HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-01-20 Public hearing NOT~CE OF PUBliC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will
be held by the City Council of iowa City, iowa,
at 7:00 p.m. on the sixth day of 3anuary, 2004,
in Emma 3. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington
Street, Towa 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:
:L An ordinance rezoning approximately
acres from iD-RS, Interim Development
Single-Family and ID-RM, interim
Development Multi-Family, to OPDHI5,
Planned Development Overlay - Single
Family Residential, subject to conditions, for
property located south of Pepperwood
Addition and east of Gilbert Street.
2. An ordinance rezoning approximately 16.1
acres from Residential Factory Built Housing,
RFBH, to Planned Development Housing
Overlay-12 (OPDH-12), for property on
Heinz Road south of Paddock Boulevard.
3. An ordinance rezoning approximately 25.07
acres from Highway Commercial, CH-l, to
Sensitive Areas Overlay (SAO/CH-1) for
property located west of Mormon Trek
Boulevard and south of Highway 1.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, iowa City, iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, C~1~' CLERK
City of Iowa City 7c
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 15, 2004
To: City Council
From: Karin Franklin, Director,
Re: PDH Rezoning for Sandhill Estates
I would like to clarify and comment on some of the testimony presented at the Council
hearing January 6th for the Sandhill Estates rezoning application.
· The developer's attorney stated that forward-placed garages are a
phenomenon that is occurring nationwide, so we should not be concerned
about it in Iowa City.
Yes, it is true that this type of housing has been occurring in many locations over the
past 10 or 15 years. About 15 years ago we first started seeing such housing in
iowa City on an occasional basis but these houses were not prevalent in most new
neighborhoods. In the past few years, however, they have become more common.
More to the point, as Iowa City has approved more narrow lot subdivisions, the
repetitive prominence of garages along residential streets has become more
noticeable.
Similar to Iowa City, many cities are changing development regulations to make it
easier to build small lot neighborhoods as one tool to prevent urban sprawl.
However, many communities are also adopting standards to prevent repetitive,
garagescape subdivision designs.
We attempted to craft requirements that are the minimum necessary to prevent
streets dominated by garages. The proposed standards deal only with the
placement of the garage. The recommended conditions do not speak to architectural
or design issues. Rather they are simple zoning bulk and setback tools; concepts
which have been the essence of zoning regulations since 1920.
· The developer has warned that the garage placement standards will restrict
consumer choices.
The proposed standards only apply to lots narrower than 60 feet. The only choice
that would be restricted are designs that include a garage that consumes more than
half of the lot frontage and garages that are located more than 6 feet in front of the
house.
From the information the developer of Sandhill Estates has made available to us,
the choices given their customers are 8 plans, 7 of which are slight variations on the
dominant garage footprint and one which would comply with the garage standards
suggested. This does not seem like much of a choice relative to the issue we are
discussing.
Planning staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission considered the developers
concerns carefully. They informed us that consumers desire two-car attached
garages and house plans that have large living spaces that face a private back yard.
After looking through plan books, talking with developers and real estate agents from
other towns and cities, and consulting the National Homebuilders literature, it
became apparent that "garagescapes" have become an issue of concern nationwide.
More importantly, architects and home designers have responded accordingly.
There are many, many house plans on the market that would meet the proposed
garage placement standards and also provide the types of features and privacy of
the garage-dominated designs. Examples of built structures may be found in
Southpointe in Iowa City and in North Ridge in Coralville.
· At the hearing there was some discussion about whether these garage
standards would increase the cost of housing.
We had a building contractor do cost comparisons between models that comply with
the requirements and those that do not. The construction costs are virtually the
same for comparable size houses. A number of these plans are being built in the
Iowa City and Coralville housing market and sell for prices comparable to houses
currently offered by Southgate. With regard to the porch issue, some of Southgate's
designs have porches and some do not. Some of the plans that meet the garage
standards have porches and some do not. Providing a porch is not a requirement,
but it does allow some additional flexibility with placement of a garage. If a house
has a porch, the garage can be placed forward of the house, but no closer to the
street than the front of the porch.
