City has interests as well and this is the center balance position that they came to. The City ultimately said that it's okay for the area south of Highway 1 to develop in compliance with the County's Comprehensive Plan if it was included in the growth area and subject to the City's urban design standards. What that means is anytime there's a subdivision in any part of this area, they need to meet the City's subdivision standards which are pretty high standards in terms of requirements of infrastructure that would be required of any property owner. Craig noted commercial development has grown, she lived south of town 45 years ago and there were just a couple little things there and now it's gotten bigger. Another question is for a couple of these areas, some language is used, for instance in area five, where it talks about the buffer between the residential and the commercial office, and that the open space is ag land, and that Planning and Zoning Commission October 7, 2021 Page 8of11 needs to be kept the way. How can they dictate that it's kept the way, that is will stay ag land. Townsend said it will be ag land until annexed into the City. Craig questioned if it's not annexed for 20 years, then the person that owns that piece of property can't do anything with it except grow stuff. Russett said they could develop under the provisions the current County zoning would allow. The County does have rezoning authority, but the City would have to review it and provide a recommendation and then when it came to subdividing it, they would have to develop to the City's urban design standards. Townsend asked about the major changes to the development standards and all those things taken out. The existing agreement had emphasis on avoiding wetlands, floodplains and conflicts and that whole list and so then in the proposed amendment they are not concerned about that. Heitner said it's not that they're not concerned about those things they just feel that most of those things are already covered in the City and County Comprehensive Plans as larger goals within those plans. The clustering development to preserve open space is something that's in the existing agreement but what they would really look to there is more of the higher level of detail and use the district plans for that guidance. Hekteon noted the current agreement had a lot more policy statements but as they have seen recently with the applications over the past two years is the County has gone in a different direction with their zoning and comprehensive plans. So with this agreement they are giving back each governmental body the authority to make their own policy decisions within the framework of review that this agreement is creating. Padron asked regarding reviewing this every five years if they wanted to change that to three years could the Commission do that because five years right now seems like a very long time. Hekteon replied if the Commission wants to recommend that change to the agreement, they can. Okay. Signs asked for an explanation on the difference between the subareas and the expansion areas, what is the difference. Heitner said with the subareas they're talking about a policy focus within those areas, what specific policy interpretations they would have for those areas. The expansion areas are just areas where they're looking to expand the growth area and supplying the rationale for why they're looking to expand those areas. Russett added all those subareas are within the proposed growth areas. For the most part in the growth areas it's the City's Comprehensive Plan that guides development but in a few of those subareas it's the County's Comprehensive Plan. Signs opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Signs closed the public hearing. Craig moved to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan on an update to the Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. Martin seconded the motion. Signs really likes this concept of separating the policy and the process because the Planning and Zoning Commission October 7, 2021 Page 9 of 11 Comprehensive Plans are updated fairly often. It will be good to use the neighborhood plans that are in the City and County Comprehensive Plans to make those policy decisions. He did find it interesting about the population growth estimates, the emphasis on the word high density, he brings this up because as he understands it those numbers rely on the fact that they're going to have some high-density growth. His observation is this community doesn't have the stomach for a lot of high-density growth and imagines those numbers are probably going to come in at a lesser degree. Padron agrees with the separation of policy and process, especially since it was noted that the two governments were having some disagreements so that would be a good way to fix it. The only thing that she is concerned about is the five-year review and would like to see it a little bit shorter. Craig is concerned while three years would be great, is it doable and practical. Staff spend many years on this. Russett noted three years is not that much time for staff and it would take away staff time on other projects, like district plan updates or other things like that. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0 (Hensch recused) CASE NO. CPA21-0002: Location: SW corner of Slothower Road and IWV Road A request to set a public hearing for October 21, 2021 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Public/Private Open Space and to change the Southwest District Plan text and future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Vegetative Noise/Sight Buffer for approximately 79 acres of property located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. Hensch rejoined the meeting for this item. Russett noted the motion to approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment did not pass at the last meeting so the applicant came back with some changes and would like to re -present it to the Commission. Signs moved to set a public hearing for October 21, 2021 on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Public/Private Open Space and to change the Southwest District Plan text and future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Vegetative Noise/Sight Buffer for approximately 79 acres of property located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. Townsend seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 16,2021: Proposed Fringe Area Agreement Inside the City's Growth Area Outside the City's Growth Area Latepi ndouts Distributed ill to f4JnI /(_ i(42- i( (Date) Review Actions Review Actions Iowa City Staff: Iowa City P&Z: Iowa Citv CC: jJ0C0 Staff: JOCO P&Z: JOCO BIDS: Iowa City Staff: Iowa City P&Z: F IJOCO Staff: JOCO P&Z: JOCO BIDS: Future Land Use Map INA Amendments: Recommend Recommend Recommend Recommend Recommend Final Approval Staff opinion submitted to JC P&Z NA Recommend Recommend Final Approval Rezonings: Recommend Recommend Recommend Recommend Recommend Final Approval Notified of cases by County NA NA Recommend Recommend IFinalApproval Preliminary Plats (3 or More Lots): Recommend Recommend Approval or Denial Recommend Recommend Final Approval Comment NA NA Recommend Recommend Final Approval Preliminary Plats (Less than 3 Lots): Recommend Notified of cases by Recommend Approval or Denial Recommend Recommend Final Approval NA NA NA Recommend Recommend Final Approval Final Plats: County. NA NA Recommend NA Final Approval Notified of cases by County NA NA Recommend NA Final Approval Combined Preliminary & Final Plats: Recommend Recommend Approval or Denial Recommend Recommend Final Approval Comment NA NA Recommend Recommend Final Approval Site Plans (Greater than 2 acres): Comment NA NA Final Approval NA NA NA NA NA Final Approval NA NA Annexations: Recommend Recommend Final Approval Comment INA Comment Recommend Recommend Final Approval Comment NA Comment Latepi ndouts Distributed ill to f4JnI /(_ i(42- i( (Date) • Your28E Agreement has been filed. • Please print your filed 28E Agreement for your records. (CBck Here)(128EJSearahlFinetPDFOoaumentIM514197) • Thank you for using the online li ng system. • Return to My Agreements (128ENVAtimments) Iowa Sscrretery of State FILED 321 East 12th Street Filing Data /1/2 212 021 09:58 AM Des Moines, IA 50318 Filing Number: M514197 eos.lovaa.9ov ¢*sa aF,o �'4M OFy 28E Agreement Full Legal Name Organization Type County. Penyi Johnson County County Johnson Pany 2 City or Iowa CRY City Johnson PeNdpants 550 -Planning Seams type To provide for orderly growth and development within fine Cfly(County FdngeArea Purpose Indeflnits Ouradan I c t O...- Resolution-10.14.21.03-Iowa-Ory-Fdnge-Area-Agreament4adumd.pdf (Alploadal rYjM3OXdWW13ZEVOSXNONDkvby84vHBiMIZOR3EwdkhnYUxIMTZMeU1 UdOSrSWpFCT9yTGFONUSyZGxaRO1LUFINM3JRNmpf33jdIL3Jo22VML3M4YmcgPO%30%: Upload Seennad Agremwx Nancy Conlnd First Name Rockensles Contact Let Name Secretary II Job Title Flaming Development& Sustainablilty Departmanl nmokens@tahnammuntykrwa.gov Fmell Addren 1 3193566083 Phone Number First Floor • Luras Building 321 E. 12th St Des Molnes, IA 50319 Contact Person: (Optional) My Agreements (128EMMyAgreenents) Webeita soe.fowa.gov (htbowifsoa.lowa.govfi Ema9: ftftilisoa.lowa.gov (mallto:help@sos.iowa.gov) Phone: 1.888-767.8683 (tef:1.888.76741883) Page 1 of 23 Doo ID: 031700440023 Type: GEN Kind: AGREEMENT Recorded: it/0/2021 at 08:0:43 FM Fee Amt: $0.00 Page i of 23 Johnson county Iowa Nim Painter eonntV Recorder RESOLUTION NO. 1c) -14-;Z1- v3 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FRINGE AREA POLICY AGREEMENT BETWEEN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA AND THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA WHEREAS, Chapter 28E of the Iowa Code (2021) enables two or more local governments to enter into agreements to cooperate for their mutual advantage; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code Section 354.9 gives the City and the County the authority to establish, by agreement, the standards and conditions applied by a city or county for review and approval of a county subdivision, and other development applications to which such an agreement may be addressed; and WIJEREAS, pursuant to these powers; the City and County did enter into a 28E Agreement in October 2006 pertaining to the City / County Fringe Area, which has not been renewed as of October 12, 2021; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the County and the City to update the applicable policies for orderly growth and development within the City / County Fringe Area and, accordingly, the planning and development staff of both the County and the City have developed a draft new agreement to supersede and replace the October 2006 fringe area agreement; and WHEREAS, the Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission, following a public meeting on September 13, 2021, has reviewed this drab new fringe area policy agreement, filed its report, and recommended that said agreement be approved; and WHEREAS, having received the report and recommendation of the Johnson County Planting and Zoning Commission, conducted a public hearing an October 14, 2021, considered the information and objections presented at said hearing, if any, and otherwise informed itself of the particulars of the proposed Fringe Area Policy Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA: 1. That the Johnson County Board of Supervisors hereby accepts and agrees to the Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. That the Chairperson be authorized and directed to sign said Fringe Area Policy Agreement and arrange for its filing with the Iowa Secretary of State as required by Iowa Code Sec. 28E.5 upon full execution by the parties. It was moved by is ree+rl and seconded by Green - boggjass the Resolution be adopted this "* day of 4 efabe r 12021, all Call: Green Green -Douglass Heiden- !' Forter� Sullivan �l Ar— Pa Heiden, Chairperson Board o��Sit etvisors ,oil - Date t� ATTEST: _ Travis Weipert, Auditor Johnson County, Iowa Page 2 of 23 Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner, 4101 E. Washington St, Iowa City. IA RESOLUTION NO. 21-285 Resolution to amend the Comprehensive Plan and approve a 28E Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. (CPA21-0003) Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan serves as a land -use planning guide by illustrating and describing the location and configuration of appropriate land uses throughout the City, provides notification to the public regarding intended uses of land; and illustrates the long-range growth area limit for the City; and Whereas, if circumstances change and/or additional information or factors come to light, a change to the Comprehensive Plan may be in the public interest; and Whereas, circumstances have changed, including the adoption of the Johnson County Comprehensive Plan in 2018, new City public infrastructure projects at the periphery of the city that will accommodate new growth, and an interest in updating the City's land use plans to ensure a diversity of lousing types and highly interconnected street networks through form -based planning principles; and Whereas, Chapter 354, Code of Iowa (2021) allows the City of Iowa City to establish an extraterritorial area, known as the fringe area, within two miles of the city boundaries for the purpose of reviewing and approving subdivisions; and Whereas, Chapter 354, Cede of Iowa (2021) further grants the City the authority to require that subdivisions within the fringe area edhere to the City's subdivision standards and conditions, unless the City establishes alternative standards and conditions for review and approval of subdivisions through a 28E agreement between the City and the County; and Whereas, Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa (2021) enables We or more local government to enter into agreements to cooperate for their mutual advantage; and Whereas, pursuant to these powers, the City and County entered into a Fringe Area Policy Agreement in 2008 (Resolution No. 06-318) governing the development of land within the extraterritorial area of Iowa City; and Whereas, it is in the interest of the County and the City to establish policies for the orderly growth and development within the City Fringe Area through an updated agreement; and Whereas, such policies are necessary to more effectively and economically provide services for future ,growth and development and to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this amendment at its meeting on October 7, 2021 and determined that circumstances changed to the extent that an amendment to the comprehensive plan is warranted and the proposed 28E Agreement is compatible with other policies or provisions of the comprehensive plan. Now, Therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that: 1. It is in the public interest to update the Comprehensive Plan to respond to changes in circumstances in the City. Page 3 of 23 Resolution No. 21-285 Page 2 2. The Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as set forth in Appendix 1, attached and inoorporated herein by this reference. 1 The City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa hereby accepts and agrees to the 28E Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City as set forth in Appendix 2, attached and incorporated herein by this reference. 4, The Mayor Is hereby auftfted to sign and the City Clerk to attest to the 28E agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City (Appendix 2) establishing land use policies for the two-mile extraterritorial jurisdiction of Iowa City, for recordation as provided by law upon execution by Johnson County. S. Resolution No. 06-318 is hereby rescinded. Page 4 of 23 Resolution No. 21-285 Page ._ 3 It was moved by Thomas _ and seconded by Taylor the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Bergus x Mims x Salih x Taylor x Teague x Thomas x Weiner 1s An aerial view of the eastern edge of Iowa City. An important goal of Iowa City's Comprehen- sive Plan is to manage urban growth by en- couraging compact and contiguous develop- ment. Contiguous development is more effi- cient since building on land that is adjacent to existing development and connecting into existing road and utility networks is cost and resource efficient and ensures that neighbor- hoods are not isolated. This saves money for developers, property owners, and taxpayers. Appendix 1 If the annexation is for residential development that will result in the creation of ten (10) or more new housing units, the development will support the City's goal of creating and maintaining the supply of af- fordable housing. Such support shall be based on providing affordable units equal to 10% of the total units in the annexed area with an assurance of long term affordability, preferably for a term of not less than 20 years. Income targets shall be consistent with the City's existing program requirements. How the development provides such support will vary depending on the particular circumstances of annexation, and may include, but is not limited to, transfer of lots/units to the City or an affordable housing provider; fee -in -lieu paid to the City's affordable housing fund; and/or participation in a state or federal housing program. In determining the most desirable option, preference shall be weighted toward options that help achieve better socio-economic balance among Iowa City neighborhoods and among schools in the Iowa City Community School District. An agreement committing the Owner/Developer to the affordable housing obligation, shall be required prior to annexation, and shall be further memorialized, if necessary, in a conditional zoning agreement. Fringe Area Agreement State enabling legislation permits a city to regulate the subdivision of land within two miles of the City's corporate boundaries. This area is known as the urban fringe area. Counties that enact ordinances control the land uses permitted in this same area through zoning. In the interest of managing growth and development in Iowa City's two-mile fringe area in a mutually ac-ceptable manner, Johnson County and Iowa City negotiated a Fringe Area Agreement. This Agreement sets forth the appropriate land uses and standards for development, including County land use map amendments, rezonings and subdivisions. have agreed on the appropriate land uses and standards for development. As Johnson County and Iowa City consider rezoning, subdivision, County future land use map amendment, and certain site plan applications, considers rezoning applications and Iowa City reviews subdivisions, their decisions will be governed by the Iowa City/Johnson County Fringe Area Policy Agreement. The Fringe Area Agreement enables both the City and the County to cooperate for their mutual benefit through coordinated land use planning. Such policies are necessary to more effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development, and to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features. The Agreement reflects the City's development strategy of expanding the City's corporate boundary only as necessary. It serves this Comprehensive Plan's goal to encourage compact, efficient development that is contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods. By guiding new peripheral development in the City's Growth Area, the Fringe Area Agreement discourages sprawl and preserves prime farmland and ensures that development can be adapted to City infrastructure upon annexation. Growth and the Environment Iowa City's vision for the future includes environmental protection as a basic tenet. This includes strong community support for the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO). Growth and development should be man -aged such that the environmental quality of the community is not sacrificed. Measures should be taken in all private and public projects to ensure that any impacts on regulated environmental features are mini-mized. The City's Sensitive Areas Inventory identifies the general location of woodlands, wetlands, regulated slopes, hydric soils, prairie remnants, stream corridors, and archaeological sites (See the appendix). Based on the information provided in the inventory, an ordinance was adopted in 1995 to provide protec-tions for the identified environmentally sensitive areas. The ordinance requires consideration of environ -mental features during the development process and encourages construction that respects and protects natural areas. As the City continues to grow and redevelop, natural areas that contribute to the health and character of the city will be protected. The City should encourage subdivisions that not only preserve en-vironmental areas but that incorporate them as assets in the overall development as private or public open space. 19 _) l L—�s I � � L �� Mests elm � .o \ • . • _ ...Z" N, €_ �r I _ �� I`n- ll�l a' - IM -1 ~ — . _ a J� f I ,� k Y•kY'1 I ��I i6 ] �.. !eJll ` • - .,. i ..� r r - '� i Iins II • - u MlxpOK� I� � I I r I r AL — — — — — — — — — — — Rural Residential / I I Conservation Design t 2-8 DU/A Intensive Commercial 8-16 DU/A O Office Commercial - 16-24 DU/A General Commercial - 25+DU/A Office Research Devel. Center Future Land Use, Iowa City ® Mixed Use General Industrial Based on Planning Districts - Neighborhood Center Public/Semi-Public - General Commercial Public/Private Open Space — — City Limits - Highway Commercial Water Feature City Growth Area (Resolution 21-___) Appendix 2 Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City This agreement is entered into pursuant to Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa, by and between Johnson County, Iowa, hereinafter referred to as "County," and the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City," (together, the "Parties"). Whereas, pursuant to Iowa Code Section 354.9, the City has adopted Iowa City Ordinance 15-1-4 requiring that all subdivisions located within two (2) miles of the City's corporate boundaries shall be subject to City review and approval, except for those areas exempt from such review pursuant to the Johnson County/Iowa City fringe area agreement; and Whereas, Iowa Code Section 354.9 gives the City and the County the authority to establish, by agreement, the standards and conditions applied by a city or county for review and approval of a county subdivision; and Whereas, Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa (2021) enables two or more local governments to enter into agreements to cooperate for their mutual advantage; and Whereas, pursuant to these powers, the City and County did enter into a 28E Agreement in October 2006 pertaining to the City 1 County Fringe Area and that agreement is superseded through the execution of this 28E Agreement; and Whereas, the Johnson County 2018 Comprehensive Pian for unincorporated Johnson County adopted May 17, 2018, calls for the preparation and adoption of development plans and agreements between the County and the City; and Whereas, the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2013 and associated District Plans, as amended, provide the vision and land use policy direction for growth within and around the City; and Whereas, it is in the interest of the County and the City to establish policies for the orderly growth and development within the City 1 County Fringe Area; and Whereas, the County and the City mutually agree that such policies are necessary to more effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development and to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features. Now, therefore, the parties agree as follows: Section I. Fringe Area Development Policies A. Purpose: This Fringe Area Policy Agreement is intended to provide for orderly and efficient development patterns appropriate to the fringe area, to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and environmentally sensitive features, to direct development to areas with physical characteristics that can accommodate development, and to effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development. In light of these objectives, the City and the County examined the development capabilities of the Iowa City fringe area (i.e. that unincorporated area outside the corporate limits of the City but within two (2) miles of the existing City limits, designated the "City / County Fringe Area") and determined that development within the boundaries of the City / County Fringe Area, as shown on the Fringe Area Development Map attached to this Agreement as Appendix A and incorporated by this reference, is to occur in accordance with the development policies contained in this Agreement. Development should conform to the criteria outlined in this agreement, supplemented by the adopted Johnson County Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, and/or the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, and all City and County development regulations, as applicable. B. General Policies: The following general policies apply to development in all areas of the City / County Fringe Area, as defined in Appendix A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 1. Development Applications: Where City review, comment, or approval is required herein, an applicant shall simultaneously file a development application with the County and the City. Applicants are encouraged to coordinate with City Staff prior to filing their applications. The City may begin review of Future Land Use Map amendments outside of the City's growth area prior to County receipt of an application. 2. Prior Approval: Unless the City declines to review an application, the County Planning and Zoning Commission shall not hold a public hearing on any matter subject to City review, comment, recommendation or approval pursuant to this 28E Agreement until receipt of such review, comment or approval as described in this Agreement. 3. Official Recommendation: Official review, comment, recommendation or approval by the City shall be in writing. If the action of the Council was via resolution, a copy of the resolution shall also be included. This communication may be either electronic or hard copy. 4. Reasons for Denial: For any application that is denied by the City, the City shall provide written communication to the Board of Supervisors detailing reasons for denial. 5. City Processing: If an application has not received final disposition in accordance with the review and approval timelines set by City ordinances, the County Planning and Zoning Commission may proceed to conduct its public hearing on such application prior to receiving final comment, recommendation, or approval from the City. C. Policies within the City's Growth Area The following policies apply to development in the City's Growth Area shown in Appendix A. 'Growth and development within the City's Growth Area is guided by the land use policy direction of the either the City's Comprehensive Plan or the County's Comprehensive Plan as outlined in this Subsection and Subsection D which outlines the five identified subareas within the City's Growth Area. 1. Locagon: The City's Growth Area is adjacent to the current City corporate boundary and extends into Me County in varying degrees as shown on the attached Fringe Area Development Map (Appendix A). 2. Future Land Use Map Amendments: The City shall review applications for amendments to the County's Future Land Use Map for land within the City's Growth Area according to the following. City staff will make a recommendation on the proposed map amendment to Me Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission, who shall make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will make a final recommendation on the proposed map amendment to the County Planning and Zoning Commission. The City will use this Agreement and the City's Comprehensive Plan as policy documents to guide its recommendations. County will provide notice of the application within three business days from the County's annual fling deadline for project specific Future Land Use Map amendments. The City shall provide comment prior to the regularly scheduled August County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. In the event the City does not provide the County comments prior to the regularly scheduled August County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the City shall be deemed to have waived its right to review; however such review period may be extended upon coordination with County planning stat provided! City comment con be provided by the public hearing before the Boom of Supervisors. 3. Rezonings: The City shall review and make a recommendation to the Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission on applications for rezoning for land within the Cil Growth Area, in accordance with the following process. City stat will make a recommendation to the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission, who shall make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will make a final recommendation on the proposed rezoning to the County Planning and Zoning Commission. The City will use this Agreement and the City's Comprehensive Plan as the guiding policy documents informing rezoning recommendations. The County will use this agreement and the County's Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map as the guiding policy documents informing rezoning decisions. The County will also consider the City recommendation. 4. Subdivision Plate a. Preliminary Plate: A preliminary plat shall be required for any subdivision of land, as defined in section 354.2 of Iowa State Code, Mat divides a tract of land into three or more lots. The City will review all preliminary plats for subdivisions and divisions, as defined in section 364.2 of Iowa State Code, within the Growth Area, except for Farmstead splits, as detailed in section 8:1.6.A.7 and 8:1.6.L of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance, as amended. Preliminary plats shall be designed to conform to the City's Urban Design Standards, set forth in Iowa City Code Chapter 15 which may be amended from time to time in the City's sole discretion, as well as compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended. The City shall review and approve applications for preliminary plats of land within the City's Growth Area, in accordance with the following. City staff will review and make a recommendation to the City Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will consider a resolution to approve or deny the plat. Preliminary plats that gain approval from the City Council will be forwarded onto the County Planning and Zoning Commission. City Council approval of an application is required prior to any public hearing by the County Planning and Zoning Commission. City approval of preliminary plats is required, and I an application for preliminary plat fails to gain approval of Me City Council, the County will consider the application to be incomplete and will not consider the application. Where Me City has approved an application for preliminary plat, the County Board of Supervisors shall also approve or deny the plat. An application for a combined preliminary and final plat shall also be reviewed according to this provision. Developments which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served by package sanitary sewer treatment plant and common wells with sanitary sewer and water collection and distribution systems which are constructed to City standards and can be connected to municipal systems upon annexation. To ensure compliance with the City's Urban Design Standards, where a developer desires to install required improvements, which may become public upon annexation, the applicant shall provide detailed construction drawings and infrastructure plans to the City with the application for preliminary plat. The City will not approve the preliminary plat until said drawings and plans have been approved by the City Engineer. b. Final Plats: Applications for final plats shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. The County shall forward all final plat applications to City staff for notification purposes, but the City need not formally approve or deny any final plat applications. In the event Mat a final plat requires dedication of easements or installation of infrastructure to be owned and maintained by the City upon annexation, the County shall coordinate with City staff and the City Attorney's Office for such documents review and approval by Council. City staff will notify County staff when the approval of the necessary documents is finalized. 5. Site Plans: The City shall administratively review site plans for land greater than 2 acres. All site plans for land greater than 2 acres shall comply with 18-3-2F of the Iowa City Code of Ordinances, as amended. In addition, City staff will review said site plans against 18-3-2A, 18-3-2B, 18-3-2C, and 1832D of Me Iowa City Code of Ordinances. as amended, and provide comments for the County's consideration. City staff will provide comments to the County within twenty-one (21) working days of receipt of a completed application, in accordance with Title 18 of the Iowa City Code of Ordinances. The County Board of Supervisors shall not act on any site plan subject to City review pursuant to this 28E Agreement until receipt of such review, comment, or approval as described in this Agreement. D. Policies for Specific Subareas within the City Growth Area: Gmwth and development within the City's Growth Area is guided by the land use policy direction of the City's Comprehensive Plan with the exception of certain areas. Specifically, Mere are areas within the City's Growth Area identified as Subareas in Appendices B -F, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, where more specific policy direction applies. In addition to Sections B and C above, the following additional policies apply: 1. Subarea #1: Located north and south of Highway 1. This area may become ripe for development in the future, once Me area to the north is developed. Subarea #1 shall develop in accordance with the Future Land Use Map of the County's Comprehensive Plan as opposed to the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. Subarea #2: Located south of Highway 218 and Riverside Drive, Subarea #2 may attract commercial uses due to its highway adjacency and positioning as a southern gateway to the Iowa City area. This area shall develop in alignment with the Future Land Use Map of the County's Comprehensive Plan, as opposed to the City's Comprehensive Plan, which identifies a Commercial growth area. 3. Subarea 03: Subarea #3 is located north of Highway 6 near Taft Avenue. Once land within the City's Industrial Park is fully occupied, the land use policy vision for this area is additional commercial and industrial development following annexation into the City. Land in Subarea #3 shall remain as open space or agricultural land use until annexed by the City. 4. Subarea #4: Subarea #4 is located to the west of the Herbert Hoover Highway and 1-00 interchange. This interchange acts as an eastern gateway to the Iowa City area and contains prime interstate access. A portion of Subarea #4 is appropriate for certain commercial development and a portion should remain agricultural in nature. The map In Appendix E identifies land that shall develop in alignment with the County's Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan, which identifies this area as appropriate for Commercial and Highway Commercial land uses. For the remainder of land within this area, remnings to other canes besides Agriculture are not allowed. S. Subarea 05: Subarea #5 is located to the north of I-80, and east of Highway 1. Subarea 45 is intended to provide a buffer between non-residential uses to Me south and County Residential uses to the north. Land in Subarea #5 shall remain as open space or agricultural land use until annexed by the City. E. Policies Outslde the City's Growth Area The following policies apply to all areas within the 2 -mile fringe area that are outside Me City's Growth Area shown in Appendix A. 1. Location: Those areas Mat are outside of the Ciry's Growth Area but still located within Me Fringe Area are identified in Me Fringe Area Development Map (Appendix A). This land is not intended to the annexed into the City in the foreseeable future due to distance from the City's corporate limits and existing City infrastructure. 2. Future Land Use Map Amendments: The City shall administratively review and make a recommendation on applications for amendments to the County's Future Land Use Map in accordance with the following process. County staff shall notify City staff of any proposed amendments. City staff will submit a formal advisory opinion on any proposed changes to the County Planning and Zoning Commission. City staff will use the criteria from this Agreement and the City's Comprehensive Plan to guide its recommendations. Notwithstanding 1.B.2. above, the County's Planning and Zoning Commission may proceed to conduct a hearing and forward its recommendations to the County Board of Supervisors on applications for amendments to the County's Future Land Use Map if an advisory opinion from City staff has not been received by the time such applications are regularly scheduled for consideration by the County's Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. Rezonings: Applications for rezoning of land outside of the City's Growth Area shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. The County shall notify the City of any such rezoning application. County staff will use the County Comprehensive Plan and County Future Land Use Map as guidance for its recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. 4. Subdivision Plats a. Preliminary plats of fewer than three (3) lots: Subdivisions and divisions of land into fewer than three lots (including outlots) shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. b. Preliminary Plats of three (3) lots or more: Preliminary plats subdividing a tract of land into three or more lots (including outlots), shall conform to the City's Rural Design Standards (Appendix G). City staff will administratively review preliminary plats to the City's Rural Design Standards (Appendix G) and forward comments and recommendations to the County for consideration. For these applications, comments and recommendations from City staff must be received by the County prior to public hearing by the County Planning and Zoning Commission. An application for a combined preliminary and final plat shall also be reviewed according to this provision. c. Final Plats: Applications for final plats shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. The County shall forward all final plat applications to City staff for notification purposes, but the City need not formally approve or deny any final plat applications. In the event that a final plat requires dedication of easements or installation of public infrastructure to be owned and maintained by the City, the County shall coordinate with City Planning staff and the City Attorney's Office for such documents review and approval by Council. City staff will notify County staff when the approval of the necessary documents is finalized. 5. Site Plans: All site plans and development projects for land outside of the City's Growth Area shall solely be reviewed and approved or denied by the County. Section II. Agreement Review A. Agreement Review Period This Agreement shall be reviewed every five years. At any time between five-year reviews, either the Chair of the County Board of Supervisors or the Mayor of the City may initiate review of the policies of this Agreement by contacting the other party to this Agreement. Alternatively, either party may re -affirm the current agreement in writing, at which point both parties may agree to waive review of this agreement. Both parties to this Agreement shall consider modifications of this Agreement in good faith. B. Agreement Termination Either party may terminate this Agreement by providing written notification to the other party, accompanied by an approved resolution of the governing body directing such termination, sent by registered mail. Such termination shall be effective no earlier than ninety days after the mailing date of the notification. C. Boundary Changes Annexation of property by the City does not automatically adjust the boundaries established by this Agreement. Such boundaries, and the applicability of this Agreement to unincorporated territory of Johnson County, may only be changed or extended by modifying this Agreement by mutual agreement of the Parties. Section III. Effective Period This Agreement shall become effective upon acceptance and execution by all Parties, and shall be in effect for 10 years after the date of execution of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be automatically renewed for one five-year period unless the County or the City objects to such renewal prior to the renewal date. This Agreement may be modified or extended by the written mutual consent of both Parties. Section V. Recordation This Agreement shall be filed with the Secretary of the State of Iowa, and with the Johnson County Recorder in compliance with Chapter 28E, Code of Iowa (2021). [Signatures on the following page] Page 15 of 23 Dated this I q* day of 0 CTn 0--- , 2021. JOI, OgbpCOUNTY By. Chain arson, Board of Supervisors CountyAuditor U I q Datedthis .15th day of November 2021. CITY OF 1O A q l l ,T.11 A. Frin"Area Development Map B. Su&ea #1 C. Subarea #2 D. Subarea #3 E. Subarea #4 F. Subarea #5 G. City's Rural Design Standards 8 a AV Aft ♦ moi: _ � 1' t ' 1''-i'';I `r c .a , rpt , ♦ - , ♦ ♦ 'i♦( p'� � ' ' _i_ � I � � i � . + f3 �, ' llb rf - - - _- + J ' � -� ` � •`��'/�!/x����_''1��T f a r . T - ' .. , , 'STT y ♦ 1 Ono �; 1 •. a -y+. _ . r.�-►- T � �, ��,.� - � • . - � _yam„ area f owth Area I y'. itside Growth Area �`► `� barea _ d _ .r "4' �' — Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographies, ONES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, A1:414 D, IGN, and the GIS User Community Created by: Joshua Engelbrecht September 2021 __ _�_______________________�____ �♦ � '4i�y' • `�- `n d ® \ \ � _ ��� � ��. [ � � �� i�, 1 �� I 13 C�9E�i7 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 September 2021 ix D: Subarea #3 Iowa City Corporate Limits _ Subarea #3 Fringe Area mi Growth Area Outside Growth Area 0 0.050.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 September I j 1 1 1 I 1 � 1 lr�m hLJ Iowa City Corporate Limits _ Subarea #5 Fringe Area _ Growth Area dix F-. Subarea #5 Outside Growth Area Mlles Created by: Joshua Engelbre 0 0.0250.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 September 2021 Appendix G City Rural Design Standards A. Streets 1. Streets shall be designed for a minimum surface width of 22 feet. Curb and gutter will not be required. 2. The right-of-way for local residential streets shall be 60 feet to enable retrofit of sewer, water, and sidewalk in the future as necessary. The right-of-way for arterial, industrial, and collector streets for the developed area shall be determined by City and County planning and engineering staff. 3. The maximum street grade for local streets shall be 12%. 4. The pavement cross section for all pavements will be a 2% parabolic crown. This cross slope is equivalent to'/4-inch per foot. 5. At a minimum, the pavement slab shall be constructed of a 6" rolled stone base and a 22 -foot wide chipseal or other paved surface. 6. Minimum corner radii shall be 20 feet. 7. The minimum ditch grade shall be 1 %. In addition, it will be necessary to place a 12 - inch diameter (minimum) culvert, either reinforced concrete pipe or corrugated metal pipe, through all drive approaches constructed over a drainage ditch. The exact size of pipe required will be a function of the area to be drained. 8. Drive approaches shall be hard surfaced within the right-of-way. B. Water Distribution System 1. Well(s) shall conform to the requirements of the Johnson County Health Department and the distribution system, if installed, (water main) shall be either ductile iron pipe (DIP) or poly vinyl chloride (PVC) pipe, - and conform with Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) Standard Specifications. 2. It shall be the responsibility of the developer's engineer to establish a fire rating for the area being developed, and to identify any infrastructure being constructed (or other means anticipated) for the purpose of fire protection. Prior to the plat approval, there shall be a letter from the appropriate Fire Protection District approving the proposed fire protection measures based on current practices. 3. Connection to the City of Iowa City Water Distribution System is subject to City Council consideration based on availability. Generally, annexation is a criterion which must be met. C. Sanitary Sewer All methods of sanitation shall conform to all current Johnson County Board of Health Rules and Regulations Governing On-site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems. D. Stormwater Management 1. Stormwater facilities shall conform to all current Johnson County stormwater management regulations and policies. 2. Storm sewer construction shall be in accordance with the Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) Standard Specifications. 3. Culverts shall be a minimum of 12 inches in diameter and reinforced concrete pipe shall be used. Culverts shall conform with the Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) Standard Specifications. Minimum cover over the top of culvert shall be six inches. E. Underground Utilities Whenever a subdivision shall be laid out such that a new street is required, telephone, cable television, internet, and electric utilities shall be underground. It is not intended that small subdivisions which would use an existing county road would follow this requirement since overhead utilities are probably directly adjacent to the property. 2 Item Number: 11.b. �r CITY OE IOWA CITY www.iogov.org November 16, 2021 Resolution to amend the Southwest District Plan and IC2030 Comprehensive Plan to allow intensive commercial and open space land uses for the property south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. (C PA21-0002) /_1iETSUILTA 121L1M,1 Description P&Z Staff Report Packet 10-21-21 Additional Correspondence P&Z Minutes 10-21-21 Resolution t �CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: October 21, 2021 To: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Kirk Lehmann, Associate Planner Re: CPA21-0002 — IWV/Slothower Comprehensive Plan Amendment Resubmission BACKGROUND: On September 16, 2021, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on a requested amendment to change the Southwest District Plan and Comprehensive Plan future land use map designations, and related plan text, from residential, open space, and future development to intensive commercial for approximately 79.4 acres located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. Staff recommended approval based on rationale detailed in the staff report dated September 2, 2021 (Attachment 2). The motion to approve the comprehensive plan amendment failed by a vote of 3-2 (Padron and Townsend against) because a minimum of 4 votes is required to recommend approval. The applicant, MMS Consultants, applying on behalf of Matt Adam and IWV Holdings, LLC, has submitted a revised comprehensive plan amendment (Attachment 1) for consideration. ANALYSIS: The Iowa City Comprehensive Plan serves as a land -use planning guide by illustrating and describing the location and configuration of appropriate land uses throughout the City, providing notification to the public regarding intended uses of land; and illustrating the long-range growth area limit for the City. Applicants may request an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan with City Council approval after a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Applicants for a comprehensive plan amendment must provide evidence that the request meets the following two approval criteria in Section 14 -8D -3D: 1. Circumstances have changed and/or additional information or factors have come to light such that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. 2. The proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or provisions of the comprehensive plan, including any district plans or other amendments thereto. The revised submittal contains the following changes from the original submittal: 1. The addition of an approximately 340- to 350 -foot Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer along the southern property line in the Southwest District Future Land Use Map. 2. The addition of approximately 340 to 350 feet of Public/Private Open Space along the southern property line in the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The purpose of the new vegetative buffer is to reduce the potential undesirable side-effects of the proposed use, such as noise or unwelcome views, from future adjacent development. These new future land use categories typically correspond to open space areas that are free of structures. While this can indicate parkland or natural areas, in this case, it will likely be used to preserve sensitive features and to provide for stormwater management. This is consistent with how these future land use designations are used in other areas of the City. October 21, 2021 Page 2 Figure 1 below shows the original submittal reviewed by the Commission on September 16. Figure 2 below shows the revised submittal, which will be presented at the public hearing on October 21. In Figure 2, Tracts 1-3 would become Intensive Commercial while Tracts 4-6 would become Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer / Public/Private Open Space. �-figure 7: Ungmal c;omprenensive Tian Nmenament neap �3� 6 NCT—F —NER I �� "ate H— 9.—, c0RNER OF 95E— I�-T]NN-R]W J SECTION 13-TJEN-R]'N DF THE OF THF FIFTF PFINCIPAL NERIOIAN �--- FIF-H 'RINCIPAL iIEPIOl0.N _—Na5 N'WE -'eo1 F. I'V: L 21" : FG 2M3A'F- .`.G'@TII.JIJ^I STING Crn"u l U ^CCPERATVE W II I o Im Al� � � J�PS��Go w N � Ig 3 �AW w Pape 3 ytia P gw ��2 oa®U I—EAST cDRVER sou WF THF p NOR -H IXJE HALF NORTH CNE -HAS W O o OF TP r Ti rvC+l RNEa NORRFI j oRNFR Cr d 5no°OG'26"E a —ON 13-TJ9.-RTW U 41' SECTION - - F11F1 __AL M-R11I/1N16 i - - - 1921.53' 56703'31"W - 414.99' 3OP.Ol' 'W -i - - ca 588°45'34"W 588°45'34; Lt=Gtw AN No1E=3 411a rr$�ml le i ---- ---------------- Figure ------- Figure 2: Revised Comprehensive Plan Amendment Map a .:+TNwEST CORNER -I! I xplM WwRIER CpwER .E:TI�N 1•Ln9M-Rrw -�' I SELTIM TYTrIN-Rlrt ao:L wERIw.N I 16°'06. aP W FFM PRWCIPK MAIOINI sname� "z EMISTINE �` i I g � �# it 41 ra� snvaST-w - I j N` 1100J' savaparw . -- 58993'}�'w Si8564' _ .Of :r . yo 6y SWTIOT C[IRIF,R saTxwesr cwNER w of TIE w b I LL NORSl/EWE xur OF NORTH ONE-NUF w �y 'a1r 't PR cC TK NueMW,STMcorM=R �� gb5t G ^� G j xaan+re�s, caawER CP n ¢pp SG09!'i62 Q �� YCTIOx F TWE _RM' SECTON 3S-TrOw-Rrw z E S.ai'7 j OF TIE OF THE iP1H PPIHCF/L VmaI FfTI PPR{pPAL WERIOIW - - - - 5wB-.x.'W n, 5ti - 1u,gP - S6Ew•wal.Y 5ew•ers6"w I 1sa03, - XRYild7 ". saaorsow Ij °;,. LEGEND AND NOTES ii October 21, 2021 Page 3 The proposed revision clarifies which areas of the subject properties are intended for intensive commercial development and which are intended for an open space buffer. Proposed changes to the Southwest District Plan text also continue to apply. As such, the revised amendment does not affect staff's analysis detailed in the September 2 staff report (Attachment 2). However, staff has updated the staff report packet with current exhibits and added a description of intensive commercial land uses in Appendix A of the district plan for additional clarification. Overall, staff still finds that the approval criteria are met by the applicant's revision to the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. PUBLIC COMMENT: In addition to public comments attached to the updated staff report packet, 9 members of the public expressed concerns with the proposed plan amendment at the public meeting. Their comments, and the discussion, are included in the September 16 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting minutes (Attachment 3). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve CPA21-0002, a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Public/Private Open Space and to change the Southwest District Plan text and future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Vegetative Noise/Sight Buffer for approximately 79 acres of property located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Revised Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Materials 2. September 2, 2021 Staff Report Packet [Updated October 1, 2021] 3. September 16, 2021 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Approved by: • �� ^'�"� Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services TRACT 1 TRACT 4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CURRENT LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL 2-8 DU/A CURRENT LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL 2-8 DU/A PROPOSED LAND USE: INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL PROPOSED LAND USE: PUBLIC/PRIVATE OPEN SPACE SOUTHWEST DISTRICT PLAN SOUTHWEST DISTRICT PLAN CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY/DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY/DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED LAND USE: INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL PROPOSED LAND USE: VEGETATIVE NOISE AND SIGHT BUFFER TRACT 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CURRENT LAND USE: RURAL RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED LAND USE: INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL SOUTHWEST DISTRICT PLAN CURRENT LAND USE: FUTURE URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED LAND USE: INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL TRACT 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CURRENT LAND USE: RURAL RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED LAND USE: PUBLIC/PRIVATE OPEN SPACE SOUTHWEST DISTRICT PLAN CURRENT LAND USE: FUTURE URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED LAND USE: VEGETATIVE NOISE AND SIGHT BUFFER TRACT 3 TRACT 6 (NO CHANGE REQUESTED) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CURRENT LAND USE: PUBLIC/PRIVATE OPEN SPACE CURRENT LAND USE: PUBLIC/PRIVATE OPEN SPACE PROPOSED LAND USE: INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL PROPOSED LAND USE: PUBLIC/PRIVATE OPEN SPACE SOUTHWEST DISTRICT PLAN SOUTHWEST DISTRICT PLAN CURRENT LAND USE: VEGETATIVE NOISE AND SIGHT BUFFER CURRENT LAND USE: VEGETATIVE NOISE AND SIGHT BUFFER PROPOSED LAND USE: INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL PROPOSED LAND USE: VEGETATIVE NOISE AND SIGHT BUFFER LOCATION MAP - NOT TO SCALE I - IT ANPREW+PRESBY7ERMNILHURI 0 O'00e o 2 cn 1 I lb SE 11-79-7 SW SW 12-79-7 SE SW 12-T9.7 SW SE 12-"S-7 pZ SE E°e2- �° SW SW 7-77-4k,E 3 se4 e WALN �°7Ig Nh S88°45'34"W I 5a yh9 MO—A— elroseAreALBEkT I 1E111ANI, FAY'S F GALWAY HILLS SMI p,A,1112 GALWAY HILLl�BCII SITE LOCATION NW NE 13-79-7 NE NE 13-7 7 N rOa •� �, 9s� E NE 14-79-7 _ PI IU -RS KAUBLE S SEIBBIYISIDN SW NW 11-74-7 SE NW 13- SW NE 1:7 -7`I-7 SE NE 15..74.7 SW NW 18.79.5 W 1LB PkAIkIE WILLI PRAIRIE E4TATES. PA ` 1 ', ' HSI-I�N�TERti RIIN 11 1B ••�OVNTkY'(LV B.Eti7AlES SECfINI�'A�C�IT[n1J WI LLIIE'PRAIRM:ESTA 1 1 , I NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE I N89°06'50"E FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ' 150.02' N89°06'50"E -------- AL o EW7 AND------------------� �--------------- --- — --- - - — --- — --- LQDDD71OO �] 10 o N co 0) O LLJ N Lo 00 0 O O z W N 00 O 0 0 z S89`03'31 "W 150.03' 1 1, I SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE w NORTH ONE-HALF iv -(_oOF THE `o o NORTHWEST CORNER o oo OF o I -)SECTION 13-T79N-R7W z OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN 1 LEGEND AND NOTES 150.00 LLJ S89°03'31 "W 150.03' - CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, FOUND - PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES - CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES - - - — - - - — - - - - RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES - CENTER LINES - EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMITS LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED ----------------- EXISTING EASEMENT LINES, PURPOSE NOTED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET AND HUNDREDTHS C4 cn 0 0 0 2183.39' S89°03'31 "W 1 2185.64' S89°03'31 "W 1771.50' �OO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: OWNER/APPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. 