· Much was made of compromises that led to the zoning plan and subdivision
design now being considered.
Staff and Southgate worked very hard on a solution that would allow development
and yet set aside a portion of the sand prairie area. Early on in the discussions
Southgate had agreed to a requirement that the garages be flush with or setback
from the front of the house for the lots narrower that 60 feet. This was one of the
principals stressed by their design consultant Randall Arendt as well as in the
Comprehensive Plan. We then spent several more weeks working on solutions to
other issues. However, just before the rezoning was placed on the Planning and
Zoning Commission's agenda Southgate informed us they would not agree to the
garage placement standard for the narrow lots. If Southgate had not agreed to the
garage placement standard for the narrow lots early on in the discussions, another
solution through the street layout would likely have been pursued.
· The developer's attorney made reference to pedestrians being able to see in
the windows of houses as something that the Planning and Zoning
Commission and staff advocate as pedestrian-friendly design. The implication
was that the garage placement standards would reduce privacy.
This is a misunderstanding of a pedestrian-friendly street and what is being
recommended. In fact, a basic urban design principle is that street-facing windows
be located high enough above the street to ensure that the residents of the houses
are located above pedestrians on the side walk and thus have privacy in their
homes. Another well-documented design principle is that "eyes on the street" help
create safer neighborhoods --- windows from residences looking out onto the street
so that the neighborhood may be observed from inside the house. Pedestrians feel
safer and more comfortable if they are warking down a street that has buildings with
windows and doors facing the street rather than blank walls.
· The developer's real estate agent also made reference to homeowners
preferring to not have side windows due to concerns about privacy.
There is no reference in the recommended garage placement standards to windows
on the side of the house. In fact, many plans for narrow lot development restrict side
yard windows, both for privacy and for fire safety. The City's Zoning Code and the
Fire Code currently have restrictions on the placement of side-facing windows on lots
with limited side yards.
The developer's realtor also indicated that many families prefer homes with decks
and family rooms oriented to the back yard. There is nothing in the garage setback
standards that would prevent a house from being designed in this manner. In fact
most of the floor plans that meet the garage setback standards do just that and are
being built in Iowa City and Coralville.
Some "solutions" to the different viewpoints of the garage issue that have been
suggested are increasing the front setback of the entire structure or planting trees in the
front yard and parking. Increasing the setback may minimally reduce the impact of the
garages by allowing more room to narrow the driveway at the sidewalk. However, the
consequence of a larger setback for the structure on the same size lot is diminishment of
the backyard, a focal point of family activity buyers seem to cherish.
The planting of trees may soften the impact of repetitive garages but only after a number
of years. In this project, the planting of trees in the front witl be precluded by a 15 foot
utility easement in the front yard; planting in the right-of-way is often impossible due to
sewer and water utilities. Therefore, relying on a technique that masks the buildings
seems less effective than addressing the issue through the building footprint layout at
the start.
Cc City Manager
Planning & Zoning Commission
Planning staff
Glenn Siders
Joe Holland
LouAnn Lathrop
3
Marian Karr
From: Garry & Betsy Klein [the3rdiowa@mchsi.com]
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 5:50 PM
To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org
Cc: Karin Franklin; Marcia Klingaman
Subject: Neighborhoods are not subdivisions
I don't envy the new City Council's "first test" as the Press-Citizen
has
called it. A couple weeks on the job and the P-C is already telling you
what
you should de. Of course, se are many people who would be affected by
the
Sandhill Estates project, local realtors, and the developer himself. Let
me
lend an "outsider" voice.
I own a home in the Creekside neighborhood on the east side of Iowa
City. It
is a diverse neighborhood with all kinds of housing. It is the way
neighborhoods used to be built--blocky without too much apparent thought
te
long-term ramifications of development. The things that make my
neighborhood
distinctive from a planning perspective are a neighborhood park built in
1951, a creek that runs through it, and a lot of old growth trees. It is
neighborhood with great homes ef all shapes and sizes, great neighbors,
great schools, and a great "£eel" to it. It is in no way perfect, but it
feels like home to me.