1917 S. GILBERT STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52240 --- S8 *06'50"W - -- N89°06'50"E 300.04' EXISTING COOPERATIVE I LIMITS S00`06'26"E 3.41' j- 414.99' N88°45'34"E IWV HOLDINGS LLC 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 ;� 0 20 50 100 150 200 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=200' NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ------- � I I I II I OI I o ' I I I w 0 O b Ind � u 1 1 �I S89°03'31 "W l 300.04'14 1 t 300 00' II SOUTHEAST CORNER KAU S LIE13 1 1 I 1 I OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF Lo OF THE �i oo NORTHWEST CORNER 0 OF 0 SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN FkA M S CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 351-8282 www.mmsconsultants.net Date I Revision 09-27-2021 REVISED LAND USE PER CLIENT -JDM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 05-20-2021 De5lgned by: Field Book No: KJB Drawn by: Scale: RLW 1 "=200' Checked by: Sheet No: RRN Project No: IOWA CITY 10355-010 of: 1 I tK 0 O'00e o cn 1 I , ----3flfl�37'--- F- S88°45'34"W I KAU S LIE13 1 1 I 1 I OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF Lo OF THE �i oo NORTHWEST CORNER 0 OF 0 SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN FkA M S CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 351-8282 www.mmsconsultants.net Date I Revision 09-27-2021 REVISED LAND USE PER CLIENT -JDM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 05-20-2021 De5lgned by: Field Book No: KJB Drawn by: Scale: RLW 1 "=200' Checked by: Sheet No: RRN Project No: IOWA CITY 10355-010 of: 1 STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Kirk Lehmann, Associate Planner Item: CPA21-0002 IWV & Slothower Date: September 2, 2021 Parcel(s): 1113202001, 1113201001, [Attachments 5, 7, and 8 Updated October 1, 2021] 1113226003 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Matt Adam IWV Holdings, LLC madam@spmblaw.com Contact Person: Property Owner(s): Lacey Stutzman MMS Consultants 1917 S. Gilbert Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-351-8282 I.sexton@mmsconsultants.net IWV Holdings, LLC 2916 Highway 1 NE Iowa City, IA 52240 Requested Action: To change the Southwest District and Comprehensive Plan future land use map designations, and related plan text, from residential, open space, and future development to intensive commercial Purpose: Location: Location Map: To allow intensive commercial development South of IWV Road SW, West of Slothower Road Size: 79.4 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Comprehensive Plan: Southwest District Plan: File Date: BACKGROUND: Agricultural & Residential; Rural Residential (RR -1) in Iowa City & Agricultural (A) in Johnson County North: Agricultural; Rural Residential (RR -1) & Residential -'/4 Acre Lot Minimum (R) East: Agricultural & Institutional; Neighborhood Public (P-1) South: Agricultural; Rural Residential (RR -1) & Agricultural (A) West: Agricultural; Agricultural (A) Residential 2-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre, Rural Residential, & Public/Private Open Space Single-Family/Duplex Residential, Future Urban Development, & Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer May 27, 2021 IWV Holding, LLC owns approximately 79.4 acres of property located south of IWV Road SW (Melrose Avenue in City limits) and west of Slothower Road. The owner is working with MMS Consultants to prepare three applications to allow for intensive commercial development. This specific application (CPA21-0002) proposes to amend the Southwest District Plan, part of the Comprehensive Plan, by changing the future land use map designation of the subject properties to intensive commercial. This includes some changes to the text of the Southwest District Plan as well. Attachments 7 and 8 illustrate the proposed changes to the plans, and Attachment 6 includes the applicant statement describing the rationale behind the request, along with other application materials. The Southwest District Plan, adopted in 2002, includes the subject properties in the growth limit of the Weber Subarea. The future land use scenario indicates the properties are primarily appropriate for Future Urban Development, with Single-Family/Duplex Residential shown along Slothower Road to the east and a Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer to the west near the proposed alignment of US Highway 965, which will run south from the Hurt Road alignment and along the eastern edge of the Iowa City Landfill (see Attachment 3). The plan describes that limited residential development may occur west of Slothower in the Future Urban Development area, but that limitations on sanitary sewer service prevent any significant urban development. It also notes the importance of buffering residential uses from the landfill and the proposed location of US -965 when development eventually occurs and that a more detailed plan will be needed at that time. The other concurrently submitted applications include an annexation (ANN21-0003), which would annex 70.4 acres into City limits, and a zoning map amendment (REZ21-0006) which would rezone the full 79.4 acres from Rural Residential (RR -1) in Iowa City and Agricultural (A) in Johnson County to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) and Interim Development Commercial (ID -C). The Comprehensive Plan Amendment must be approved for changes to the zoning map to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant held a Good Neighbor Meeting on July 28, 2021. Four neighbors attended. Attachment 5 provides the summary report of the meeting provided by the applicant. 2 ANALYSIS: The Iowa City Comprehensive Plan serves as a land -use planning guide by illustrating and describing the location and configuration of appropriate land uses throughout the City, providing notification to the public regarding intended uses of land; and illustrating the long-range growth area limit for the City. Applicants may request an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan with City Council approval after a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Applicants for a comprehensive plan amendment must provide evidence that the request meets the approval criteria in Section 14-813-31). The comments of the applicant are found in the attachments. Staff comments on the criteria are as follows. 14 -8D -3D Approval Criteria: Applications for a comprehensive plan amendment must include evidence that the following approval criteria are met: 1. Circumstances have changed and/or additional information or factors have come to light such that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. The subject properties are in the Weber Subarea of the Southwest District Plan. Before 1990, the area west of US -218 and north of Rohret Road was relatively undeveloped, with a few houses fronting on Rohret Road and public uses along Melrose/IWV, primarily at the County Historic Poor Farm. By the time the District Plan was adopted in 2002, housing was developing west and north of Rohret Road and south of the Poor Farm. The District Plan's future land use map primarily shows the subject properties as Future Urban Development, with Single-Family/Duplex Residential along Slothower Road and a Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer to the west. Currently, the land is used for agriculture. When the District Plan was adopted, Iowa City's Comprehensive Plan was from 1997. The 1997 Plan was the first to extend the City's western growth boundary from near Slothower Road to the proposed future alignment of US -965 (see Attachment 3). Consequently, it was the first time the City considered the future use of the subject properties, with the future land use map showing them as interim development/rural residential, a placeholder category that applied to future residential, commercial, and industrial development. Both the District and 1997 Comprehensive Plans included a policy to protect the Melrose Avenue and US -218 interchange from commercial encroachment, instead encouraging such development at the Highway 1 and US -218 interchange. This policy was first incorporated into the 1983 Comprehensive Plan, adopted around the time of the construction of US -218, because of concerns that the City could not support commercial development at both interchanges. Instead, planning documents maintained public uses directly west of the Melrose interchange. The City's current Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2013, no longer explicitly discusses this policy. However, it is reflected in the future land use map, which shows most of the subject properties as rural residential, and in the 2006 Fringe Area Agreement, which is a component of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Since adopting the Southwest District Plan, development west of US -218, and around the Melrose interchange, has continued. Land east of the interchange developed with more intense uses following Camp Cardinal Boulevard's construction in 2007, facilitated in part by three comprehensive plan amendments. These increased the intensity of uses northeast of Camp Cardinal Boulevard by introducing Office Commercial (CPA16-00001), Residential 8-16 Dwelling Units per Acre (CPA16-00003), and General Commercial (CPA20-0001) future land uses. West of the interchange, public uses intensified, including the addition of the Iowa National Guard Readiness Center, the Joint Emergency Communications Center, and the Johnson County SEATS facility. Housing development has also continued north of Rohret Road and east of Slothower Road right-of-way. Recent development in the area constitutes a change in circumstances near the subject properties such that it is in the public interest to explore future uses for the site. The subject properties have been in a holding pattern since they were first considered in Iowa City planning documents. This was largely because sewer service was not expected to be available until a lift station could be constructed, which prevented any significant urban development. However, the application shows that the north side of the properties could be serviced, which could accommodate some larger users, such as MidAmerican Energy. Additionally, Iowa City and its neighboring metropolitan cities have seen rapid growth and a redistribution of population over the past 30 years (Figure 1). Iowa City has added more than 15,000 new residents, an increase of more than 25 percent. However, the other metropolitan cities (Coralville, North Liberty, Tiffin, and University Heights) have tripled in size. This change from 1990 to 2020 is primarily due to residential growth in North Liberty (+17,553 residents) and Coralville (+11,971 residents), though Tiffin has experienced recent growth as well (+4,052 residents). With these changes, Iowa City's population has decreased as a proportion of the metro, and the center of population has shifted to the northwest. This makes the US -218 corridor increasingly important. F. ure 1: Population Change from 1990-2020 Source: 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020 Census Data The proposed amendment changes the future land use of the subject properties to intensive commercial. The Zoning Code, which helps implement City plans, describes the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone as providing areas for sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor display and storage of merchandise, by repair and sales of large equipment or motor vehicles, by outdoor commercial amusement and recreational activities, or by activities or operations conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. Types of retail trade are limited to provide opportunities for more land intensive commercial operations and to prevent conflicts between retail and industrial truck traffic. It notes that adjacent residential zones must be buffered from the potential negative aspects of allowed uses, which include a variety of commercial, light industrial, and limited institutional and residential uses. The City and metro are expected to continue growing, and commercial and industrial areas must grow to accommodate increasing demand. The City currently has around 1,239 acres of commercial and 838 acres of industrial zoning, 398 acres of which is zoned specifically for intensive commercial uses (Figure 2). Most land zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1) is occupied, but approximately 51 acres (13%) is vacant land, located on scattered parcels along Scott Boulevard and south of the Highway 1 north and east of the airport and at its interchange with US -218 (Attachment 4). While this land does not 4 1990 2000 2010 2020 Change Change Iowa City 59,735 62,220 67,862 74,828 +15,093 +25% Other Metro Cities 14,775 22,452 35,279 48,537 +33,762 +229% Remainder of County 21,609 26,334 27,741 29,489 +7,880 +36% Johnson County 96,119 111,006 130,882 152,854 +56,735 +59% Iowa City as Percent of Metro Cities 80.2% 73.5% 65.8% 60.7% Source: 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020 Census Data The proposed amendment changes the future land use of the subject properties to intensive commercial. The Zoning Code, which helps implement City plans, describes the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone as providing areas for sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor display and storage of merchandise, by repair and sales of large equipment or motor vehicles, by outdoor commercial amusement and recreational activities, or by activities or operations conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. Types of retail trade are limited to provide opportunities for more land intensive commercial operations and to prevent conflicts between retail and industrial truck traffic. It notes that adjacent residential zones must be buffered from the potential negative aspects of allowed uses, which include a variety of commercial, light industrial, and limited institutional and residential uses. The City and metro are expected to continue growing, and commercial and industrial areas must grow to accommodate increasing demand. The City currently has around 1,239 acres of commercial and 838 acres of industrial zoning, 398 acres of which is zoned specifically for intensive commercial uses (Figure 2). Most land zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1) is occupied, but approximately 51 acres (13%) is vacant land, located on scattered parcels along Scott Boulevard and south of the Highway 1 north and east of the airport and at its interchange with US -218 (Attachment 4). While this land does not 4 have buildings, only 45 acres are expected to develop; the rest is used by adjacent owners. Of developable parcels zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1), most are less than 2 acres. Other vacant parcels in the City are zoned to accommodate similar land uses, such as industrial zones, but while there is a relative abundance of vacant land zoned industrial (217.5 acres), it is primarily in the City's southeast industrial park which is well-positioned to attract railroad users but does not have good highway access. As such, the supply of vacant land in the City currently does not meet all of the needs of users in the City, including MidAmerican Energy. Figure 2: Acres Zoned for Industrial and Commercial Land Uses Land Uses Current Zoning Acres Current Vacant Acres Current Vacancy Rate General Commercial 322.84 20.04 6% Highway Commercial 64.22 8.99 14% Intensive Commercial 397.96 51.23 13% Industrial 837.74 217.50 26% Other Commercial 453.63 131.43 29% Total Commercial/Industrial 2,076.39 429.19 21% Source: Johnson County parcel information, obtained August 2021 By 2040, the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County estimates Iowa City will grow to a population of 94,093 (+25.7%). Assuming demand for Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zoning increases at the same rate, the City should anticipate a need for about 500 acres (397.96 x 125.7%) of CI -1 zoning by 2040. Based on the future land use map, the City currently plans for an additional 44 net acres of intensive commercial, or a total of about 442 acres (Figure 3). This leaves a gap in demand of 58 acres, and more than that will be needed because over 60 acres of expected additions are already occupied, plus additional land is likely needed to accommodate sensitive features and right-of-way. While this is based on the current development pattern which is changing (for example, online retail is supplanting brick -and -mortar stores), staff anticipates that demand for intensive commercial and light industrial uses will remain relatively stable as warehousing and transportation uses will fulfill needs associated with logistics and online purchasing. Staff also anticipates that MidAmerican Energy will utilize a portion of the subject property. Figure 3: Expected Change in Acres Zoned for Industrial and Commercial Land Uses Land Uses Current Zoning (Acres) Expected Additions* (Acres) Expected Losses** Net Land Use Change Potential Acres (Acres) General Commercial 322.84 +10.70 -40.81 -30.11 292.73 Highway Commercial 64.22 +0.00 -0.00 +0.00 64.22 Intensive Commercial 397.96 +107.91 -63.43 +44.48 442.44 Industrial 837.74 +300.79 -14.07 +286.72 1,124.46 Other Commercial 453.63 +613.07 -0.24 +612.83 1,066.46 Total Commercial/Industrial 1 2,076.39 1 +1,032.47 1 -118.55 +913.92 1 2,990.31 *Expected additions: Land shown as a use on the future land use map which is not currently zoned for that use (primarily in the City's growth areas). **Expected losses: Land currently zoned for a use that is not expected to be developed as that use based on the future land use map(primarily Riverfront Crossings and publicly owned land . Source: Johnson County parcel information, obtained August 2021, IC2030 Comprehensive Plan 5 Development and planning in the area constitutes a change in circumstances. Based on projected long-term demand and the characteristics of the site, including access to US - 218 and intensive commercial uses being appropriate as a buffer against future landfill expansion and US -965 extension, staff believes that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. 2. The proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or provisions of the comprehensive plan, including any district plans or other amendments thereto. The Weber Subarea of the Southwest District Plan has several policies relevant to the proposed amendment relating to transportation, infrastructure, and land use. With regards to transportation, the subject properties will be bounded by three major streets to the west, east, and north. To the west, along the City's growth limit, the City plans to extend US -965 south as an arterial to connect with Rohret Road and eventually Highway 1. As development occurs, the City needs to secure adequate right-of-way and compatible land uses near the Iowa City Landfill. To the east, a north -south collector street is expected between Melrose Avenue and Rohret Road, primarily along the Slothower Road right-of-way. To the north, Melrose Avenue needs to be improved to City standards beyond current City limits. This is currently planned for 2021 in the City's Capital Improvement Program. With regards to land use and other infrastructure, The Weber Subarea future land use map designates most of the land west of Slothower Road as Future Urban Development until sewer service is extended and lift stations are constructed where required. Water service will be expanded as part of the Melrose/IWV project in 2021. The Plan allows for some residential uses along the west side of Slothower Road, but it discourages "leapfrog" development without street and trail connections between the proposed US -965 alignment and Slothower Road. It notes that as development becomes imminent, a more detailed plan will be needed for areas of future development. The District Plan also discourages commercial uses around the Melrose and US -218 interchange, noting that there are nearby commercial areas, including the Highway 1/US-218 interchange, Walden Square, and future commercial areas south of Rohret Road. It also discusses the importance of buffering residential uses from the Iowa City Landfill and future US -965. The proposed amendment generally follows the existing policy direction of City planning documents. Amending the future land use map permits the accommodation of transportation policies discussed in the Southwest District Plan through the rezoning and subdivision processes. Similarly, the application shows that infrastructure needs can be met while allowing for continuous, contiguous development from Slothower to US -965. The proposed use is also more compatible with the nearby landfill than residential uses, which would require buffering, and is an appropriate use near two major streets. While some buffering is required between intensive commercial and residential uses, those can be accommodated through the site development standards and rezoning process. Furthermore, the proposed amendment meets several goals and strategies from the Comprehensive Plan regarding commercial and industrial development. Specifically: • Use the District Plans to identify appropriate commercial nodes and zone accordingly to focus commercial development to meet the needs of present and future population. 0 Identify, zone, and preserve land for industrial uses in areas with ready access to rail and highways. Target industrial and business sectors that align with Iowa City's economic strengths, including biotechnology, healthcare, advanced manufacturing, information technology, education services, and renewable energy. Focus growth within the Iowa City urban growth area by using the City's extra -territorial review powers to discourage sprawl and preserve prime farmland. While goals generally align, some differences between the proposed amendment and plans must be reconciled. Allowing intensive commercial development along Melrose somewhat diverges from policy preventing commercial encroachment near the US -218 and Melrose interchange. However, the area nearest the interchange will remain dedicated to public uses, and the proposed uses are consistent with goals related to identifying appropriate areas for commercial and industrial development. Another potential discrepancy is the goal of encouraging new business development in existing core or neighborhood commercial areas. While this is important, existing commercial areas do not appear to be able to accommodate all users looking to locate in Iowa City. The amendment was initially considered because MidAmerican Energy has been unable to find an appropriate site for a new facility. As such, there appears to be a need for new intensive commercial areas to meet the needs of Iowa City's future population. Other goals of the Comprehensive Plan also need to be met through the rezoning process for the subject properties. They include the following: Discourage linear strip commercial development that discourages walking and biking and does not contribute to the development of compact, urban neighborhoods. Guide development away from sensitive environmental areas, such as floodplains, wetlands, woodlands, steep slopes, flood hazard areas, and streams. These will be achieved through the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and conditions on rezonings, where necessary. Based on information submitted by the applicant, there appears to be approximately 1.13 acres of wooded wetlands, 1.46 acres of emergent wetlands, and 2.36 acres of sensitive woodlands and groves of trees on the subject properties. Sensitive features, required buffers, and potential stormwater detention areas will limit the acreage on the subject properties that may be developed. Finally, the proposed amendment meets policies adopted in other documents of the City. The Fringe Area Agreement shows this land as being within Iowa City's Growth Area C. It encourages commercial and industrial development south and southwest of the Iowa City Municipal Airport, and in interchanges of paved roads, to be annexed prior to development. However, it discourages such development in all other areas of Fringe Area C. The subject properties will be at paved intersections, and an application for annexation has been submitted with the proposed amendment. The City is currently in the process of updating the Fringe Area Agreement with Johnson County. The new agreement will state that development should follow the policy direction of the City's Comprehensive Plan. For the reasons above, staff finds that the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment (Attachments 7 and 8) is compatible with the policies in the Comprehensive Plan. However, implementing this proposed amendment requires annexing the property and amending the zoning map, which should include conditions ensuring the goals of the 7 Comprehensive Plan are met (to be considered under ANN21-0003 and REZ21-0006 respectively). PUBLIC COMMENT: Staff received one written comment opposing the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment due to potential traffic and lighting impacts. The comment can be found in Attachment 5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve CPA21-0002, a proposed amendment to change the following, as shown in Attachments 7 and 8, for approximately 79.4 acres of property located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road: • The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation from Rural Residential, Open Space, and Residential at 2-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre to Intensive Commercial; and • The Southwest District Plan future land use map designation from Single-Family/Duplex Residential and Future Urban Development to Intensive Commercial, and to change the text of the District Plan. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Proposed Iowa Highway 965 Extension & Fringe Area Maps 4. Map of Current and Expected Intensive Commercial Land Use 5. Correspondence and Good Neighbor Meeting Materials [Updated October 1, 2021] 6. Applicant Submittal 7. Proposed Changes to the Weber Subarea of the Southwest District Plan [Updated October 1, 2021] 8. Proposed Changes to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map [Updated October 1, 2021] Approved by: I Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services W {US 6 W ­��� ROCHESTER AVE— s LU O TSntr " : ,t; TON ----E BURLING07 � ST �. �— - MELROSE AVE . m. m w Z - PW I1111= O O ` =�� I i� ° Y. W_ 1 �— v�� N cP ••'��i �i i� �. A � � Nom. � \ _ -`�o - U - U) UJ U 0 0.25 0.5 1 Mil o Legend - Zoned CI -1; No Expected Change Not Zoned CI -1; Expected Additions* _ Zoned CI -1; Expected Losses" Vacant; Expected to Develop Vacant; Not Expected to Develop Major Roads .---------------MUSCATINE AVE--- "- *Expected Additions: Land shown as intensive commercial on the future land use map which is not currently zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1). **Expected Losses: Land currently zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1) that is not expected to be developed as intensive commercial based on the future land use map. From: Pamela To: Raymond Heitner Date: Wednesday, August 18, 20217:32:08 PM I am against the rezoning of Slothower Rd. I feel like it will lead to loud traffic and distracting lighting to our neighborhood. Pamela Miller-DeKeyser 1630 Lake Shore Drive Iowa City, IA 52246 Sent from the all new AOL app for Android From: DEANAGHOLSON To: Raymond Heitner Subject: Rezoning at Melrose and Slothower Date: Monday, September 13, 2021 4:00:16 PM Mr. Heitner, I am emailing you in regard to the recent proposal of rezoning in the area of Melrose and Slothower. We have lived in Iowa City for twenty years this year. We built our home on the southwest side of town near Weber school and have loved our neighborhood and location. We have paid close attention to the area to our north (Poor Farm) and west (farmland) and were happy with the cities comprehensive plan for this area over time. We are very concerned that the recent rezoning proposal is to go from rural/residential to commercial in this area. We are aware that rezoning happens (it obviously had to in order for our neighborhood to be developed) but to leap from rural to commercial seems like quite a drastic change. Once a commercial property area is developed, it seems likely that it could very well continue to develop in that manner which could effect us in the future. I am unsure if we will be able to attend the P&Z meeting this week but would request that you log our concerns in with any others you may have gotten regarding this rezoning. We would like to see the city take a step back and reassess the situation and come up with a revised comprehensive plan to share with the southwest citizens before forging ahead at this time. Thanks for your time! Deana Gholson 1332 Phoenix Drive IC IA This email is from an external source. From: John Bergstrom To: Raymond Heitner Cc: Sherri Bergstrom Subject: Case CPA21-0002 SW corner of Slothower Road and IWV Road Date: Monday, September 13, 20216:28:15 PM As representatives of Slothower Farm we are expressing our objections to the dramatic change in the Comprehensive Plan to allow for Intensive commercial development on land that has long been anticipated to be residential. This change to the IWV Holding parcel is being brought about to allow for the development of a Mid American Energy service complex that the City evidently feels that they have no where else to place it. This is certainly a change to a relatively small parcel that will affect the future of many existing and future residents. We would like to see the following addressed or answered: 1. The staff report (as well as the MMS report) refer to the significant changes that have taken place. Frankly, the changes in the immediate area west of the interchange are not new. What is new is the significant residential growth to the area abutting the County Farm. The proposed changes will affect the existing neighborhoods, existing residents and the future development of the Johnson County Poor Farm. 2. There seems to be concern about the landfill needing a buffer. The proposed 965 extension will provide a natural separation. MMS has come to its own stated conclusion that the best buffer is commercial development. Seems a little self serving. 3. Why is a longstanding planning instrument being drastically altered to accommodate a 40 acre development (initially) that will affect a large overlay area. If the Comprehensive Plan is to be altered like this, it should be much more encompassing, studied and thought out. Not as a reaction to a single user. 4. The City feels it needs more intensive commercial land? Fine, don't put it on or next to areas long slated for residential. Or, if you can't accommodate certain uses, is there any harm letting them gravitate to a neighboring community that can? 5. There are complementary non-residential uses that are compatible with neighborhoods that don't infringe on residents. The uses allowed under the proposed zoning (including Mid American Energy) are not compatible. 6. The goal of the existing Comprehensive Plan is to encourage commercial and industrial development south and southwest of the Iowa City Municipal Airport. Now you appear to conveniently be changing the Fringe Area Agreement just to accommodate a single user. 7. How does Johnson County feel about this as it relates to the Poor Farm? Intensive commercial uses would not be complementary to the proposed development schemes we have seen for the farm. Please reconsider this change to the Comprehensive Plan and the subsequent zoning changes that would result. The City needs to slow down and better understand the ramifications of this action. John and Sherri Bergstrom From: James Larimore To: Raymond Heitner Cc: Jim Larimore Subject: Opposition to proposed amendment to Comprehensive Plan Date: Wednesday, September 15, 20213:43:33 PM Dear Mr. Heitner, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rezoning of land near the intersection of Melrose and Slothower in Iowa City. My family and I live on Wildcat Lane in the Southwest District, and our house is one of those with a direct line of site to the proposed location of Intensive Commercial development. We purchased our house seven years ago in large measure because of the assurances provided in the City's Comprehensive Plan for the Southwest District, which explicitly discouraged "the establishment of commercial uses around the Melrose Avenue -Highway 218 interchange" and envisioned that future development of this area should preserve the rural character of the district, provide a diversity of housing types, and potentially include the creation of a regional park that could be connected to a planned water reservoir, the Willow Creek trail and other parks in the Southwest District. I am certain that others who have purchased homes in this area, at the combined cost of tens of millions of dollars of personal investment, also took into account the rural and residential nature of the district when they decided to move into the Southwestern District. The proposed rezoning will irretrievably damage the rural and residential character of the Southwest District and creates a risk that the proposed Intensive Commercial development will eventually cascade further down Slothower Road, impacting home values and quality of life, as well as introducing unwanted vehicular traffic seeking a faster path to Highway 218. Furthermore, in stark contrast to the transparent and inclusive process that informed the current proposal takes a piecemeal rather than comprehensive approach, and with extremely limited effort at outreach, information dissemination, and community engagement on the part of the Planning and Zoning office. I am concerned that precipitous action on the part of the Planning and Zoning Commission puts at risk the public trust which was earned by the Commission's predecessors, who facilitated direct community engagement in the creation of the current Comprehensive Plan. Trust is hard to earn and easy to squander, and I urge the Commission not to trade away public trust and confidence in the expedient pursuit of a problem for which there are likely alternative solutions. I look forward to participating in the Commission's hearing on September 16th. Sincerely, Jim Larimore Wildcat Lane Iowa City M M S ro a� LO n� c 0 w t; Q v ra LJ L, 3 T 41 c Q- 13 13 I ru L L C U MMS Consultants, Inc. Experts in Planning and Development5ince 1975 August 5, 2021 City of Iowa City Planning and Community Development Attn: Ray Heitner 410 E Washington Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: IWV Annexation, Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment 19175. G i lbert Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 319.351.8282 m msconsulta nts.ret m ms@m msconsulta nts.ret In response to the letter provided on July 30, 2021 we offer the following comments on behalf of the developer. CPA21-0002 Comments: 1. Because a comprehensive plan amendment is required, this application requires two meetings at the Planning & Zoning Commission; one to set the public hearing, and then the public hearing. We acknowledge this comment. 2. In discussing the area slated for "future urban development" on the subject properties, the Southwest District Plan notes that "When development becomes imminent a more detailed plan will need to be developed for this area." Please discuss what detailed planning has gone into determining the proposed use for the area. The District Plan references the future urban development' in thefinal paragraph of the section titled Land Use for the Weber Subarea. It mentions the importance of providing a buffer for residential uses from the Iowa City Landfill and the intended Highway 965 extension along the western most boundary. Commercial uses are the best option to provide the buffer in our opinion. This will allow for ease of access to Highway 965 for those commercial uses as well. 3. Staff anticipates that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council will have questions on potential end users and uses of the subject property. Please be prepared to make this information public prior to the public hearing date for the comprehensive plan amendment. We acknowledge this comment. The applicant will take this into consideration prior to the meetings. ANN21-0003/REZ21-0006 Comments: Urban Planning: 1. The rezoning will analyze all potential CI -1 uses and describe any potential impacts those uses might have on surrounding development. Some examples of Summary Report for Good Neighbor Meeting � r -4 CITY OF IOWA CITY Project Name: IWV Road SW Project Location: IWV Road SW Meeting Date and Time. July 28th, 2021 @ 6:30pm Meeting Location: via Zoom Names of Applicant Representatives attending: Josh Entler Jon Marner Names of City Staff Representatives attending: Raymond Heitner Number of Neighbors Attending: 4 Sign -In Attached? Yes X No General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) *General comments that the notifications should be to a larger distance than 300 feet. *Information provided and discussion of utilities and infrastructure availability to the site. *General questions of such a change from Residential land use to proposed land use. *Previous conversations by neighbors with staff seemed to indicate their property would be Residential land use. *Neighbors have not seen signs posted for the zoning. Will that be done? Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - *General questions and comments regarding future use considering the wide range of uses in the requested zone. *Will there be sufficient buffer from the proposed uses to Residential uses on neighboring properties to the south? Discussion of the sensitive areas and natural drainage way aiding in providing a buffer along with city code requirements for buffers adjacent to residential zoning. *Concern over property valuation for residential properties near the possible uses in this zone. *Question of the city restricting uses on the property. Ray provided summary of permitted, provisional and special exception use process. Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe: *Developer/Engineer planning to investigate layouts and impacts of buffers along the south property line based upon feedback received during the meeting Staff Representative Comments Attendees — done via Zoom, addresses were not collected • John Bergstrom • Sherri Bergstrom • Tammi Anderson • Dan Kauble July 15, 2021 Good Neighbor Meeting Re: Annexation, Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment request for property adjacent to IWV Road SW Location: In light of the COVID-19 situation we will not be conducting an in-person meeting, instead we will be holding an online meeting via Zoom on July 281h, 2021 at 6:30pm, as well as accepting comments and questions directly via email or letter. These comments must be sent or postmarked no later than July 28th. Zoom Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/I/87113762763?pwd=Sk96TFpEMFQ2WVg2dGU5TXJnZIJZUT09 Meeting ID: 8711376 2763 Passcode: 705652 Dear Resident: The Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) will soon consider a rezoning, annexation and comprehensive plan amendment for a property in your area. The property is located adjacent to IWV Road SW (see aerial photograph on next page). The proposal includes a request for the change of land use from a mix of Public/Private Open Space, Rural Residential and 2-8 DU/A to Intensive Commercial. The proposal also requests a rezoning from A (Agricultural) and RR1 (Rural Residential) to CI -1 (Intensive Commercial) for the East portion of the property and ID -C (Interim Development Commercial) for the West portion of the property. Accompanying the rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment, the proposal includes annexation of 70.39 acres into the City of Iowa City. It is anticipated that the Planning and Zoning Commission will be reviewing this proposal on August 19, 2021. A notice of a formal review by the Planning and Zoning Commission will be sent to all property owners within 300' of the property under review by the City. You are encouraged to attend these meetings and voice your opinions. As the representative of this request, we would like to invite you to participate in a virtual Good Neighbor Meeting held via Zoom regarding said project where you will have an opportunity to learn about the requested land use change and we can gather comments you may have regarding this proposal. Information on how to participate in this meeting as well as the link can be found on the attached page. If you are unable to attend the meeting, please feel free to send any questions or comments utilizing the contact information listed below. As stated above these comments must be sent or postmarked no later than July 281h, 2021. Josh Entler IWV Holdings LLC 2916 Highway 1 NE Iowa City, IA 52240 jentler@conciseearth.com Sincerely, Jon D. Marner MMS Consultants, Inc. Ray Heitner City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Raymond-Heitner@iowa-city.org LEGEND AND NOTES DESCRIPTION - ANNEXATION PARCEL A -CONCRESSIONAL CORNEA, FOUND PROPE-- I-DRISS NAL SECTON RL ES Es A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST - - - 1111 ssc ry QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, - --- - RIGHT OF AlWLINES -'XSTN LrvEs OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, LOT LINES I FRATVF LEl DEED osF rvorco DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ARE IN FEET AND Commencing at the North Quarter Corner of Section 13, Township 79 North, Range 7 West, of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Johnson County, gT Iowa; Thence S89"06'50"W, along the North Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 300.04 feet, to the Point of Beginning; Thence S00"00'59"W, along a line parallel with and 300.00 feet normally distant Westerly from the East Line of the North BB1D 5E One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 1307.41 feet, to Its intersection with the North Line of Kauble's Subdivision, In accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 20 at Page 47 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S88"45'34 W along said North Line, 414.99 feet to the Northwest Comer thereof; Thence S00°OB'28 E along the West Line of said Kauble's Subdivision, 3 41 feet to is Intersection with the South Line of the North RAP GHIC SCALEIN FEET One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13 Thence S89"03'31 W, along said South Line, 1921.53 feet, to the Southwest Comer of said North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 13; Thence NOO'08'52"E, along the West Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 1315.30 feet, to the Northwest Corner of said Section 13; Thence N89°06'50"E, along the North Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 2333.42 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said Annexation Parcel contains 70.39 Acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. 1.P4'I O t5� NORTHWEOST CORNER I I' SECTIONO3THE9N-R7W �1P JFIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN FAYS MRS SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OFTHE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN LOCATION MAP - NOT TO SCALE 4V + — �� POINT OF BEGINNING S --- --- --- --- ----___-___-___-___--- --___________ J NORTH LINE OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWES QUARTER OF SECTION 13-T79N-17W N69'06'5D"E DSM G OG^Q� �� / 2333.42' — EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMIT 3 P ANNEXATION PARCEL 70.39 AC fnl-° «�ykA ANNEXATION EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: OWNER/APPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. IWV HOLDINGS LLC 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY. IA 52240 IOWA CITY. IOWA 52240 POINT OF COMMENCEMENT NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN - 3QQ.Qa' - 3 3QO.On' - � 3 a o 'P R9 2 HE 4% �o 1U0 U., CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 u,unu mmernnenl}anfe nni — _v..' 0T-08-2021 PER GDM REVIEW -RLW ANNEXATION EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN SOUTH UNE OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWE T QUARTER OF SECTION 13-779N-R7W S69'45'34"W - - - - - - - - JOHNSON COUNTY 414 99 SOUTHEAST CORNER .IOYY�IIA 1921.53' 589'03'31"W _ OF THE q o� Q������,� NORTOF NEE HALF MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. NORTHWESTOF CORNERIN ����Q 07-08-2021 SECTION 13-T79N-R7W q �esg„ed nj. KJB Fold aook l+o. N' cam'ry RFi.LxnERS OF THE Ha FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN&* k orad: RLw sola: 1"=zoo' GDM sheat No• ° 1IOWA CITY ' 10355-001 - ANNEXATION PARCEL mow« '•y ,- „-„-, 4V + — �� POINT OF BEGINNING S --- --- --- --- ----___-___-___-___--- --___________ J NORTH LINE OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWES QUARTER OF SECTION 13-T79N-17W N69'06'5D"E DSM G OG^Q� �� / 2333.42' — EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMIT 3 P ANNEXATION PARCEL 70.39 AC fnl-° «�ykA ANNEXATION EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: OWNER/APPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. IWV HOLDINGS LLC 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY. IA 52240 IOWA CITY. IOWA 52240 POINT OF COMMENCEMENT NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN - 3QQ.Qa' - 3 3QO.On' - � 3 a o 'P R9 2 HE 4% �o 1U0 U., CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 u,unu mmernnenl}anfe nni — _v..' 0T-08-2021 PER GDM REVIEW -RLW ANNEXATION EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN SOUTH UNE OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWE T QUARTER OF SECTION 13-779N-R7W S69'45'34"W - - - - - - - - JOHNSON COUNTY 414 99 SOUTHEAST CORNER .IOYY�IIA 1921.53' 589'03'31"W _ OF THE q o� Q������,� NORTOF NEE HALF MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. NORTHWESTOF CORNERIN ����Q 07-08-2021 SECTION 13-T79N-R7W q �esg„ed nj. KJB Fold aook l+o. N' cam'ry RFi.LxnERS OF THE Ha FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN&* k orad: RLw sola: 1"=zoo' GDM sheat No• ° 1IOWA CITY ' 10355-001 DESCRIPTION - REZONING PARCEL 41 A PORTION OF THE EAST 300 FEET OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Beginning at the North Quarter Comer of Sect on 13 Township 79 Nodh Range 7 West, of the Fifth Pdndpal Meridian, Johnson County, Iowa Thence S00°D059"W along the East Line of the NOdh One H,K Of the Nodwest QaSdr of said Section 13 a distance Of 1305.56 NmL m Rs ntersectmn wifth the E -fly ed Pro on of the North U.. ne of Nmd1Ws Subtl m on n 1 accordance with the Plat thereof OCEO In Plat Book 20 W Pae 47 Of the 1, U, d the Johnson Coun f th. Neh Om C Thence mid S.di,, 3: T Bald Easteri Pro edion and 9 N 9 Y I Ndfth Une, 300.0] feet; Thence N00°00'59"E, 1307.41 feet, ,I a Poi,R on the NMh 9.0 of the Nod R, ,bj, if of the Nodwest Queder of self Sadion 13; Thence N89°08'50"E, along saitl Nodh Line, 300.04 feet, to thePoint of Beginning. Slid Rezoning Pamel #1 centains 9.00 Acres, antl Is subject to easements and restrictions of rewN. DESCRIPTION - REZONING PARCEL 42 A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Commending al th. Nod Queder Comer of SeCfbn 13, -hip 79 Nod, R.N. 7 West, Of the Fid Pdncipal MI Johnsen County, lO Thence SOD'OO'S9"W, along the East Line .1the Nod One -Half of the Nodhwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 1305.56 teat, to its intersection with Ne Eastedy Projection of the Nod Line of Kaubles SubtliNeion, in -AM m with the Plat thereof ReceNed In Plat BOON, 20 M Pae 47 of he Recerds Of the Johnson Coun ReceNers Of im; Thence S88°45'34'W aIOn said Easted Pro edion and 9 ty 9 NOd NO.. 300.07 fee b the Point of B innin I Thence conenuin Sth, S,34'W ,tori saitl Nodh Line 414.99 feet to he NOdM1west Comer thereof' Thence S00°O6'26'E abn he t eg 9• 9 9 8 West Line 1 said 4 Hug's Subdivision 3.41 feet to its intersection with the South Line of the Nod One -Half d S- , 43-fi Quarter of saitl Section 13' Thence S89°03'31"W alon said 9 80Od1 th. 158786 feet Thence ND2°13' I Q 328.44 feet Thence 13; T'11"E, 611.8] feat; Thence N33°02'35"E, 93147 feat Thence O. SO'37"W, 86.39 feet, I. a Point On the Nod Une of the Nod Ona -Half d he Nodwest Queder of said I, bid Thence N89°N1 rd E, along saitl Nod Lina, 14]1.32 feet; Thence 500°00'S9'VJ, 1307.41 feet to the Point of BeOinning. Slid Rezoning Parcel #2 contains 53.90 Acres, antl is subject fo easements antl resNdions M remN. DESCRIPTION - REZONING PARCEL #3 LOCATION MAP - NOT TO SCALE A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, L JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: oaalg�aa o -i: Q Beginning at the Northwest Comer df S,mhon 13, TOwnsM1ip \..::w.. the NO Dne-Hdlf Of the Nodwest Cuader Of saitl Sedion 13, a distance of 862.10 feet; Thence S00°53'27"E, 86.39 feet Thence S33°02'35'"N, 438.62 feet; Thence S27°56'17'W, 611.87 feel; Thence 502°13'32"E, 328.44 feet W a Pdnt on the 8ouh Line of the NOdM1 One -Half of the NOdweslQueder of saitl Section 13; Thence 889°03'31"W, elorg said South Une, 353.69 feet to the Southwest Corner of the NOd One- Half of the Nodwest Cuarier Of saitl Section 13; Thence NOO°OB'S2'E, along the Wast Line Of the Nod One -Half Of the. Nodwest a +ia., to the Point of Beginning. Said Rezoning Parcel #3 contains 18.49 Acres, end is subject tO easements II POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL NO. 3 NORTHWEST CORNER SECTION 13-T7 9N-R7W F THE end restrictions of recoN. Q� EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMITS ,.a� T: laE aye- 4�sm - - N89'06'S0"E NORTH LINE OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTI fi. NHaD6. SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE 2� ,<>s, REZONING PARCELS "•"""v a, ~'"``� "' (COUNTY "A" TO CI -1) z 53.90 AC ew"w,ana :�"�"<` QF Q R A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, L JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: oaalg�aa o -i: Q Beginning at the Northwest Comer df S,mhon 13, TOwnsM1ip 79 Nodh, Range 7 West of the Fifth Pdndpal Meridian, Jdhnsan County, Iowa; Thence N89'01 almg the Nodh Line of the NO Dne-Hdlf Of the Nodwest Cuader Of saitl Sedion 13, a distance of 862.10 feet; Thence S00°53'27"E, 86.39 feet Thence S33°02'35'"N, 438.62 feet; Thence S27°56'17'W, 611.87 feel; Thence 502°13'32"E, 328.44 feet W a Pdnt on the 8ouh Line of the NOdM1 One -Half of the NOdweslQueder of saitl Section 13; Thence 889°03'31"W, elorg said South Une, 353.69 feet to the Southwest Corner of the NOd One- Half of the Nodwest Cuarier Of saitl Section 13; Thence NOO°OB'S2'E, along the Wast Line Of the Nod One -Half Of the. Nodwest Cuader of said Section 13, a distance of 1315.30 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said Rezoning Parcel #3 contains 18.49 Acres, end is subject tO easements II POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL NO. 3 NORTHWEST CORNER SECTION 13-T7 9N-R7W F THE end restrictions of recoN. Q� EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMITS FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN 3oo.oC' - - N89'06'S0"E NORTH LINE OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTI fi. NHaD6. FAY's FURS -1 SOUTHWEST CORNER OFTHE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN 1. 589'06'50"W QUARTER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W - 300.04' 0 nM Y ROAD aw { F46 1471.32 589'03'31"W LEGEND AND NOTES A - CONCHESSONAL CORNER FOUND PROPERTY ,N/air BOUNDARY LINES COry ESSIo oN LINES --- H -O A --- --- - RICY ury s CENTER tINEB - EX TING COOPERATIVE LIMITS LOTS LI R BY PORP TING cA OSE NOTED UNLESS NDTEO OTHERMISE, ALL DMENSONS IES ARE IN FEET AND H ­ SOUTH UNE OF THE NORTH UNE -HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W REZONING EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: OWNERIAPPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. IWV HOLDINGS LLC 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY. IA 52240 IOWA CITY. IOWA 52: ma* ;E=- GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1'=2, POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL NO. 1 NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN 3 3U oaalg�aa o -i: Q Io � REZONING PARCEL NO. 3 3 "°1'53'27"W SDD'B6;9:'F mala. G,ackea (COUNTY "A" TO ID -C) GDM a R fact No: ryo 16.49 AC r'� ry I EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMITS at. 3oo.oC' 'u SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE 2� REZONING PARCEL NO. 2 O (COUNTY "A" TO CI -1) z 53.90 AC W QF Q o � O hry0 O L1 i o I POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL NO. 2 �1 z 589'03'31"W LEGEND AND NOTES A - CONCHESSONAL CORNER FOUND PROPERTY ,N/air BOUNDARY LINES COry ESSIo oN LINES --- H -O A --- --- - RICY ury s CENTER tINEB - EX TING COOPERATIVE LIMITS LOTS LI R BY PORP TING cA OSE NOTED UNLESS NDTEO OTHERMISE, ALL DMENSONS IES ARE IN FEET AND H ­ SOUTH UNE OF THE NORTH UNE -HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W REZONING EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: OWNERIAPPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. IWV HOLDINGS LLC 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY. IA 52240 IOWA CITY. IOWA 52: ma* ;E=- GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1'=2, POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL NO. 1 NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN I Ill* KAIUSLIE'S 4�� N .11 LEE � LEE 0� �6p M RA !9-1 CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 ......... ......�.. (31 9)351-8282 REZONING EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC 3 3U oaalg�aa o -i: Q Io � a a n b RLW mala. G,ackea sheet No: GDM a R fact No: IOWA CITY I 10355-010 at. SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE Q NORTHWEST CORNER OF - SECTION13-T79N-R7W OF THE I w FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN I Ill* KAIUSLIE'S 4�� N .11 LEE � LEE 0� �6p M RA !9-1 CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 ......... ......