I grew up in Park Forest, Illinois (A post-war Leavittown on the
southside
of Chicago) and Huber Heights, Ohio (self-professed "largest core, unity
of
all brick Nomes in the US")beth of which were "cookie-cutter" homes.
Park
Forest and Huber Heights shared a common bond, they were communities of
"starter homes", and the houses turned over many times. The downside of
these conm~unities is they got quite shaggy with age. Hy guess is the
cookie-cutter homes built in Iowa City will too.
When I looked at the City's South District Plan recently, I got the
sense
that people had really thought about what would make a dense,
environmentally sensitive, affordable-housing neighborhood work.
Specifically, there are guidelines about hew hemes should be built. It
is
clear the planners were trying te build a neighborhood with lasting
qualities--aesthetics to be sure, but something mere--a place they would
be
proud te call home.
Even though he has been willing te go back to the drawing board to plan
the
subdivision around envrinomentally-sensitive areas, Southgate's
developer
appears to be stuck on the idea of which way a garage faces or where it
is
located on his houses. They are his properties after all. He is in the
business of building houses that will provide him a living, but I'm
guessing
he has ne plans to live in the Sandhill Estates himself.
For him I offer him this thought, Iowa City has several things going for
it.
Most of all, it is a place people want to live. People like living here
because it is a cultural, educational, and business center and for the
overall quality of life it affords. I guess I don't see how a business
person would turn away an opportunity to build 329 homes based on where
a
garage is placed. But, if its a matter of finances, perhaps the
development
should be built be someone who can see the value of building a
well-planned
neighborhood. There are plenty of Park Forests and Huber Heights out
there
already.
As for the City Council, I know each of you are deeply invested in the
community. Compromising on this point may feel like a step toward
progress.
I challenge you to hold Southgate to the guidelines that the community
and
urban planners devised. I have faith that they were planning with the
future
in mind. I think you will all agree with me that building a neighborhood
is
no small thing and should be held to the highest reasonable standards.
Sincerely,
Garry Klein
628 2nd Ave.
Iowa City, lA 52245
Marian Karr
From: Heather MacDonald [heather-macdonald~uiowaedu]
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 4:47 PM
To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org
Subject: Sandhill Development Regulations
I read the editorial opinion in the Press Citizen {January 9) on
the
City's recommendations for the Sandhill development with interest. I
agree
wholeheartedly with the writer that Iowa City should not "unnecessarily
obstruct subdivisions", and that pushing development out to the fringe
of
the metropolitan area will harm everyone by encouraging sprawl. However,
I
do not believe that the design regulations the City is proposing will
have
this effect.
The developer has wisely agreed to cluster homes on portions of
the site
that will have less effect on the endangered species found there, the
remnants of sand prairie, and the archeological remains. Clustering
homes
requires that lots are narrower. For homes without alley access, this
poses
some design problems. Some of these are purely practical - how can
vehicle
access be provided to each lot while minimizing curb cuts (thus
maintaining
the continuity of sidewalks) on the street? Some problems are indeed
"aesthetic", but I think we could only accuse the city of being
"subjective" if the aesthetic judgements imposed were whimsical,
arbitrary,
and not widely shared.
While it is quite true that "garagescapes" are built all over
the United
States, and we certainly have our share of them in Johnson County, this
does not appear to be because people actively prefer to walk along
streets,
or look out on neighboring homes, composed almost entirely of double
garage
doors and concrete driveways. Instead, homes are built like this because
no-one took the trouble to think through an alternative way to arrange
homes on small lots that would provide the same space and access, along
with a pleasant residential setting. In fact, it appears that the
objections many people have to "higher density" housing hinge precisely
on
their objection to living next door to (or driving through) such a
garagescape.