�.. (31 9)351-8282 REZONING EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC 07-07-2021 oaalg�aa o -i: Flele Book ra: KJB a a n b RLW mala. G,ackea sheet No: GDM AAA R fact No: IOWA CITY I 10355-010 at. — -- ALC ERT AND --- rAysmsEr a N� ADD�'RON U FEW SITE LOCATION u,ac�a ay' RRN F'.oJ�cc rm. W IOWA CITY 10355-010 � O NORTHWEST CORNER SII W OF > SECTION 13-T79N-R7W a' OFTHF W FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN J z — -- ALC ERT AND --- rAysmsEr a N� ADD�'RON U FEW SITE LOCATION u,ac�a ay' RRN F'.oJ�cc rm. W IOWA CITY 10355-010 L6 O U W � > W J z Z) w ooh 6 Z og o Z W SOUTHWEST CORNER Z OF THE Z NORTH ONE-HALFUE O OF THE O NORTHWEST CORNER 2' d OF 7 SECTION 13-T79N-R7W U OFTHE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN I LEGEND AND NOTES A - CONCE—AL CORNER,, FOUND - - - IINIOLTREIIINA1 LINES �- NEC ES E sTNI 11ERATLNES, PLAT_rvE �u TI LOTPURPOSE NDTEO UNLESS NOTE➢ oR£RVASE. AIL DMERRONs — IN FEET AND HDNDPEDIHS LOCATION MAP - NOT TO SCALE I 9"06'50"E Imo/ ROAD ow ✓ GQ6 2333.41' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: OWNERAPPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. IWV HOLDINGS LLC 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 EXISTING COOPERATIVE I LIMITS 0 a�0 S00°06'26"E 41' S89'03'31"W - 414.99' �1921.53' S88°45'34"W — q 3T _ * E fib GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET r=zoo' NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN S88"45'34"W SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OFTHE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN q q0 ,?j,4�� �40 PROJAC M M CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 5240 (319)351-8282 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC 3 oes �a a N� KJB oIa FEW SITE LOCATION u,ac�a ay' RRN F'.oJ�cc rm. sn�e ho. IOWA CITY 10355-010 a, I 9"06'50"E Imo/ ROAD ow ✓ GQ6 2333.41' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: OWNERAPPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. IWV HOLDINGS LLC 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 EXISTING COOPERATIVE I LIMITS 0 a�0 S00°06'26"E 41' S89'03'31"W - 414.99' �1921.53' S88°45'34"W — q 3T _ * E fib GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET r=zoo' NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN S88"45'34"W SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OFTHE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN q q0 ,?j,4�� �40 PROJAC M M CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 5240 (319)351-8282 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC 05-20-2021 oes �a a N� KJB oIa FEW u,ac�a ay' RRN F'.oJ�cc rm. sn�e ho. IOWA CITY 10355-010 a, AMERICAN TOWER CORP GRAINCOMM III LLC IWV HOLDINGS LLC PO BOX 723597 PO BOX 723597 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE ATLANTA, GA 31139 ATLANTA, GA 31139 IOWA CITY IA 52240 776 52240 JERRY ROGERS 3276 IWV RD SW IOWA CITY, IA 52240 KENNEDY ENTERPRISES LLC PO BOX 2000 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-2000 ROGER D HURT 3165 IWV RD SW IOWA CITY, IA 52246 JOHN S KAUBLE PO BOX 5466 CORALVILLE, IA 52241-0466 KEVIN L PRATT 1120 N KING ST APT 103 SEGUIN, TX 78155-3842 SLOTHOWER FARMS LLC 2490 COTTONWOOD CT NE NORTH LIBERTY, IA 52317 JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA 913 S DUBUQUE ST STE 101 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 MARY L HURT PO BOX 220 HILLS, IA 52235-0220 M M LJQ) Q U1 ro v E r - L j LU MMS Consultants, Inc. Experts in Planning and Development Since 1975 July 8, 2021 City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 19]75. G i lbert Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 319.351.8282 mmsconsulta nts.net mms@mmsconsultants.net Re: IWV Road SW Rezoning, Annexation and Comprehensive Plan Amendment On behalf of IWV Holdings LLC we are submitting a request for an Annexation and 1; Rezoning in conjunction with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The described land consists of 79.39 acres in total, the proposal includes 70.39 acres to be annexed into the Q City of Iowa City with 9.0 acres currently located within the city limits. The area is shown as a future growth area. Scheduled improvements to IWV Road will provide ro necessary arterial access, with additional access provided via Slothower Road. Public Ln water will be available to the site, and public sewer can be extended to serve the site as required. Circumstances for this site have changed since the current plan was adopted. As mentioned above, there are scheduled improvements to IWV Road, and the city has T LIJ v v w 3 U expressed a plan to revisit the comprehensive plan for this region in the near term. These factors, in addition to the plans by the county for the Johnson County Poor Farm, meet the approval criteria for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. We are proposing a change of the land use from a mix of Public/Private Open Space, Rural Residential and 2-8 DU/A to Intensive Commercial. We feel this amendment is appropriate given the access from the property to an arterial road which provides a direct route to Interstate I-380. The proximity to the Iowa City Landfill and a number of other commercially zoned properties along IWV Road SW shows a consistent pattern of compatibility with surrounding development in this area, and is generally compatible with the policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. At this time Intensive Commercial (CI -1) is being requested for the East portion of the property and Interim Development Commercial (ID -C) is being requested for the West portion of the property. The ID -C zoning will allow for managed growth of future development and for the current use of the land to continue until a plan to provide city services can be established. This zoning also allows for a review of the stream corridor and the associated sensitive areas located in the West portion when a permanent zoning classification application is submitted. Development of the West portion, and any potential impacts to the sensitive areas, can be more appropriately reviewed when city services are able to be provided. V) t; V L v ro U N 19 T LIJ C CL C v (Ll C C LJ 3 U M19]75. G i lbert Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 M MMS Consultants Inc319.351.8282 ] . mmsconsulta ntsnet nts.net Experts in Planning and Development Since 1975 mms@mmsconsultants.net If you have questions or require any additional information, please contact us accordingly. Respectfully submitted, Jon Marner. MMS Consultants, Inc. 10355-010L2.DOCX LOCATION MAP - NOT TO SCALE U) _ ST. ANPREW+PRESBY.TERrANICHUR Z 0 \ � O \ 81 \ � 6 � n OF E $E 11-7U-7 tiW SW 11-7i1-7 SE SW 12.79.7 SW SE 12-"S-7 L)2 S\E\SSE veZ_ �qeJ ns SW SW 7-79� e9va WALK to 218 U Nb \ �h9 Melo Are Mellase Ava y' gh4 ,ALBERT AND FAY'S F \ PI M 2 GALWAY HILLS SUB GALWR dH[Ll5 SUBL) HILLS E NE 14-79-7 SITE LOCATION NW NE 13-79-7 NE NE 13-7 7 H KAUBLE' S SMIJISION �o RS tiW NW 11-74-7 SE NW 13- SW NE 13-79-7 SE NE 13-79-7 - - - WILD PRAIRIE — 1 • �.OUNTRY'(LUB.ESTATE4 � — SEC'OpHP'API�ITION', WILL) PRA HE ESTATES A H�U-�N�TERS RIIN till WILP'P.RACRg ESTATE 1 I I NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W �I ' OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN --- — --- — --- — --- — --- — --- — - -- N89006'50"E ALIEBEIR'r AMID -- FIATS [RR67w ------LQDDD71 H to Q n - viU Z ry LLj w o 0- 75 M O :5 Lu O M QU W �U) a_z U z m a_(n wZ:) 0 Lu Z � O J o Z C) o J W SOUTHWEST CORNER o U) OF THE z Z 0 NORTH ONE-HALF � O OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER � n OF D SECTION 13-T79N-R7W U OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN LEGEND AND NOTES - CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, FOUND - PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES - CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES - - - — - - - — - - - - RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES - CENTER LINES - EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMITS LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- EXISTING EASEMENT LINES, PURPOSE NOTED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET AND HUNDREDTHS I � OOH �o I � 2333.41' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. 1917 S. GILBERT STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52240 06'50"W - - - N89006'50"E inn nay – EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMITS GJ Oci 0 POO Q �0� v�J S00006'26"E 3.41' S89003'31 "W 414.99' S88045'34"W 0 OWNER/APPLICANT: IWV HOLDINGS LLC 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 m ;� 0 20 50 100 150 200 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=200' NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN --- — --- II J I Q U ' W' I Q 75 o� O 00 00 W coN uj Z U)w oZ J cnW I- zo W Z � J � 0 U w O O I S88045'34"W , 1 1 1 to SOUTHEAST CORNER M OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER i OF SECTION 13-T79N-R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN PROJAC RA RA S CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 351-8282 www.mmsconsultants.net Date I Revision COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 05-20-2021 De5igned by: Field Book No: KJB Drawn by: Scale: - RLW 1 "=200' Checked by: Sheet No: RRN Project No: - IOWA CITY 10355-010 of: 1 DESCRIPTION - REZONING PARCEL NO. 1 THE EAST 300 FEET OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. SAID REZONING PARCEL NO. 1 CONTAINS 9.0 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION - REZONING PARCEL NO. 2 THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. EXCEPTING THE EAST 300 FEET THEREFROM SAID REZONING PARCEL NO. 2 CONTAINS 30.7 ACRES, MORE OR LESS DESCRIPTION - REZONING PARCEL NO. 3 THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. SAID REZONING PARCEL NO. 3 CONTAINS 39.7 ACRES, MORE OR LESS WEBER SUBAREA The Weber Subarea is located south of Melrose Avenue and Highway 218, north of Rohret Road, extending to the City's growth limits half a mile west of Slothower Road. Before the 1980s this area was relatively undeveloped, with a few houses fronting onto Rohret Road. Through the 1980's and 90's housing developed westward on the north side of Rohret Road and south of the County Poor Farm property. Roughly two-thirds of the land area is undeveloped. Some patches of woodland and native prairie exist, but most of it is under cultivation. The area contains three public/institutional uses: Irving B. Weber Elementary School, the Korean Methodist Church, and Chatham Oaks, a residential care facility located on the County Poor Farm property. There are no commercial uses in the subarea. Transportation In the future next 20 to twenty-five years, the City plans to extend Highway 965 southward along the current western growth limit to connect with Rohret Road via the eastern edge of the Iowa City Landfill. It will eventually reach Highway 1 and serve as a far west side arterial. As development approaches this area, the City needs to secure adequate road right-of-way and sufficient buffer width against the Iowa City Landfill. As an entryway corridor into Iowa City, Highway 965 should incorporate boulevard design standards with a well -landscaped median and generous landscaping along both sides, wide sidewalks and bicycle lanes. This could serve as additional buffer against the landfill. In the more immediate future a north -south collector street will be required between Melrose Avenue and Rohret Road, part of it configured using the Slothower Road right-of-way. Care must be taken to keep the eventual route somewhat circuitous between Melrose and Rohret to diminish its desirability as a cut -through route for non -local traffic. In addition, access routes to the southern portion of the County Poor Farm should be incorporated into the local street layouts in future phases of both Wild Prairie Estates and Country Club Estates. Willow Creek Trail will eventually cross Highway 218 via tunnel and connect Hunters Run Park to the wider community trail system. A trail link across the County Poor Farm property to Melrose Avenue will connect this regional trail to the arterial street system in the far western part of the Southwest District. If a regional stormwater lake is constructed in the Rohret South Subarea, it will be important to construct a trail connection between Hunters Run Park and the public open space surrounding this new lake. Southwest District Plan 10/8/02 38 As westward development creates the need, both Rohret Road and Melrose Avenue will be improved to City standards beyond the point of the current corporate limits. Public Services and Facilities Before much of the area between Slothower and the landfill can be developed, a sanitary sewer lift station will have to be constructed. Northern portions of Country Club Estates can build out without further sewer improvements, but the southern two- thirds adjacent to Rohret Road drains to the southwest. This portion cannot be developed until a temporary lift station is built that connects to the landfill's lift station or a proposed permanent lift station is built south of Rohret Road on the western edge of the Rohret South Subarea. Land Use Several areas of particular interest stand out in the Weber subarea with regard to land use: the build -out of Country Club Estates and Wild Prairie Estates; the development of the area west of Slothower Road; and future use of the County Poor Farm property. Future use of the County Poor Farm property generated considerable discussion and a wide variety of suggestions during Citizen Planning workshops. The following considerations should be used as a guide to future development of this property: The following important elements should be preserved and protected from the encroachment of development: the historic poor farm buildings and cemetery; Chatham Oaks residential care facility; and any environmentally sensitive areas. Approximately 90 acres of the property are wooded, brushy, or contain prairie remnants. These areas would be suitable for use as a regional park that could be connected via the Willow Creek trail to other parks and destinations in the Southwest District. The southwest portion of the property contains approximately fifty acres of relatively flat ground that is currently row -cropped. This area would be suitable for residential development. Any new subdivisions in this location should be connected to the street network developed in the Southwest Estates and Wild Prairie Estates subdivisions located directly south of the County Farm property. ❑ If any development occurs on the county property adjacent to Highway 218, a buffer should be maintained. ❑ Future use of the county property located north of Melrose Avenue should be considered carefully with regard to potential impacts on the poor farm property. Southwest District Plan 10/8/02 39 Wild Prairie Estates will soon reach its northern boundary. Access to and through the Poor Farm is a desirable option in the future and for now a street stub northward up to the Willow Creek -Hunters Run Trail extension will be necessary. North of that and adjacent to Highway 218's right-of-way, a noise and sight buffer should be established between residential areas and the highway. The Comprehensive Plan discourages the establishment of commercial uses around the Melrose Avenue -Highway 218 interchange. This policy generally should be maintained because there are several adequate commercial services in the vicinity to serve this area. The Highway 1 -Highway 218 interchange further south provides community and highway commercial services. In addition, Walden Square in the Willow Creek Subarea provides neighborhood commercial services, and a future neighborhood commercial area is proposed in the Rohret South Subarea. However, intensive commercial uses may be appropriate along Melrose Avenue Turther from the interchange due to proximity to major thoroughfares and to serve as a buffer for residential uses from the potential future expansion of the landfill and Highway 965. The remaining portion of the Country Club Estates property is primarily suitable for low-density single-family development. If well-designed, the portion of the property adjacent to Rohret Road may be suitable for clusters of medium -density residential uses, such as townhouses or condominiums. A transition between existing Rural Residential -zoned (RR -1) portions of Southwest Estates and future low-density single-family residential development to the west may be accomplished by platting larger RS -5 - zoned lots backing onto the existing rural residential lots of Southwest Estates. The land west of Slothower is currently used for agriculture. The Weber Subarea Plan Map designates this area as "future urban development." However, until sewer service is extended in that direction and one or more lift stations constructed, there will not be any significant urban development. Before reaching the twenty-year horizon of this plan, some residential uses, or intensive commercial, may develop along the west side of Slothower Road and begin moving toward the future Highway 965 extension. However, the expectation is that development will not and should not "leapfrog" without street and trail connections bridging the gap between 965 and Slothower Road. When development becomes imminent a more detailed plan will need to be developed for this area. When development does occur, it will be important to buffer residential uses from the Iowa City Landfill and Highway 965. Southwest District Plan 10/8/02 40 Open Space As this subarea continues to develop additional public open space will be needed. Recent improvements to Hunters Run Park increased the amount of active park space in the area. This park may be extended to the west when the northern part of Wild Prairie Estates is subdivided. As mentioned, the County Poor Farm property contains land that is suitable for public open space and connecting trail corridors. The County should plan for public open space needs as it contemplates future uses for the property. The City plans to use a small parcel of land near the southwest corner of the County Poor Farm property for a water reservoir. Most of the ground will remain open and could be used for a small neighborhood park. Additional parkland could be added tc this property as Country Club Estates continues to develop. Southwest District Plan 10/8/02 41 9 I.WV ROAD I� I� I� Poor Farm SOUTHWEST PLANNING DISTRICT Weber Subarea VI YV West High School i LEGEND Large Lot/ Rural Residential - Public/Private Open Spam 6"1` Existing Trail Single-Family/Duplex Residential Public Serviceslinstitutional ♦ ~ ♦ Proposed Trail Low Density Multi Family Residential Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer - — — Proposed Street Future Urban Development Intensive Commercial Appendix A Southwest District Plan Map Designations Large Lot/Rural Residential Suitable for large lot single family development in areas not suited for more intensive development due to natural limitations, i.e. soil, slope, unavailability of sewer and water utilities. Development Density: approximately 1 dwelling unit/acre Single-Family/Duplex Residential Intended primarily for single family and duplex residential development. Lower density zoning designations are suitable for areas with sensitive environmental features, topographical constraints, or limited street access. Higher densities are more appropriate for areas with good access to all city services and facilities. Development Density: 2-12 dwelling units/acre Narrow Lot/Townhouse Residential Suitable for medium to high density single family residential development, including zero lot line development, duplexes, townhouses, and narrow lot detached single family housing. Development Density: 6-12 dwelling units/acre Low -Density Multi -Family Residential Intended for low -density multi -family housing. Suitable for areas with good access to all city services and facilities. Higher density zoning designations may not be suitable for areas with topographical constraints or limited street access. Development Density: 8 -15 dwelling units/acre Medium- to High -Density Multi -Family Residential Intended for medium- to high-density multi -family housing. Suitable for areas with good access to all city services and facilities. Higher density zoning designations may not be suitable for areas with topographical constraints or limited street access. Development Density: 16-44 dwelling units/acre Future Urban Development Areas within the growth limit that are not yet served by City services and may not experience substantial development within the lifetime of this district plan. As development becomes imminent in these areas, the City will develop more detailed land use and street layout concepts to supplement the current plan. Public/Private Open Space Indicates existing open space that is important for the protection of sensitive natural features and/or to provide for recreational opportunities and protect the aesthetic values of the community. An open space designation on private land may indicate that an area is largely unsuitable for development due to environmental or topographical constraints. While these areas are best reserved or acquired for private or public open space, development may occur on privately held land if a proposal meets the underlying zoning requirements and the requirements of the Iowa City Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer Useful public facilities, such as limited -access highways or landfills, can produce undesirable side-effects. In these areas a substantial vegetative buffer should be maintained or established to separate residential development from these uses. Alternatively, where appropriate, nonresidential uses can be used to buffer residential areas from highways, landfills, and other such uses. Public Services/Institutional Areas intended for civic, cultural, or historical institutions; public schools; and places of assembly or worship. Iowa City does not have a zone that designates institutional uses as the primary, preferred land use. However, there are a number of zones where these uses are permitted or provisional uses. Development proposals are subject to the requirements of the underlying zoning designation. Land that is owned by a public entity is typically zoned Public (P). Neighborhood Commercial Areas intended for retail sales and personal service uses that meet the day-to-day needs of a fully developed residential neighborhood. A grocery store or grocery store/drug store combination is preferred as the primary tenant in a Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) zone. Specific site development standards will apply in these areas to ensure that commercial development is pedestrian -friendly and compatible with surrounding residential development. Office Commercial Areas intended for office uses and compatible businesses. In some cases these areas may serve as a buffer between residential areas and more intensive commercial or industrial uses. General Commercial Areas intended to provide the opportunity for a large variety of commercial uses that serve a major segment of the community. Mixed Use Areas intended for development that combines commercial and residential uses. An area may be primarily commercial in nature or may be primarily residential depending on the location and the surrounding neighborhood. Commercial uses will typically be located on the ground floor with housing above. Development is intended to be pedestrian - oriented with buildings close to and oriented to the sidewalk. Appendix A Southwest District Plan Map Designations Intensive Commercial Areas intended for those sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor display and storage of merchandise, by repair businesses, quasi -industrial uses, and for sales of large equipment or motor vehicles, or by activities or operations conducted in buildings or structure not completely enclosed. Retail uses are restricted in order to provide opportunities for more land -intensive or quasi -industrial commercial operations and also to prevent conflicts between retail and industrial truck traffic. Special attention must be directed toward buffering the negative aspects of allowed uses from any adjacent lower intensity commercial areas or residential areas. � �:!�!�' � � ' t�� L��� ©� _T MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 16, 2021 —7:00 PM FORMAL MEETING THE CENTER — ASSEMBLY ROOM FINAL MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Mike Hensch, Maria Padron, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Phoebe Martin, Mark Nolte STAFF PRESENT: Ray Heitner, Sara Hektoen, Kirk Lehmann, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: Jon Marner, Josh Entler, John Bergstrom, Eric Freedman, Jim Larimore, Sherri Slothower Bergstrom, Cindy Seyfer, Brenda Scott, Tim Slothower, Duane Kruse, Jim Seyfer, Alex Hachtman, Joleah Shaw, Chris Arch RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 3-2 (Townsend and Padron dissenting) the Commission recommends approval of CPA21-0002, a proposed amendment to change the following for around 80 acres of property located south of IWV and west of Slothower: The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation from Rural Residential, Open Space, and Residential at 2-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre to Intensive Commercial; and The Southwest District Plan future land use map designation from Single-Family/Duplex Residential and Future Urban Development to Intensive Commercial, and to change the text of the District Plan to what was included in the agenda packet. Note: After the meeting it was determined that the motion to approve the comprehensive plan amendment did not pass because a minimum of 4 votes is required. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of ANN21-0003, a voluntary annexation of approximately 70.39 acres of property located south of IWV Road and west of Slothower Road. By a vote of 4-1 (Padron dissenting) the Commission recommends approval of REZ21-0006, a rezoning of approximately 53.36 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Intensive Commercial (CI - 1), 9 acres from Rural Residential (RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1), and 17.03 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Interim Development Commercial (ID -C) subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owner shall: a. Plat all the property herein rezoned to follow the zoning boundaries. b. Submit a landscape plan, which shall be approved by the City Forester, to ensure that, when developed, the subject property is designed in a manner that emphasizes green components within its location along an arterial and as an entryway into the City. c. Owner shall contribute 25% of the cost of upgrading Slothower Road, south of the proposed access, to collector street standards, adjacent to the subject property. 2. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the property fronting Slothower Road: Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 2 of 36 a. Installation of landscaping to the S3 standard, as detailed in section 14 -5F -6C of City Code, along the subject property's Slothower Road frontage. If said certificate of occupancy is issued during a poor planting season, by May 31 following issuance of the certificate of occupancy. b. Improvement of Slothower Road to the southern end of the proposed access off Slothower Road. c. Installation of landscaping to the S3 standard along the property line and IWV Road. 3. At the time the final plat is approved, Owner shall dedicate additional right-of-way along the Slothower Road frontage in an amount and location approved by the City Engineer. 4. Parking, loading areas, and outdoor storage shall either not be located between the front facade of the principal structure and the front yard right-of-way line or shall be screened to the S3 standard along the IWV Road frontage. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of CPA21-0001, a proposed amendment to the South District Plan to facilitate development that follows form -based principles in the South District of Iowa City. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends recommend a Zoning Code Amendment to adopt form -based standards for new development as identified in the South District Plan. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends setting a public hearing on October 7, 2021 on a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan on an update to the Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: CASE NO. CPA21-0002: Location: SW corner of Slothower Road and IWV Road A public hearing on amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the Southwest District Plan and Comprehensive Plan future land use map designations, and related plan text, from residential, open space, and future development to intensive commercial. Lehmann began a presentation on the staff report noting this item is proposing to amend the Southwest District Plan and the Comprehensive Plan future land use maps from their current Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 3 of 36 designations to intensive commercial south of IWV Road and west of Slothower Road. This application was submitted by MMS Consultants on behalf of the owner. Lehmann noted it was submitted with two additional applications as well, so in addition to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment there is an annexation (ANN21-0003) which would annex 70 acres into the City and a rezoning (REZ21-0006) to rezone this land from its current designations of Rural Residential within the City and Agriculture in the County to Intensive Commercial and Interim Development Commercial. Currently the land is used for agriculture and it's part of the Southwest District Plan which was adopted in 2002. The subject properties are within the Weber Subarea of the Plan, one of four subareas in this Southwest District Plan, and in the future land use it is shown primarily as future urban development but then there's also some single-family duplex residential along Slothower to the east side and a Vegetative Noise and Site Buffer to the west. The Plan notes some limited residential development may occur west of Slothower Road, but that due to sanitary sewer limitations, extensive development wasn't expected at that time, or in the near future. The Plan also states that residential uses should be buffered from the landfill and the proposed US 965 alignment and that a more detailed plan will be needed when development eventually occurs. Lehmann showed a map of the subject parcel noting it's south of IWV Road which turns into Melrose Avenue and west of Slothower Road. It's approximately 80 acres and it's all agricultural. US 218 is further to the east, but directly east is the Johnson County Historic Poor Farm. Again, the property is currently zoned County Agricultural, it's got some Rural Agricultural to the north, County Agricultural for the rest of it, and then to the east are some public uses where there's the Poor Farm and some other uses such as the Johnson County facilities buildings and the National Guard Center. Lehmann showed a picture of the topography of the area and noted some hills. Lehmann noted the proposed amendment has two components, one for the Southwest District Plan and one for the Comprehensive Plan and those would be to modify the future land use map so that it's reflected in both of them. He added there's also some text changes to the Southwest District Plan that generalizes the timeframe for the US 965 extension and then discusses intensive commercial uses that may be appropriate along Melrose should the proposed amendment be adopted. The proposed amendment would change the land use designation to intensive commercial but that doesn't mean the entire site would be intensive commercial, there are sensitive features on site that have to be accommodated, but the entire parcel would be shown on the future land use map as intensive commercial and the future land use map on the Comprehensive Plan would reflect that same change should it be amended. The role of the Commission tonight is to decide if the two general criteria that are used to determine if a Comprehensive Plan Amendment should be made (found at 14 -8D -3D) and that is that the circumstances have changed, or additional information or factors have come to light such that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. Second, the proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, including any District Plans or other Amendments thereto. Lehmann noted all of this is laid out in the staff report, but he will try to summarize and make it as clear as possible. Starting with the first criteria, looking at circumstances that have changed such that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. First looking at what was happening at the time these Plans were adopted, prior to 1990 the area was undeveloped, there are a few homes on Rohret Road and some public uses, primarily the County Poor Farm on Melrose, but Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 4 of 36 other than that there wasn't much development. By the time the Southwest District Plan was adopted in 2002 housing was continuing to develop west and north of Rohret Road and at that time the Comprehensive Plan was from 1997. That Plan was the first to actually extend the growth area of the City from approximately Slothower to the proposed future alignment of US 965. That Plan was also the first to consider the future use of the site and the future land use map showed it as interim development or rural residential. Lehmann noted there was also a policy that was included in that Comprehensive Plan and in the Southwest District Plan that talks about discouraging commercial uses at the Melrose and 218 interchange and instead it encouraged focusing commercial and industrial development at the Highway 1/218 interchange due to concerns that both areas would not be able to support full development so staff wanted to concentrate it at that south interchange. That policy was first adopted in the 1983 Comprehensive Plan so that policy has been in place since 218 was built. The 1983 Plan also talks about maintaining public uses directly west of the Melrose interchange, and this policy while it is not explicitly discussed in the current Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted in 2013, it is reflected in the future land use map showing the site as rural residential which is similar to the interim development / rural residential that was used in 1997 and is also included in the 2006 Fringe Area Agreement, which is a part of that Comprehensive Plan. Regarding development over time, predominantly south of Melrose, there's some early residential subdivisions that started occurring along Rohret Road and then some additional residential development that crosses 218 and even more once Camp Cardinal Boulevard was constructed in 2007. In 2016 and 2020 three Comprehensive Plan Amendments were made that started introducing some commercial uses into the area, specifically office commercial, and some medium density residential and general commercial uses in relatively small pockets. To the west of the interchange, there are public land uses, the Iowa National Guard Readiness Center, the Joint Emergency Communication Center and the Johnson County SEATS facility. Also housing development has continued west of US 218 and north of Rohret Road. Therefore, staff believes that it's in the public interest to explore future uses for this area as the site has basically been in a holding pattern since the 1997 Comprehensive Plan and the 2002 Southwest District Plan, partially because it was assumed that infrastructure would not be available and that would prevent urban development. However, the applications show that the property can be serviced, so it makes sense to define what future urban uses might look like in this area. Another change in circumstance since the time this Plan was adopted has been rapid growth and population redistribution in the Iowa City metro over the last 30 years. Since 1990 Iowa City has grown by about 25% but other metros have grown by about three times their population, especially North Liberty and Coralville, so with that, Iowa City has decreased as a proportion of the metro population and the center of population has shifted northwest, which makes the US 218 corridor increasingly important. Growth is expected to continue so uses must grow to accommodate demand as well. The application is asking to change the future land use of this area to intensive commercial. Lehmann explained intensive commercial has a broad range of uses that are allowed but it's generally sales and service businesses, often characterized by outdoor uses such as large-scale repair or sales or unenclosed operations. It includes some limited retail trade as well. With intensive commercial uses, there is a need to buffer residential uses because it allows some higher intensity commercial and light industrial uses. With regards to intensive commercial uses across the City, it appears that the current vacant land does not meet the needs of all uses within the City. Currently around 400 acres of intensive commercial is in the City and about 13% of that land is vacant. Most of the vacant 45 acres is expected to develop into small parcels with Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 5 of 36 individual businesses occupying those spaces. Lehmann added some other zones allow similar uses, there are commercials zones that are similar and industrial zones. There is quite a bit of vacant general industrial land as well, but that is primarily positioned to attract railroad users, whereas this site has access to the interstate so that was a factor in staff's recommendation. Lehmann also noted this all started with MidAmerican Energy trying to locate a site and after looking around the City, they found none that met their needs and so they began looking at other areas that might be suitable for that type of use. Lehmann added that this is change is brought about by the application and is not a City -led process and staff is looking at what are the uses generally that might be appropriate. Throughout the City there are three general areas that might accommodate some of these uses, one is around the airport to the southwest, that's one of the larger areas that allows light industrial uses. There's the industrial area that runs along the railroad to the southeast and then on 1-80 and Dodge Street to the north that is a commercial area. All those areas have different challenges and benefits. The area to the north would require rezoning and an annexation, the current industrial park doesn't have good highway access, and the area near the airport primarily has smaller parcels. The area they're looking at now is relatively small compared to these other general light industrial areas. In addition, staff looks at future need for Iowa City. Based on MPO projections, Iowa City is expected to grow to approximately 94,000 people by 2040 so that is a growth of about 26%. Assuming demand increases at about the same rate, that shows a need for about 500 acres of intensive commercial and based on what's been planned for in the City currently, there will be around 442 acres of intensive commercial so that leaves a 58 -acre gap. Lehmann noted it's actually a larger gap than that because a lot of intensive commercial areas that are going to be annexed into the City are already occupied either by intensive commercial uses or by other unrelated uses. Lehmann noted there is also changing demand over time, and so, whether staff uses the same growth rate as population, it's not the exact amount that is needed, it's a ballpark for what's an appropriate amount of intensive commercial uses. Staff anticipates demand is going to remain relatively stable, unlike other uses related to commercial where there is a decline in brick and mortar stores with a shift to online retail. The reason staff believes it's going to remain relatively stable is because these sorts of uses often meet some of the demands that would have been met by brick and mortar stores otherwise, especially logistics, transportation, warehousing and those sorts of uses. Staff also believes that MidAmerican Energy would occupy a portion of the site. So based on that projected demand and based on the site and its access to the interstate, staff believes that the amendment is in the public interest and that circumstances have changed over time. Lehmann reiterated areas where staff is expecting additions of intensive commercial are primarily by the interstate interchange and then on south Riverside Drive, but when looking at vacant parcels, that is just the area southwest of the airport, some small parcels near the US 218 interchange, some small parcels north of the airport and some small parcels on Scott Boulevard. Again, generally there's not many large areas for this type of development within this zone. Lehmann stated the second criterion staff uses to judge Comprehensive Plan Amendments is tied to if it's compatible with the policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan or District Plans and this proposal does align with many of the policies in the Southwest District Plan, especially for the Weber subarea. This area was slated for future development until infrastructure was available, it maintains the transportation vision for the area which includes US 965 along the west border, Slothower to the east, and Melrose to the north, it allows for contiguous development from Slothower to US 965 and provides the transition from the landfill and US 965 to intensive commercial and then to agriculture/residential uses. Additional buffering for those uses can be accommodated through rezoning. It also aligns with other goals or objectives in the Comprehensive Plan as well such as identifying appropriate locations for Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 6 of 36 commercial development, the needs of the future population, identifying land for industrial uses with ready access to rail and highways and also targeting industrial business sectors that align with Iowa City's economic strengths, i.e., renewable energy or energy in general, finance manufacturing and focusing growth in the City's growth area. Lehmann stated this area is within Iowa City's fringe Growth Area C. Lehmann stated there are also policies affiliated with the Comprehensive Plan, looking at commercial, industrial development south and southwest at the airport or along intersections of paved roads to be annexed prior to development. This application is at paved intersections and has applied for annexation. Lehmann also noted the Commission will be asked later to set a public hearing for the Fringe Area Agreement, which they have to update because it is expiring, but this policy also aligns with what staff is proposing for the future fringe area as well. That being said, Lehmann noted there are some differences in policies that are in the Comprehensive and Southwest District Plans. Intensive commercial somewhat diverges from the policy mentioned against commercial encroachment near Melrose and 218. However the area near the interchange will continue to remain as a public use, and it does meet other goals that are tied to identifying appropriate locations for commercial and industrial development so staff believes that the spirit of the policy is met. There's also another policy about encouraging new businesses in existing commercial areas but in this case the existing commercial areas don't seem to accommodate all users within the City that would like to locate here. Lehmann reiterated this was initially considered because of MidAmerican Energy was looking for a site and was not able to find one, and there is a need for future new intensive commercial uses based on population growth within the City. Lehmann stated there's some other policies he wanted to mention that could be accommodated through the sensitive areas and site development processes, especially related to strip commercial development, discouraging walking and biking and then also sensitive areas, a lot of those can be covered either through conditions on rezoning or by the zoning standards generally which helps those policies be met. So, based on these findings staff believes that the proposed amendment is compatible with the policies in the Comprehensive Plan but that implementation would require annexation and rezoning which the Commission will also consider this evening and those should include conditions to ensure that the goals of the Comprehensive Plan are met. Lehmann stated staff also received public comments for this item and all were forwarded to the Commission in advance of this meeting. The applicant held a good neighbor meeting, four neighbors attended and there was discussion along a range of items that included the potentially wide range of uses for the proposed zone, about buffers from residences and sensitive features on the site, and also concern over property values for residential properties that are nearby. In terms of written correspondence, there were four that were opposed, one due to potential traffic and lighting impacts of the proposed use, one with concerns about the shift from rural residential to commercial and that being a relatively large change in policy and that might encourage future commercial development which might have negative impacts, one tied to concerns regarding long term policy in a large area near residences and impacts on residential uses and requested that the City slow down to better understand the impacts, and then one that noted the area being rural residential with a diversity of housing types is one of the reasons they bought their home Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 7 of 36 and noted the amendment process was not transparent and did not have enough outreach. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approved CPA21-0002, a proposed amendment to change the following for around 80 acres of property located south of IWV and west of Slothower: The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation from Rural Residential, Open Space, and Residential at 2-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre to Intensive Commercial; and The Southwest District Plan future land use map designation from Single-Family/Duplex Residential and Future Urban Development to Intensive Commercial, and to change the text of the District Plan to what was included in the agenda packet. In terms of next steps, the goal is to determine if the proposed plan amendment should be recommended for approval by city council, which would run concurrently with the annexation and rezoning. In terms of Council making the final decisions, they would consider the Comprehensive Plan Amendment on November 16, that would be a single meeting, and then there'd be three meetings on the rezoning, so two additional meetings potentially ending December 21. Hensch asked if the Comprehensive Plan for this area was last updated in 2002 so almost 20 years ago. Lehmann replied for the District Plan yes. Hensch asked what some of the current uses of the land are to the east and to the north of this area. Lehmann stated directly east is the County Poor Farm property that is currently used for agriculture, but also used for events, to the northeast there is the facilities building for Johnson County, so outdoor storage of buses and some maintenance facilities, also the National Guard Readiness Center is over there, but directly north is agricultural. Hensch noted also present on the Johnson County Poor Farm are the Joint Emergency Communications Center and the Chatham Oaks residential care facility which is housing for the long term chronically mentally ill. Hensch asked what the distance from the landfill these 79 acres is. Heitner replied it's about half a mile to three quarters of a mile to the southwest depending on where they're measuring. Hensch asked if the roadway through here from 218 to just past the landfill is all being currently improved. Lehmann confirmed it is. Hensch opened the public hearing. Jon Marner (MMS Consultants) is representing the applicant First he thanked staff as they have been working together on this project for close to six months and staff did a great job with the report and putting the packet together with a lot of useful information. Marner wanted to highlight one specific item, the comprehensive planning and zoning amendments that are being sought are to provide an opportunity for businesses that require close access to not only arterial roadways but also the interstate system. There are no finalized agreements at this time for any end users. Staff alluded to MidAmerican as a possible end user and is somebody that would fit this classification, but that's not finalized at this time. Manner stated they feel that this use will be beneficial as there is a growing need or a future need based on the growth in this area for this type of use in the Iowa City community. Given the way the growth has moved towards the north and west and with the recent improvements to the IWV this is a natural location, they feel, to Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 8 of 36 provide those uses. This location has arterial road access both on IWV right now and the future Highway 965 location that's planned to go along the east side of landfill at the western edge of this property. And of course, the property is in very close proximity to the interstate system. Marner noted regarding a few other items staff mentioned were comments, questions and concerns from the good neighbor meeting and also received written comments, they understand there was a concern about the proximity of this type of use to future residential development in the area. The southern edge of this property has a stream corridor that runs close to parallel to the property line and there's a lot of sensitive features, wetlands, some wooded areas, forest, as well as the stream corridor that runs north/south along the very west edge of the of the property. Those features, combined with a detention basin that they have currently planned for the property, account for approximately a third of the property and that is well above the required buffer for this zoning code for intensive commercial from residential. They are taking advantage of the natural features that are already in place and then extending them by providing the detention that's required as part of the City's ordinance and utilizing that area to help provide an additional buffer for any potential future residential development. Marner affirmed they did listen to those concerns, as part of that meeting, as the original detention basin they had planned did not extend all the way over to Slothower Road but they did extend it over all the way to Slothower Road so it provides a full buffer all the way along the south edge of the property. A couple other items Marner wanted to address were the changes to the area. There's a lot of growth in this area and some of the uses have changed since 2002 when the Plan was adopted such as the Joint Emergency Communication Center and the County's current plans as they have changed the Poor Farm for that area since then. One last item Marner wanted to address was the traffic flow on Slothower. Currently Slothower terminates just south of Wild Cat Lane to the south, there is no connection all the way through to Rohret Road, and it was an expressed concern in the Comprehensive Plan that it might be used as a cut through as it develops to the south. There is an opportunity either through design of traffic control features or rerouting that location to design that Slothower connection as it moves south towards Rohret to discourage the cut through the Comprehensive Plan alludes to at this time. Manner noted though all the anticipated traffic flow for this type of use will be to the interstate as those uses desire close and easy access to the interstate. They would typically utilize that entrance and would not go to the south, any potential flow to the south would likely occur due to residential development that continues as it grows to the south. Hensch stated it's a 79.4 acre site and about a third of the site will not be available for development because of the sensitive areas and detention basin which is about 26 acres so that the buffer area will all be to the south, or will that be distributed throughout the property. Marner stated they submitted a plan that would do a much better job of depicting the area, but it is wetlands and primarily a small stream corridor that runs north/south at the very western edge of the property. The zoning parcel that's described runs along the stream corridor on the western edge towards the western quarter of the property. The buffer he is referring to with the detention basin and natural features are extended further east to try to get as close to Slothower as possible. There's additional detention in the southwest corner next to that stream corridor and then the sensitive features that are located centrally right in the middle of the site along the south boundary is a combination of the stream corridor and wetlands. Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 9 of 36 Hensch also asked about the extension of 965, he doesn't recall the Iowa Department Transportation Commission having funded that project. Marner confirmed it's not, everything that they've alluded to is based on the City's Comprehensive Plan and long term. Hensch wondered on something like that how wide would the right-of-way typically be. Marner stated typically an arterial is at least 80 feet, oftentimes it will range up to 100, he knows there was discussion mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan of utilizing that particular right-of-way to provide some additional green space or to do a little bit of different design there to try to provide some extra screening from the landfill. Craig noted they spoke of the County's plans for the Poor Farm and some of the correspondence had said something about the County's plans for the Poor Farm and they all know plans change, but what are the County's plans for the Poor Farm. Marner stated he hasn't seen an updated plan lately, his reference to it was primarily the change when the County moved forward with their plan to develop the Poor Farm in some manner, as opposed to the previous plan that was in place whenever the Comprehensive Plan was written. The Comprehensive Plan alludes to some of that ground potentially becoming public or private development and park area, he doesn't know if that's necessarily in their current plan. Marner added, and staff will probably touch on this during the rezoning application, one of the conditions suggested is a CZA to require S3 screening, so a higher level of screening, along Slothower to help with some of the visibility and to help buffer on the east side any potential users of the Johnson County Poor Farm. Lehmann noted he can touch a bit on that plan too as they recently updated their plan. The Johnson County Poor Farm site shows the area as continued agricultural and if they have residential uses it would be adjacent to the existing residential uses to the southeast of the property. Craig confirmed she hasn't followed it closely but it was her understanding that the nature of the Poor Farm, while some of the individual uses may change, will still be pretty agriculture looking. Signs asked if they had any idea of the amount of this parcel or property that MidAmerican is interested in using. Marner replied it would depend on their total use, with the stream corridor and the unusable land in the buffer area, the maximum available land would be around 40 acres. Marner reiterated they've had a preliminary conversation at this point as far as their interest goes but this application and request is being developed in this manner and the requested zoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment regardless of any user's pursuance of the property. It fits the need for the area and an opportunity to provide it in a good location for any type of user. Townsend asked if at this point only MidAmerica has given an interest in this area. Marner can't speak directly to that as he is not part of the development team on the ownership side. He believes there's a chance that other parties are interested and MidAmerican Energy is just the one staff was aware of. Josh Entler (IWV Holdings) added they are committed to dedicating that vegetative buffer to make sure there's no structures and what that equates to is the south 20 acres would be reserved as vegetative buffer and the other six acres comes from that stream corridor going north and south on the western third of the parcel, so it'll be about a 20 acre reservation. Entler noted it is about seven times the required minimum buffer from commercial to residential so they're doing as much as they can to acknowledge that they heard some feedback at the good neighbor meeting and want to be committed to providing an adequate buffer on the property to make sure that should the landowners to the south want to do residential in the future they have Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 10 of 36 a fair opportunity to do so. Padron asked for clarification on the size of the buffer. Entler explained it would be 350 feet going along the north and south and then it would stretch the entire width of the 70 -acre parcel, so it equates to 20 acres of reservation. Entler also wanted to thank staff for spending lots of time and research kind exploring a variety of different options, they've come to similar conclusions and the point he wanted to hit on is commercial users are looking for larger contiguous tracts of land, not just little 5 and 10 acre parcels but looking for opportunities that could be 10 or 20 acre parcels that are close access to interstate 218 and the 1-80/380 corridor as it is becoming a growing attractive location to have some intensive commercial uses. John Bergstrom (Slothower Farms) represents the family who owned the hundred plus acres directly south of the subject property. His involvement is he's married to Sherri Slothower and her brother Tim is here tonight also and they've been monitoring things in this area for a while and have come to the conclusion they would like to object to this development. They just don't understand why blow-up years and years of planning and Comprehensive Plan zoning for a single 40 -acre user because this development is going to be the first step of dictating what happens in a large overlay area. This area has always been anticipated to be residential and now all of a sudden as he reads the staff report, everything planned to accommodate a 40 acre user, MidAmerica. Bergstrom can appreciate the fact that they are having trouble finding a site, but why take an area here that affects large neighborhoods, it will affect whatever happens at the County Farm and it just doesn't make any sense. In reading the report, and his comments are in the packet but he would like to address that the changes that are in place at that intersection. Right now, the changes on the east side of the interchange really doesn't have much to do on the west side. That is a natural separation and the general area there south of Melrose hasn't changed much at all. Bergstrom talked to staff back in February and he went back through the notes and the things that jumped out was it's going to be residential and also there was a note that there is no commercial interest. Well, evidently there is by one user and it's intensive commercial, it's not a good neighbor for residential and why blow up this entire area. They were talking earlier about defining what an urban user is, well intensive commercial is very urban and it's not a compatible neighbor for residential. There was concerned about the buffer, 965 will be a natural buffer and he's talked to residential developers, and they have concerns with the landfill so they think it actually provides a natural ending point for a neighborhood. Iowa City appears to be concerned about not having enough intensive commercial in the future, as he looked at the map shown tonight, there's plenty of land near other commercial areas and intensive commercial areas that could be land to develop. The current Fringe Area Agreement says that this type of development in the future should be south and west of the airport well this is certainly not south and west of the airport. Bergstrom can understand maybe some zoning changes but not this abrupt of one, if this corner was going to be neighborhood commercial or something like that it's complimentary to the residents that live in Country Club Estates and hopefully on the land that the Slothower family owns and the land to the south. Bergstrom would just ask to slow this thing down, this is a knee jerk reaction to a single user and it's a user that should not be on this corner. Eric Freedman (4401 Tempe Place) began by stating he agrees with Bergstrom and they just heard there's over 100 families in their community and several hundred more in the area surrounding Weber school and none of them really heard about this until they got an email from Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 11 of 36 one person who happened to hear from Bergstrom and the board of their housing organization hasn't even had a chance to talk about it yet, this is too fast to allow a democratic process to occur. Another point is there actually is a plan for the Poor Farm and they need to know what is happening on that site before they make any decisions about what's happening across the street. His understanding is that there's trails being created there, people are going to be able to take walks and there's forested areas. He also believes there's going to be some housing for low income families and some other community farm sites on that site. Freedman stated it doesn't sound like the staff have a clear idea of what's happening there, and he thinks they need to get a better sense of what's happening there before they build across the street. Freedman also stated what the community that he lives in needs is neighborhood commercial as there's very few supermarkets or restaurants or anything close to them. They need a road that connects right to Melrose west of the highway so they can get to places north instead of having to weave all the way around to the east side of the highway through all the backstreets. Those things seem to be much higher priority than to make one exception for one company that wants to build there. Freedman would like to see a better picture of the whole area, is this going to be the only heavy commercial site or is there going to be more to the south or is it going to expand to the north, what's going to happen. He thinks they need to think about this in a broader more long-term light as opposed to this one organization that wants to build one thing in one place. They need to slow down and have a more democratic conversation among all the hundreds of families that are living there now. Jim Larimore (1143 Wildcat Lane) stated from his front yard they have a clear line of sight to the proposed building site and what he wanted to share tonight is that when his family decided seven years ago that they would make their home in that neighborhood they carefully reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and read through every word in the Southwest District Plan. They felt that it was a very thorough, very well thought through plan, and it gave them a lot of confidence for what the future of their neighborhood would be. His opinion is that the current proposal, in spite of the language that was used rather artfully in some of the reports, is not consistent with the Southwest District Plan, in fact the proposal reverses key parts of the Plan such as avoiding commercial development at the Melrose/218 interchange and preserving the rural and residential character of the area in question. Larimore takes issue with the idea that his neighbors and he should consider intensive commercial development as a buffer to protect their neighborhood when the documents from the City's Planning and Zoning Department included proposed requirements that would buffer them from the impact of the proposed intensive commercial development. If they need to be buffered from the proposed buffer, he doesn't find it reasonable to consider that intensive commercial development actually acts as a buffer. Larimore seconds the call that the process should be slowed down, they should not act on a Comprehensive Plan in a piecemeal way, if the Comprehensive Plan is going to be revisited then do it in an open, inclusive process. The same type of process that was used about 20 years ago to develop the current Plan. Larimore reiterated his request the Commission don't rush a judgment and don't take a piecemeal approach to a Comprehensive Plan. Sherri Slothower Bergstrom (Slothower Farms) is one of the co-owners with her family of the Slothower Farm area that butts right up to the property that they're talking about here today. She wants to echo what everybody has said, this has happened really quick, they are the next-door neighbors and had no idea anything like this was being considered. The City talked about the good neighbor meeting and that there were four people there, well, the reason there were four people there is because no one was notified. There wasn't a sign what up on the property, they had to ask about that and then they were told that legally the City is only required to notify people Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 12 of 36 within a 300 -foot area of the property so none of the wonderful people that are here from the Country Club Estates area were notified and the people that live in their farmhouse currently were not notified. Bergstrom also noted they got a distinct impression that there's been a lot of conversations going on between the City and the developer, as the developer said, for nearly six months. Nobody knew anything, no one was notified about anything, and they felt like it was done before it even came to the neighbors. Bergstrom asked the Commission to think for one minute about what this means to the people that live in the beautiful neighborhood in the Country Club Estates neighborhood which is right across the road from her farmhouse. They are going to be looking at large lighting, tall fences, maybe even with security fencing, big trucks, lots of them, and it will be very disruptive. Bergstrom can't think of a buffer they could come up with no matter how long it stretches that is going to help them from the pollution, the light pollution, and the noise. This will change to the character of their neighborhood. Cindy Seyfer (36 Tempe Court) stated she doesn't have a lot to add other than saying that she agrees with what her neighbors have said and many of them chose to live there for the specific reason that they had the rural residential mix. Her husband and she have the pleasure of looking out their back yard onto the Poor Farm and seeing the sunsets from their deck and seeing the dark night skies from their deck. She understands the need for public use and what might be in the public interest, but she also thinks there is a balance and to her this is not going to be the right balance for the interest of the public and the people if they move from rural residential to intensive commercial. That's just leaping too far, too fast, and she agrees with Sherri Bergstrom in terms of the ability for them to be part of the good neighbor process. There's a few of them here tonight, but there would have been even more that would have come out had they had an opportunity early on to be part of good neighbor discussions. Seyfer would like to encourage the Commission, as others have said, to slow down, involve the rest of the community, and to look closely and honestly at what the plan is for the future. One of the things they all appreciate about Iowa City is the concepts and ideals of transparency and inclusivity and they've not found that yet here but do appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight. They just want to be more involved in the process. Brenda Scott (1783 Lake Shore Drive) lives in the Country Club Estates and echoes what everyone has said here. If anyone has ever driven out there late at night, go to the end of one of these roads that they're talking about and see how dark it is. The biggest lights are coming from the landfill and adding a ton of lights in an industrial area going to completely change the neighborhood. Another thing to consider is as a parent of a West High student that's a young driver that has to head south and goes through Shannon Drive currently, she knows there's been talk of doing another road like Slothower was before Southwest Estates was built, but she has heard that they have that route through Lake Shore Drive potentially, which is where she lives, and that road has a ton of traffic, high speed traffic, so having additional traffic also go to Lake Shore to get to this area would be bad especially if they are talking about giant trucks going through a neighborhood filled with kids. Also, because the traffic to the east of this location would be going by West High it will cause issues. The main road to get to West High for everyone down there is Shannon Drive turning right to go to West High or turning left to get to Northwest Junior High. In the mornings that street is backed up so much and trying to add large industrial trucks into that is going to cause even more congestion and a dangerous situation for immature drivers. Scott acknowledged she doesn't really understand when they say MidAmerican is going to be built there, what that means, is it a hub for their trucks or is it one of those giant energy plant type things. She would appreciate an answer that too. But overall, just the amount of traffic, the light, and changing the neighborhood is all happening way too fast. Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 13 of 36 Tim Slothower (Slothower Farms) stated their family moved out to that area back in the early 70s and so they lived out there at a time when that road actually went through from Melrose to Rohret Road. About halfway down it turned into a mud road. Slothower also stated unfortunately there's a lot of traffic that uses that road, because if anyone wants to go south and then west the best place to go that direction is south on Slothower Road, from the interstate there is not a direct route to head south and west. So, when they moved out there, the road was through and they had constant traffic coming up and down that road from Secondary Roads. They had 30-40 dump trucks a day going up and down that road, and at that time it was a gravel road and it's not that much better now than it was back then. Slothower did have two questions, one is there going to be access from this new development to Slothower Road or will all the access be from Melrose and IWV. The other question he has is how much traffic would be going down a road if it does get connected to the subdivision. Again, he has lived on that road for 30 years and seen a lot of changes out there as far as traffic and that kind of thing and he hates to see it go back to that direction, it's a nice quiet neighborhood and it should stay that way. Duane Kruse (965 Slothower Road) is one of the two residents that live on Slothower Road and agrees with what everybody has stated, it's beautiful out there at nighttime, it's dark with a great view of the stars and wonderful sunsets. He's grown to love the land and got the distinct privilege of buying the family farmstead and three acres. They too were under the impression that when they purchased this land in the future, at some point in time, it would be developed to residential. He and his wife Kathy are opposed to this and think it should be very highly considered to jump in lightly on this. It is not wise for a lot of different reasons, one, as everybody stated, to put in heavy industrial is going to bring big lights and big fences. To his understanding MidAmerican Energy would have a storage facility, which they have one now to the south and it's not very neat and orderly nor very attractive. Kruse spoke with the developer back there they have they have a large buffer strip which is very positive, but it changes everything, it changes the environment, it floods the area with lights, as the Iowa City landfill has done. The historic farm has also started to put up heavy lights that flood the area. Kruse stated if they had a magic wand they would just turn it all into a forest with ponds and maybe a park for the public to enjoy, but never industrial. Again, he stated he had his wife Kathy are most definitely opposed, the 49 pheasants that were in their front yard all winter long are opposed, their two dogs are opposed, their three cats are opposed. They love that land; he grew up on a farm and to see something in this magnitude really needs to be considered and take a pause and ask do they really need to change things to this nature. Kruse asked if this was in your backyard, would you want it there. Wind turbines are the most efficient use and are out in the ocean because east coast communities say no, they can't put them in their backyards because they have political power. Maybe the City needs to consider what's the real purpose here, why change something to this nature, because is that a wise move. Kruse doesn't know that answer, but he does know this much from having the privilege of living out there for five years or so now, he has grown to love this property for a lot of different reasons, so he urges the Commission to reconsider this. Jim Seyfer (36 Tempe Court) had just a couple of points. Number one he is pretty astounded that there isn't more understanding or knowledge of what the County Poor Farms plans are so that is another reason to slow down. Secondly, he doesn't have a master's in urban planning, but he thinks a principle of urban planning is to group and place and approve the proper activities in the right zones. As he looks at the maps and they're off in the west corner as a one-off proposal which would need to be rezoned. It doesn't belong there and intensive commercial just flies in the face of what he thinks urban planning should be all about. He just wants to echo his support Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 14 of 36 for everyone else who has spoken before him. Hensch closed the public hearing. Signs moved to recommend approval of CPA21-0002, a proposed amendment to change the following for around 80 acres of property located south of IWV and west of Slothower: • The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation from Rural Residential, Open Space, and Residential at 2-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre to Intensive Commercial; and • The Southwest District Plan future land use map designation from Single- Family/Duplex Residential and Future Urban Development to Intensive Commercial, and to change the text of the District Plan to what was included in the agenda packet. Townsend seconded the motion. Hensch noted the discussion now is relative exclusively to the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan and the question before the Commission as set forth by the rules of Iowa City is looking at the approval criteria for the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to this area and there's two different items in this. His personal opinion is that the City has shown that these two items that have existed, that is, the circumstances have changed and/or additional information or factors have come to light, such as the proposed amendment is in the public interest. Hensch noted that is always the Commission's purpose here, what are they looking at and what is best for the City of Iowa City, the entire city. The second area is what is proposed will be compatible with other policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, including any district plans or amendments thereto. He believes both those circumstances and both those things are true so he'll be supporting this application. Signs agrees and thinks Hensch made a good point that this piece is just around the Comprehensive Plan change and that there are other opportunities to put criteria in if anyone feels the need to as they go through the annexation and rezoning. He has struggled with this a little bit, but does think that the area has changed, and the intent of some of the future plans such as bringing 965 down on the west side and making it a major thoroughfare does enhance that or indicate that there's going to be even more change in the future. Having driven on IWV road many times there's a lot of dump trucks that go up and down that road so he certainly wouldn't call it a quiet residential neighborhood. He is impressed with the buffering that's naturally created and the retention basin. As he looks forward to potentially the rezoning he probably would be inclined to encourage a lot of buffering on the property as a whole, but he feels like the growth of the residential area is coming from the south, he doesn't foresee a big developer come out on IWV road north of the landfill or next to the County property there. He thinks the development that has occurred out there west of the interstate has started a pattern and started a trend of use that is not inappropriate, certainly it can be subject to other people's visions, but it seems to be a logical place to continue on with some of that commercial, industrial use and continue to focus development to the south for residential and they know that there's a large residential proposal south of Rohret Road and if he had to guess that's where the residential growth is going to be in Iowa City in the coming years. He just doesn't see residential really happening along IWV road and so he is inclined to think that the change in the Comprehensive Plan based on the changes in circumstances and the community needs warrants approval, and he will be supporting this. Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 15 of 36 Townsend stated she is torn because of the intensive commercial in what was supposed to be a residential area, so she is still pondering that even though it has changed and it's going to continue to change, especially with the new development off of Rohret Road. Craig stated she is supportive of the of the change, staff makes the case for the changes that have happened and occurred and agrees that when you drive down Melrose and IWV it is not a residential neighborhood. Hensch stated in the immediate area it's pretty hard to see this as residential with the National Guard Armory, the SEATS and Secondary Roads campus, the Joint Emergency Communications Center, Chatham Oaks residential care facility, it's just not a residential character of that neighborhood. Signs agrees with Townsend and thinks there needs to be a lot of buffering but is impressed with the buffering that is currently proposed and won't have any problem suggesting maximum buffering when they get to some of the other phases as property develops, but he does think that's key, but there is quite a bit already there 300 feet is a lot of butter, that's a football field. Padron stated she will not be supporting this; she is concerned with the sensitive areas around the intensive commercial. Commercial is not a kind of buffer. Also, the Poor Farm has been used lately to for festival and family activities and this is too close to the Poor Farm and if that's the intention, or the plan, of how to use the Poor Farm, then there are too many concerns for her. Padron also didn't like that there weren't enough neighbors at the good neighbor meeting, there should have been more people there. A vote was taken and the motion failed 3-2 (Townsend and Padron dissenting). CASE NO. ANN21-0003 & REZ21-0006: Location: SW corner of Slothower Road and IWV Road a. An application for an annexation of approximately 70.39 acres of land currently in unincorporated Johnson County. b. An application for a rezoning from County Agricultural (A) to Intensive Commercial CI -1) for approximately 53.36 acres, Interim Development Commercial ( ID -C) for approximately 17.03 acres, and approximately 9 acres of land from Rural Residential RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1). Heitner stated the presentation is going to have a lot of similarity between this agenda item and the previous agenda item so he would try to not be duplicative in the interest of time. He began with an aerial view of subject property and an overview of the existing zoning noting County Agriculture, Rural Residential and County Residential. Heitner noted the majority of the 70 acres of subject property is located in the growth area of the Fringe Area Agreement, there is a little strip, around 9 acres, to the east that is already in the City limits. That nine -acre strip along with about 53 acres of the proposed annexation would seek CI -1 (Intensive Commercial) zoning and the remaining balance to the west would seek ID -C (Interim Development Commercial) zoning for about 17 acres. From: John Bergstrom To: Raymond Heitner Cc: Sherri Bergstrom; Sevfer, James W Subject: IWV/Slothower Road Date: Monday, October 18, 2021 1:07:26 PM Ray, as we discussed, we continue to object to the change in the comprehensive plan and the rezoning at the corner of IWV and Slothower Road. It has been made clear that this change is being made to accommodate MidAmerican Energy with little thought as to how it affects a much greater area. That said, I believe there is a solution that everyone can live with. Move the MidAmerican facility to the 40 acres that IWV partners also owns on the north side of IWV Road. The comprehensive plan and zoning would remain in place on the south side of IWV. On the north side, the facility would be more consistent with the properties immediately to the east. While I cannot speak for the neighborhood to the south of the county farm, I am led to believe this is a solution they might consider to be palatable. Please consider this alternative with your staff. John Bergstrom Sent from Mail for Windows MINUTES FINAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 21, 2021 —7:00 PM FORMAL MEETING THE CENTER — ASSEMBLY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Mike Hensch, Mark Nolte, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Phoebe Martin, Maria Padron STAFF PRESENT: Ray Heitner, Sara Hektoen, Kirk Lehmann, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: John Marner, Josh Entler, John Bergstrom, Sherri Slothower Bergstrom, Cathy Tholen, Jim Seyfer RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of the proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Public/Private Open Space and to change the Southwest District Plan text and future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Vegetative Noise/Sight Buffer for approximately 79 acres of property located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ21-0006, a rezoning of approximately 53.36 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1), 9 acres from Rural Residential (RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1), and 17.03 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Interim Development Commercial (ID -C) subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permit, Owner shall plat the property herein rezoned to follow the zoning boundaries. a. Said plat shall show a buffer easement area generally 350' wide consistent with the comprehensive plan map. This easement area shall be governed by an easement agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. This easement area shall be planted according to a landscape plan approved by the City Forester at such times as required by the subdivider's agreement. b. Said plat shall include the dedication of right-of-way along the Slothower Road frontage in a size and location approved by the City Engineer to allow Slothower Road to be improved to City urban design standards. 2. Pursuant to Iowa City Code Title 15, Owner shall, contemporaneous with the final plat approval, execute a subdivider's agreement addressing, among other things, the following conditions: a. Owner shall contribute 25% of the cost of upgrading Slothower Road, south of any future access, to collector street standards, adjacent to the subject property. b. Owner shall install landscaping to the S3 standard along the Slothower Road and IWV Road frontages shall include in addition to the S3 standard, a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees as approved by the City Forester. c. Improve Slothower Road to the southern end of any future access off Slothower Road. 3. For all lots fronting IWV Road and Slothower Road, loading areas, and outdoor storage shall not be located between the front facade of the principal structure and the public right-of-way line. Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2021 Page 2 of 18 CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: CASE NO. CPA21-0002: Location: SW corner of Slothower Road and IWV Road A public hearing on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Public/Private Open Space and to change the Southwest District Plan text and future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Vegetative Noise/Sight Buffer for approximately 79 acres of property located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. Lehmann stated the area of this application is south of IWV Road and west of Slothower Road in the county. Regarding background, there are three applications that are part of this, one is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow intensive commercial, second is an annexation that would annex about 70 acres into the City and finally there's a rezoning for all of that land to a mix of intensive commercial and interim development commercial. This particular case was recently heard by this Commission on September 16, 2021, and at that time staff had recommended all three items in their motions to approve. That passed for the annexation and rezoning because the annexation was unanimous, and the rezoning was four to one however the motion to approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment actually failed because it does require a vote four affirmative votes and therefore the vote of three to two made it failed. Therefore, tonight the applicant has submitted a revised Comprehensive Plan Amendment to review tonight. Additionally, as part of this staff is also recommending new conditions as part of the rezoning and that will be covered in the next agenda item. Lehmann noted the area is about 80 acres and is all currently zoned agricultural and there is also the landfill to the southwest. The zoning generally matches the current land uses, it's zoned for agriculture with some limited rural residential zoning where it's within the City, the area to the east is zoned public and then there's some county rural zoning to the north. Also to the east is the County Poor Farm property and then to the northeast there are some other public uses. The revised Comprehensive Plan Amendment is generally similar to what was presented last time where it modifies the future land use map with intensive commercial, there is still the generalized the timeframe for the US 965 extension, and it discusses that intensive commercial uses may be appropriate along Melrose. Lehmann explained the big difference is that along the south property line there's about a 350 -foot vegetative noise and site buffer that would be Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2021 Page 3 of 18 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. It is noted as public and private open space in the Southwest District Plan and would now be called that in the Comprehensive Plan as well. Lehmann reiterated it is again along the south property line for a width of 350 feet. He showed an image of the current Southwest District Plan Map that is adopted, noting the subject property in the northwest corner of the Weber subarea and it's mostly tailored for future urban development. He also pointed out along the west property line of this property is the proposed future 965 extension that would be coming down from the north and go along the east edge of the landfill all the way down to Highway 1. In the previous application seen in September it was all shown as intensive commercial development for that subject property and the revised submittal would still keep most of it as intensive commercial, but it would include that 350 -foot strip of vegetative noise and site buffer creating a more formal buffering along the south property line. Again, that also gets carried through into the Comprehensive Plan Amendment future land use map as well. The role of the Commission is to determine if the Comprehensive Plan amendment meets the approval criteria that are in the zoning code at 14 -8D -3D and those two criteria are that circumstances have changed and/or additional information or factors have come to light, such as the proposed amendments in the public interest and two, the proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, including any district plans or other amendments thereto. The information provided to the Commission in the agenda packet included staff's previous analysis that was done for the September 16 meeting and that analysis continues to apply since generally this noise and site buffer just clarifies where that intensive commercial would go. Tonight, Lehmann will give the Commission a brief summary of staff's rationale for those two factors but also rely on the on that previous presentation and information that is included in the packet. Lehmann noted for the first factor, as to circumstances having changed and or additional information or factors have come to light such that is in the public interest, he explained the Southwest District Plan was initially adopted in 2002 and there have been several changes that have occurred since that time including new residential development that has occurred north of Rohret Road and some higher intensity commercial and public uses that have occurred to the east, things like the public dispatch center, the County bus area, and the Johnson County Poor Farm. Additionally, there has been some introduction of commercial uses that occurred on the east side of the US 218 Interchange and that has happened through three different Comprehensive Plan Amendments that have increased the intensity around that interchange on the east side. Lehmann did acknowledge that the 2002 Plan did have a policy that discouraged commercial uses at the Melrose/ US 218 Interchange and that policy was initially adopted in the 1983 Comprehensive Plan and has been carried forward since that time. That policy was adopted in 1983 due to concern that such development couldn't be supported at both that interchange and the interchange with Highway 1 to the south. In addition to that, the metro has also experienced rapid population growth since then, especially to the northwest, in Coralville, Tiffin and North Liberty so that has made the US 218 corridor increasingly important, and staff believes that does warrant a reevaluation of some of these policies. Also based on some of these things, staff does believe that the revised amendment is in the public interest. Staff also found when looking at other similar land that allows intensive commercial uses, especially vacant land, it doesn't seem to be meeting the needs of users within the city. Most of those intensive commercial uses are generally smaller parcels or they're already developed, and they don't often Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2021 Page 4 of 18 work for larger users of intensive commercial, especially with that proximity to a highway. In addition, with expected growth staff expects an increased demand for additional intensive commercial uses. Staff did project the use and there is a potential gap in the future and staff does believe that this site especially makes sense for that given it's good access to the highway. Again, staff does believe that it's in the public interest and that things have changed quite a bit since 2002 and especially since 1983 when that policy was initially adopted. As far as the other criteria, is it compatible with other policies or provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, including amendments. Generally, it does align with the current policy direction of the City. Within the Southwest District Plan it provides for contiguous development, it has infrastructure access, which is one of the reasons that development had not occurred in the past, and it does have proximity to major streets, especially the upgraded IWV Road, the future US 965 extension, and the proximity to US 218, as well as the potential future expansion of the landfill. As far as other policies the Comprehensive Plan, this Comprehensive Plan Amendment would allow targeted nonresidential development that would help meet future needs, and it would be within the growth area and have that ready highway access, which is deemed as an appropriate area for these types of uses. It also complies with the fringe area agreement, which allows nonresidential developments in the interchanges to pave roads, if it's annexed prior to development. In this case, it would be annexed and rezoned as part of these joint applications. Lehmann stated there are two policies that need to be reconciled somewhat, one is the policy mentioned about discouraging commercial uses at Melrose and US 218. Again, staff does believe that circumstances have changed, but that public uses generally will still be immediately by the interchange, the subject properties are appropriate for the proposed use, and then the other policy is encouraging new businesses in existing commercial areas. Again, as previously mentioned, the existing commercial areas don't seem to meet all user's needs, so some additional areas are needed to meet future needs and that's why staff believes this is an appropriate change. Lehmann noted there are some other Plan goals as well that would be accommodated through rezoning and through the development standards like discouraging strict commercial and protecting sensitive areas. In the case of this revised amendment that would also include some sort of buffer strip to the south as included in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Generally, staff does believe that the revised amendment does continue to meet this standard as well. Lehmann noted there was significant public comment included in the packet, there was a good neighbor meeting on July 28, attended by four attendees, there was correspondence from four folks who are against it. Additionally, at the hearing on the September 16 there were nine attendees who spoke against it. Staff did receive a new correspondence and that was also provided to the Commission in advance of this meeting. The new correspondence was from John Bergstrom, who objects due to concerns about the impact on the larger area and also suggests that intensive commercial, specifically the MidAmerican Energy would be better suited for the north side of IWV instead. Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve CPA21-0002, a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Public/Private Open Space and to change the Southwest District Plan text and future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Vegetative Noise/Sight Buffer for approximately 79 acres Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2021 Page 5 of 18 of property located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. Next steps is for the Commission to determine if the amendment should be recommended to City Council, the actual application itself, if it were approved or denied, would still run concurrently with the annexation and rezoning as well. The next Council meeting would be November 16 and that would be the public hearing. The zoning code text amendment would follow with a public hearing and two additional meetings. Of course, those are subject to change but that would be about the estimated timeline. Hensch asked about the vegetative noise and sight buffer, he was trying to visualize how big a 350 -foot -wide area would be. Lehmann said it is 350 -feet wide which is about the size of a football field. Signs asked about the future land use map noting it shows a buffer, public private open space running along future Highway 965 and then cutting across east/west on the south edge of this property. So is this 300 feet in addition to that previous amount that was originally shown. Lehmann explained there was a vegetative buffer along the west property line in the September proposal but was not included in the older comp plan. Nolte asked if the Highway 965 expansion is a hypothetical or is it on the radar to be budgeted soon. Lehmann said it is not in any budget soon nor is it in the long-range transportation plan, but it is in long-term planning. Hensch opened the public hearing. Jon Marner (MMS Consultants) is representing the applicant and noted staff did a great job of summarizing the changes to the application. He noted there was quite a bit of discussion at the last meeting so they walked away from that meeting, met with the developer, had some discussions with City staff and felt it was appropriate to resubmit the application with the changes that had been presented. While they talked about the 350 -foot buffer at the last meeting, there was nothing formally in place so with this application submission they put something formerly in place that removes that 350 feet from the intense commercial land use and places that in that vegetative noise buffer or open space. The other thing he'd add is the 350 feet is approximately the length of a football field, and when they take that 350 feet across the length of the property it totals approximately 21.18 acres. So of the 79.39 acres that are being annexed and developed and rezoned as part of this application, that constitutes 26% of the property. It's a significant amount of the property that's been set aside as preserved for that open space and buffer from the properties to the south. Hensch asked Manner to describe the buffer area and what the land looks like in there, will they add any vegetation or what are the plans for that area. Marner noted more information will be forthcoming in the zoning application, but there's a portion right in the middle of the property that has two detention basins, one to the west and one to the east, there is then the stream corridor that runs along the western edge of the property. So to answer the question, the buffer area would be comprised primarily of sensitive features with the stream corridor, there's some wetlands and a little bit of a stream corridor in between the detention basins. The detention basins are required for stormwater as per City ordinances for stormwater for the property so and Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2021 Page 6 of 18 that detention basin on the east extends over to the right-of-way of Slothower Road. Signs asked if the proposal involves planting any additional trees or anything in that area. Marner replied it's not part of this application, but he believes that was one of the conditions of the zoning agreement that there would be some landscaping to an S3 standard. Heitner confirmed they would discuss that more in the next agenda item, but they are recommending S3 screening along that south side. Signs asked what S3 screening involves. Heitner explained it is the most intense screening standard that the City has, it involves a five to six foot continuous hedge of either shrubs or evergreens or trees, and there's an ability to mix and match with a masonry wall or a berm. It's the most intense screening standard and typically utilized when transitioning a commercial or industrial use to residential use. Nolte asked about the correspondence received stating MidAmerican admitted looking at locating their project on the north side of the road. Marner stated he would let the representative or the developer speak to that. Marner noted one of the other concerns that was expressed was the impact on the Poor Farm across the road. They reviewed that Poor Farm, the most recent concept, as part of this change and while there is some potential housing development suggested as part of that master plan, it's located in the very southwest corner of that property, it actually lies south and east of the corner of this property. It's approximately 600 to 1000 feet away from the north line of this buffer that would be established as part of this land use. Josh Entler (IWV Holdings) is representing the applicant and developer. He would first address the prior question and stated MidAmerican has looked at this site has asked about this site but in response to some of the comments from last meeting, this is not a MidAmerican development, they would like to have MidAmerican there, it'd be a great use, but they are just excited about this development for intensive commercial users, just on the face of that potential zoning, on that comp plan amendment, as well as the annexation. They do not have any users specified at this moment, it could be a prospect, but nobody's guaranteed. They've heard a variety of cavilings in the neighborhood, as well as some national users and national realtors that see this area is a great fit for intensive commercial with quick access to the highway, particularly with CDL drivers that may be coming off the highway left in and then right out, they're slowing down in traffic and then pulling out in a single lane instead of crossing traffic. There's a lot of folks that like this side of the street, they like the quick access and don't have to go through any residential neighborhoods to get right on the interstate to 1-80 and 1-380. They see it as a very high potential site and not just MidAmerican as a potential user. The other thing Entler wanted to address publicly, and wanted to clarify, this is not an industrial type use, it is intensive commercial. John Bergstrom (Slothower Farms) is a member of the Slothower family and spoke his piece last time but wanted to be clear, the only reason they're discussing this tonight is because MidAmerican Energy is looking for a site and the City of Iowa City steered them this way. He stated it was very clear on that from discussions with City people and one of the partners. He admitted there may be a shortage of intense commercial space around the City but there's also plenty of other areas that this could go that doesn't impact a lot of other residents and future residents. This is just not a good place and again, this is all about MidAmerican Energy. This is an 80 -acre piece and MidAmerican Energy needs about 40 acres. Changing the Comprehensive Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2021 Page 7 of 18 Plan is a big deal in a community and in a discussion earlier and he asked about looking at a broader approach to the Comprehensive Planning, but it was very clear and his interpretation was the City is only looking at this piece and nothing beyond it and that just doesn't make sense. This affects a lot of people, it affects a lot of land and he would just ask that they slow this down a little bit. If they're going to change the Comprehensive Plan there's a number of landowners including them who would like to know how it's going to affect their peace. It's a big deal to change a Comprehensive Plan and they're doing it for one user, it just doesn't make sense. Bergstrom did propose in his email that IWV Partners owns 40 acres directly across on the other side of IWV Road that it looks like it would be developable. He can't speak for the neighbors but the one discussion he did have with them they said that might make sense, because then when they turn off IWV and it's residential, it's good continuity. His last comment is on the Johnson County Poor Farm, nobody's real sure what's going to happen there but if they let this workstation go in, it's going to have a big impact. Again he asks that they please slow this thing down a little bit and if they're going to change the plan, let's change the plan, but do it in a much broader manner. Sherri Slothower Bergstrom (Slothower Farms) is John's Bergstrom's wife, and they own the property directly to the south of the land in this application. They have 120 acres there so this is going to have a huge impact on their land, its value and its use. Bergstrom stated there is the old adage, you can't fight City Hall, but she would like to be proved wrong about that. She listened to the Commission talk last time about their responsibility as volunteers to do the best thing for Iowa City. Well, to her Iowa City is the neighborhoods and the people and the essence of community and what's changed since 2002 is over 100 families have built homes, and a pool and a clubhouse, an overall beautiful area right adjacent to the land in this application. One of her objections to the slideshow that was shown last time is there was not one picture, not one slide, of that neighborhood. It was very slanted to the armory, the Johnson County garage and the things that are right there on the corner. There was no overall picture to show what it actually is like there. Bergstrom doesn't know how many of them have driven out there to actually look at this but there's a lot of beautiful homes out there and a lot of brand-new homes being built right on IWV Road, right behind the landfill. Also in this area is a beautiful new winery. As her husband noted, this has happened really quickly, it wasn't until they got a letter for the good neighbor meeting that they heard of this. This is affecting a lot of people and the Bergstrom's had to personally contact other neighbors because they weren't even notified. This has happened suspiciously and it's going to affect a huge area and a lot of people, a lot of families that have not been pictured in the presentations. She agrees with her husband and wonders why they are rushing to change a Comprehensive Plan that is going to affect a huge area of the City. There are other places in Iowa City to accommodate MidAmerican Energy. She asks that the Commission just take their time and look at this and make sure it's the right thing for an area that hosts hundreds of families living in beautiful homes. Cathy Tholen (965 Slothower Road) states they live in the closest home to this parcel, they live in the Slothower old farmstead which they bought from them. She has not been notified by any member of the City, or anyone, in regards to this rezoning. Sherri Slothower called Tholen on the telephone to notify them of the rezoning to the property out there. No one from the City has contacted her and she received no letter. The City did put up a sign, they put it on the Johnson County Poor Farmland behind dirt because the IWV Road is being revamped and widened. She feels that probably has something to do with this push for intensive commercial use. The Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2021 Page 8of18 property was bought in the early part of this year and probably was already discussed with the City of Iowa City about the reasoning and why it was bought, it was bought for this specific process. Whether it's MidAmerican Energy, or whether it's some other nationally acclaimed business that's going to move into the neighborhood, don't think for a moment that Pandora's Box isn't going to be opened up here. They will be commercial businesses on both sides of that road all the way out to the landfill. And if by chance in the future 965 does go through, it will be there too. So intensive commercial will be in her backyard. There's going to be a tremendous amount of lighting, there's going to be noise, there's going to be cement, there's going to be traffic. They've widened the road and given them the infrastructure that they need for this commercial property. The City has given a lot of money to Grow Johnson County which is by the Poor Farm, which is right next to Chatham Oaks, which by the way is a residence, people live there. Melrose Ridge apartments is a residence with people living there. Tholen acknowledge the buffer that they're planning on putting in is great but what about along Slothower Road. Is there a buffer that reaches into the Poor Farm, or down the road, which is a dead end but there's all kinds of communities there. There's Country Club Estates, Galloway Hills, Walnut Ridge, the new Camp Cardinal, housing developments on Rohret Road, and all the way to Mormon Trek is all housing. This plan may be MidAmerican Energy, or Amazon warehouse, commercial buildings, or whatever but there will be light, there'll be cement, there'll be noise, and they probably are going to have to widen the IWV Road for all of the people that are going to be in and out of there. Right now in the mornings at the interstate exchange there is a tremendous amount of traffic coming into town to work. There's a tremendous amount of traffic that comes down the IWV Road that goes into work at the University Hospital and to put intensive commercial there, whether it's big trucks or whatever, there's going to be a lot of traffic. They are going to take a rural community in with the Poor Farm right there, they're going to be using that Grow Johnson County for educational purposes, they're going to use it for family things, talks about putting trails in there, open space and prairie, and then right next to that will now be big lights and cement and whole bunch of buildings. Jim Seyfer (36 Tempe Court) wanted to strongly concur with what John and Sherri Bergstrom have said about slowing down this process and looking at the area as a whole, before making an irreversible change to the neighborhood. Many of them live on the north edge of the residential development right now, they look north at night and the sky along the IWV Road where the Johnson County facility and the National Guard facility are located has a lot of light streamed up into the sky and that would be increased by this development. So again, he just want to echo his support for what has been said already and encourage a no vote by the Commission. Hensch closed he public hearing. Nolte moved to recommend approval of CPA21-0002, a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Public/Private Open Space and to change the Southwest District Plan text and future land use map to Intensive Commercial and Vegetative Noise/Sight Buffer for approximately 79 acres of property located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. Craig seconded the motion. Hensch asked if it is still 300 feet or is it 500 feet for notifying neighbors. Lehmann confirmed Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2021 Page 9 of 18 that everyone that lives within 300 feet of the subject property is receives notification. Hensch questioned if there a City standard about downcast lighting for development within the City of Iowa City. Lehmann confirmed there is, there are standards related to the form of lighting and then standards related to overall light output. Nolte noted the National Guard facility in the County so that would be not subject to the City's light ordinance. Russett stated the National Guard is not subject to Iowa City standards, the Secondary Roads/Seats facility and the Historic Poor Farm would have to comply with downcast lighting standards as the County is subject to the City's zoning regulations within the fringe area but not state or federal government, or the university. Signs stated he came in here thinking that he might be changing his vote from last time based on one of the comments in the correspondence but is now back to where he was before. The one thing that does bother him, and this is something he read in correspondence, is this concept of spot rezoning and spot redevelopment and changing Comprehensive Plans. This feels like exactly that and he has spoken against that before. Now, having said that, several people this evening talked about looking at the area as a whole so he's been poking around the aerial map and there's some natural barriers here. There are some stream beds, there's some valleys, there's a landfill of nearly 80 acres away from the last street to the east and the topography of the ground to the north of the landfill which is also on the other side of the stream bed is pretty steep, and pretty severe. And the same with the County Poor Farm, there's a pretty substantial ravine and that is the reason for the proposed housing in the very southwest corner of that property is because there's some natural barriers there. When he looks at the area as a whole, he sees kind of a circle where realistically, residential is not going to grow beyond and it should be some other type of zoning. As for development on IWV Road, any that continues much to the north will run into Coralville but heading south there's lots of room for residential and his personal opinion is that most of the residential growth will go south of Rohret Road. He feels comfortable with this. Hensch noted just on the issue of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments, this Commission probably amends the Comprehensive Plan two or three times a year, it's not like this is a one off. Craig agrees, this is something that happens fairly frequently because the Comprehensive Plan is 20 years old. She has no problem with looking at this parcel and saying times have changed in 20 years. Signs agrees, but to that point, the Council interpreted a 20 -year-old Comprehensive Plan and neighborhood plan very literally in a recent rezoning decision. He had asked this group is there any direction that they need to be taking or any observations they need to be making by their actions. At some point they've talked about a proposal or a recommendation to Council to increase the speed of comprehensive plan and neighborhood plan updates, because 20 years is a generation and additional changes are probably going to happen along that road. Townsend noted her concern before was in the 100 feet that they were going to use for buffering but 300 feet is almost a football field so it seems that would be enough and there shouldn't be any problem with the Poor Farm and places around it. Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2021 Page 10 of 18 Hensch can speak pretty intelligently on the Poor Farm since he's responsible for it, there's a 10 - year master plan and the possibility for affordable housing won't even occur until year seven. They're on year three and there's been no further discussion, there's been no consultants retained, there's been no development, no money has been spent on that. Signs asked if they could include an amendment to increase some tree planting along the south and the east borders, the S3 six-foot hedge is nice for when one is driving by but from a landscape perspective it really doesn't do a whole lot. Hensch noted that can be done in the rezoning, this is just a comprehensive plan. He noted last time they added the condition of S3 landscaping on the northern edge as well. Craig wanted to add she has gone out and driven the neighborhood's, she has a friend who lives in the neighborhood behind Weber School and she feels it is her responsibility as a member of the Commission to see the lay of the land. She had not had time to do it before the other meeting, but she did do it before this meeting. Her opinion is the same as it was in the initial meeting, there is development happening along IWV Road and this is compatible with what is there. She agrees with the person who said what is going to happen after this is more commercial development along IWV Road and she thinks from a City perspective and thinking about what's best for the City, they are spending money on upgrading the roads so it can handle all the traffic that is goes to the landfill and they are creating an infrastructure that costs all the taxpayers a lot of money and it makes it possible for some of this development to happen and will bring tax dollars back into the City. She is supportive of this project. Signs does have one more cynical observation as he was perusing the aerial map, there are two radio tower installations on the Slothower farm and it seems like that would affect a view of a neighborhood too. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CASE NO. REZ21-0006: Location: SW corner of Slothower Road and IWV Road An application for a rezoning from County Agricultural (A) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) for approximately 53.36 acres, Interim Development Commercial (ID -C) for approximately 17.03 acres, and approximately 9 acres of land from Rural Residential (RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1). Heitner noted there's some crossover with this presentation and what was just went over so he'll try his best to not be too duplicative. For the rezoning component, Heitner showed an aerial of the subject property, and a look at the existing zoning which showed County agricultural zoning and the narrow nine -acre sliver of City rural residential on the east. Most of the property which is zoned County Agricultural is in Fringe Area C inside the growth area, and the nine -acre strip on the far east is within Iowa City limits. Heitner next showed the proposed rezoning noting it has not changed since it was last discussed here. There are the two parcels to the east going to Deferred to 11/30/21 1(, b Prepared by: Kirk Lehmann, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington St, Iowa City, IA; 319-356-5230 RESOLUTION NO. Resolution to amend the Southwest District Plan and IC2030 Comprehensive Plan to allow intensive commercial and open space land uses for the property south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road. (CPA21-0002) Whereas, the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan serves as a land -use planning guide by illustrating and describing the location and configuration of appropriate land uses throughout the City, providing notification to the public regarding intended uses of land; and illustrating the long- range growth area limit for the City; and Whereas, IWV Holdings, LLC has requested that the future land use designation for the properties located south of IWV Road SW and west of Slothower Road be changed from Residential 2-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre, Rural Residential, and Public/Private Open Space to Intensive Commercial and Public/Private Open Space in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan, as shown in Appendix 1; and Whereas, IWV Holdings, LLC has requested that the text be amended and the future land use designation for the same properties be changed from Future Urban Development, Single- Family/Duplex Residential, and Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer to Intensive Commercial and Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer in the Iowa City Southwest District Plan, a component of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan, as shown in Appendix 2; and Whereas, if circumstances change and/or additional information or factors come to light, a change to the Comprehensive Plan may be in the public interest; and Whereas, circumstances have changed since the Southwest District Plan was adopted in 2002, including recent development near the subject properties, population growth in the Iowa City metropolitan area, the availability of sanitary sewer service, and demand for additional areas to accommodate intensive commercial uses; and Whereas, the proposed amendments are compatible with other policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, including the transportation policies in the Southwest District Plan, providing for continuous, contiguous development at the edge of the City, planning for defined, intensive commercial nodes with ready access to highways, and providing an appropriate transition from properties near the Iowa City Landfill and planned U.S. Highway 965 extension to adjacent future land uses; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this amendment at their meeting on October 21, 2021 and determined that circumstances changed to the extent that an amendment to the comprehensive plan is warranted and the proposed amendment is compatible with other policies or provisions of the comprehensive plan. Now, Therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that: 1. It is in the public interest to amend the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Southwest District Plan as shown in the attached Appendices 1 and 2, to respond to changes in circumstances in the City. 2. The amendments attached in Appendices 1 and 2 are compatible with other policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Resolution No. Page 2 3. The amended future land use map of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan and the future land use map and text of the Southwest District Plan, as illustrated and described in Appendices 1 and 2 are hereby approved. Passed and approved this day of 12021. Attest: City Clerk Mayor Pro Tem City Atto ney's Office (Sara Greenwood Hektoen —11110121) � �:!�!�' � � ' t�� L��� ©� _T Appendix 2 WEBER SUBAREA The Weber Subarea is located south of Melrose Avenue and Highway 218, north of Rohret Road, extending to the City's growth limits half a mile west of Slothower Road. Before the 1980s this area was relatively undeveloped, with a few houses fronting onto Rohret Road. Through the 1980's and 90's housing developed westward on the north side of Rohret Road and south of the County Poor Farm property. Roughly two-thirds of the land area is undeveloped. Some patches of woodland and native prairie exist, but most of it is under cultivation. The area contains three public/institutional uses: Irving B. Weber Elementary School, the Korean Methodist Church, and Chatham Oaks, a residential care facility located on the County Poor Farm property. There are no commercial uses in the subarea. Transportation In the future next 20 to twenty-five years, the City plans to extend Highway 965 southward along the current western growth limit to connect with Rohret Road via the eastern edge of the Iowa City Landfill. It will eventually reach Highway 1 and serve as a far west side arterial. As development approaches this area, the City needs to secure adequate road right-of-way and sufficient buffer width against the Iowa City Landfill. As an entryway corridor into Iowa City, Highway 965 should incorporate boulevard design standards with a well -landscaped median and generous landscaping along both sides, wide sidewalks and bicycle lanes. This could serve as additional buffer against the landfill. In the more immediate future a north -south collector street will be required between Melrose Avenue and Rohret Road, part of it configured using the Slothower Road right-of-way. Care must be taken to keep the eventual route somewhat circuitous between Melrose and Rohret to diminish its desirability as a cut -through route for non -local traffic. In addition, access routes to the southern portion of the County Poor Farm should be incorporated into the local street layouts in future phases of both Wild Prairie Estates and Country Club Estates. Willow Creek Trail will eventually cross Highway 218 via tunnel and connect Hunters Run Park to the wider community trail system. A trail link across the County Poor Farm property to Melrose Avenue will connect this regional trail to the arterial street system in the far western part of the Southwest District. If a regional stormwater lake is constructed in the Rohret South Subarea, it will be important to construct a trail connection between Hunters Run Park and the public open space surrounding this new lake. Southwest District Plan 10/8/02 38 As westward development creates the need, both Rohret Road and Melrose Avenue will be improved to City standards beyond the point of the current corporate limits. Public Services and Facilities Before much of the area between Slothower and the landfill can be developed, a sanitary sewer lift station will have to be constructed. Northern portions of Country Club Estates can build out without further sewer improvements, but the southern two- thirds adjacent to Rohret Road drains to the southwest. This portion cannot be developed until a temporary lift station is built that connects to the landfill's lift station or a proposed permanent lift station is built south of Rohret Road on the western edge of the Rohret South Subarea. Land Use Several areas of particular interest stand out in the Weber subarea with regard to land use: the build -out of Country Club Estates and Wild Prairie Estates; the development of the area west of Slothower Road; and future use of the County Poor Farm property. Future use of the County Poor Farm property generated considerable discussion and a wide variety of suggestions during Citizen Planning workshops. The following considerations should be used as a guide to future development of this property: The following important elements should be preserved and protected from the encroachment of development: the historic poor farm buildings and cemetery; Chatham Oaks residential care facility; and any environmentally sensitive areas. Approximately 90 acres of the property are wooded, brushy, or contain prairie remnants. These areas would be suitable for use as a regional park that could be connected via the Willow Creek trail to other parks and destinations in the Southwest District. The southwest portion of the property contains approximately fifty acres of relatively flat ground that is currently row -cropped. This area would be suitable for residential development. Any new subdivisions in this location should be connected to the street network developed in the Southwest Estates and Wild Prairie Estates subdivisions located directly south of the County Farm property. ❑ If any development occurs on the county property adjacent to Highway 218, a buffer should be maintained. ❑ Future use of the county property located north of Melrose Avenue should be considered carefully with regard to potential impacts on the poor farm property. Southwest District Plan 10/8/02 39 Wild Prairie Estates will soon reach its northern boundary. Access to and through the Poor Farm is a desirable option in the future and for now a street stub northward up to the Willow Creek -Hunters Run Trail extension will be necessary. North of that and adjacent to Highway 218's right-of-way, a noise and sight buffer should be established between residential areas and the highway. The Comprehensive Plan discourages the establishment of commercial uses around the Melrose Avenue -Highway 218 interchange. This policy generally should be maintained because there are several adequate commercial services in the vicinity to serve this area. The Highway 1 -Highway 218 interchange further south provides community and highway commercial services. In addition, Walden Square in the Willow Creek Subarea provides neighborhood commercial services, and a future neighborhood commercial area is proposed in the Rohret South Subarea. However, intensive commercial uses may be appropriate along Melrose Avenue Turther from the interchange due to proximity to major thoroughfares and to serve as a buffer for residential uses from the potential future expansion of the landfill and Highway 965. The remaining portion of the Country Club Estates property is primarily suitable for low-density single-family development. If well-designed, the portion of the property adjacent to Rohret Road may be suitable for clusters of medium -density residential uses, such as townhouses or condominiums. A transition between existing Rural Residential -zoned (RR -1) portions of Southwest Estates and future low-density single-family residential development to the west may be accomplished by platting larger RS -5 - zoned lots backing onto the existing rural residential lots of Southwest Estates. The land west of Slothower is currently used for agriculture. The Weber Subarea Plan Map designates this area as "future urban development." However, until sewer service is extended in that direction and one or more lift stations constructed, there will not be any significant urban development. Before reaching the twenty-year horizon of this plan, some residential uses, or intensive commercial, may develop along the west side of Slothower Road and begin moving toward the future Highway 965 extension. However, the expectation is that development will not and should not "leapfrog" without street and trail connections bridging the gap between 965 and Slothower Road. When development becomes imminent a more detailed plan will need to be developed for this area. When development does occur, it will be important to buffer residential uses from the Iowa City Landfill and Highway 965. Southwest District Plan 10/8/02 40 Open Space As this subarea continues to develop additional public open space will be needed. Recent improvements to Hunters Run Park increased the amount of active park space in the area. This park may be extended to the west when the northern part of Wild Prairie Estates is subdivided. As mentioned, the County Poor Farm property contains land that is suitable for public open space and connecting trail corridors. The County should plan for public open space needs as it contemplates future uses for the property. The City plans to use a small parcel of land near the southwest corner of the County Poor Farm property for a water reservoir. Most of the ground will remain open and could be used for a small neighborhood park. Additional parkland could be added tc this property as Country Club Estates continues to develop. Southwest District Plan 10/8/02 41 9 I.WV ROAD I� I� I� Poor Farm SOUTHWEST PLANNING DISTRICT Weber Subarea VI YV West High School i LEGEND Large Lot/ Rural Residential - Public/Private Open Spam 6"1` Existing Trail Single-Family/Duplex Residential Public Serviceslinstitutional ♦ ~ ♦ Proposed Trail Low Density Multi Family Residential Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer - — — Proposed Street Future Urban Development Intensive Commercial Appendix A Southwest District Plan Map Designations Large Lot/Rural Residential Suitable for large lot single family development in areas not suited for more intensive development due to natural limitations, i.e. soil, slope, unavailability of sewer and water utilities. Development Density: approximately 1 dwelling unit/acre Single-Family/Duplex Residential Intended primarily for single family and duplex residential development. Lower density zoning designations are suitable for areas with sensitive environmental features, topographical constraints, or limited street access. Higher densities are more appropriate for areas with good access to all city services and facilities. Development Density: 2-12 dwelling units/acre Narrow Lot/Townhouse Residential Suitable for medium to high density single family residential development, including zero lot line development, duplexes, townhouses, and narrow lot detached single family housing. Development Density: 6-12 dwelling units/acre Low -Density Multi -Family Residential Intended for low -density multi -family housing. Suitable for areas with good access to all city services and facilities. Higher density zoning designations may not be suitable for areas with topographical constraints or limited street access. Development Density: 8 -15 dwelling units/acre Medium- to High -Density Multi -Family Residential Intended for medium- to high-density multi -family housing. Suitable for areas with good access to all city services and facilities. Higher density zoning designations may not be suitable for areas with topographical constraints or limited street access. Development Density: 16-44 dwelling units/acre Future Urban Development Areas within the growth limit that are not yet served by City services and may not experience substantial development within the lifetime of this district plan. As development becomes imminent in these areas, the City will develop more detailed land use and street layout concepts to supplement the current plan. Public/Private Open Space Indicates existing open space that is important for the protection of sensitive natural features and/or to provide for recreational opportunities and protect the aesthetic values of the community. An open space designation on private land may indicate that an area is largely unsuitable for development due to environmental or topographical constraints. While these areas are best reserved or acquired for private or public open space, development may occur on privately held land if a proposal meets the underlying zoning requirements and the requirements of the Iowa City Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer Useful public facilities, such as limited -access highways or landfills, can produce undesirable side-effects. In these areas a substantial vegetative buffer should be maintained or established to separate residential development from these uses. Alternatively, where appropriate, nonresidential uses can be used to buffer residential areas from highways, landfills, and other such uses. Public Services/Institutional Areas intended for civic, cultural, or historical institutions; public schools; and places of assembly or worship. Iowa City does not have a zone that designates institutional uses as the primary, preferred land use. However, there are a number of zones where these uses are permitted or provisional uses. Development proposals are subject to the requirements of the underlying zoning designation. Land that is owned by a public entity is typically zoned Public (P). Neighborhood Commercial Areas intended for retail sales and personal service uses that meet the day-to-day needs of a fully developed residential neighborhood. A grocery store or grocery store/drug store combination is preferred as the primary tenant in a Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) zone. Specific site development standards will apply in these areas to ensure that commercial development is pedestrian -friendly and compatible with surrounding residential development. Office Commercial Areas intended for office uses and compatible businesses. In some cases these areas may serve as a buffer between residential areas and more intensive commercial or industrial uses. General Commercial Areas intended to provide the opportunity for a large variety of commercial uses that serve a major segment of the community. Mixed Use Areas intended for development that combines commercial and residential uses. An area may be primarily commercial in nature or may be primarily residential depending on the location and the surrounding neighborhood. Commercial uses will typically be located on the ground floor with housing above. Development is intended to be pedestrian - oriented with buildings close to and oriented to the sidewalk. Appendix A Southwest District Plan Map Designations Intensive Commercial Areas intended for those sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor display and storage of merchandise, by repair businesses, quasi -industrial uses, and for sales of large equipment or motor vehicles, or by activities or operations conducted in buildings or structure not completely enclosed. Retail uses are restricted in order to provide opportunities for more land -intensive or quasi -industrial commercial operations and also to prevent conflicts between retail and industrial truck traffic. Special attention must be directed toward buffering the negative aspects of allowed uses from any adjacent lower intensity commercial areas or residential areas. Item Number: 11.c. �r CITY OE IOWA CITY www.iogov.org November 16, 2021 Resolution to annex approximately 70.39 acres of land located west of the intersection of IWV Road SW and Slothower Road. (ANN21-0003) ATTACHMENTS: Description Planning and Zoning Commission Annexation Staff Report Location Map Aerial Photograph Fringe Area Map Annexation Exhibit Applicant Statement Annexation Legal Description Good Neighbor Meeting Summary P&Z Minutes Correspondence Correspondence from Johnson County BOS Resolution STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: AN N21-0003/REZ21-0006 Prepared by: Ray Heitner, Associate Planner Date: September 16, 2021 MMS Consultants Applicant: 1917 S. Gilbert St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319-351-8282 I.sextonammsconsultants.net Contact Person: Jon Marner MMS Consultants 1917 S. Gilbert St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319-351-8282 i. marner(a-mmsconsultants.net Owner: Matt Adam IWV Holdings, LLC. 319-248-6316 madam(a)-spmblaw.com Requested Action: Annexation & Rezoning Purpose: Annexation of 70.39 acres of land currently in unincorporated Johnson County and rezoning it from County Agricultural (A) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone and Interim Development — Commercial (ID -C) zone. Rezoning of 9 acres of Rural Residential (RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone. Location: South of IWV Road and west of Slothower Road. Location Map: K Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: District Plan: Neighborhood Open Space District: Public Meeting Notification: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Annexation and rezoning - 70.39 acres; Rezoning within the City limits — 9 acres Farmland, Rural Residential (RR -1) and County Agricultural (A) North: (Farmland) County Residential R and Rural Residential RR -1 South: (Farmland, Rural Residential) County Agricultural A and Rural Residential RR -1 East: (Johnson County Poor Farm) Neighborhood Public P-1 West: (Farmland) County Agricultural A Intensive Commercial' Southwest District Plan - Single- Family/Duplex Residential, Future Urban Development, & Vegetative Noise and Sight Buffer SW5 — Only for the 9 acres currently in the City limits. Property owners located within 300' of the project site and residents of the Country Club Estates Fourth and Fifth Addition Subdivisions received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. Rezoning signs were also posted on the site. May 27, 2021 NA The owner is requesting annexation and rezoning of 70.39 acres of property located south of IWV Road and west of Slothower Road. The owner has requested that the property be rezoned from County Agricultural (A) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) for approximately 53.36 acres, and to Interim Development Commercial (ID -C) for approximately 17.03 acres. In addition, the owner has requested a rezoning of approximately 9 acres of land currently located within the City limits from Rural Residential (RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1). Pending approval of the associated Comprehensive Plan amendment to Intensive Commercial land use, per case number CPA21-0002. 3 The 70.39 acres of land that is currently located outside of the city limits is adjacent to Iowa City's current boundary and within Fringe Area C, inside the City's growth area of the Johnson County/Iowa City Fringe Area Agreement. The Southwest District Plan shows this area with a future land use designation of Rural Residential for the majority of this land, with a narrow strip of private/public open space to the west, bordering the City's landfill. The Southwest District Plan shows the portion of the subject properties that is currently within the City limits as Residential at 2-8 dwelling units per acre. The owner has also applied for a comprehensive plan amendment with the subject annexation and rezoning applications. If approved, the comprehensive plan amendment would change the future land use designations to Intensive Commercial. The owner has used the Good Neighbor Policy and held a Good Neighbor Meeting on July 28, 2021. Four neighbors attended. Attachment #11 provides the summary report of the meeting provided by the applicant. Staff has received one email expressing opposition to the annexation and rezoning, which is attached as correspondence. In addition, staff received several emails and phone calls asking questions about the annexation and rezoning. Pursuant to state code requirements for voluntary annexations, City staff held a consult with two Union Township Trustees on Thursday, July 29, 2021 to discuss the proposed annexation application. Trustees expressed concern about the loss of productive farmland and Township tax revenue losses. ANALYSIS: Annexation: The Comprehensive Plan has established a growth policy to guide decisions regarding annexations. The annexation policy states that annexations are to occur primarily through voluntary petitions filed by the property owners. Further, voluntary annexation requests are to be reviewed under the following three criteria. The Comprehensive Plan states that voluntary annexation requests should be viewed positively when the following conditions exist. 1. The area under consideration falls within the adopted long-range planning boundary. A growth area is illustrated in the Comprehensive Plan and on the City's Zoning Map. The subject property is located within the City's long-range growth boundary. 2. Development in the area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need without imposing an undue burden on the City. The Southwest District Plan identifies the subject area as being appropriate for annexation and development upon provision of sanitary sewer service. A sanitary sewer main line can be extended to the west from its current endpoint near the Johnson County Poor Farm property, along the south side of IWV Road. The extension could service the properties that would be rezoned to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zoning. The property seeking Interim Development Commercial zoning to the west will likely need a lift station for future sanitary sewer service to be provided. Since there are no plans to sewer this property right now, an interim zone is appropriate. The City's 2021 Capital Improvement Plan has budgeted over $5,000,000 for improvements to Melrose Avenue between Highway 218 and Hebl Avenue. These improvements will bring this stretch of roadway into compliance with the City's Urban Design Standards. As a part of these improvements, the City will also be extending its water main west to the City landfill site, allowing any future development between Highway 218 and the landfill to tap into the water main. Development in this area will engender suitable development to utilize these improvements, while providing the City with needed land for Intensive Commercial use. Staff's analysis for the associated comprehensive plan amendment (CPA21-0002) revealed that ri approximately 13% of the City's Intensive Commercial zoned land is vacant. Furthermore, what land is available for Industrial use tends to be clustered in the southeast section of the City, in the City's Industrial Park and south of the Highway 1 at the US -218 interchange and north and east of the airport. While these are suitable locations for some industrial or intensive commercial uses, these properties may not have the desired degree of highway access that other Intensive Commercial or Industrial users may require. In addition, many of these vacant parcels are less than 2 acres in size. Lastly, the Comprehensive Plan encourages growth that is contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods to reduce the costs of providing infrastructure and City services. The subject properties are bordered by the city limits on the east side. Therefore, the subject property is contiguous to current development and meets the goal of contiguous growth. 3. Control of the development is in the City's best interest. The property is within the City's designated Growth Area. It is appropriate that the proposed property be located within the City so that future development may be served by Fire, Police, water, and sanitary sewer service. Annexation will allow the City to provide these services and control zoning so that development of the subject area is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. For the reasons stated above, staff finds that the proposed annexation complies with the annexation policy. Current Zoning: The western properties are currently zoned County Agricultural (A), while the eastern property already within the city limits is zoned Rural Residential (RR -1). The County (A) zone is intended to provide land for all types of agricultural production. The zone allows for a wide range of agriculturally oriented uses, as well single-family dwellings and manufactured homes. The City's RR -1 zone is intended to provide a rural residential character for areas in the city that are not projected to have the utilities necessary for urban development in the foreseeable future or for areas that have sensitive environmental features that preclude development at urban densities. Proposed Zoning: The request is to rezone the eastern two properties as Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone, and Interim Commercial zone (ID -C) for the far western property. This request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan amendment application filed contemporaneously with this application, which staff supports for the reasons set forth in the associated staff report. Because the requested rezoning boundaries do not follow existing property lines, however, a plat is necessary to establish property lines consistent therewith. The purpose of the Interim Development (ID) zone is to provide for areas of managed growth in which agricultural and other nonurban uses of land may continue until such time as the City is able to provide services and urban development can occur. The ID zone is the default zoning district to which all undeveloped areas should be classified until City services are provided. Upon provision of City services, a rezoning to zones consistent with the Comprehensive Plan may be considered. The western property, shown in purple in Figure #1, does not have an immediate solution for sanitary sewer service. Therefore, an ID zone is appropriate. 5 rlgure i — vvestern iu-c.; rarcei EZONING PARCEL NO. 3 o x� i;000NTY W TO 10.0 j ,a« 11.0.3 qC 7S-nw ,,.,ENvnvc LH171 H-na 12• S,"7M'E �xr�nV uFE "E n na Mn CfE-u n", T E A0 IKJT s u� I i,•a POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL NO. 2 J&1 LL ST]CG �'-E FI The purpose of the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone is to provide areas for those sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor display and storage of merchandise, by repair and sales of large equipment or motor vehicles, by outdoor commercial amusement and recreational activities or by activities or operations conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. The types of retail trade in this zone are limited in order to provide opportunities for more land intensive commercial operations and to prevent conflicts between retail and industrial truck traffic. City Code specifies that special attention must be directed toward buffering the negative aspects of allowed uses from adjacent residential zones. The uses in Table 1 are permitted by right in a CI -1 zone. Table 1 — Uses Permitted by Riaht in a CI -1 Zone Use: Examples: Building Trade Uses LL RE NING PARCEL NO. 2 1 iC CLIMY'A•TO CI -1 conditioning contractors, etc. Commercial Recreational Uses Outdoor: Campgrounds; commercial tennis and swimming facilities; drive-in theaters; outdoor skating rinks; golf driving ranges; outdoor miniature golf facilities; etc. c Indoor: Physical fitness centers; health clubs; gyms; bowling alleys; indoor skating rinks; etc. U cc Restaurants; cafes; cafeterias; coffee shops; etc. Office Uses Professional offices, such as lawyers, H-na 12• S,"7M'E �xr�nV uFE "E n na Mn CfE-u n", T E A0 IKJT s u� I i,•a POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL NO. 2 J&1 LL ST]CG �'-E FI The purpose of the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone is to provide areas for those sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor display and storage of merchandise, by repair and sales of large equipment or motor vehicles, by outdoor commercial amusement and recreational activities or by activities or operations conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. The types of retail trade in this zone are limited in order to provide opportunities for more land intensive commercial operations and to prevent conflicts between retail and industrial truck traffic. City Code specifies that special attention must be directed toward buffering the negative aspects of allowed uses from adjacent residential zones. The uses in Table 1 are permitted by right in a CI -1 zone. Table 1 — Uses Permitted by Riaht in a CI -1 Zone Use: Examples: Building Trade Uses Electrical, plumbing, heating, and air conditioning contractors, etc. Commercial Recreational Uses Outdoor: Campgrounds; commercial tennis and swimming facilities; drive-in theaters; outdoor skating rinks; golf driving ranges; outdoor miniature golf facilities; etc. Indoor: Physical fitness centers; health clubs; gyms; bowling alleys; indoor skating rinks; etc. Eating Establishments Restaurants; cafes; cafeterias; coffee shops; etc. Office Uses Professional offices, such as lawyers, accountants, engineers, architects, and real estate agents; financial businesses, such as mortgage lenders, government offices; etc. Retail Sales Sales Oriented: Stores selling, leasing, or renting consumer, home, and business goods. Personal Service Oriented: Retail banking establishments, laundromats, catering services, dry cleaners, tailors, shoe repair, etc. Repair Oriented: Repair of consumer goods, such as electronics, bicycles, office equipment; a liances. M In addition to the uses that are permitted by right, several uses are permitted provisionally. Provisional uses must abide by additional requirements, which are detailed in section 14-413-4 of the City Code. Attachment #12 provides a more detailed analysis of the additional criteria that is required for each provisional use. The uses in Table 2 are permitted as provisional uses in a CI -1 zone. Table 2 — Provisional Uses in a CI -1 Zone Use: Hospitality Oriented: Hotels; motels; Adult Business Uses convention centers; guesthouses; and commercial meeting halls/event facilities. Animal Related Commercial Uses Outdoor Storage and Display Oriented: Lumberyards; sales or leasing of consumer vehicles, including passenger vehicles, light and medium trucks, etc. Quick Vehicle Servicing Uses Alcohol Sales Oriented: Liquor stores; wine shops; grocery stores; convenience stores; etc. Vehicle Repair Uses Delayed Deposit Service Uses: Payday lenders and any other similar use that meets General Manufacturing the definition of "delayed deposit service use", as defined in chapter 9, article A of Title 14 of the City Code. Industrial Service Uses Facilities, yards, and preassembly yards for construction contractors; welding shops; machines shops; tool repair; electric motor repair; repair of scientific or professional instruments; repair of heavy machinery; towing and vehicle storage; servicing and repair of medium and heavy trucks; etc. Self -Service Storage Uses Miniwarehouses; ministora a facilities. Warehouse and Freight Movement Uses Separate warehouses used by retail stores such as furniture and appliance stores; household moving and general freight storage; cold storage plants, including frozen food lockers; major wholesale distribution centers; truck and air freight terminals; etc. Wholesale Sales Uses Wholesale sales and rental of heavy trucks, machinery, equipment, building materials, special trade tools, welding supplies, machine arts, etc. In addition to the uses that are permitted by right, several uses are permitted provisionally. Provisional uses must abide by additional requirements, which are detailed in section 14-413-4 of the City Code. Attachment #12 provides a more detailed analysis of the additional criteria that is required for each provisional use. The uses in Table 2 are permitted as provisional uses in a CI -1 zone. Table 2 — Provisional Uses in a CI -1 Zone Use: Examples: Adult Business Uses Adult bookstores; adult video stores; nightclubs featuring nude dancing. Animal Related Commercial Uses General: Veterinary clinics; animal grooming establishments; pet crematoriums; animal daycare; indoor animal recreation. Intensive: Kennels; stables. Quick Vehicle Servicing Uses Full serve and miniserve gas stations; unattended card key service stations; car washes. Vehicle Repair Uses Vehicle repair shops; auto body shops; transmission and muffler shops; etc. General Manufacturing Manufacturing, compounding, assembling or VA Furthermore, several uses in the CI -1 zoning designation are permitted by special exception. Uses permitted by special exception must be approved by the City's Board of Adjustment. Like provisional uses, uses requiring special exception must meet additional criteria. Attachment #12 provides a more detailed analysis of the additional criteria that is required for each use that is permitted by special exception in the CI -1 zone. The uses in Table 3 are permitted by special exception in a CI - 1 zone. Table 3 — Uses Permitted by Special Exception in a CI -1 Zone Use: treatment of most articles, materials, or Assisted Group Living merchandise. Basic Utility Uses Utility substation facilities; water and sewer lift Heavy Manufacturing stations, water towers, and reservoirs. Community Service — Long-term Housing Long term housing for persons with a disability operated by a public or nonprofit agency. Daycare Uses Childcare centers; adult daycare; preschools and latchkey programs not accessory to an Community Service — Long Term Housing educational facility use. Communication Transmission Facility Uses Broadcast towers and antennas; wireless Community Service - Shelter communication towers and antennas; etc. Furthermore, several uses in the CI -1 zoning designation are permitted by special exception. Uses permitted by special exception must be approved by the City's Board of Adjustment. Like provisional uses, uses requiring special exception must meet additional criteria. Attachment #12 provides a more detailed analysis of the additional criteria that is required for each use that is permitted by special exception in the CI -1 zone. The uses in Table 3 are permitted by special exception in a CI - 1 zone. Table 3 — Uses Permitted by Special Exception in a CI -1 Zone Use: Examples: Assisted Group Living Group care facilities, including nursing and convalescent homes; assisted living facilities. Heavy Manufacturing Concrete batch/mix plants; asphalt mixing plants; meatpacking plants; sawmills and tannin mills; etc. Basic Utility Uses Utility substation facilities; water and sewer lift stations, water towers, and reservoirs. Community Service — Long Term Housing Long term housing for persons with a disability operated by a public or nonprofit agency. Community Service - Shelter Transient housing operated by a public or nonprofit agency. General Community Service Libraries; museums; transit centers; park and ride facilities; senior centers; community centers; neighborhood centers; youth club facilities; etc. Detention Facilities Prisons; jails; probation centers; juvenile detention homes; halfway houses. Education Facilities (Specialized) Music schools, dramatic schools, dance studios, martial arts studios, etc. Utility -Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Energy A solar energy system that is structurally Systems mounted on the ground and is not roof mounted, and the system's footprint is at least 1 acre in size. Communication Transmission Facility Uses Broadcast towers and antennas; wireless communication towers and antennas; etc. Rezoning Review Criteria: Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezonings: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan; 2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. n Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The current Southwest District Plan future land use map designates this area as appropriate for rural residential uses and private/public open space. The owner has requested, and staff supports, an amendment to this plan to show this area as appropriate for Intensive Commercial. The plan amendment would also change the Southwest District Plan's future land use map from Single-Family/Duplex Residential for the 9 acres within the city limits, and as Future Urban Development for the remaining acres located outside of the city limits to Intensive Commercial. That amendment is being contemporaneously considered by the Commission and the reasons for Staff's recommendation are described in detail in that staff report. Assuming that the amendment is approved, this application would be consistent therewith. The Comprehensive Plan identifies several goals and strategies regarding commercial and industrial development. Specifically: • Use the District Plans to identify appropriate commercial nodes and zone accordingly to focus commercial development to meet the needs of present and future population. • Identify, zone, and preserve land for industrial uses in areas with ready access to rail and highways. • Target industrial and business sectors that align with Iowa City's economic strengths, including biotechnology, healthcare, advanced manufacturing, information technology, education services, and renewable energy. • Focus growth within the Iowa City urban growth area by using the City's extra -territorial review powers to discourage sprawl and preserve prime farmland. The Weber Subarea of the Southwest District Plan's Future Land Use Map designates the subject properties as appropriate for future urban development until sewer service is extended and lift stations are constructed where required. The subject properties will eventually be bordered by arterial streets along the north (Melrose Ave./IWV Rd.) and west (Hwy. 965 extension) sides, with eventual improvements to Slothower Road creating a major collector street along the east side. The subject properties also fall within a'/2 -mile to 1 -mile distance of the Melrose Ave./Hwy. 218 interchange. The enhanced road network and highway adjacency make this land desirable for future commercial or industrial development. While the City's comprehensive plan amendment analysis showed that there is a supply (approximately 51 acres) of vacant Intensive Commercial land within the current city limits, the suitability and location of much of that land may be inadequate, based on highway proximity and land area constraints The analysis also forecasted a potential growing need for future Intensive Commercial lands, given the region's increasing population and the ever-increasing demand for warehousing and logistics -oriented space. While the proposed annexation and rezoning would likely result in the removal of productive farmland, it is in the City and County's interest to ensure that this development takes place within the City's growth area, so as to not create "leapfrog style" development that cannot be adequately served by City services. Figure #2 below shows an outline of the City's current Growth Area within the Fringe Area. The subject properties that are outside of the City limits are highlighted within the Growth Area, in Fringe Area C. Land that is located within the City's Growth Area is anticipated to be annexed into the City and further developed. lJ Figure #2 — Growth Area Map Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character: The subject properties are adjacent to undeveloped farmland to the north, south, and west. A mixture of farmland, streams, and woodlands can be found throughout these properties. The properties to the south and west contain County Agricultural (A) zoning, while the properties to the north contain a split of County Residential (R) and City Rural Residential (RR -1) zoning. The Johnson County Poor Farm is immediately east of the subject property. The Poor Farm currently contains farmland (approximately 400' x 1,270') for the entire stretch of adjacent property, across from Slothower Road. The County has expressed a desire to develop the southwest portion of the Poor Farm property with future residential dwellings, but it is not believed that this portion of the property will be directly across from this application's subject properties. Still, to soften the transition from an Intensive Commercial land use to an agricultural/residential use to the east, staff is proposing a condition that the developer provide an S3 landscape buffer along the entire Slothower Road frontage. In addition, staff is proposing a condition that the developer submit a landscape plan, which shall be approved by the City Forester, prior to issuance of any building permits for the subject properties. The current land use composition changes outside of the immediately adjacent properties. About 650' southwest of the southwestern extent of the subject properties begins the northern portion of the Iowa City landfill. While the areas abutting the landfill are currently still agricultural in nature, prudent planning would dictate that as the area between the landfill and Highway 218 continues to develop, uses should be scaled in intensity from the landfill, a geographically large area with several negative externalities (noise, odors, etc.) to the existing residences that can be found east of Slothower Road. The Weber Subarea Plan briefly touches upon the need to buffer residential uses from the landfill. Based on projected long-term demand and the characteristics of the subject 10 properties, including access to US -218 and intensive commercial uses being appropriate as a buffer against future landfill expansion and US -965 extension, the subject properties will likely be desired for future commercial or intensive commercial development. Furthermore, land located northwest of the Melrose Avenue/Highway 218 interchange is already zoned Public and contains lighter industrial and institutional uses in a County Public Works facility and an Iowa Armory Board facility. These public zones that contain more intense uses are directly adjacent to farmland and residential zoning (City and County), giving the corridor a light industrial aesthetic. The City's Commercial Site Development Standards provide some initial restrictions pertaining to the screening of parking and loading areas. Parking and loading areas must be set back at least 10' from any front and street -side lot lines. However, any loading area, parking spaces or aisles located within 50' of a residential zone boundary must be set back at least 20' from the front or street -side lot line. The Standards go on to specify that all areas of the site that are not used for buildings, parking, vehicular and pedestrian use areas, sidewalk cafes and plazas must be landscaped with trees and/or plant materials. A landscaping plan must be submitted for site plan review. Furthermore, surface parking areas, loading areas, and drives must be screened from view of abutting properties to at least the S2 standard. Additional screening is required for properties that abut properties zoned residential. Parking areas, loading areas, and drives must be screened from view of any abutting property zoned residential to at least the S3 standard. Staff is proposing a condition to require an S3 High Screen, along the property's eastern frontage. While outdoor storage and display oriented retail is a permitted use in a CI -1 zone, the Commercial Site Development Standards do regulate where these uses can locate, and how they are screened from public view. The Standards detail that outdoor storage of materials in the CH - 1 and CI -1 zones is permitted, provided it is concealed from public view to the extent possible. If it is not feasible to conceal the storage areas behind buildings, the storage areas must be set back at least 20' from any public right of way, including public trails and open space, and screened from view to at least the S3 standard. With respect to views into the subject properties from the south, the Standards elaborate that any outdoor display area located along a side or rear lot line that does not abut a public right of way must be set back at least 10' from said lot line and screened from view of abutting properties to at least the S2 standard. If the display area is adjacent to a residential zone boundary, it must be screened to the S3 standard. Although the zoning code includes regulations that further regulate parking areas, loading zones, and outdoor storage to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, staff proposes a condition of the rezoning that parking, loading areas, and outdoor storage shall either not be located between the front facade of the principal structure and the front yard right-of-way line, or be screened to the S3 standard along the IWV Road frontage. Staff is recommending this condition for the following reasons. Shielding these uses from the IWV Road right-of-way will help implement the Comprehensive Plan's goal of emphasizing green components in all street improvement projects, especially along arterial roads and entryways into the City. This portion of IWV Road is both an arterial road and an entryway into the City from the west. The Comprehensive Plan also encourages the preservation and enhancement of entryways into the City. Implementing the requested screening along the IWV Road right-of-way will enhance the aesthetics of the entryway into the city. In addition to the baseline standards in the Commercial Site Development Standards, Attachment #12 provides more detail on the additional criteria that applies to Provisional Uses in a CI -1 zone. In general, the additional criteria require additional setbacks from certain other uses (residential, religious, educational facility, etc.) as well as techniques to screen these CI -1 uses from adjacent lower intensity uses. Hours of operation may also be restricted for certain uses, such as vehicle repair uses. Certain General Manufacturing uses, such as chemical product manufacturing, 11 milling, motor vehicle manufacturing, and the processing of rubber and plastics are also prohibited in the CI -1 zone. Attachment #12 also provides more detail on the additional criteria that would be reviewed for any uses seeking a special exception from the Board of Adjustment. As is the case with additional criteria for provisional uses, the special exception criteria add more specific restrictions on use setbacks, screening, and outright restriction of certain uses. An example of this is Heavy Manufacturing, which is limited to concrete mixing plants that require a 500' buffer from any residential zone. The existing use specific criteria and special exception process provides additional regulation that are aimed are reducing conflicts with neighbors. While the combined acreage of the subject properties is over 79 acres, much of the land to the south will not be able to be fully developed since there are existing sensitive areas and logical places for stormwater detention. This creates a generous buffer of at least 1,700' from the nearest existing residential use to the southeast and any potential CI -1 use. In addition, required improvements to Slothower Road, upon subsequent development, to collector street standards will create a 66' wide right-of-way, which should create a clear physical distinction between the potential Intensive Commercial use on the subject properties and the rural and residential uses to the east and southeast. Lastly, as described previously, the IWV/Melrose corridor does already have some existing uses of higher intensity to the east, with the Iowa City landfill located further west. A high landscape screen along the property's east side and the additional regulations applicable to more intense CI -1 uses will help ensure compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood character. Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The subject properties contain several sensitive areas, as shown on the Sensitive Areas Plan (Attachment #6). The sensitive areas plan meets the woodland retention requirements and wetland buffer requirements and is not requesting any buffer reductions. Because there are no impacts to these areas or requested buffer reductions, the sensitive areas are reviewed under a Level 1 Sensitive Areas Review. This level of review is not considered a type of planned development. The southern'/4 of the properties that are seeking Intensive Commercial zoning (CI -1) contains a blue line stream and a 50' stream corridor buffer. The area also contains .37 acres of wooded wetlands and .95 acres of emergent wetlands. The southern wetland (Wetland "A" from the Wetland Delineation Report, Attachment #7) is bordered by a 100' wetland buffer. Due to the location of sensitive areas within the southern portion of these properties, future development in this southern % will not be allowed, thereby creating a natural buffer from development to the south. An additional wetland (Wetland "B" from the Wetland Delineation Report, Attachment #7) is found on the westernmost property. This wetland contains .75 acres of wooded wetlands and .5 acres of emergent wetlands. This wetland also contains a 100' buffer. A stream bisects this property; however, it is not regulated under Iowa City's sensitive areas ordinance due to its lack of an ordinary high watermark. The westernmost property also contains 2.02 acres of sensitive woodlands, along with a 50' woodland buffer. A small area of steep slopes can be found adjacent to both Wetland "A" and Wetland "B". According to the Office of the State Archaeologist, the subject properties are not on record as ever having been subject to professional archaeological investigation. Examination of available data suggests the area to be a low to moderate probability location for preservation of significant archaeological resources. No archaeological investigations are deemed warranted. If in the course of ground -disturbing development activities unanticipated discovery of apparent 12 archaeological materials occurs, then construction activities must cease within 50 feet of the discovery and staff from the State Historic Preservation Office and Office of the State Archaeologist must be notified and allowed to evaluate and consult. Traffic Implications: As of 2018, Iowa DOT traffic counts showed an average daily trip count of approximately 2,000 vehicles per day on IWV Road in the vicinity of the subject properties. There are no recent counts for vehicles on Slothower Road, but any counts for Slothower are assumed to be insignificant, given the road's rural character. At 2,000 vehicles per day, this stretch of IWV Road is well below the arterial capacity of approximately 17,000 vehicles per day for a two-lane roadway. Access and Street Design: There is an existing driveway cutout along the south side of IWV Road where the potential end user can obtain access from IWV Road. The City's Access Management Standards discourages direct access to arterial roads when possible. Should the property to the west develop later, an additional access onto IWV Road will be required, unless a cross access easement to a singular access of IWV Road becomes feasible. Access to the site will be determined during site plan review. The attached grading plans shows two separate conceptual access points off IWV Road to the eastern property. These access points are conceptual and not supported by staff. Access to a future development at the southwest corner of IWV Road and Slothower Road will likely require an access point off Slothower Road as well. This is the City's preferred point of primary access to the overall site. The applicant will be responsible for any improvements needed to the southern end of the future Slothower Road access point. Furthermore, since Slothower Road is planned to be a future collector street, the applicant will be responsible for 25% of the cost of upgrading the remaining portion of Slothower Road (south of the previously described required improvements) for the entire section of Slothower Road that is adjacent to the subject property. In addition, staff will be recommending a condition that the applicant dedicate the necessary amount of land needed for a 66' wide right-of-way along the Slothower Road frontage. Stormwater Management: On the applicant's Site Grading and Erosion Control and Sensitive Areas Plan, stormwater management for the eastern two properties (intended to be developed as one property) is shown as provided via three separate on-site detention basins. One smaller basin is shown in the northeast section of the subject properties, while the other two basins would be situated in the southern % of the subject properties, closer to the southern property boundary. Stormwater calculations will be reviewed more thoroughly once the properties are replatted to conform to the proposed zoning boundary lines. Infrastructure Fees: In addition to the previously described roadway improvements, the developer will be required to pay a water main extension fee of $503.57 per acre before public improvements are constructed. The subject properties will not be required to pay sanitary sewer tap -on fees. �IyZrIM909d After recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission the following will occur: • City Council will need to set a public hearing for both the annexation and rezoning. • Prior to the public hearing, utility companies and non -consenting parties will be sent the annexation application via certified mail. • City Council will consider the comprehensive plan amendment (CPA21-0002), annexation (ANN21-0003), and rezoning (REZ21-0006). • The application for annexation will be sent to the State Development Board for consideration and approval. 13 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of ANN21-0003, a voluntary annexation of approximately 70.39 acres of property located south of IWV Road and west of Slothower Road. Staff also recommends approval of REZ21-0006, a rezoning of approximately 53.36 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1), 9 acres from Rural Residential (RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1), and 17.03 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Interim Development Commercial (ID -C) subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owner shall: a. Plat all the property herein rezoned to follow the zoning boundaries; b. Submit a landscape plan, which shall be approved by the City Forester, to ensure that, when developed, the subject property is designed in a manner that emphasizes green components within its location along an arterial and as an entryway into the City. c. Owner shall contribute 25% of the cost of upgrading Slothower Road, south of the proposed access, to collector street standards, adjacent to the subject property. 2. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the property fronting Slothower Road: a. Installation of landscaping to the S3 standard, as detailed in section 14 -5F -6C of City Code, along the subject property's Slothower Road frontage. If said certificate of occupancy is issued during a poor planting season, by May 31 following issuance of the certificate of occupancy; and b. Improvement of Slothower Road to the southern end of the proposed access off Slothower Road. 3. At the time the final plat is approved, Owner shall dedicate additional right-of-way along the Slothower Road frontage in an amount and location approved by the City Engineer. 4. Parking, loading areas, and outdoor storage shall either not be located between the front facade of the principal structure and the front yard right-of-way line or shall be screened to the S3 standard along the IWV Road frontage. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Aerial Photograph 3. Fringe Area Map 4. Annexation Exhibit 5. Rezoning Exhibit 6. Site Grading and Erosion Control Plan and Sensitive Areas Plan 7. Wetland Delineation Report 8. Applicant Statement (July 8, 2021) 9. Annexation Legal Description 10. Rezoning Legal Description 11. Good Neighbor Meeting Summary 12. CI -1 Zone Permitted Uses Summary 13. Correspondence Approved by: Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services LEGEND AND NOTES A - CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, FOUND - PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES - CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES - - - — - - - — - - - - RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES - CENTER LINES - EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMITS - LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - EXISTING EASEMENT LINES, PURPOSE NOTED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET AND HUNDREDTHS J RiMPI 0 20 50 100 150 200 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1 "=200' f, f, f , f' f ' O Ac� ll (r�1 ll ADD DESCRIPTION - ANNEXATION PARCEL A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Commencing at the North Quarter Corner of Section 13, Township 79 North, Range 7 West, of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Johnson County, Iowa; Thence S89°06'50"W, along the North Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 300.04 feet, to the Point of Beginning; Thence S00°00'59"W, along a line parallel with and 300.00 feet normally distant Westerly from the East Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 1307.41 feet, to its intersection with the North Line of Kauble's Subdivision, in accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 20 at Page 47 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S88°45'34"W, along said North Line, 414.99 feet, to the Northwest Corner thereof; Thence S00°06'26"E, along the West Line of said Kauble's Subdivision, 3.41 feet, to its intersection with the South Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13; Thence S89°03'31 "W, along said South Line, 1921.53 feet, to the Southwest Corner of said North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 13; Thence N00°08'52"E, along the West Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 1315.30 feet, to the Northwest Corner of said Section 13; Thence N89°06'50"E, along the North Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 2333.42 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said Annexation Parcel contains 70.39 Acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. o LOCATION MAP - NOT TO SCALE POINT OF BEGINNING I ANNEXATION EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. 1917 S. GILBERT STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52240 SOUTHWEST COI OF THE NORTH ONE—H OF THE NORTHWEST COI OF SECTION 13—T791` OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL M I NtKCUr KCGC/KVtV IN F LAI 17ULK LU AT PAGE 47 OF ME FEGGFF P5OF ThE JOHNSON COUNTY REGOFPEK"5 OFFICE i OWNER/APPLICANT- IWV HOLDINGS LLC 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 POINT OF COMMENCEMENT NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13—T79N—R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN goo SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH ONE—HALF OF THE O� NORTHWEST CORNER < OF �J �0� SECTION 13—T79N—R7W o OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN cl�) �OO FAA RA M CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 351-8282 www.mmsconsultants.net Date I Revision 07-08-2021 PER GDM REVIEW - RLW ANNEXATION EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 07-08-2021 Designed by: Field Book No: KJB - Drawn by: Scale: RLW Ghecked by: Sheet No: GDM Project No: IOWA CITY 10355-001 11=200' - of: 1 ST. AN DREW PPESBY,TER IA N 1C HVR 14 _ SW SW 12-79-7 SE SW 12-79-7 SW SE 72= 9-7 P2 SE E e2- MJ�os � egya SW 9W 7-7Y '� WALIJ ESE 11-79-7 v lo< 1eMh b��B — Mefrase A�. l'hk hlzlrnse A�P ALBERT AND FAY'S F GALWAY HELLS tiV I PTMM12 \ GALWA��:�JBDI ANNEXATION PARCEL NW NE I:3-7- .7 NE NE 11-7 7 1~�wn1'"e `2'9'8 5 - E NE 19-79-7 4 1 ID -RS PAVBLE'S SUBDIVISION SW NW 13_74.7 SE NW 13- - SW NE 13-79-7 SE NE 13-7v-7 WELD PPAIR[E WILD PRAIRIE ESTATES, PA - 1 HUNTERS RUN SU - - COUNTRY CLV B.EST0.lES SE (Y)ND ADDITION _ WILD PPRRAIRIEESTATE POINT OF BEGINNING I ANNEXATION EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. 1917 S. GILBERT STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52240 SOUTHWEST COI OF THE NORTH ONE—H OF THE NORTHWEST COI OF SECTION 13—T791` OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL M I NtKCUr KCGC/KVtV IN F LAI 17ULK LU AT PAGE 47 OF ME FEGGFF P5OF ThE JOHNSON COUNTY REGOFPEK"5 OFFICE i OWNER/APPLICANT- IWV HOLDINGS LLC 2916 HIGHWAY 1 NE IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 POINT OF COMMENCEMENT NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13—T79N—R7W OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN goo SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH ONE—HALF OF THE O� NORTHWEST CORNER < OF �J �0� SECTION 13—T79N—R7W o OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN cl�) �OO FAA RA M CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 351-8282 www.mmsconsultants.net Date I Revision 07-08-2021 PER GDM REVIEW - RLW ANNEXATION EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 07-08-2021 Designed by: Field Book No: KJB - Drawn by: Scale: RLW Ghecked by: Sheet No: GDM Project No: IOWA CITY 10355-001 11=200' - of: 1 M M LJQ) Q U1 ro v E r - L j LU MMS Consultants, Inc. Experts in Planning and Development Since 1975 July 8, 2021 City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 19]75. G i lbert Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 319.351.8282 mmsconsulta nts.net mms@mmsconsultants.net Re: IWV Road SW Rezoning, Annexation and Comprehensive Plan Amendment On behalf of IWV Holdings LLC we are submitting a request for an Annexation and 1; Rezoning in conjunction with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The described land consists of 79.39 acres in total, the proposal includes 70.39 acres to be annexed into the Q City of Iowa City with 9.0 acres currently located within the city limits. The area is shown as a future growth area. Scheduled improvements to IWV Road will provide ro necessary arterial access, with additional access provided via Slothower Road. Public Ln water will be available to the site, and public sewer can be extended to serve the site as required. Circumstances for this site have changed since the current plan was adopted. As mentioned above, there are scheduled improvements to IWV Road, and the city has T LIJ v v w 3 U expressed a plan to revisit the comprehensive plan for this region in the near term. These factors, in addition to the plans by the county for the Johnson County Poor Farm, meet the approval criteria for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. We are proposing a change of the land use from a mix of Public/Private Open Space, Rural Residential and 2-8 DU/A to Intensive Commercial. We feel this amendment is appropriate given the access from the property to an arterial road which provides a direct route to Interstate I-380. The proximity to the Iowa City Landfill and a number of other commercially zoned properties along IWV Road SW shows a consistent pattern of compatibility with surrounding development in this area, and is generally compatible with the policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. At this time Intensive Commercial (CI -1) is being requested for the East portion of the property and Interim Development Commercial (ID -C) is being requested for the West portion of the property. The ID -C zoning will allow for managed growth of future development and for the current use of the land to continue until a plan to provide city services can be established. This zoning also allows for a review of the stream corridor and the associated sensitive areas located in the West portion when a permanent zoning classification application is submitted. Development of the West portion, and any potential impacts to the sensitive areas, can be more appropriately reviewed when city services are able to be provided. V) t; V L v ro U N 19 T LIJ C CL C v (Ll C C LJ 3 U M19]75. G i lbert Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 M MMS Consultants Inc319.351.8282 ] . mmsconsulta ntsnet nts.net Experts in Planning and Development Since 1975 mms@mmsconsultants.net If you have questions or require any additional information, please contact us accordingly. Respectfully submitted, Jon Marner. MMS Consultants, Inc. 10355-010L2.DOCX DESCRIPTION -ANNEXATION PARCEL THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. EXCEPTING THE EAST 300 FEET THEREFROM CONTAINING 70.4 ACRES, MORE OR LESS Summary Report for Good Neighbor Meeting � r -4 CITY OF IOWA CITY Project Name: IWV Road SW Project Location: IWV Road SW Meeting Date and Time. July 28th, 2021 @ 6:30pm Meeting Location: via Zoom Names of Applicant Representatives attending: Josh Entler Jon Marner Names of City Staff Representatives attending: Raymond Heitner Number of Neighbors Attending: 4 Sign -In Attached? Yes X No General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) *General comments that the notifications should be to a larger distance than 300 feet. *Information provided and discussion of utilities and infrastructure availability to the site. *General questions of such a change from Residential land use to proposed land use. *Previous conversations by neighbors with staff seemed to indicate their property would be Residential land use. *Neighbors have not seen signs posted for the zoning. Will that be done? Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - *General questions and comments regarding future use considering the wide range of uses in the requested zone. *Will there be sufficient buffer from the proposed uses to Residential uses on neighboring properties to the south? Discussion of the sensitive areas and natural drainage way aiding in providing a buffer along with city code requirements for buffers adjacent to residential zoning. *Concern over property valuation for residential properties near the possible uses in this zone. *Question of the city restricting uses on the property. Ray provided summary of permitted, provisional and special exception use process. Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe: *Developer/Engineer planning to investigate layouts and impacts of buffers along the south property line based upon feedback received during the meeting Staff Representative Comments Attendees — done via Zoom, addresses were not collected • John Bergstrom • Sherri Bergstrom • Tammi Anderson • Dan Kauble Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 15 of 36 Townsend stated she is torn because of the intensive commercial in what was supposed to be a residential area, so she is still pondering that even though it has changed and it's going to continue to change, especially with the new development off of Rohret Road. Craig stated she is supportive of the of the change, staff makes the case for the changes that have happened and occurred and agrees that when you drive down Melrose and IWV it is not a residential neighborhood. Hensch stated in the immediate area it's pretty hard to see this as residential with the National Guard Armory, the SEATS and Secondary Roads campus, the Joint Emergency Communications Center, Chatham Oaks residential care facility, it's just not a residential character of that neighborhood. Signs agrees with Townsend and thinks there needs to be a lot of buffering but is impressed with the buffering that is currently proposed and won't have any problem suggesting maximum buffering when they get to some of the other phases as property develops, but he does think that's key, but there is quite a bit already there 300 feet is a lot of butter, that's a football field. Padron stated she will not be supporting this; she is concerned with the sensitive areas around the intensive commercial. Commercial is not a kind of buffer. Also, the Poor Farm has been used lately to for festival and family activities and this is too close to the Poor Farm and if that's the intention, or the plan, of how to use the Poor Farm, then there are too many concerns for her. Padron also didn't like that there weren't enough neighbors at the good neighbor meeting, there should have been more people there. A vote was taken and the motion failed 3-2 (Townsend and Padron dissenting). CASE NO. ANN21-0003 & REZ21-0006: Location: SW corner of Slothower Road and IWV Road a. An application for an annexation of approximately 70.39 acres of land currently in unincorporated Johnson County. b. An application for a rezoning from County Agricultural (A) to Intensive Commercial CI -1) for approximately 53.36 acres, Interim Development Commercial ( ID -C) for approximately 17.03 acres, and approximately 9 acres of land from Rural Residential RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1). Heitner stated the presentation is going to have a lot of similarity between this agenda item and the previous agenda item so he would try to not be duplicative in the interest of time. He began with an aerial view of subject property and an overview of the existing zoning noting County Agriculture, Rural Residential and County Residential. Heitner noted the majority of the 70 acres of subject property is located in the growth area of the Fringe Area Agreement, there is a little strip, around 9 acres, to the east that is already in the City limits. That nine -acre strip along with about 53 acres of the proposed annexation would seek CI -1 (Intensive Commercial) zoning and the remaining balance to the west would seek ID -C (Interim Development Commercial) zoning for about 17 acres. Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 16 of 36 Heitner explained this agenda item is focusing on the actual annexation application and the rezoning associated with that annexation as the property is annex into the City. He also wanted to comment on a couple things from just the general background stance, there's been discussion about the lack of attendance at the good neighbor meeting. Those notices were sent out pursuant to the City's current requirement of a 300 -foot notification radius. Heitner attended that meeting, and they made a concerted effort in notification, they sent out notifications to residents within the Country Club Estates Fourth and Fifth Additions as well which is outside of the 300 - foot notification window. Staff did so because they understood that there is a potential for a larger impact for area, since it is a larger agricultural property. They also held a consult on the annexation on July 29th with two Union Township trustees and they also voiced concerns mostly about the potential loss of farmland and tax revenue to the township. Heitner showed an overview of the existing Southwest District Plan and Weber subarea, as Lehmann mentioned the majority of this area was slated for future urban development for single family duplex residential and then also a Vegetative and Noise and Sight Buffer to the west near the landfill. For the annexation component of this, voluntary annexations are reviewed under three different criteria, first, that the area under consideration falls within the adopted long range planning boundary, second that development in the area proposed annexation will fulfill and identify need without imposing an undue burden on the City, and third, that control of the development is in the City's best interest. Heitner stated on that first point with the area under consideration falling within the adapted long range planning boundary, the portion of the subject property that isn't already in the City limits is all entirely within the City's growth area in fringe area C and it's anticipated that anything within that growth area will eventually or could eventually be annexed into the City. Number two, that development in the area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need without imposing an undue burden on the City. The applicant has demonstrated that sanitary sewer service is possible to the eastern properties that are seeking the intensive commercial CI -1 zoning. There are capital improvements underway on IWV road with the intent of bringing the road to urban arterial standards. That will include an urban overlay of that segment of the road roughly between the Poor Farm and Hebl Avenue to the landfill as well as installation of a water line throughout that segment of road with the expectation that waterline and section of the road will be utilized for those infrastructure improvements. Heitner noted there is a great deal of highway adjacency lot size and also arterial proximity that makes this subject property pretty appealing for future commercial development. Also, with regards to the Comprehensive Plan the subject properties are contiguous the City limits there by satisfying that goal for annexation. The last point, control the development is in the City's best interest, as previously mentioned this property is within the City's growth area and is appropriate for properties seeking annexation upon development to seek adequate City services, this is especially true for commercial and industrial oriented uses that may develop within the growth area. It is a long-standing policy that the City tries to direct those uses within the City limits if possible. Heitner showed an overview of the zoning noting the eastern parcels will have intensive commercial zoning with the western parcel seeking interim development commercial. As an overview of a CI -1 zone, it is a zone with a lot of depth to it and the purpose of the zone is to Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 17 of 36 provide areas for sales and service functions, businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor displays and storage of merchandise, repair, and sales of large equipment or motor vehicles or commercial amusement recreational activities. It's an extensive zone and there's a lot of discussion within the zoning ordinance about how to buffer some of those uses from adjacent residential zones. Heitner acknowledged there's been a lot of talk about MidAmerican being a potential end user here, certainly a possibility, but when staff is assessing a rezoning like this, they have to analyze the potential for any kind of use that might be permitted within that zone. There are three different ways they look at uses in zones, they have uses that are permitted by right, meaning that if they follow all of the other items and steps within the zoning or subdivision ordinance they are permitted without any further scrutiny, there's provisional uses which require a few more steps and criteria to satisfy and then there's uses permitted by special exception which require even more criteria to satisfy and they have to obtain that special exception through the Board of Adjustment, an entirely different review body. Heitner showed a quick overview of some of the uses that are permitted through each mechanism. By right, they can have building trade, commercial recreational, eating establishments, office, retail, industrial service, self-service storage warehouse, and freight movement. Provisional uses, which again require a bit more criteria to satisfy are adult businesses, animal related commercial, some general manufacturing, and basic utility. Finally are the uses as permitted by special exception which deserve a bit more analysis and scrutiny, are things like heavy manufacturing, basic utilities that maybe are outside, detention facilities, and utility scale solar. The IDC zone to the far west is intended to provide areas for managed growth, it's a default zoning district that's often applied to undeveloped areas until City services can be provided, as is the case with this portion of the subject property. For the rezoning component Heitner explained there's two criteria that need to be satisfied, consistency with Comprehensive Plan and compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. With respect to consistency with Comprehensive Plan, a lot of that is tied to the previous agenda item and whether intensive commercial designation within the Comprehensive Plan is passed. What is existing right now is classified as future urban development. Heitner wanted to touch on the attractiveness of the site for a couple reasons, the highway adjacency and future arterial road access. As mentioned earlier, there are improvements ongoing right now to IWV Road to make that up to arterial urban design standards. Also discussed already tonight was the potential for the extension of 965 that would be on the west side of the subject property, closer to the interim zone area, and then in the Comprehensive Plan there are plans for making Slothower Road a collector street which is a step down from an arterial assuming less traffic than an arterial but still more volume than a local neighborhood street. With respect to compatibility with the existing neighborhood character Heitner wanted to highlight topography of the area, with the lighter industrial uses to the northeast of the subject property, the Poor Farm directly east, agricultural residential to the north and the Country Club Estates residential of the southeast. Staff does acknowledge there's definitely concerns with potentially having a zone with the breath of uses that an intensive commercial zone presents and being as sensitive as possible to existing neighbors and adjacent properties so there are a few conditions in that respect that staff would recommend for rezoning. Staff is recommending a S3 high screen landscape buffer along the properties on Slothower Road frontage. S3 is the most intense screening within the code and consists of six -foot -tall dense shrub and/or tree buffer with potential to incorporate berming with that buffer or a masonry wall. They are also recommending Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 18 of 36 a condition that any parking along the IWV Road frontage be screened to the S3 standard and that any loading areas and outdoor storage be located behind the principal structure. In addition, there's also some built in criteria for buffering that's for more intense uses that might fall under this zone, the code already prescribes in terms of buffering for uses such as manufacturing, which is limited concrete mix plants, would require at least the 500 foot buffer from any residential zone. General manufacturing has a size limitation of about 15,000 square feet and there's certain protocols for what production could take place out of that general manufacturing. Detention facilities must be at least 1000 feet from any residential zone and communication transmission facility towers have to be set back at least the distance equal to the height of the tower from any residential zone. Heitner next discussed the environmental sensitive areas, the applicant did submit sensitive areas plan as part of the review of the annexation and rezoning. It was already discussed about the natural buffering that will take place on the south side of the subject property spanning the entire width of the property and again that's largely because of a combination of planned detention, also the stream corridor on the south end of the property, as well as a wetland a little bit under an acre in size on the south of the property and associated 100 -foot buffer around that wetland. So there will be natural buffering on the south side of subject property that effectively prohibits any urban development from taking place within that area. Regarding traffic and access to the site, right now the most recent vehicle count that they have for IWV Road is approximately 2000 vehicles per day which is well below the arterial size capacity of about 17,000 vehicles per day. Staff is looking to finalize access to the site upon site plan review, however, there is a City Code policy on limiting access to arterial roads, and it is the City's preference to have that primary access point off Slothower Road, and there's a few conditions related to that access. One, that the applicant would be obligated to improve Slothower Road to the southern end of that proposed access and then contributes 25% toward the cost of upgrading the remaining portion of Slothower Road along the rest of the frontage. Staff is also requesting a dedication of approximately 13 feet of additional right-of-way along the Slothower Road frontage. Heitner noted the public comments received regarding concerns with the annexation were largely similar to the concerns related to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment about the wide range of uses in the proposed zone, concerns about buffers and impacts to sensitive features, detrimental property valuation to adjacent residences, concerns about negative externalities from the use of traffic, lighting impacts, the large shift from a rural residential character to an intensive commercial or lighter industrial character and then potential implications for the larger area. With respect to the annexation policy, the role of the Commission tonight is to determine that the following are satisfied conditions by the Comprehensive Plans annexation policy, one that the area falls within the adopted long range planning boundary; two, that the development area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need without imposing undue burden on the City; and three, that control of the development is the City's best interest. With respect to next steps, after recommendation from this Commission the following will occur: • City Council would set a public hearing for both the annexation and rezoning. • Prior to the public hearing, utility companies and non -consenting parties will be sent the annexation application via certified mail. Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 19 of 36 City Council will consider the comprehensive plan amendment (CPA21-0002), annexation ANN21-0003), and rezoning (REZ21-0006). The application for annexation will be sent to the State Development Board for consideration and approval. Staff recommends approval of ANN21-0003, a voluntary annexation of approximately 70.39 acres of property located south of IWV Road and west of Slothower Road. Staff also recommends approval of REZ21-0006, a rezoning of approximately 53.36 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1), 9 acres from Rural Residential (RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1), and 17.03 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Interim Development Commercial (ID -C) subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owner shall: a. Plat all the property herein rezoned to follow the zoning boundaries. b. Submit a landscape plan, which shall be approved by the City Forester, to ensure that, when developed, the subject property is designed in a manner that emphasizes green components within its location along an arterial and as an entryway into the City. c. Owner shall contribute 25% of the cost of upgrading Slothower Road, south of the proposed access, to collector street standards, adjacent to the subject property. 2. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the property fronting Slothower Road: a. Installation of landscaping to the S3 standard, as detailed in section 14 -5F -6C of City Code, along the subject property's Slothower Road frontage. If said certificate of occupancy is issued during a poor planting season, by May 31 following issuance of the certificate of occupancy. b. Improvement of Slothower Road to the southern end of the proposed access off Slothower Road. 3. At the time the final plat is approved, Owner shall dedicate additional right-of-way along the Slothower Road frontage in an amount and location approved by the City Engineer. 4. Parking, loading areas, and outdoor storage shall either not be located between the front facade of the principal structure and the front yard right-of-way line or shall be screened to the S3 standard along the IWV Road frontage. Hensch had three questions, one about uses as permitted by right, provisionally and by special exception. For the special exceptions, is it correct that those would have to go before the Board of Adjustment to get approval and there'd be no administrative course of action, because some of those uses sound pretty intensive. Heitner confirmed that was correct anything requiring a special exception will require Board approval. Hensch acknowledged a couple of the public speakers intermixed industrial zoning with intensive commercial zoning and they're not talking about any industrial zoning tonight, the heaviest zoning is intensive commercial. Again Heitner confirmed that was correct. Hensch noted that Slothower Road is currently a county level B road, so that means that there's zero maintenance going on and it's essentially non -traversable at this point by a regular motor vehicle. Heitner confirmed it's a level B road so the County provides no maintenance for the entire length of that road. Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 20 of 36 Hensch's last question is under the additional conditions in staff's recommendation, the recommendation was that there should be S3 screening standards applied for landscaping along the length of Slothower Road and he was curious why that wasn't extend to the length of the IWV Road since that is an entry area to Iowa City. Hensch noted the Commission has always paid particular importance to green entry ways into the City so was there any consideration given to have S3 standards for that length IWV Road and if not that's something he'd be interested in adding. Heitner stated there was consideration given to it and if it's the Commission's desire to create a new condition that would require that S3 screening on the IWV Road frontage staff would be supportive of that. Their focus with respect to IWV Road was just making sure that any parking within that front yard area off IWV Road be screened but again would be totally supportive of extending that screening throughout the entire IWV Road frontage. Hensch is not only concerned aesthetically but also quite certain the engineering staff would recommend limitation of access on IWV Road from the main property so if they're not going to have driveways anyway why not have this look as aesthetically pleasing as possible. Heitner agreed and stated it also goes to further satisfy the Comprehensive Plan goal about having aesthetically pleasing beautified entries into the City. Signs stated he did appreciate the review of the various uses this by right, provisional and by special exception, that did answer some of his questions. He would definitely be supportive of extending the S3 screening standard the entire length of the IWV Road on the side of that property. Signs noted one of the things that they seem to be bumping up against a lot lately, in the last year of applications that came before the Commission, is there's a common theme of not wanting change and not wanting growth. For those folks here tonight to speak against growth, if they stick around a little bit longer, they're going to hear the folks that are going to speak against growth on the south side. The Commission talked with all the folks on the northeast side of town a couple times in the last two years about the fact that they didn't want their natural areas to grow, and it really got him thinking and begging the question of where is the City going to grow if nobody wants to grow. In the paper last week it stated the official census estimate for Iowa City shows that the growth was less than expected, while the growth in the neighboring communities was way more than expected. And to be honest, there's a reason for that and it is because they want to grow and the Iowa City community, at least part of the community, doesn't want to grow. The Commission is seeing this trend and it's starting to concern him and as stated earlier their role is to look at the good of the community as a whole. He is not opposed to change, they've seen change happen on the IWV corridor and her anticipates that the demand for that's going to continue regardless of any decision made tonight. He personally thinks that if he had to choose between that and 230 some acres south of Rohret Road this makes the most sense to put in some type of a heavier use of zoning so there are some of those types of businesses and industries on that side of town and it's really the only place that seems logical for him. He likes the staff's conditions and totally support those, he would also support extending the screening on IWV Road and is inclined to support this. He is definitely inclined to support the annexation and is comforted by the chart that showed the uses of the zoning allowed so he is more inclined now to support the zoning. Hensch opened the public hearing. Jon Marner (MMS Consultants) stated they would also support the extension to the S3 screening along IWV Road. The other thing he wanted to add is just to reiterate again that this zoning amendment is being sought not just for one user, there's an opportunity for multiple other businesses, whether they've expressed interest at this point or not, this is a great location to Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 21 of 36 provide quick access to the arterial road and immediate access to Highway 218 and the interstate system and as staff pointed out there's not a lot of those types of properties in the area. Other areas are located away from the highway or from the interstate or the area on the east part of town is located near railways and are different uses or smaller parcels. A lot of the people that are interested in this type of property for this type of uses are searching for something more in the neighborhood of 10 to 15 acres or a little larger and those properties simply don't exist in the Iowa City area at this time, so this is a great location. John Bergstrom (Slothower Farms) want to state they are not anti -growth, they just don't like the abrupt change in the land plan and doesn't think he was hearing anti -growth. This area has always been deemed to be residential and he thinks it should continue as residential. As far as north of Melrose frankly this development would probably fit better north of Melrose, but as they turn onto Slothower Road that should be residential or neighborhood commercial because then to the south is residential and the County Farm will have a residential component to it. Again, this is just a big change, and as they change an instrument like the Comprehensive Plan it should be much more encompassing than just accommodating MidAmerican Energy because it's very clear from all the staff comments that is what this is all about. Hensch stated just so everybody knows they have not materials that state what the potential users of these properties and they strictly look at the application and what the application says. Eric Freedman (4401 Tempe Place) wanted to acknowledge he heard a couple of the Commissioners say this is not a residential area, west on Melrose, but that's not the concern, the concern is the views from the south, and what this impacts to the south. On the map it is shown that a ton of people live right across the Poor Farm, it's a clear line of sight. If the Poor Farm is going to be a community resource with trails and some housing and community farming, then right next to it will be a row of trees or shrubs like six feet high and he has no idea what it's going to look like so it'd be nice to at least see something that would show them what it's going to look like when this is built to the west of the Poor Farm. There is concern among people who live in this vibrant neighborhood of what the impact would be. He doesn't think any of them are opposed to annexing more land and creating space for things that are useful to the City, but they don't understand why it was chosen to be here without looking at other options. Why not north of Melrose, what's the long-term plan, is this going to be one little tiny piece, or is there going to be expansion for other intensive commercial, is there a plan for that they haven't seen. He'd like to know more, in order to be able to make a clear decision and he doesn't know how they can make a decision on this, given what they've heard so far. For example, something along the east side of that space that was more compatible and useful to the people living there. Nobody wants to live next to a dump so if there's going to be stuff farther west that is fine, but he thinks people are concerned about along Slothower Road is directly next to where people live. Jim Larimore (1143 Wildcat Lane) is one of the families that looks across that field at the proposed site. Since one of the Commissioners made some comments that are interpreted as being directed at those who are here in attendance, he thinks it's interesting sometimes that they can hear the same words and or be exposed to the same words and hear such dramatically different things. Larimore has not heard a single one of his neighbors express a concern about growth. Some of them came to Iowa City and contributed to the growth of the population, so he doesn't think that anyone is anti -growth. From what he's heard so far, they do have some concerns about what is planned, or what is potentially going to be for some of them within a very Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 22 of 36 long stone's throw of their neighborhood and the thing that he would point out and where he heard some things tonight that are worrisome was actually in the documentation that was posted online and there is a reference in some of the material that suggests the plan for the County and the Poor Farm. They're actually considering putting some residential units there which would be very close to the proposed site and that creates a much more immediate conflict between the kinds of uses for these properties. The thing he is very concerned about, because there were also comments that none of us has a crystal ball, they really don't know what will go there and there's no confirmed plan for MidAmerica Energy to use the site, but there is beyond the rights that can be exercised to build on that site subject only to provisional review. What was referenced as an adult video stores or strip clubs that's what the Code says so by opening up the door for intensive commercial use on this property, not very far from one of Iowa City's high schools and not very far from residential neighborhoods are possibilities that no one really want in their backyards. Cindy Seyfer (36 Tempe Court) wanted to follow up with that comment they're not concerned if it's MidAmerican or who it is that builds there, they are looking at what's in the best interest for Iowa City and the public. She thinks it's really dangerous to annex and start to allow that land to be used in a way that they don't have a plan for. They don't know what the future will hold for that land, but what they do know is what is near it. The Commissioners indicated it isn't residential, but she would assume that the residents of Walnut Ridge and Galway Hills would beg to differ, because they would find themselves pretty close to that area. Her neighborhood would find themselves close to that area and again that's where she thinks they need to be looking at tiers, rather than jumping straight from residential to intense commercial. Once it is intense commercial all of those options exist in terms of what could go on that land, and it makes it really hard to feel comfortable with what the future might hold. She also wanted to echo none of them are against the growth, they wanted residential growth or at the very least maybe some neighborhood commercial growth, they just don't think an appropriate use is intense commercial. Sherri Slothower Bergstrom (Slothower Farms) feels like the panel here maybe doesn't have a good understanding of that area. They have been talking a lot about IWV Road but the people that are here and the big impact that they are missing is what's going to happen south of there. There's a big strip of land there and this small piece of land that they're addressing tonight is going to set the tone for what happens in that whole area, and it really concerns her and bothers her a lot that the people on the panel are not really understanding that. Maybe the Commissioners are not real familiar with the area, but IWV Road is probably not what they should be thinking about here, there is going to be impact in the future from this decision on a large area of agricultural land and on a lot of people. Look at that neighborhood there and look at what's going to happen in the future on that agricultural land and what they are deciding here for a very small plot is going to impact that greatly. Duane Kruse (965 Slothower Road) and as Bergstrom just pointed out the decision that's being imposed on the Commission tonight does impact a lot of people and it's a very large decision. When one drives up and down IWV you see commercial, but you get past that and there's a lot of land there that is going to be impacted by this decision if this area goes to heavy industrial. He is also not opposed to growth, they all want to grow, they all want to be successful, but he also thinks if they make this decision in favor of the heavy industrial, they're opening pandora's box and can't close it once it's opened. Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 23 of 36 Craig corrected that it's not heavy industrial zoning. Kruse accepted that but stated he is opposed to this, his wife Kathy is opposed, their two dogs are opposed, their three cats are opposed and 49 pheasants in their front yard last winter are opposed. Hensch asked the applicant what's the CSR (corn suitability rating) for this land. Marner replied he did not know off the top of his head. Hensch noted several people mentioned the agricultural lands and he presumes it's around 50-60. He assumes it would be the same as the Poor Farm and the Poor Farm CSR is low, it's around 50. Freedman had a quick question as there was a mention in the conditions for the plan that the resident would pay 25% of the improvements to Slothower Road to the south of the site. What is the vision and is that going to extend all the way down to Rohret Road or that would connect up the Lake Shore. Hensch reminded him this is not a question/answer opportunity, it's an opportunity for the public to address the Commission and share information. He could certainly ask staff after the meeting. Freedman stated then if the idea was that collector road is going to feed on to Lake Shore and not go all the way down to Rohret Road it would be tremendously opposed by many, many people in the community because then lots of traffic would be going right through a street where there's tons of kids. So if there's thinking here about creating a collector road they have to be very careful and do an analysis of where that collector is going to go, he thinks it should go to Rohret Road. Marner stated the CSR is 72, he was able to look it up on the internet. Hensch noted just so people know it's a scale of zero to 100 and the closer to 100 is prime agricultural land and as it goes down its lesser value and that determines how it sells frankly. Hensch closed the public hearing. Townsend moved to recommend approval of ANN21-0003, a voluntary annexation of approximately 70.39 acres of property located south of IWV Road and west of Slothower Road. Signs seconded the motion. Hensch stated here they are talking about the annexation of approximately 70.39 acres and they need to analyze three criteria that's in the annexation policy. Number one, the area under consideration falls within the adopted long range planning boundary; number two, development in the area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need without imposing undue burden on the City, so talking about city services such as utilities and other services; and number three, the control of the development is in the City's best interest and really that's what the Commission is always to look at, what's best for the City. Hensch started he completely empathizes with everybody in this room, he lives on the south side of Iowa City and there's been a lot of zoning actions have been taken adjacent to his property Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 24 of 36 that he did not agree with and did not like but that's just the way it is. Other people make these decisions, sometimes in our favor and sometimes not. He looks at this critically, he has been doing this for seven years now, and so on these annexations he thinks it's usually pretty straightforward by reviewing the three criteria. Again, they are not talking about rezoning, it has nothing to do with the conversation right now, this is about annexation. He thinks all three of these criteria clearly been met. Signs agrees, he is very much supportive if the property owner wants to bring their property into the into the City and add value to the City. Hensch thanked Signs for bringing that up. The City's annexation policy is it's only voluntary annexation so the owner of this property wishes to be annexed into Iowa City. Signs agrees and states he personally thinks they need to look pretty favorably upon it, as long as it's not going to create some detriment to City services or resources. Townsend, Craig and Padron all agreed. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. Motion by Signs to recommend approval of REZ21-0006, a rezoning of approximately 53.36 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1), 9 acres from Rural Residential (RR -1) to Intensive Commercial (CI -1), and 17.03 acres from County Agricultural (A) to Interim Development Commercial (ID -C) subject to the following conditions: 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owner shall: a. Plat all the property herein rezoned to follow the zoning boundaries. b. Submit a landscape plan, which shall be approved by the City Forester, to ensure that, when developed, the subject property is designed in a manner that emphasizes green components within its location along an arterial and as an entryway into the City. c. Owner shall contribute 25% of the cost of upgrading Slothower Road, south of the proposed access, to collector street standards, adjacent to the subject property. 6. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the property fronting Slothower Road: a. Installation of landscaping to the S3 standard, as detailed in section 14 -5F - 6C of City Code, along the subject property's Slothower Road frontage. If said certificate of occupancy is issued during a poor planting season, by May 31 following issuance of the certificate of occupancy. b. Improvement of Slothower Road to the southern end of the proposed access off Slothower Road. c. Installation of landscaping to the S3 standard along the property line and IWV Road. 7. At the time the final plat is approved, Owner shall dedicate additional right-of-way along the Slothower Road frontage in an amount and location approved by the City Engineer. 8. Parking, loading areas, and outdoor storage shall either not be located between the Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 25 of 36 front facade of the principal structure and the front yard right-of-way line or shall be screened to the S3 standard along the IWV Road frontage. The motion was seconded by Craig. Hensch stated this is the hardest part and he presumes no one in the audience will like what he has to say but they have to look at what's best for the entire city of Iowa City, not for particular areas. He has heard every word they said, he listened carefully, and he understands exactly why they feel the way they do but the Commission's job is to make decisions that's best for the entire city of Iowa City. He personally thinks Mr. Signs comments were correct that there seems to be a real strong, and he's not accusing anybody in here of this, of anti -development in Iowa City because the Commission has gone through some really rough public hearings for development on east side by Hickory Hills and on the south side with the new zoning standards. Somebody's got to pay property taxes, land has to be developed for the people that want to live here, people keep moving here and they have to live somewhere, they have to work somewhere, so the Commission has to make really hard decisions that are pretty thankless. At the end of the day, he has to look at is a Comprehensive Plan being complied with, are the district plans and the subdistrict plans being complied with, in general, because this is subjective when talking about comprehensive plans and district plans and then in a particularity are the development ordinances being followed. That's the Commission's role and he views it pretty literal and has to take out his personal feelings on a lot of things. Hensch acknowledged there's some subjectivity but mostly their job is are the rules being followed and is the intention of the plans being followed and the answer for him in this case is yes. He acknowledged he wouldn't like it if he was a neighbor, he does disagree with them that the residential area is farther to the south, and he is thrilled to have a developer voluntarily without coercion have one third of their property be a buffer. Hensch stated this is a onetime thing for the neighbors, but this is a regular every meeting for Commission and this is a great deal and he will support this without reservation Craig stated she also supports the rezoning, she would not support it if it came further south, but she thinks it's in keeping with what is going to be there when 965 comes down between the landfill and this property. They weren't going to be building residential houses to the west because like someone already said residential houses don't want to back up to the landfill, well residential houses don't want to live on 965 either, so there's going to be something happening there that is not residential, and this creates the beginning of that buffer that they are going to want to your residential neighborhoods. If this was that full strip of land they were asking for, she would not approve it, but she thinks the corner up there by Melrose is in keeping with the uses on Melrose, so she is very supportive of it. Padron is still opposed to the change; she still thinks the Poor Farm is too close. For example, the bike library is organizing rides to different farms in town, so people can ride their bike and go to other farms and the Poor Farm has been participating in that. She received notifications to go there and spend the day there with other nonprofit organizations doing family events as well, so she thinks it is too close to the Poor Farm. She is also concerned with all the uses that were listed; some are not very family friendly. Padron acknowledged Craig said if it were the whole strip she would not approve but Padron feels approving this corner might be a beginning for developers to keep asking for changes on the whole strip. She is very in favor of City growth but doesn't think this is the right way to grow the City and is concerned. This particular area is not the right place for it. Planning and Zoning Commission September 16, 2021 Page 26 of 36 Townsend noted at this point they're not voting on any specific proposal, right now they're just voting on rezoning the land and she doesn't have a problem. Hensch agreed, they never really know what it's going to end up somewhere when they rezone it, they rezone land and do not rezone for particular use that's going to happen eventually in the future. Signs appreciates that comment and would agree and is not making any decision based on the idea that MidAmerican Energy as maybe the tenant there. He supports this type of growth along IWV in whatever it might be. There were couple of references to some of the provisional uses there he can assure them if something like an adult bookstore came before the Board of Adjustment, he is sure there would be a tremendous neighborhood input in that session, and he is pretty sure it wouldn't get past. He also reiterated it is really important to note this is not industrial, this is intensive commercial and he is in support of the rezoning. A vote was taken and the motion passes 4-1 (Padron dissenting). CASE NO. CPA21-0001: A public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the South District Plan to facilitate development that follows form -based principles. Russett began with a brief summary of what's in the staff report, the City has been working with Opticos on this since 2019 and they've met with several stakeholders over the past two years to get input on the plan. A few things she wanted to highlight since the Commission last saw this is staff has made some changes to the Comprehensive Plan and some of those changes were also incorporated into the proposed zoning code. The vast majority of the changes are non - substantive changes, formatting issues and typos, but there were also a few things staff found that they wanted to clarify in the code so they made those changes. One thing is they did change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map based on recent input from a landowner south of Wetherby Park and that will be discussed later in the presentation. Lehmann stated for CPA21-0001, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is really a couple changes to the context, the goals and objectives, new land use descriptions, and a new future land use map. Lehmann showed an image of the new future land use map that takes a form - based approach to land use. As far as context and background, there's some information about the form -based code process and some added some information about history including planning and of the area and development that's happened since the Plan was initially adopted in 2015, as well as some generalizing language, based on the proposed new future land use map. Lehmann noted it also talks about form -based zoning and form -based codes and how those work, which is instead of organizing zones by uses, zones are organized by what they look like and trying to tailor the character to the form of the area. He explained that is a difference and it clarifies how that would occur in the South District. As part of that staff also is proposing three new goals and objectives that discuss exactly what form -based zoning looks like in the South District and how those would support other goals that are also within the Plan and broader goals of the City as well, including a diversity of housing types, promoting walkability and use of alternative modes of transportation, and including new neighborhood commercial areas. From: Pamela To: Raymond Heitner Date: Wednesday, August 18, 20217:32:08 PM I am against the rezoning of Slothower Rd. I feel like it will lead to loud traffic and distracting lighting to our neighborhood. Pamela Miller-DeKeyser 1630 Lake Shore Drive Iowa City, IA 52246 Sent from the all new AOL app for Android From: DEANAGHOLSON To: Raymond Heitner Subject: Rezoning at Melrose and Slothower Date: Monday, September 13, 2021 4:00:16 PM Mr. Heitner, I am emailing you in regard to the recent proposal of rezoning in the area of Melrose and Slothower. We have lived in Iowa City for twenty years this year. We built our home on the southwest side of town near Weber school and have loved our neighborhood and location. We have paid close attention to the area to our north (Poor Farm) and west (farmland) and were happy with the cities comprehensive plan for this area over time. We are very concerned that the recent rezoning proposal is to go from rural/residential to commercial in this area. We are aware that rezoning happens (it obviously had to in order for our neighborhood to be developed) but to leap from rural to commercial seems like quite a drastic change. Once a commercial property area is developed, it seems likely that it could very well continue to develop in that manner which could effect us in the future. I am unsure if we will be able to attend the P&Z meeting this week but would request that you log our concerns in with any others you may have gotten regarding this rezoning. We would like to see the city take a step back and reassess the situation and come up with a revised comprehensive plan to share with the southwest citizens before forging ahead at this time. Thanks for your time! Deana Gholson 1332 Phoenix Drive IC IA This email is from an external source. From: John Bergstrom To: Raymond Heitner Cc: Sherri Bergstrom Subject: Case CPA21-0002 SW corner of Slothower Road and IWV Road Date: Monday, September 13, 20216:28:15 PM As representatives of Slothower Farm we are expressing our objections to the dramatic change in the Comprehensive Plan to allow for Intensive commercial development on land that has long been anticipated to be residential. This change to the IWV Holding parcel is being brought about to allow for the development of a Mid American Energy service complex that the City evidently feels that they have no where else to place it. This is certainly a change to a relatively small parcel that will affect the future of many existing and future residents. We would like to see the following addressed or answered: 1. The staff report (as well as the MMS report) refer to the significant changes that have taken place. Frankly, the changes in the immediate area west of the interchange are not new. What is new is the significant residential growth to the area abutting the County Farm. The proposed changes will affect the existing neighborhoods, existing residents and the future development of the Johnson County Poor Farm. 2. There seems to be concern about the landfill needing a buffer. The proposed 965 extension will provide a natural separation. MMS has come to its own stated conclusion that the best buffer is commercial development. Seems a little self serving. 