Since the 1980s, urban designers have devoted tremendous effort
to
surveying people across the country about their preferences, to find out
what they mean when they say they want to live in an "attractive" or
"pleasant" neighborhood. Using a variety of methods, from standardized
surveys in which people are asked to rate pictures of homes,
streetscapes
and commercial areas, to design charettes where people experiment with
different models to design neighborhoods they would like to live in, a
pretty consistent picture of people's preferences has emerged. Those
preferences do not include residential streets defined by double garage
doors. Instead, what people seem to prefer overwhelmingly, looks
remarkably
similar to some of the typical neighborhoods in Iowa City - Longfellow,
!
the
Northside, East College, and so on. Few of the streets in those
neighborhoods are dominated by double garage doors, although many homes
do
have garages with access from the street.
Residents of the South District helped define goals for future
development in the district in a recent plan. Unsurprisingly, residents
wanted to see "attractive, livable neighborhoods" developed (a goal
shared
by Iowa City residents in general). The city appears to be acting quite
responsibly by proposing simple design regulations that will help carry
out
the desires of South District residents. From a legal standpoint, there
a very well-developed body of law that supports the responsibility of
cities to do just that, as long as the regulations they propose are
clear
(as these are). The design regulations the City proposes are intended to
offer practical solutions to the design problems of clustering homes on
relatively small lots, not to obstruct or exclude the development.
Improving the aesthetic quality of new residential development will not
restrict economic growth and the availability of housing for a larger
labor
force. In fact, by making a wider range of types of housing acceptable
to
current residents, design regulations may help overcome some of the
NIMBYism that some have seen in residents' responses to recent
development
proposals.
Heather MacDonald
Associate Professor
Graduate Program in Urban and Regional Planning
University of Iowa
Heather MacDonald
Assoc. Professor
Graduate Program in Urban and Regional Planning
University of Iowa
319-335-0501 (voice)
319-335-3330 (fax)
Marian Karr
From: Heather MacDonald [heather-macdonald@uiowa.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 6:52 PM
To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org
Subject: Sandhill Development Regulations
I read the editorial opinion in the Press Citizen {January 9) on
the
City's recommendations for the Sandhill development with interest. I
agree
wholeheartedly with the writer that Iowa City should not "unnecessarily
obstruct subdivisions", and that pushing development out to the fringe
of
the metropolitan area will harm everyone by encouraging sprawl. However,
I
do not believe that the design regulations the City is proposing will
have
this effect.
The developer has wisely agreed to cluster homes on portions of
the site
that will have less effect on the endangered species found there, the
remnants of sand prairie, and the archeological remains. Clustering
homes
requires that lots are narrower. For homes without alley access, this
poses
some design problems. Some of these are purely practical - how can
vehicle
access be provided to each lot while minimizing curb cuts (thus
maintaining
the continuity of sidewalks) on the street? Some problems are indeed
"aesthetic", but I think we could only accuse the city of being
"subjective" if the aesthetic judgements imposed were whimsical,
arbitrary,
and not widely shared.
While it is quite true that "garagescapes" are built all over
the United
States, and we certainly have our share of them in Johnson County, this
does not appear to be because people actively prefer to walk along
streets,
or look out on neighboring homes, composed almost entirely of double
garage
doors and concrete driveways. Instead, homes are built like this because
no-one took the trouble to think through an alternative way to arrange
homes on small lots that would provide the same space and access, along
with a pleasant residential setting. In fact, it appears that the
objections many people have to "higher density" housing hinge precisely
on
their objection to living next door to (or driving through) such a
garagescape.
Since the 1980s, urban designers have devoted tremendous effort
to
surveying people across the country about their preferences, to find out
what they mean when they say they want to live in an "attractive" or
"pleasant" neighborhood. Using a variety of methods, from standardized
surveys in which people are asked to rate pictures of homes,
streetscapes
and commercial areas, to design charettes where people experiment with
different models to design neighborhoods they would like to live in, a
pretty consistent picture of people's preferences has emerged. Those
preferences do not include residential streets defined by double garage
doors. Instead, what people seem to prefer overwhelmingly, looks
remarkably
similar to some of the typical neighborhoods in Iowa City - Longfellow,
1
the
Northside, East College, and so on. Few of the streets in those
neighborhoods are dominated by double garage doors, although many homes
do
have garages with access from the street.