3. Why is a longstanding planning instrument being drastically altered to accommodate a 40 acre development (initially) that will affect a large overlay area. If the Comprehensive Plan is to be altered like this, it should be much more encompassing, studied and thought out. Not as a reaction to a single user. 4. The City feels it needs more intensive commercial land? Fine, don't put it on or next to areas long slated for residential. Or, if you can't accommodate certain uses, is there any harm letting them gravitate to a neighboring community that can? 5. There are complementary non-residential uses that are compatible with neighborhoods that don't infringe on residents. The uses allowed under the proposed zoning (including Mid American Energy) are not compatible. 6. The goal of the existing Comprehensive Plan is to encourage commercial and industrial development south and southwest of the Iowa City Municipal Airport. Now you appear to conveniently be changing the Fringe Area Agreement just to accommodate a single user. 7. How does Johnson County feel about this as it relates to the Poor Farm? Intensive commercial uses would not be complementary to the proposed development schemes we have seen for the farm. Please reconsider this change to the Comprehensive Plan and the subsequent zoning changes that would result. The City needs to slow down and better understand the ramifications of this action. John and Sherri Bergstrom From: James Larimore To: Raymond Heitner Cc: Jim Larimore Subject: Opposition to proposed amendment to Comprehensive Plan Date: Wednesday, September 15, 20213:43:33 PM Dear Mr. Heitner, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rezoning of land near the intersection of Melrose and Slothower in Iowa City. My family and I live on Wildcat Lane in the Southwest District, and our house is one of those with a direct line of site to the proposed location of Intensive Commercial development. We purchased our house seven years ago in large measure because of the assurances provided in the City's Comprehensive Plan for the Southwest District, which explicitly discouraged "the establishment of commercial uses around the Melrose Avenue -Highway 218 interchange" and envisioned that future development of this area should preserve the rural character of the district, provide a diversity of housing types, and potentially include the creation of a regional park that could be connected to a planned water reservoir, the Willow Creek trail and other parks in the Southwest District. I am certain that others who have purchased homes in this area, at the combined cost of tens of millions of dollars of personal investment, also took into account the rural and residential nature of the district when they decided to move into the Southwestern District. The proposed rezoning will irretrievably damage the rural and residential character of the Southwest District and creates a risk that the proposed Intensive Commercial development will eventually cascade further down Slothower Road, impacting home values and quality of life, as well as introducing unwanted vehicular traffic seeking a faster path to Highway 218. Furthermore, in stark contrast to the transparent and inclusive process that informed the current proposal takes a piecemeal rather than comprehensive approach, and with extremely limited effort at outreach, information dissemination, and community engagement on the part of the Planning and Zoning office. I am concerned that precipitous action on the part of the Planning and Zoning Commission puts at risk the public trust which was earned by the Commission's predecessors, who facilitated direct community engagement in the creation of the current Comprehensive Plan. Trust is hard to earn and easy to squander, and I urge the Commission not to trade away public trust and confidence in the expedient pursuit of a problem for which there are likely alternative solutions. I look forward to participating in the Commission's hearing on September 16th. Sincerely, Jim Larimore Wildcat Lane Iowa City From: John Bergstrom To: Raymond Heitner Cc: Sherri Bergstrom; Sevfer, James W Subject: IWV/Slothower Road Date: Monday, October 18, 2021 1:07:26 PM Ray, as we discussed, we continue to object to the change in the comprehensive plan and the rezoning at the corner of IWV and Slothower Road. It has been made clear that this change is being made to accommodate MidAmerican Energy with little thought as to how it affects a much greater area. That said, I believe there is a solution that everyone can live with. Move the MidAmerican facility to the 40 acres that IWV partners also owns on the north side of IWV Road. The comprehensive plan and zoning would remain in place on the south side of IWV. On the north side, the facility would be more consistent with the properties immediately to the east. While I cannot speak for the neighborhood to the south of the county farm, I am led to believe this is a solution they might consider to be palatable. Please consider this alternative with your staff. John Bergstrom Sent from Mail for Windows November 4, 2021 11111oll • Pat Heiden, Chairperson Jon Green Royceann Porter, Vice Chairperson Lisa Green -Douglass Rod Sullivan Ray Heitner Associate Planner City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 Dear Ray, We received your notice regarding an application from IWV Holdings, LLC for a voluntary annexation into the City of Iowa City of approximately 70.4 acres of land located west of the intersection of IWV Road and Slothower Road on October 27, 2021. This is to notify you that the Board of Supervisors does not have a comment on this annexation and will not be attending the public hearing set for 6:00 p.m on November 16, 2021. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (319) 356-6000 or email mhensch@johnsoncountyiowa.gov. Sincerely, Mike Hensch Executive Director 913 South Dubuque Street ♦ Iowa City, Iowa 52240 0 319-356-6000 d www.johnsoncountyiowa.gov ir.C' Deferred to 11/30/21 Prepared by: Ray Heitner, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5238 (ANN21-0003) RESOLUTION NO. Resolution to annex approximately 70.39 acres of land located west of the intersection of IWV Road SW and Slothower Road. Whereas, IWV Holdings, LLC. is the owner of approximately 70.39 acres located west of the intersection of IWV Road and Slothower Road; and Whereas, Owner has requested annexation of the approximate 70.39 -acre tract into the City of Iowa City, Iowa; and Whereas, the aforementioned property is located within the Long -Range Planning Boundary of the City of Iowa City, and Whereas, control of the area proposed for annexation is in the City's best interest because it will allow development in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, pursuant to Iowa Code 368.5 and 368.7 (2021), notice of the application for annexation was sent to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, Johnson County departments of Attorney, Auditor, Engineer, Planning and Zoning, each affected public utility, the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County, and the East Central Iowa Council of Governments; and Whereas, none of these entities have objected to the proposed annexation; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed annexation and rezoning and has recommended approval. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that: 1. The following described land should be voluntarily annexed to the City of Iowa City, Iowa: A PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 7 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Commencing at the North Quarter Corner of Section 13, Township 79 North, Range 7 West, of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Johnson County, Iowa; Thence S89°06'50"W, along the North Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 300.04 feet, to the Point of Beginning; Thence S00°00'59"W, along a line parallel with and 300.00 feet normally distant Westerly from the East Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 1307.41 feet, to its intersection with the North Line of Kauble's Subdivision, in accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 20 at Page 47 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S88°45'34"W, along said North Line, 414.99 feet, to the Northwest Corner thereof; Thence S00°06'26"E, along the West Line of said Kauble's Subdivision, 3.41 feet, to its intersection with the South Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13; Thence S89°03'31 "W, along said South Line, 1921.53 feet, to the Southwest Corner of said North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 13; Thence N00°08'52"E, along the West Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of Resolution No. Page 2 said Section 13, a distance of 1315.30 feet, to the Northwest Corner of said Section 13; Thence N89°06'50"E, along the North Line of the North One -Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 13, a distance of 2333.42 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said Annexation Parcel contains 70.39 Acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify, file, and record all necessary documents as required by Iowa law under Section 368.7 at Owners' expense. 3. Further, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify and file all necessary documents for certification of the population of the annexed territory to Johnson County and the State Treasurer, said population being zero. Passed and approved this day of 12021 Mayor Pro Tem Appro d by ATTEST: CITY CLERK City Atto ey's Office (Sara Greenwood Hektoen — 11/09/21) Item Number: 12. AL CITY OF IOWA CITY =�c�- COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution approving project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the Influent Rake and Screen Replacement Project, establishing amount of bid security to accompany each bid, directing City Clerk to post notice to bidders, and fixing time and place for receipt of bids. Prepared By: Ben Clark, Sr. Civil Engineer Reviewed By: Tim Wilkey, Wastewater Superintendent Jason Havel, City Engineer Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Geoff Fruin, City Manager Fiscal Impact: $1,800,000 available in the Influent Rake and Screen Replacement account # V3153 Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Resolution Executive Summary: This agenda item begins the bidding process for the construction of the Influent Rake and Screen Replacement Project. Background /Analysis: The influent pump station at the wastewater treatment facility has two rake and screen assemblies that catch large debris at the head of the treatment process. They have been in continual operation since being installed in the late 1990's and are nearing the end of their useful life. This equipment prevents blockages and excessive wear on downstream pumps and grinders and is critical for the operation of the treatment facility. One of the assemblies failed catastrophically in Fall 2017 and again in 2018. Although it was repaired to be operational, staff is not confident in how long the repairs will last given the age of the equipment. Maintenance on both assemblies has been increased with the anticipation that either could fail again. Future repair costs are unknown but expected to be greater than previous repairs. This project will replace both existing rake and screen assemblies, which are necessary to maintain the viability of the screening function and decrease annual maintenance costs. Operational efficiency improvements include adding washing presses and a conveyance system to a new screenings storage building addition; replacing influent channel slide plates with slide gates; and adding a new dewatering station and associated pavement for septic haulers that transport high grit (car wash) loads. Project Timeline: Hold Public Hearing — November 16, 2021 Bid Letting — December 7, 2021 Award Date — December 14, 2021 Construction — Winter 2021 — Fall 2022 ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution Prepared by: Ben Clark, PE, Engineering Division, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240, (319) 356-5436 Resolution No. 21-286 Resolution approving project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the Influent Rake and Screen Replacement Project, establishing amount of bid security to accompany each bid, directing City Clerk to post notice to bidders, and fixing time and place for receipt of bids. Whereas, notice of public hearing on the project manual and estimate of cost for the above- named project was published as required by law, and the hearing thereon held; and Whereas, the City Engineer or designee intends to post notice of the project on the website owned and maintained by the City of Iowa City; and Whereas, funds for this project are available in the Influent Rake and Screen Replacement account # V3153. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa that 1. The project manual and estimate of cost for the above-named project are hereby approved. 2. The amount of bid security to accompany each bid for the construction of the above- named project shall be in the amount of 10% (ten percent) of bid payable to Treasurer, City of Iowa City, Iowa. 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to post notice as required in Section 26.3, not less than 13 days and not more than 45 days before the date of the bid letting, which may be satisfied by timely posting notice on the Construction Update Network, operated by the Master Builder of Iowa, and the Iowa League of Cities website. 4. Sealed bids for the above-named project are to be received by the City of Iowa City, Iowa, at the Office of the City Clerk, at the City Hall, before 3:00 p.m. on the 71h day of December, 2021. At that time, the bids will be opened by the City Engineer or his designee, and thereupon referred to the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, for action upon said bids at its next regular meeting, to be held at the Emma J. Harvat Hall, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa, at 6:00 p.m. on the 14th day of December, 2021, or at a special meeting called for that purpose. Passed and approved this 16th day of Attest: City Clerk 2021 'ro Tem Approy d by City Atto`ey's Office (Sara Greenwood Hektoen — 11/08/21) I a Resolution No. 21-286 Page 2 It was moved by Bergus and seconded by Weiner the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Ayes: Nays: Absent: x Bergus x Mims T Salih X Taylor X Teague x Thomas x Weiner Item Number: 14. 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY ��.:. -4 in � at COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution directing the filing of TIF certification under Iowa Code Section 403.19 for the 2021 end of year certification of urban renewal projects. Prepared By: Wendy Ford, Economic Development Coordinator Jacklyn Fleagle, Budget & Compliance Officer Reviewed By: Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director Fiscal Impact: N/A Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Summary Table of TI F certification forms TIF certification forms Resolution Executive Summary: Each year, the City is required to file an annual TI F debt certification with the County Auditor. Background /Analysis: The annual TI F debt certification to the County Auditor specifies TI F tax collection for each urban renewal area in which there is activity. Depending on the activity in an urban renewal area, different forms are submitted to the County Auditor. Form 1 initiates the collection of tax increment for projects not certified with the Auditor previously. Form 2 requests a specific dollar amount less than the full amount of available increment and Form 3 ends the collection of tax increment. Attached is a summary of the forms to be submitted this year with a short note about each. Afull version of the forms follows the summary. ATTACHMENTS: Description Summary of Certification forms Certification forms Resolution TIF certification forms for the County Auditor, 12/1/2021 Below is a summary of the TIF certification forms being submitted to the County Auditor's office. Form 1 initiates the collection of tax increment for projects not certified with the Auditor previously. Form 2 requests a specific dollar amount less than the full amount of available increment and Form 3 ends the collection of tax increment. Urban Renewal Area Forms submitted City University Project 1 downtown Form 1 Form 2 Form 3 - Admin costs, internal loan, attorney - GO Bond payments — reduces TIF request by portion of incentive from hotel taxes Foster Road Form 1 — Admin costs, internal loan Heinz Road Form 1- Admin costs & 3 Energy Efficiency rants Riverside Drive Form 2 — Bond payments Scott Six Form 1 — Admin costs, attorney, misc. & 1 Energy Efficiency grant Sycamore Mall & First Ave. Form 1 Form 3 —1 Energy efficiency grant — Remainder of Economic Dev grant on ICMarketplace Towncrest Form 2 — GO Bond payment (William St. reconstruction), MDK internal loan Prepared by: Wendy Ford, Ec. Dev. Coord., 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240, 319-356-5248 Resolution No. 21-287 Resolution directing the filing of TIF certification under Iowa Code Section 403.19 for the 2021 end of year certification of urban renewal projects. Whereas, the City of Iowa City, Iowa has established the various urban renewal plans for certain urban renewal areas (the "Urban Renewal Areas") and is undertaking certain projects within the Urban Renewal Areas (the 'Projects'); and Whereas, it is the intention of the City to certify the amount so incurred and advanced, together with interest, for reimbursement under Iowa Code Section 403.19, Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: 1. There has been established separate tax increment revenue funds for the City - University Project I Urban Renewal Area; Foster Road Urban Renewal Area, Heinz Road Urban Renewal Area, Riverside Drive Urban Renewal Area, Scott Six Urban Renewal Area, Sycamore & First Avenue Urban Renewal Area, and Towncrest Urban Renewal Area (collectively the "Tax Increment Funds'), into which incremental property tax revenues received from the respective urban renewal areas are deposited. The Council finds the Projects identified in the attached TIF certifications to be Urban Renewal Projects as defined in Iowa Code Chapter 403 and directs that the amounts specified in said exhibits be certified for reimbursement under Iowa Code Section 403.19. 2. The Clerk and other City officials having responsibility for the books and records of the City shall take such actions as are necessary to comply with this Resolution, including but not limited to, certification for reimbursement under Iowa Code Section 403.19. Passed and approved this 16thday of November 2021 ATTEST: 1f LLP City Uerk APPROVED: City Attor e (Sara reenwood Hektoen —11 /08/21) FILED JOHNSON CO. IOWA Nov 18 2021 COUNTY AUDITOR 1 4. ciTYTiF FORM 1 -INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Cover Sheet CODE OF IOWA SECTION 403.19 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa Urban Renewal Area Name: City Univ Urban Renewal Area Number: 52024 County: Johnson (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above the City has outstanding loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds, none of which have been previously certified, in the collective amount shown below, all of which qualify for repayment from the special fund referred to in paragraph 2 of Section 403.19 of the Code of Iowa. Urban Renewal Area Indebtedness Not Previously Certified°: $ 25,157 *There must be attached a supporting itemized listing of the dates that individual loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds were initially approved by the governing body. (Complete and attach'CITY TIF FORM 1.1'.) The County Auditor shall provide the available TIF increment tax in subsequent fiscal years without further certification until the above -stated amount of indebtedness is paid to the City. However, for any fiscal year a City may elect to receive less than the available TIF increment tax by certifying the requested amount to the County Auditor on or before the preceding December 1. (File'CITY TIF FORM T with the County Auditor by the preceding December 1 for each of those fiscal years where all of the TIF increment tax is not requested.) A City reducing certified TIF indebtedness by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer shall certify such reduced amounts to the County Auditor no later than December 1 of the year of occurrence. (File 'CITY TIF 'FORM T with the County Auditor when TIF indebtedness has been reduced by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer.) Notes/Additional Information: IOWA COUNTY AUt7iTOR Dated this /64k day of Royeu_, ev a0z1 �� 319-356-5053 Signature of Authorized fficial Telephone CITY TIF FORM 1.1 - To be attached to CITY TIF FORM 1 -IN DEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION TIF INDEBTEDNESS NOT PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED ELIGIBLE FOR TAX COLLECTIONS NEXT FISCAL YEAR City: Iowa Urban Renewal Area Name: City Univ County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Number: 52024 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) Individual TIF Indebtedness Type/Description/Details: Page 1 Date Approved*: Total Amount: 1. Administrative Costs - Internal Loan 11/16/2021 25,157 Includes attorney and other mist. expenses Total For City TIF Form 1.1 Page 1 * "Date Approved" is the date that the local governing body initially approved the TIF indebtedness. 25,157 FTX this box if a rebate agreement. 2. List administrative details on lines above. []'X' this box if a rebate agreement. 3. List administrative details on lines above. []'X' this box if a rebate agreement. 4. List administrative details on lines above. FTX'this box if a rebate agreement. 5. List administrative details on lines above. RX' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. If more indebtedness entry lines are needed continue to Form 1.1 Page 2. Total For City TIF Form 1.1 Page 1 * "Date Approved" is the date that the local governing body initially approved the TIF indebtedness. 25,157 CITY TIF FORM 2 SPECIFIC DOLLAR REQUEST FOR AVAILABLE TIP INCREMENT TAX FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year Where Less Than The Legally Available TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa City County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Name: City Univ Proj I Urban Renewal Area Number: 52024 (Use five -dig it Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the next fiscal year and for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above, the City requests less than the maximum legally available TIF increment tax as detailed below. Provide sufficient detail so that the County Auditorwill know how to specifically administer your request. For example you may have multiple indebtedness certifications in an Urban Renewal Area, and want the maximum tax for rebate agreement property that the County has segregated into separate taxing districts, but only want a portion of the available increment tax from the remainder of the taxing districts in the Area. Specific Instructions To County Auditor For Administering The Request That This Urban Renewal Area Generate Less Than The Maximum Available TIF Increment Tax: 2013A GO Bonds (CBD) - Gen. Obligation BDnds/Notes 2014A GO Bonds (CBD) - Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 2015A GO Bonds (CBD & Riverside Crossin) - Gen Obligation Bonds/Notes 2016E TIF Revenue Notes Administrative Expenses FY21 - Internal Loan Amount Requested: 42,959 112,741 62,256 1,315,200 25,157 Dated this I& )_ day of Dover rev 20A I -356 -5os3 Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 3 TIF INDEBTEDNESS HAS BEEN REDUCED BY REASON OTHER THAN APPLICATION OF TIF INCREMENT TAX RECEIVED FROM THE COUNTY TREASURER CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa City County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Name: City Univ Proj I Urban Renewal Area Number: 52024 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above, the City has reduced previously certified indebtedness, by reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer, by the total amount as shown below. Provide sufficient detail so that the County Auditor will know how to specially administer your request. For example, you could have multiple indebtedness certifications in the Urban Renewal Area, and the County Auditor would need to know which particular indebtedness certifcafdon(s) to reduce. If rebate agreements are involved with a reduction, and the County has segregated the rebate property into separate TIF Increment taxing districts, provide the five -digit county increment taxing district numbers for reference. Individual TIF Indebtedness Type/Description/Details: TIF Rebate - Development Agreement - Iowa City Associates, Hilton Garden Inn Amount Reduced: 51,716 Total Reduction In Indebtedness For This Urban Renewal Area: 51,716 Dated this �day of /Javewlie✓ 20A1 31 1-35"C- 5053 Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 1 - INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Cover Sheet CODE OF IOWA SECTION 403.19 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use one Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa City County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Name: Foster Road Urban Renewal Area Number: 52034 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above the City has outstanding loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds, none of which have been previously certified, in the collective amount shown below, all of which qualify for repayment from the special fund referred to in paragraph 2 of Section 403.19 of the Code of Iowa. Urban Renewal Area Indebtedness Not Previously Certified*: *There must be attached a supporting itemized listing of the dates that individual loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds were initially approved by the governing body. (Complete and attach'CITY TIF FORM 1.1'.) 339 The County Auditor shall provide the available TIF increment tax in subsequent fiscal years without further certification until the above -stated amount of indebtedness is paid to the City. However, for any fiscal year a City may elect to receive less than the available TIF increment tax by certifying the requested amount to the County Auditor on or before the preceding December 1. (File'CITY TIF FORM 2' with the County Auditor by the preceding December 1 for each of those fiscal years where all of the TIF increment tax is not requested.) A City reducing certified TIF indebtedness by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer shall certify such reduced amounts to the County Auditor no later than December 1 of the year of occurrence. (File 'CITY TIF 'FORM 3' with the County Auditor when TIF indebtedness has been reduced by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer.) Notes/Additional Information: Dated this 1 (;'4- day of Nove—er I a0�2! Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 1.1 - To be attached to CITY TIF FORM 1 - INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Page 1 TIF INDEBTEDNESS NOT PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED ELIGIBLE FOR TAX COLLECTIONS NEXT FISCAL YEAR City: Iowa City County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Name: Foster Road Urban Renewal Area Number: 52034 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the CountyAuditor) Individual TIF Indebtedness Type/Description/Details: Date Approved': Total Amount: 1. Administrative Costs FY21 - Internal Loan 11/16/2021 339 Includes attorney and other misc. expenses Q'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 2. R'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 3. F]'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 4. F]'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 5. F]'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. If more indebtedness entry lines are needed continue to Form 1.1 Page 2. Total For City TIF Form 1.1 Page 1: 339 "'Date Approved" is the date that the local goveming body initially approved the TIF indebtedness. CITY TIF FORM 1 -INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Cover Sheet CODE OF IOWA SECTION 403.19 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa Urban Renewal Area Name: Heinz Road County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Number: 52027 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above the City has outstanding loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds, none of which have been previously certified, in the collective amount shown below, all of which qualify for repayment from the special fund referred to in paragraph 2 of Section 403.19 of the Code of Iowa. Urban Renewal Area Indebtedness Not Previously Certified*: $ 209,003 *There must be attached a supporting itemized listing of the dates that individual loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds were initially approved by the governing body. (Complete and attach'CITY TIF FORM 1.1'.) The County Auditor shall provide the available TIF increment tax in subsequent fiscal years without further certification until the above -stated amount of indebtedness is paid to the City. However, for any fiscal year a City may elect to receive less than the available TIF increment tax by certifying the requested amount to the County Auditor on or before the preceding December 1. (File'CITY TIF FORM 2' with the County Auditor by the preceding December 1 for each of those fiscal years where all of the TIF increment tax is not requested.) A City reducing certified TIF indebtedness by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer shall certify such reduced amounts to the County Auditor no later than December 1 of the year of occurrence. (File'CITY TIF 'FORM 3' with the County Auditor when TIF indebtedness has been reduced by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer.) Notes/Additional Information: CO. t0WA COUNTY Dated this /day of 0. V, M L ' ;-%) If Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 1.1 - To be attached to CITY TIF FORM 1 - INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Page 1 TIF INDEBTEDNESS NOT PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED ELIGIBLE FOR TAX COLLECTIONS NEXT FISCAL YEAR City: Iowa City County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Name: Heinz Road Urban Renewal Area Number: 52027 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County AU d itor) Individual TIF Indebtedness Type/Description/Details: Date Approved*: Total Amount: 1. Administrative Costs - Internal Loan 11/16/2021 36 Includes attorney and other misc, expenses F'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 2. Iowa City Storage energy efficiency TIF grant 6/15/2021 93,777 F -]'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 3. UNFI energy efficiency TIF grant 5/18/2021 38,743 F -]'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 4. Reunion Brewery energy efficiency TIF grant 6/15/2021 76,448 f -]'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above 5. []'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above If more indebtedness entry lines are needed continue to Form 1.1 Page 2. Total For City TIF Form 1.1 Page 1: 209,003 * "Date Approved" is the date that the local governing body initially approved the TIF indebtedness. CITY TIF FORM 1 - INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Cover Sheet CODE OF IOWA SECTION 403.19 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City; Iowa Urban Renewal Area Name: Riverside Drive County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Number: 52031 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above the City has outstanding loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds, none of which have been previously certified, in the collective amqunt shown below, all of which qualify for repayment from the special fund referred to in paragraph 2 of Section 403,19 of the Code of Iowa. Urban Renewal Area Indebtedness Not Previously Certified': `There must be attached a supporting itemized listing of the dates that individual loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds were initially approved by the governing body. (Complete and attach'CITY TIF FORM 1.1'.) The County Auditor shall provide the available TIF increment tax in subsequent fiscal years without further certification until the above -stated amount of indebtedness is paid to the City. However, for any fiscal year a City may elect to receive less than the available TIF increment tax by certifying the requested amount to the County Auditor on or before the preceding December 1. (File'CITY TIF FORM 2' with the County Auditor by the preceding December 1 for each of those fiscal years where all of the TIF increment tax is not requested.) A City reducing certified TIF indebtedness by any reason other than application of TIF Increment tax received from the County Treasurer shall certify such reduced amounts to the County Auditor no later than December 1 of the year of occurrence. (File'CITY TIF 'FORM T with the County Auditor when TIF indebtedness has been reduced by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer.) Notes/Additional Information: NOV 18 2021 —01llhTM Alai I Dated this /(off' day of M r,-4er 1 .1J11 %—� 31q-3SC-SaS3 Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 2 SPECIFIC DOLLAR REQUEST FOR AVAILABLE TIF INCREMENT TAX FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year Where Less Than The Legally Available TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa City County; Johnson Urban Renewal Area Name: Riverside Urban Renewal Area Number: 52031 (Use fiv"ig t Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the next fiscal year and for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above, the City requests less than the maximum legally available TIF increment tax as detailed below. Provide sufficient detail so that the County Auditor will know how to specifically administer your request. For example you may have multiple indebtedness certifications in an Urban Renewal Area, and want the maximum tax for rebate agreement property that the County has segregated into separate taxing districts, but only want a portion of the available increment tax from the remainder of the taxing districts in the Area. Specific Instructions To County Auditor For Administering The Request That This Urban Renewal Area Generate Less Than The Maximum Available TIF Increment Tax. Amount Requested: 2017A GO Bonds (Streetscape) - Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 160,106 Dated this 10- day of Nove- �_ � 3)i-3sL-sos3 Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 1 - INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Cover Sheet CODE OF IOWA SECTION 403.19 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa City County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Name: Scott Six Urban Renewal Area Number: 52021 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above the City has outstanding loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds, none of which have been previously certified, in the collective amount shown below, all of which qualify for repayment from the special fund referred to in paragraph 2 of Section 403.19 of the Code of Iowa. Urban Renewal Area Indebtedness Not Previously Certified': $ 27,640 "There must be attached a supporting itemized listing of the dates that individual loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds were initially approved by the governing body. (Complete and attach'CITY TIF FORM 1.1'.) The County Auditor shall provide the available TIF increment tax in subsequent fiscal years without further certification until the above -stated amount of indebtedness is paid to the City. However, for any fiscal year a City may elect to receive less than the available TIF increment tax by certifying the requested amount to the County Auditor on or before the preceding December 1. (File'CITY TIF FORM 2' with the County Auditor by the preceding December 1 for each of those fiscal years where all of the TIF increment tax is not requested.) A City reducing certified TIF indebtedness by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer shall certify such reduced amounts to the County Auditor no later than December 1 of the year Of occurrence. (File'CITY TIF'FORM 3' with the County Auditor when TIF indebtedness has been reduced by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer.) Notes/Additional Information: NOV 18 ZU21 Dated this %L' dayof /"o4eW46r j0"11 ���� X19 -3SG- 5053 Signature otAuthorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 1.1 - To be attached to CITY TIF FORM 1 - INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Page 1 TIF INDEBTEDNESS NOT PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED ELIGIBLE FOR TAX COLLECTIONS NEXT FISCAL YEAR City: Iowa City County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Name: Scott Six Urban Renewal Area Number: 52021 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) Individual TIF Indebtedness Type/Description/Details: Date Approved': Total Amount: 1. Administrative Costs - Internal Loan 11116/2021 226 Includes attorney and other misc. expenses D'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 2. Adamantine Spine Moving energy efficiency TIF grant 6/15/2021 27,414 P'Xthis box If a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 3. []'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 4. F'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. 5. F'X' this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. If more indebtedness entry lines are needed continue to Form 1.1 Page 2. Total For City TIF Form 1.1 Page 1: 27,640 " "Date Approved" is the date that the local governing body initially approved the TIF indebtedness. CITY TIF FORM 1 - INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Cover Sheet CODE OF IOWA SECTION 403.19 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa Urban Renewal Area Name: Sycamore Mall & First Avenue County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Number: 52020(Use fiveAlgitAreaNumber Assigned bythe County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above the City has outstanding loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds, none of which have been previously certified, in the collective amount shown below, all of which qualify for repayment from the special fund referred to in paragraph 2 of Section 403.19 of the Code of Iowa, Urban Renewal Area Indebtedness Not Previously Certified": $ 200,000 `There must be attached a supporting itemized listing of the dates that individual loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds were initially approved by the governing body. (Complete and attach'CITY TIF FORM 1.1'.) The County Auditor shall provide the available TIF increment tax in subsequent fiscal years without further certification until the above -stated amount of indebtedness is paid to the City. However, for any fiscal year a City may elect to receive less than the available TIF increment tax by certifying the requested amount to the County Auditor on or before the preceding December 1. (File'CITY TIF FORM 2' with the County Auditor by the preceding December 1 for each of those fiscal years where all of the TIF increment tax is not requested.) A City reducing certified TIF indebtedness by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer shall certify such reduced amounts to the County Auditor no later than December 1 of the year of occurrence. (File'CITY TIF'FORM T with the County Auditor when TIF indebtedness has been reduced by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer.) Notes/Add itional Information: Not requesting any funds for FY2023 -- FILED JOHNSON CO. IOVJA Nny I A 2021 �� oJ" r' 0 U i 10 IN Dated this /b't' day of MleN. Iyl 7-3xl L)! --7 31g -35C-5053 Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 1.1 - To be attached to CITY TIF FORM 1 - INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION TIF INDEBTEDNESS NOT PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED ELIGIBLE FOR TAX COLLECTIONS NEXT FISCAL YEAR City: Iowa Urban Renewal Area Name: Sycamore Mall & First Avenue County: Johnson Page 1 Urban Renewal Area Number: 5202D (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the county Aaditor) Individual TIF Indebtedness Type/Description/Details: Date Approved*: Total Amount: 1. Procter & Gamble energy efficiency TIF grant 6/15/2021 200,000 Total For City TIF Form 1.1 Page 1: 200,000 * "Date Approved" is the date that the local governing body initially approved the TIF indebtedness. FIX this box if a rebate agreement. 2. List administrative details on lines above. F—I'X'this box if a rebate agreement. 3. List administrative details on lines above. FIX'this box if a rebate agreement. 4. List administrative details on lines above. E'X' this box if a rebate agreement. 5. List administrative details on lines above. E'X'this box if a rebate agreement. List administrative details on lines above. If more indebtedness entry lines are needed continue to Form 1.1 Page 2. Total For City TIF Form 1.1 Page 1: 200,000 * "Date Approved" is the date that the local governing body initially approved the TIF indebtedness. CITY TIF FORM 2 SPECIFIC DOLLAR REQUEST FOR AVAILABLE TIF INCREMENT TAX FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor 6y December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year Where Less Than The Legally Available TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa Urban Renewal Area Name: Sycamore Mall & First Avenue County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Number: 52020 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the next fiscal year and for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above, the City requests less than the maximum legally available TIF increment tax as detailed below. Provide sufficient detail so that the County Auditor will know how to specifically administer your request. For example you may have multiple indebtedness certifications in an Urban Renewal Area, and want the maximum tax for rebate agreement property that the County has segregated into separate taxing districts, but only want a portion of the available increment tax from the remainder of the taxing districts in the Area. Specific Instructions To County Auditor For Administering The Request That This Urban Renewal Area Generate Less Than The Maximum Available TIF Increment Tax: Not requesting additional funds at this time, Amount Requested: Dated this ILt` dayof Mo.rw. er I 3aaI Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 3 TIF INDEBTEDNESS HAS BEEN REDUCED BY REASON OTHER THAN APPLICATION OF TIF INCREMENT TAX RECEIVED FROM THE COUNTY TREASURER CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa City Urban Renewal Area Name: Sycamore Mall & First Avenue County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Number: 52020 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above, the City has reduced previously certified indebtedness, by reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer, by the total amount as shown below. Provide sufficient detail so that the County Auditor will know how to specialty administer your request. For example, you could have multiple indebtedness certifications in the Urban Renewal Area, and the County Auditor would need to know which particular indebtedness certifcation(s) to reduce. If rebate agreements are involved with a reduction, and the County has segregated the rebate property into separate TIF Increment taxing districts, provide the five -digit county increment taxing district numbers for reference. Individual TIF Indebtedness Type/Description/Details: Amount Reduced: Economic Development Grant - Iowa City Market Place 750,000 Total Reduction In Indebtedness For This Urban Renewal Area: 750,000 Dated this ) 6 t( day of 910�2 i 315- 35G-5053 Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 1 - INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION Cover Sheet CODE OF IOWA SECTION 403.19 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) INDEBTEDNESS CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa City County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Name: Towncrest Urban Renewal Area Number: 52030 (Use five -digit Area Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above the City has outstanding loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds, none of which have been previously certified, in the collective amount shown below, all of which qualify for repayment from the special fund referred to In paragraph 2 of Section 403.19 of the Code of Iowa. Urban Renewal Area Indebtedness Not Previously Certified`: $ 0 "There must be attached a supporting itemized listing of the dates that individual loans, advances, indebtedness, or bonds were initially approved by the governing body. (Complete and attach 'CITY TIF FORM 1.1'.) The County Auditor shall provide the available TIF increment tax in subsequent fiscal years without further certification until the above -stated amount of indebtedness is paid to the City. However, for any fiscal year a City may elect to receive less than the available TIF increment tax by certifying the requested amount to the County Auditor on or before the preceding December 1. (File'CITYTIF FORM 2' with the County Auditor by the preceding December 1 for each of those fiscal years where all of the TIF increment tax is not requested.) A City reducing certified TIF indebtedness by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer shall certify such reduced amounts to the County Auditor no later than December 1 of the year of occurrence. (File'CITY TIF 'FORM 3' with the County Auditor when TIF indebtedness has been reduced by any reason other than application of TIF increment tax received from the County Treasurer.) Notes/Additional Information: FILED CURNSON CO. IOWA Dated this !C J11 day of N&irr,, ,v 2_01 1 _J%-�� 3,y-ash-sos3 Signature of Authorized Official Telephone CITY TIF FORM 2 SPECIFIC DOLLAR REQUEST FOR AVAILABLE TIF INCREMENT TAX FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR Due To County Auditor By December 1 Prior To The Fiscal Year Where Less Than The Legally Available TIF Increment Tax Is Requested Use One Certification Per Urban Renewal Area City: Iowa Urban Renewal Area Name: Towncrest County: Johnson Urban Renewal Area Number: 52030 (Usefive-digitArea Number Assigned by the County Auditor) I hereby certify to the County Auditor that for the next fiscal year and for the Urban Renewal Area within the City and County named above, the City requests less than the maximum legally available TIF increment tax as detailed below. Provide sufficient detail so that the County Auditor will know how to specifically administer your request. For example you may have multiple indebtedness certifications in an Urban Renewal Area, and want the maximum tax for rebate agreement property that the County has segregated into separate taxing districts, but only want a portion of the available increment tax from the remainder of the taxing districts in the Area. Specific Instructions To County Auditor For Administering The Request That This Urban Renewal Area Generate Less Than The Maximum Available TIF Increment Tax: Amount Requested: 2013A GO Bond (Williams St. Reconstruction) - Gen.Obligation Bonds/Notes 6,671 MDK Loan - Internal loan 42,540 Dated this /C4 day of No`"r, 1 aZ>al Signature of Authorized Official Telephone Item Number: 15. AL CITY OF IOWA CITY =�c�- COUNCIL ACTION REPORT November 16, 2021 Resolution approving the Fiscal Year Ending 2021 Annual Urban Renewal Report (AU RR). Prepared By: Wendy Ford, Economic Development Coordinator Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director Reviewed By: Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director Fiscal Impact: N/A Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Annual Urban Renewal Report New Value Created by TI F projects Resolution Executive Summary: Pursuant to Iowa Code Section 384.22, the City must file this report for each of its 14 urban renewal areas. This report must be approved by a majority of the Council, and filed prior to the publication and adoption of the city budget. Filing this report is required before the Department of Management will certify the city's taxes back to the county auditor. Background /Analysis: TIF is one of the few tools that allows cities to assist in economic development projects in their communities. Iowa City has established fourteen Urban Renewal Areas enabling the use of TIF. Each Urban Renewal Plan specifies the goals and planned urban renewal projects. Since 2003, the City has been a financial partner in several TIF projects ranging from industrial businesses adding jobs and new products, to the redevelopment of blighted properties and high-rise mixed-use buildings. The attached chart, New Value Created by TIF projects, shows all of the TIF projects the City has assisted. The increase in taxable value (the increment) for Iowa City's TIF projects now exceeds $223,000,000 and generates property taxes in excess of $7 million every year (see New Value Created by TIF projects, attached). ATTACHMENTS: Description Annual Urban Renewal Report New value created by T I F Resolution Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 202 Levy Authority Summary Local Government Name: IOWA CITY Local Government Number: 52G483 U� # of Tif Active Urban Renewal Areas Taxing Districts IOWA CITY SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL 52020 2 IOWA CITY SCOTT SIX URBAN RENEWAL 52021 2 IOWA CITY NORTHGATE CORP PARK URBAN RENEWAL 52023 4 IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL 52024 12 IOWA CITY HEINZ ROAD URBAN RENEWAL 52027 2 IOWA CITY HIGHWAY SIX URBAN RENEWAL 52028 2 IOWA CITY MOSS GREEN URBAN VILLAGE URBAN RENEWAL 52029 2 IOWA CITY TOWNCREST URBAN RENEWAL 52030 1 IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE DRIVE URBAN RENEWAL 52031 2 IOWA CITY FOSTER ROAD URBAN RENEWAL 52034 0 IOWA CITY FOREST VIEW URBAN RENEWAL 52920 0 TIF Debt Outstanding: 50,047,462 ..................................Ca........B...ala.....n'c"e .................................................................................... Am..ou.........n.t ...o..f....Ca....s...... B..ala......n..... . TIF Sp. Rev. Fund sh ....07-01-2020........ ........h ce .. as of 07-01-2020: 768,159 0 Restricted for LMI TIF Revenue: 2,636,005 TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: 7,827 Property Tax Replacement Claims 0 Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: 51,716 Total Revenue: 2,695,548 Rebate Expenditures: 933,303 Non -Rebate Expenditures: 1,108,347 Returned to County Treasurer: 0 Total Expenditures: 2,041,650 TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance IV Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 1,422,057 0 Restricted for LMI ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... . Year -End Outstanding TIF Obligations, Net of TIF Special Revenue Fund Balance: 46,583,755 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52020 UR Area Creation Date UR Area Purpose: 08/2000 To formulate and execute a workable program using public and private resources to develop the Urban Renewal Project area for retail, office, and other commercial uses. Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVE U.R. TIF INCREMENT IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/SYCAMORE & 1ST AVE UR 2003 AMEND INCR Urban Renewal Area Value by Class -1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Assessed 0 3,490,860 38,470,090 9,249,850 0 -1,852 Taxable 0 1,922,568 34,623,081 8,324,865 0 -1,852 Homestead Credits TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: TIF Revenue: TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: Property Tax Replacement Claims Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: Total Revenue: Rebate Expenditures: Non -Rebate Expenditures: Returned to County Treasurer: Total Expenditures: 1,318,799 1,335 0 0 0 1,335 0 160,242 0 160,242 0 TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 1,159,892 0 Base Increment Increment No. No. Value Used 520195 520196 36,150 520239 520240 7,585 Total Gas/Electric Utility Total 53,960,128 0 53,960,128 46,828,877 0 46,828,877 Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance Restricted for LMI Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance Restricted for LMI 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Projects For IOWA CITY SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL Lower Muscatine Road Reconstruction Description: Improve roads around Kirkwood Comm College & Mall Classification: Roads, Bridges & Utilities Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No Iowa City Marketplace Description: Economic develpment agreement Classification: Commercial - retail Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No Administrative Expenses Description: Classification: Physically Complete: Payments Complete: Energy Efficiency Grants Description: Classification: Physically Complete Payments Complete: Administrative Expenses Administrative expenses No No Energy Efficiency Grants Industrial/manufacturing property No No 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Debts/Obligations For IOWA CITY SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL 2012A GO Bonds (Low. Mus. Rd Recon.) Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 88,685 1,774 90,459 No 06/05/2012 2022 2013A GO Bonds (Low. Mus. Rd Recon.) Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 67,396 1,078 68,474 No 06/18/2013 2023 Economic Development Grant Debt/Obligation Type: Other Debt Principal: 750,000 Interest: 0 Total: 750,000 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/18/2014 FY of Last Payment: 2024 FY19 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 1,309 Interest: 0 Total: 1,309 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/19/2019 FY of Last Payment: 2021 Procter & Gamble Energy Efficiency grant Debt/Obligation Type: Other Debt Principal: 200,000 Interest: 0 Total: 200,000 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 06/15/2021 FY of Last Payment: 2024 FY20 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 149 Interest: 0 Total: 149 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/02/2020 FY of Last Payment: 2022 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Non -Rebates For IOWA CITY SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL TIF Expenditure Amount: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: TIF Expenditure Amount: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: TIF Expenditure Amount: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: 90,459 2012A GO Bonds (Low. Mus. Rd Recon.) Lower Muscatine Road Reconstruction 68,474 2013A GO Bonds (Low. Mus. Rd Recon.) Lower Muscatine Road Reconstruction 1,309 FYI Administrative Expenses Administrative Expenses 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Rebates For IOWA CITY SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL 1602 Sycamore Street, Iowa City TIF Expenditure Amount: Rebate Paid To: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: Projected Final FY of Rebate 0 CORE Sycamore Town Center Economic Development Grant Iowa City Marketplace 2024 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL (52020) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVE U.R. TIF INCREMENT 0 0 TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520196 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2000 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2004 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 08/2000 statutorily ends: 2022 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 1,107 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 37,975,470 0 0 0 40,726,650 0 P40,726,650 Taxable 0 0 34,177,923 0 0 0 36,138,138 0 36,138,138 Homestead Credits statutorily ends: 2022 116 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 22,927,940 17,798,710 36,150 17,762,560 533,405 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 1,107 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY SYCAMORE MALL & FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL (52020) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/SYCAMORE & 1 ST AVE UR 2003 AMEND INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520240 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2004 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 08/2000 statutorily ends: 2022 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 228 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 3,490,860 494,620 9,249,850 0 -1,852 13,233,478 0 P13,233,478 Taxable 0 1,922,568 445,158 8,324,865 0 -1,852 10,690,739 0 10,690,739 Homestead Credits IL 8 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 9,496,280 3,739,050 7,585 3,731,465 112,055 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 228 Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY SCOTT SIX URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52021 UR Area Creation Date UR Area Purpose: 07/1997 To grow tax base; encourage development of start up firms, expansion of existing and attraction of new industries, especially in the are of renewable energy. Enhance number of sites available for industrial development. Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/SCOTT SIX UR TIF INCREMENT IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/SCOTT SIX UR TIF INCREMENT Urban Renewal Area Value by Class -1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Assessed 28,820 0 51,003,600 1,769,920 0 Taxable 23,485 0 45,903,240 1,592,928 0 Homestead Credits TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: 0 TIF Revenue: 35 TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: 0 Property Tax Replacement Claims 0 Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: 0 Total Revenue: 35 Rebate Expenditures: 0 Non -Rebate Expenditures: 35 Returned to County Treasurer: 0 Total Expenditures: 35 Base Increment Increment No. No. Value Used 520208 520209 0 520210 520211 0 Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total 0 52,802,340 0 —717777o 0 47,519,653 0 47,519,653 0 Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance 0 Restricted for LMI 11 IT k3F. ITETTF un ash Balance Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 0 0 Restricted for LMI Renewal Repwa Projects For IOWA CITY SCOTT SIX URBAN RENEWAL Administrative Expenses Description: Classification: Physically Complete Payments Complete: Energy Efficiency Grants Description: Classification: Physically Complete: Payments Complete: Administrative expenses Administrative expenses No No Energy Efficiency Grants Industrial/manufacturing property No No an Renewal Rep Debts/Obligations For IOWA CITY SCOTT SIX URBAN RENEWAL FY18 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 183 Interest: 0 Total: 183 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/06/2018 FY of Last Payment: 2022 FY20 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 1,032 Interest: 0 Total: 1,032 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/02/2020 FY of Last Payment: 2024 Adamantine Energy Efficiency Grant Debt/Obligation Type: Other Debt Principal: 27,414 Interest: 0 Total: 27,414 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 06/15/2021 FY of Last Payment: 2022 Renewal Rep Non -Rebates For IOWA CITY SCOTT SIX URBAN RENEWAL TIF Expenditure Amount: 35 Tied To Debt: FYI Administrative Expenses Tied To Project: Administrative Expenses The original 1997 Scott Six Urban Renewal Area was amended for the first time in July 2011. A TIF ordinance for the amended area has not yet been adopted. 256 Characters Left Sum of Private Investment Made Within This Urban Renewal Area during FY 2021 0 ban Renewal Report, Fisc TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY SCOTT SIX URBAN RENEWAL (52021) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/SCOTT SIX UR TIF INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520209 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2001 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2005 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 07/1997 statutorily ends: 2023 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 35 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 51,003,600 1,769,920 0 0 52,773,520 0 P52,773,520 Taxable 0 0 45,903,240 1,592,928 0 0 47,496,168 0[ 47,496,168 Homestead Credits statutorily ends: 2023 ` 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 2,323,386 47,496,168 0 47,496,168 1,426,298 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 35 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY SCOTT SIX URBAN RENEWAL (52021) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/SCOTT SIX UR TIF INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520211 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2001 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2005 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 07/1997 statutorily ends: 2023 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 28,820 0 0 0 0 0 28,820 0 28,820 Taxable 23,485 0 0 0 0 0 23,485 0 Homestead Credits k23,485 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 18,630 10,190 0 10,190 202 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 202 Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY NORTHGATE CORP PARK URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52023 UR Area Creation Date UR Area Purpose: 04/1999 To facilitate an urban renewal program using private and public resources to develop the area for office, research, production and/or assembly uses. To increase tax base; attract new and expansion of existing firms in area; provide new development sites. Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/NORTHGATE CORP PARK UR INCR IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/NORTHGATE UR TIF INCR IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/NORTHGATE CORP PK 2005 AMEND INCR IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/NORTHGATE CORP PK 2005 AMEND INCR Urban Renewal Area Value by Class -1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Assessed 77,230 137,240 43,867,590 0 0 Taxable 62,929 75,584 39,480,831 0 0 Homestead Credits TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: 0 TIF Revenue: 0 TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: 0 Property Tax Replacement Claims 0 Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: 0 Total Revenue: 0 Rebate Expenditures: 0 Non -Rebate Expenditures: 0 Returned to County Treasurer: 0 Total Expenditures: 0 Base Increment Increment No. No. Value Used 520230 520231 0 520325 520326 0 520345 520346 0 520347 520348 0 Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total 0 44,082,060 0 P44,082,060 0 39,619,344 0 39,619,344 Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance 0 Restricted for LMI TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 0 0 Restricted for LMI rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY NORTHGATE CORP PARK URBAN RENEWAL (52023) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/NORTHGATE CORP PARK UR INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520231 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2005 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 04/1999 statutorily ends: 2023 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY NORTHGATE CORP PARK URBAN RENEWAL (52023) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/NORTHGATE UR TIF INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520326 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2005 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 04/1999 statutorily ends: 2023 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Assessed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taxable 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Homestead Credits Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 14,807 0 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 Gas/Electric Utility Total 0 0 0 M Increment Revenue Not Used 0 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 43,867,590 0 0 0 43,867,590 0 !43,867,590 Taxable 0 0 39,480,831 0 0 0 39,480,831 0 Homestead Credits 139,480,831 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 6,728,364 37,139,226 0 37,139,226 1,115,282 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY NORTHGATE CORP PARK URBAN RENEWAL (52023) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/NORTHGATE UR TIF INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520326 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2005 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 04/1999 statutorily ends: 2023 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Assessed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taxable 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Homestead Credits Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 14,807 0 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 Gas/Electric Utility Total 0 0 0 M Increment Revenue Not Used 0 rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY NORTHGATE CORP PARK URBAN RENEWAL (52023) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/NORTHGATE CORP PK 2005 AMEND INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520346 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2004 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum NoBlighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 137,240 0 0 0 0 137,240 0 137,240 Taxable 0 75,584 0 0 0 0 75,584 0 75,584 Homestead Credits 0 0 62,929 0 62,929 jkL 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 180,959 0 0 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY NORTHGATE CORP PARK URBAN RENEWAL (52023) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/NORTHGATE CORP PK 2005 AMEND INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520348 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2004 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/ElectricUtility Total Assessed 77,230 0 0 0 0 0 77,230 0 77,230 Taxable 62,929 0 0 0 0 0 62,929 0 62,929 Homestead Credits 6 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 63,129 14,101 0 14,101 280 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52024 UR Area Creation Date UR Area Purpose: 10/1969 Create a more livable, walkable community, remediate blight, establish attractive design standards for new and rehabilitated buildings, increase office and residential space by promoting mixed use building, and develop multi -modal transportation network. Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV PROJ I UR AREA INCR IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR INCR- IC DOWNTOWN SSMID IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF AMEND INCR IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF AMD-SSMID INCR IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF AMD 10 INCR IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF AMD 10-SSMID INCR IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF 2017 AMEND-SSMID INCREMENT IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF AMEND 10 -A&M DEVELOPMENT INCREMENT IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF-SSMID- IOWA CITY HOTEL ASSOC INCREMENT IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF 2017 AMEND-SSMID- AUGUISTA PLACE INCREMENT IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF-SSMID- HIERONYMOUS SQUARE INCREMENT IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF -2017 AMD -RES -AUGUSTA PL INCREMENT Urban Renewal Area Value by Class -1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Assessed 0 291,036,680 330,194,540 0 0 -12,964 Taxable 0 160,286,359 297,175,091 0 0 -12,964 Homestead Credits TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: TIF Revenue: TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: Property Tax Replacement Claims Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: Total Revenue: Rebate Expenditures: Non -Rebate Expenditures: Returned to County Treasurer: Total Expenditures: -598,291 2,059,610 7,827 0 51,716 2,119,153 675,844 632,838 0 1,308,682 0 Base Increment Increment No. No. Value Used 520234 520235 6,123,668 520352 520353 6,106,370 520354 520355 4,447,435 520356 520357 4,509,166 520366 520367 15,640,426 520382 520383 1,675,310 520425 520426 0 520427 520428 3,660,179 520429 520430 15,574,995 520431 520432 580,284 520433 520434 189,469 520437 520438 6,530,558 Total Gas/Electric Utility Total 766,921,645 0 766,921,645 561,262,163 0 561,262,163 Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance Restricted for LMI TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: MENSELMMMO Restricted for LMI 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Projects For IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL Park @ 201 Description: High rise residential, office, retail Mixed use property (ie: a significant portion is residential Classification: and significant portion is commercial) Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No Hieronymous Square Description: Hieronymous Square; future development Mixed use property (ie: a significant portion is residential Classification: and significant portion is commercial) Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No The Chauncey Description: Infill project at SE corner of College & Gilberts Streets Mixed use property (ie: a significant portion is residential Classification: and significant portion is commercial) Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No Riverside/Hwy 6 Redevelopment of Old Public Works site; future Description: development Classification: Commercial - retail Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No CBD streetscape renovation Description: improvements to downtown business district Recreational facilities (lake development, parks, ball fields, Classification: trails) Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No Central Business District Projects Description: Improvements to central business district Mixed use property (ie: a significant portion is residential Classification: and significant portion is commercial) Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No Harrison Street Condos Condo project lining new parking includes 3 units Description: affordable Classification: Residential property (classified residential) Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No Hilton Garden Inn Description: High rise hotel on Clinton St. Classification: Commercial - hotels and conference centers Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No Administration Expense Description: Administration Expense Classification: Administrative expenses Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No Augusta Place Description: Private Redevelopment of portion of City Hall block Mixed use property (ie: a significant portion is residential Classification: and significant portion is commercial) Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No Energy Efficiency Grants Description: Energy Efficiency Grants Classification: Industrial/manufacturing property Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No Tailwinds Description: Redevelopment of the 100 block of E. College Street Mixed use property (ie: a significant portion is residential Classification: and significant portion is commercial) Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Debts/Obligations For IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL 2013A GO Bonds (CBD) Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: 2014A GO Bonds (CBD) Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: 2015A GO Bonds (CBD) Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 121,746 6,804 128,550 No 06/18/2013 2023 Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 413,578 37,102 450,680 No 05/06/2014 2024 Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 186,490 11,492 197,982 No 05/05/2015 2025 2015A GO Bonds (Riverfront Crossing) Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: Iowa City Hotel Associates Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: A&M Development II, LLC Debt/Obligation Type Principal: Interest: Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 106,566 6,567 113,133 No 05/05/2015 2025 Rebates 7,710,784 0 7,710,784 No 03/23/2015 2040 Rebates 873,774 0 Total: 873,774 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 01/20/2015 FY of Last Payment: 2032 2016E TIF Revenue Notes Debt/Obligation Type: TIF Revenue Bonds/Notes Principal: 12,805,000 Interest: 3,472,805 Total: 16,277,805 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 08/16/2016 FY of Last Payment: 2036 Augusta Place, LLC Debt/Obligation Type: Rebates Principal: 4,020,292 Interest: 0 Total: 4,020,292 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 05/20/2017 FY of Last Payment: 2029 Hieronymi Partnership, LLC Debt/Obligation Type: Rebates Principal: 7,400,000 Interest: 0 Total: 7,400,000 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 09/19/2017 FY of Last Payment: 2036 FY19 Administrative Costs Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 749 Interest: 0 Total: 749 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/19/2019 FY of Last Payment: 2021 FY16 Administrative Costs Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 12,103 Interest: 0 Total: 12,103 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/01/2016 FY of Last Payment: 2022 FY20 Administrative Costs Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 2,438 Interest: 0 Total: 2,438 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/02/2020 FY of Last Payment: 2022 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Non -Rebates For IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL TIF Expenditure Amount: 0 Tied To Debt: 2013A GO Bonds (CBD) Tied To Project: Park @ 201 TIF Expenditure Amount: 112,776 Tied To Debt: 2014A GO Bonds (CBD) Tied To Project: CBD streetscape renovation TIF Expenditure Amount: 42,635 Tied To Debt: 2013A GO Bonds (CBD) Tied To Project: CBD streetscape renovation TIF Expenditure Amount: 39,024 Tied To Debt: 2015A GO Bonds (CBD) Tied To Project: CBD streetscape renovation TIF Expenditure Amount: 22,299 Tied To Debt: 2015A GO Bonds (Riverfront Crossing) Tied To Project: Riverside/Hwy 6 TIF Expenditure Amount: 408,331 Tied To Debt: 2016E TIF Revenue Notes Tied To Project: Administration Expense TIF Expenditure Amount: 7,024 Tied To Debt: FY16 Administrative Costs Tied To Project: Administration Expense TIF Expenditure Amount: 749 Tied To Debt: FYI Administrative Costs Tied To Project: Administration Expense 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Rebates For IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL 328 S. Clinton Street, Iowa City TIF Expenditure Amount: Rebate Paid To: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: Projected Final FY of Rebate 566,076 Iowa City Hotel Associates Iowa City Hotel Associates Hilton Garden Inn 2040 509-591 S. Dubuque St., Iowa City TIF Expenditure Amount: Rebate Paid To: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: Projected Final FY of Rebate 314 S. Clinton St, Iowa City TIF Expenditure Amount: Rebate Paid To: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: Projected Final FY of Rebate 109,768 A&M Development II A&M Development II, LLC Harrison Street Condos 2032 0 Hieronymous Project Hieronymi Partnership, LLC Hieronymous Square 2036 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV PROJ I UR AREA INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520235 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 UR Designation Slum No FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2005 Blighted 10/1969 Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development 11/2001 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 180,136 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR INCR- IC DOWNTOWN SSMID TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520353 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2014 Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 83,836,500 7,749,583 0 0 -5,556 113,441,314 0 113,441,314 Taxable 0 46,172,352 6,974,625 0 0 -5,556 68,717,232 0 IL 68,717,232 Homestead Credits K 17 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 15,265,935 68,717,232 6,123,668 62,593,564 1,879,669 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 180,136 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR INCR- IC DOWNTOWN SSMID TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520353 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2014 Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 285,106 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 114,422,368 0 0 0 122,534,925 0 122,534,925 Taxable 0 0 102,980,133 0 0 0 108,760,328 0 108,760,328 Homestead Credits Mk 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 54,011,518 68,523,407 6,106,370 62,417,037 1,999,202 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 285,106 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF AMEND INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520355 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2014 Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 68,731,350 12,402,612 0 0 -1,852 82,386,458 0 Pr82,386,458 Taxable 0 37,853,318 11,162,351 0 0 -1,852 49,907,539 0 49,907,539 Homestead Credits 80,765,734 Homestead Credits 1h 6 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 13,678,036 49,907,539 4,447,435 45,460,104 1,365,156 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 130,828 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF AMD-SSMID INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520357 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2014 Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 211,721 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 72,383,746 0 0 0 94,307,057 04,307,057 Taxable 0 0 65,145,374 0 0 0 80,765,734 0 80,765,734 Homestead Credits 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 43,707,044 50,600,013 4,509,166 46,090,847 1,476,278 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 211,721 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF AMD 10 INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520367 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2011 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2014 Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 538,617 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF AMD 10-SSMID INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520383 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2011 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 119,961,810 94,462,710 0 0 -3,704 290,753,993 0 290,753,993 Taxable 0 66,068,100 85,016,439 0 0 -3,704 205,468,228 0 205,468,228 Homestead Credits 0 sh 11 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 115,247,160 175,510,537 15,640,426 159,870,111 4,800,860 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 538,617 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF AMD 10-SSMID INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520383 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2011 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 49,282 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 8,048,481 0 0 0 24,267,690 04,267,690 Taxable 0 0 7,243,633 0 0 0 18,799,829 0 18,799,829 Homestead Credits 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 1,619,510 18,799,829 1,675,310 17,124,519 548,494 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 49,282 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF 2017 AMEND-SSMID INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520426 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2016 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum NoBlighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ Taxable 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0_ Homestead Credits _ Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 576,570 0 0 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF AMEND 10 -A&M DEVELOPMENTINCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520428 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2011 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2020 Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 109,768 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 6,649,240 0 0 0 -1,852 6,647,388 0 6,647,388 Taxable 0 3,662,031 0 0 0 -1,852 3,660,179 0 3,660,179 Homestead Credits 1 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 204,810 3,660,179 3,660,179 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 109,768 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF-SSMID- IOWA CITY HOTEL ASSOC INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520430 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2020 Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 527,796 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF 2017 AMEND-SSMID- AUGUISTA PLACE INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520432 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2016 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 644,760 0 0 0 644,760 0 644,760 Taxable 0 0 580,284 0 0 0 580,284 0 580,284 Homestead Credits 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 0 580,284 580,284 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 2,691 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 17,305,550 0 0 0 17,305,550 0 17,305,550 Taxable 0 0 15,574,995 0 0 0 15,574,995 0 15,574,995 Homestead Credits k 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 553,482 15,574,995 15,574,995 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 527,796 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF 2017 AMEND-SSMID- AUGUISTA PLACE INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520432 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2016 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 644,760 0 0 0 644,760 0 644,760 Taxable 0 0 580,284 0 0 0 580,284 0 580,284 Homestead Credits 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 0 580,284 580,284 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 2,691 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV UR TIF-SSMID- HIERONYMOUS SQUARE INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520434 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2002 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum NoBlighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 6,546 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF -2017 AMD -RES -AUGUSTA PL INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520438 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2016 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 2,774,730 0 0 0 2,774,730 0 R 2,774,730 Taxable 0 0 2,497,257 0 0 0 2,497,257 0 2,497,257 Homestead Credits 0 Frozen Base Value Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 648,745 2,125,985 189,469 1,936,516 62,026 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 6,546 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY CITY UNIV PROJ I URBAN RENEWAL (52024) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/CITY UNIV TIF -2017 AMD -RES -AUGUSTA PL INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520438 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2016 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 11,857,780 0 0 0 0 11,857,780 0 11,857,780 Taxable 0 6,530,558 0 0 0 0 6,530,558 0 6,530,558 Homestead Credits 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 0 6,530,558 6,530,558 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 17,119 Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY HEINZ ROAD URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52027 UR Area Creation Date UR Area Purpose: 05/2001 To formulate a workable program using public and private resources to further develop the area for industrial development. To build tax base; attract new firms and assist existing firms with expansion; make site improvements deemed necessary for industry. Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/HEINZ RD UR TIF INCR IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/HEINZ RD UR TIF INCR Urban Renewal Area Value by Class -1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Assessed 19,730 0 45,785,195 19,757,250 Taxable 16,077 0 41,206,676 17,781,525 Homestead Credits TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: 0 TIF Revenue: 0 TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: 0 Property Tax Replacement Claims 0 Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: 0 Total Revenue: 0 Rebate Expenditures: 0 Non -Rebate Expenditures: 0 Returned to County Treasurer: 0 Total Expenditures: 0 Other Military Total 0 0 65,562,175 0 0 59,004,278 Base Increment Increment No. No. Value Used 520249 520250 0 520251 520252 0 Gas/Electric Utility Total 0 65,562,175 0 59,004,278 0 Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance 0 Restricted for LMI TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 0 0 Restricted for LMI Urban Renewal Rep Projects For IOWA CITY HEINZ ROAD URBAN RENEWAL Energy Efficiency Grant Description: Energy Efficiency Grant Classification: Industrial/manufacturing property Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No an Renewal Rep Debts/Obligations For IOWA CITY HEINZ ROAD URBAN RENEWAL Iowa City Storage Energy Efficiency Grant Debt/Obligation Type: Other Debt Principal: 93,777 Interest: 0 Total: 93,777 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 06/15/2021 FY of Last Payment: 2024 UNFI Energy Efficiency Grant Debt/Obligation Type: Other Debt Principal: 38,743 Interest: 0 Total: 38,743 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 05/18/2021 FY of Last Payment: 2024 Reunion Brewery Energy Efficiency Grant Debt/Obligation Type: Other Debt Principal: 76,448 Interest: 0 Total: 76,448 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 06/15/2021 FY of Last Payment: 2024 ban Renewal Report, Fi TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY HEINZ ROAD URBAN RENEWAL (52027) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/HEINZ RD UR TIF INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520250 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2003 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2007 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 05/2002 statutorily ends: 2025 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 45,785,195 19,757,250 0 0 65,542,445 0 IP65,542,445 Taxable 0 0 41,206,676 17,781,525 0 0 58,988,201 0 58,988,201 Homestead Credits statutorily ends: 2025 IL 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 44,171,017 21,371,428 0 21,371,428 641,779 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY HEINZ ROAD URBAN RENEWAL (52027) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/HEINZ RD UR TIF INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520252 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2003 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2006 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 05/2002 statutorily ends: 2025 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 19,730 0 0 0 0 0 19,730 0 19,730 Taxable 16,077 0 0 0 0 0 16,077 0 16,077 Homestead Credits k 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 7,358 12,372 0 12,372 245 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY HIGHWAY SIX URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52028 UR Area Creation Date UR Area Purpose: 05/2003 To formulate and execute a program using public and private resources to develop the area for retail, office, and other commercial uses. To revitalize commercial activity, expand taxable values, and make public improvements supporting commercial activity. Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/IC HWY 6 COMMERCIAL UR TIF INCR IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/HWY 6 COMM UR TIF INCR Urban Renewal Area Value by Class -1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Assessed 5,330 1,317,610 81,274,167 0 0 Taxable 4,343 725,663 73,146,752 0 0 Homestead Credits TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: 0 TIF Revenue: 0 TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: 0 Property Tax Replacement Claims 0 Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: 0 Total Revenue: 0 Rebate Expenditures: 0 Non -Rebate Expenditures: 0 Returned to County Treasurer: 0 Total Expenditures: 0 Base Increment Increment No. No. Value Used 520255 520256 0 520317 520318 0 Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total 0 84,013,474 0 84,013,474 0 74,885,921 0 74,885,921 0 Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance 0 Restricted for LMI TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 0 0 Restricted for LMI rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY HIGHWAY SIX URBAN RENEWAL (52028) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/IC HWY 6 COMMERCIAL UR TIF INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520256 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2003 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2005 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 05/2003 statutorily ends: 2025 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 1,317,610 81,274,167 0 0 0 84,008,144 0 '84,008,144 Taxable 0 725,663 73,146,752 0 0 0 74,881,578 0 Subject to a Statutory end date? Homestead Credits Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 05/2003 statutorily ends: 174,881,578 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 58,091,667 25,916,477 0 25,916,477 778,265 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY HIGHWAY SIX URBAN RENEWAL (52028) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/HWY 6 COMM UR TIF INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520318 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2003 FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2005 UR Designation Slum No Subject to a Statutory end date? Yes Blighted No Fiscal year this TIF Taxing District Economic Development 05/2003 statutorily ends: 2025 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility _ Total Assessed 5,330 0 0 0 0 0 5,330 0` 5,330 Taxable 4,343 0 0 0 0 0 4,343 014,343 Homestead Credits 1 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 209,314 0 0 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY MOSS GREEN URBAN VILLAGE URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52029 UR Area Creation Date UR Area Purpose: 04/2010 To formulate and execute a workable program using public and private resources to develop the Urban Renewal Project area for office and other commercial uses. Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/MOSS GREEN URB VILLTIF INCR IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/MOSS GREEN URB VILL UR INCREMENT Urban Renewal Area Value by Class -1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Assessed 219,060 0 0 0 Taxable 178,496 0 0 0 Homestead Credits TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: 0 TIF Revenue: 0 TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: 0 Property Tax Replacement Claims 0 Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: 0 Total Revenue: 0 Rebate Expenditures: 0 Non -Rebate Expenditures: 0 Returned to County Treasurer: 0 Total Expenditures: 0 TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 0 Base Increment Increment No. No. Value Used 520358 520359 0 520446 520447 0 Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total 0 0 219,060 0 219,060 0 0 178,496 0 178,496 mommi Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance 0 Restricted for LMI Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance 0 Restricted for LMI 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Projects For IOWA CITY MOSS GREEN URBAN VILLAGE URBAN RENEWAL Moss Road Project Description: Classification: Physically Complete Payments Complete: Administrative Expenses Description: Classification: Physically Complete: Payments Complete: Moss Road extension Roads, Bridges & Utilities Yes No Administrative Expenses Administrative expenses No No 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Debts/Obligations For IOWA CITY MOSS GREEN URBAN VILLAGE URBAN RENEWAL Moss Road Portion of 2014A Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 1,736,385 248,915 1,985,300 No 05/06/2014 2024 FY16 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 2,644 Interest: 0 Total: 2,644 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/19/2019 FY of Last Payment: 2022 FY17 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 40 Interest: 0 Total: 40 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/19/2019 FY of Last Payment: 2022 FY19 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 30 Interest: 0 Total: 30 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/19/2019 FY of Last Payment: 2022 -6 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 202 TIF ordinance approved in March 2019; to certify first debt in FY2020 256 Characters Left Sum of Private Investment Made Within This Urban Renewal Area during FY 2021 0 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY MOSS GREEN URBAN VILLAGE URBAN RENEWAL (52029) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/MOSS GREEN URB VILLTIF INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520359 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2018 UR Designation Slum NoBlighted FY TIF Revenue First Received: No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development 04/2010 TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/ElectricUtility Total Assessed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taxable 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Homestead Credits im Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 0 0 0 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY MOSS GREEN URBAN VILLAGE URBAN RENEWAL (52029) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY AG/IOWA CITY SCH/MOSS GREEN URB VILL UR INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520447 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2018 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: Slum No Blighted No Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 219,060 0 0 0 0 0 219,060 0 219,060 Taxable 178,496 0 0 0 0 0 178,496 0 178,496 Homestead Credits ML 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 311,390 0 0 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 0 Renewal Report, F Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY TOWNCREST URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52030 UR Area Creation Date: 12/2010 To formulate and execute a workable program using public and private resources to develop the Urban Renewal Project area for retail, office, and other commercial UR Area Purpose: uses. Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/TOWNCREST TIF INCR Urban Renewal Area Value by Class -1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Assessed 0 7,143,790 31,729,395 0 0 Taxable 0 3,934,391 28,556,456 0 0 Homestead Credits TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: 0 TIF Revenue: 155,530 TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: 0 Property Tax Replacement Claims 0 Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: 0 Total Revenue: 155,530 Rebate Expenditures: 0 Non -Rebate Expenditures: 154,696 Returned to County Treasurer: 0 Total Expenditures: 154,696 Base Increment Increment No. No. Value Used 520360 520361 5,168,351 Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total -1,852 44,281,368 0 44,281,368 -1,852 36,343,647 0 36,343,647 Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance 0 Restricted for LMI TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 834 0 Restricted for LMI Urban Renewal Rep Projects For IOWA CITY TOWNCREST URBAN RENEWAL William Street Streetscape Description: Public Improvement coinciding with Med Office Bldg. Classification: Roads, Bridges & Utilities Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No MDK Development Med Office Bldg Description: Medical Office Building Classification: Commercial - office properties Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No an Renewal RepIMM _ W) I Debts/Obligations For IOWA CITY TOWNCREST URBAN RENEWAL 2013A GO Bonds (Williams St. Recon.) Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: MDK Forgivable Loan Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 118,236 20,491 138,727 No 06/18/2013 2023 Internal Loans 684,180 0 684,180 No 06/19/2012 2035 Renewal Rep 2021 Non -Rebates For IOWA CITY TOWNCREST URBAN RENEWAL TIF Expenditure Amount: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: TIF Expenditure Amount: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: 65,780 2013A GO Bonds (Williams St. Recon.) William Street Streetscape 88,916 MDK Forgivable Loan MDK Development Med Office Bldg Renewal Report, F TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY TOWNCREST URBAN RENEWAL (52030) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/TOWNCREST TIF INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520361 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2011 UR Designation Slum No FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2014 Blighted 12/2010 Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 155,530 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 7,143,790 31,729,395 0 0 -1,852 44,281,368 0 jr44,281,368 Taxable 0 3,934,391 28,556,456 0 0 -1,852 36,343,647 0 36,343,647 Homestead Credits kh 4 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 32,550,010 11,733,210 5,168,351 6,564,859 197,141 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 155,530 rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Yea Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE DRIVE URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52031 UR Area Creation Date UR Area Purpose: 10/2011 To formulate and execute a workable program using public and private resources to develop the Urban Renewal Project area for retail, office and other commercial uses. Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/RIVERSIDE DR TIF INCR IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE UR EMRICO INCREMENT Urban Renewal Area Value by Class -1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Assessed 0 15,567,410 35,325,067 0 Taxable 0 8,573,644 31,792,562 0 Homestead Credits TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: TIF Revenue: TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: Property Tax Replacement Claims Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: Total Revenue: Rebate Expenditures: Non -Rebate Expenditures: Returned to County Treasurer: Total Expenditures: TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 47,651 419,495 0 0 0 419,495 257,459 160,536 0 417,995 Base Increment Increment No. No. Value Used 520362 520363 5,254,347 520396 520397 8,573,644 Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total 0 0 51,178,990 0 F 51,178,990 0 0 40,570,346 0 40,570,346 MMMQ Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance 0 Restricted for LMI Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance 0 Restricted for LMI rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Yeai Projects For IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE DRIVE URBAN RENEWAL Administrative Expenses Description: Legal, consulting, recording, & publications Classification: Administrative expenses Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No Riverside Dr Pedestrian Tunnel Description: Pedestrian tunnel Recreational facilities (lake development, parks, ball fields, Classification: trails) Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No Riverview West Apartments Description: Classification: Physically Complete Payments Complete: Riverside Dr Streetscape Description Classification: Physically Complete: Payments Complete: 639 S. Riverside redevelop former car lot Residential property (classified residential) Yes No Streetscape Recreational facilities (lake development, parks, ball fields, trails) No No Myrtle/Riverside Intersection Description: Signalization of intersection Classification: Roads, Bridges & Utilities Physically Complete: Yes Payments Complete: No Iowa River Trail Description: From Benton to Sturgis Recreational facilities (lake development, parks, ball fields, Classification: trails) Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No West Riverbank Stabilization Description: Riverbank stabilization Recreational facilities (lake development, parks, ball fields, Classification: trails) Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Yeai Debts/Obligations For IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE DRIVE URBAN RENEWAL Emrico Properties, LLC Debt/Obligation Type: Rebates Principal: 1,269,394 Interest: 0 Total: 1,269,394 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 12/02/2014 FY of Last Payment: 2024 2017A GO Bonds (Riverside Streetscape&Myrtle Intersection) Debt/Obligation Type: Principal: Interest: Total: Annual Appropriation?: Date Incurred: FY of Last Payment: Gen. Obligation Bonds/Notes 1,168,934 125,586 1,294,520 No 06/15/2017 2027 FY19 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 107 Interest: 0 Total: 107 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/19/2019 FY of Last Payment: 2021 rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Yeai Non -Rebates For IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE DRIVE URBAN RENEWAL TIF Expenditure Amount: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: TIF Expenditure Amount: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: 160,429 2017A GO Bonds (Riverside Streetscape&Myrtle Intersection) Myrtle/Riverside Intersection 107 FYI Administrative Expenses Administrative Expenses rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Yeai Rebates For IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE DRIVE URBAN RENEWAL 629 S. Riverside Dr. TIF Expenditure Amount: Rebate Paid To: Tied To Debt: Tied To Project: Projected Final FY of Rebate 257,459 Emrico Properties Emrico Properties, LLC Riverview West Apartments 2028 rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Yea This Urban Renewal Area was originally named Riverfront Crossings, but was amended to change the name to Riverside Drive URA in order to avoid confusion with the larger Riverfront Crossings addition to the City -University Project 1 URA. 256 Characters Left Sum of Private Investment Made Within This Urban Renewal Area during FY 2021 0 rban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE DRIVE URBAN RENEWAL (5203 1) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/RIVERSIDE DR TIF INCR TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520363 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2011 UR Designation Slum No FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2018 Blighted 10/2011 Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 162,036 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE DRIVE URBAN RENEWAL (5203 1) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE UR EMRICO INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520397 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2011 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2018 Slum No Blighted 03/2012 Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 35,325,067 0 0 0 35,611,580 05,611,580 Taxable 0 0 31,792,562 0 0 0 31,996,702 0 31,996,702 Homestead Credits 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 22,466,946 13,144,634 5,254,347 7,890,287 236,943 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 162,036 TIF Taxing District Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE DRIVE URBAN RENEWAL (5203 1) TIF Taxing District Name: IOWA CITY/IOWA CITY SCH/IOWA CITY RIVERSIDE UR EMRICO INCREMENT TIF Taxing District Inc. Number: 520397 TIF Taxing District Base Year: 2011 UR Designation FY TIF Revenue First Received: 2018 Slum No Blighted 03/2012 Subject to a Statutory end date? No Economic Development No TIF Taxing District Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 257,459 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 15,567,410 0 0 0 0 15,567,410 015,567,410 Taxable 0 8,573,644 0 0 0 0 8,573,644 0 8,573,644 Homestead Credits 0 Frozen Base Value Max Increment Value Increment Used Increment Not Used Increment Revenue Not Used Fiscal Year 2021 1,345,074 8,573,644 8,573,644 0 0 FY 2021 TIF Revenue Received: 257,459 E 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY FOSTER ROAD URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52034 UR Area Creation Date: 03/2018 Economic development activities - UR Area Purpose: LMI Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area Base Increment increment No. No. Value Used Urban Renewal Area Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taxable 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Homestead Credits 0 TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: 0 0 Restricted for LMI TIF Revenue: 0 TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: 0 Property Tax Replacement Claims 0 Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: 0 Total Revenue: 0 Rebate Expenditures: 0 Non -Rebate Expenditures: 0 Returned to County Treasurer: 0 Total Expenditures: 0 TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 0 0 Restricted for LMI 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Projects For IOWA CITY FOSTER ROAD URBAN RENEWAL Administrative Expenses Description: Classification: Physically Complete Payments Complete: Vintage Coop Description: Classification: Physically Complete: Payments Complete: Administrative Expenses Administrative expenses No No Foster Road Construction Roads, Bridges & Utilities Yes No 4 Annual Urban Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Debts/Obligations For IOWA CITY FOSTER ROAD URBAN RENEWAL Foster Road Construction Debt/Obligation Type: Rebates Principal: 3,367,000 Interest: 0 Total: 3,367,000 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 07/18/2018 FY of Last Payment: 2031 FY18 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 9,512 Interest: 0 Total: 9,512 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/02/2020 FY of Last Payment: 2024 FY19 Administrative Expenses Debt/Obligation Type: Internal Loans Principal: 4,912 Interest: 0 Total: 4,912 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 11/02/2020 FY of Last Payment: 2024 LMI Housing Outstanding LMI Housing Debt/Obligation Type: Obligations Principal: 2,754,818 Interest: 0 Total: 2,754,818 Annual Appropriation?: No Date Incurred: 07/18/2018 FY of Last Payment: 2031 Renewal Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - 2021 Urban Renewal Area Data Collection Local Government Name: IOWA CITY (52G483) Urban Renewal Area: IOWA CITY FOREST VIEW URBAN RENEWAL UR Area Number: 52920 UR Area Creation Date: 07/2019 Economic development and blight UR Area Purpose: area re -development Tax Districts within this Urban Renewal Area Base Increment increment No. No. Value Used Urban Renewal Area Value by Class - 1/1/2019 for FY 2021 Agricultural Residential Commercial Industrial Other Military Total Gas/Electric Utility Total Assessed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taxable 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Homestead Credits 0 TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance Amount of 07-01-2020 Cash Balance as of 07-01-2020: 0 0 Restricted for LMI TIF Revenue: 0 TIF Sp. Revenue Fund Interest: 0 Property Tax Replacement Claims 0 Asset Sales & Loan Repayments: 0 Total Revenue: 0 Rebate Expenditures: 0 Non -Rebate Expenditures: 0 Returned to County Treasurer: 0 Total Expenditures: 0 TIF Sp. Rev. Fund Cash Balance Amount of 06-30-2021 Cash Balance as of 06-30-2021: 0 0 Restricted for LMI Renewal Rep Projects For IOWA CITY FOREST VIEW URBAN RENEWAL Administrative Expenses Description: Classification: Physically Complete Payments Complete: Administrative Expenses Administrative expenses No No Forest View Drive Construction Description: Forest View Drive Construction Classification: Roads, Bridges & Utilities Physically Complete: No Payments Complete: No New Taxable Value created by Iowa City's TIF projects: $223,753,600 District (Bold) Base 2021 New Value District projects indented (not Start End Value of Assessed Created in bold) date Date Project Valuation TIF projects Sycamore & First Avenue URA 2000 2020 Sycamore Mall/IC Marketplace #1 2004 2010 $4,662,900 Sycamore Mall/IC Marketplace #2 2018 2024 $11,073,410 $6,410,510 Plamor Redevelopment 2006 2011 $972,150 $2,880,710 $1,908,560 Scott Six Industrial Park 2001 2021 Owens Brockway 2005 2009 $30,010 $7,434,390 $7,404,380 City -University Project 1 2001 nla* Hieronymous Square 2017 $1,364,880 $24,894,180 $23,529,300 Hilton Garden Inn 2015 $417,380 $15,273,860 $14,856,480 Park at 201 2012 $569,520 $11,456,520 $10,887,000 Plaza Towers 2004 2010 $0 $43,610,060 $43,610,060 Sabin Townhomes 2015 $0 $6,610,520 $6,610,520 The Chauncey 2015 $0 $46,144,990 $46,144,990 Vito's building rehab 2011 $813,350 $2,374,060 $1,560,710 Northgate Corporate Park 2002 2022 Seabury & Smith 2005 2011 $264,520 8,507,430 $8,242,910 Heinz Road 2002 2022 AIpIa of Iowa (agreement #1) 2003 2010 $3,594,340 AIpIa of Iowa (agreement #2) 2007 2014 $15,235,330 $11,640,990 United Natural Foods Inc. 2003 2011 $4,653,740 $10,428,680 $5,774,940 Hwy 6 Commercial URA 2003 2023 Southgate Development (Pepperwood) 2003 2013 $8,677,520 $16,004,290 $7,326,770 Towncrest URA 2010 nla* MDK Medical Office Building 2012 $885,880 $3,020,980 $2,135,100 Riverside Drive 2013 2025 Riverside West 2015 2027 $1,326,840 $15,148,940 $13,822,100 Foster Road Foster Road project $2,111,720 $14,000,000 $11,888,280 $30,344,750 $254,098,350 $223,753,600 Prepared by: Wendy Ford, Ec. Dev. Coord., 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5248 Resolution No. 21-288 Resolution approving the Fiscal Year Ending 2021 Annual Urban Renewal Report. Whereas, in an effort to provide greater public access to information about urban renewal activities, including the use of tax increment financing, the Iowa Legislature enacted changes in Iowa Code Sections 384.22 to require, among other things, the filing of an annual report detailing the City's urban renewal activities; and Whereas, the City of Iowa City had fourteen (14) Urban Renewal Areas in effect during the most recently ended fiscal year, and Whereas, City Staff has prepared an urban renewal report in compliance with state law and has placed said plan on file in the office of the Finance Director, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa; and Whereas, the report must be approved by City Council before its submission to the Iowa Department of Management on or before December 1, 2021. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: 1. The Fiscal Year Ending 2021 Annual Urban Renewal Area Report, attached hereto, is hereby approved. 2. The Finance Director is hereby directed to submit it to the Iowa Department of Management by December 1, 2021 on forms and pursuant to instructions prescribed by the Department. Passed and approved this 16t1day of November , 2021. Pro Tem ATTEST: V 1 City Ulerk ®rney APPROVED:City At (Sara greenwood Hektoen - 11/08/21) Resolution No. 21-288 Page 2 It was moved by Thomas and seconded by Weiner the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Bergus x Mims x Salih x Taylor x Teague x Thomas x Weiner