Residents of the South District helped define goals for future
development in the district in a recent plan. Unsurprisingly, residents
wanted to see "attractive, livable neighborhoods" developed (a goal
shared
by Iowa City residents in general). The city appears to be acting quite
responsibly by proposing simple design regulations that will help carry
out
the desires of South District residents. From a legal standpoint, there
is
a very well-developed body of law that supports the responsibility of
cities to do just that, as long as the regulations they propose are
clear
(as these are). The design regulations the City proposes are intended to
offer practical solutions to the design problems of clustering homes on
relatively small lots, not to obstruct or exclude the development.
Improving the aesthetic quality of new residential development will not
restrict economic growth and the availability of housing for a larger
labor
force. In fact, by making a wider range of types of housing acceptable
to
current residents, design regulations may help overcome some of the
NIMBYism that some have seen in residents' responses to recent
development
proposals.
Heather MacDonald
Associate Professor
Graduate Program in Urban and Regional Planning
University of Iowa
Heather MacDonald
Assoc. Professor
Graduate Program in Urban and Regional Planning
University of Iowa
319-335-0501 (voice)
319-335-3330 (fax)
2
Bluff~vood
STE.,E ~ ,JA. ~OC.~. January 14, 2004
Friendship
Galway Hills Iowa City City Council
410 E. Washington Street
Goosetown
c.~ ~.~ Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Grant Wood
Ho~ ,o~,. Re: Sandhill Estates Subdivision
Harlocke-Weeber
B~ O~f Dear Iowa City City Council:
Longfellow The Neighborhood Council of Iowa City has been following the evolution of
[vllG}-Ia~[- WFtI~H* the Sandhill Estates subdivision proposal and understands that it is now in your
Manville East hands for consideration.
Melrose Avenue The Neighborhood Council feels that there have been a number of very
MICHa~La~NN~ W10.~$5 positive elements evolving out of the subdivision; preservation of the sand
o~ w^~. prairie, connection of this open space with Wetherby Park and other
Miller Orchard neighborhoods, and design of the subdivision to make the most of this natural
area. Southgate Development was responsive in meeting with the adjoining
Northside neighborhoods to discuss the progress of their work and respond to questions.
Penny Bryn
p^. ~. d,~ ~< ..... We do want to strongly encourage that the Planning and Zoning Commission
Peppenvood and staffs recommendation related to garage placement be supported by you in
N~[, D~W£S your final decision. We believe that how the buildings relate to the street are as
Shimek important to livability and quality of life as are the lot and open space design.
M^~ ~o~. The document where these design considerations are defined, the South District
South Pointe Plan, was developed by the neighbors in the area who invested many hours in
process. The participants in this process were particularly concerned with
Southwest Estates small lot development as the land in the South District was considered to be
Ty'n Cae less costly than other areas and it was being used extensively for "affordable
duD-' PFOHL housing". Including the language "As housing density increases and lot sizes
Village Green are reduced, attention will need to be paid to design issues, such as garage and
M~v,. c^..o, driveway locations, to assure that the new neighborhoods are attractive and
Walnut Ridge livable" was meant to provide for more attractive affordable housing than had
NANCy PERKI*q5 been developed in the past. The Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the City
Wetherby Friends Council includes pages of language about the expectations of future housing
and Neighbors development in Iowa City including very specific language about building and
Windsor Ridge subdivision design that would meet these expectations.
We'd also like to bring up that the Zoning Ordinance includes the following
Neighborhood language (14-6J-2-A) regarding OPDH development, which is applicable to
Services Coordinator
MArCiA KLrNgAMAN Sandhill Estates.
Planned Development Housing Overlay Zone (OPDH)
Purpose: The Planned Development Housing Overlay Zone (OPDH) is established to permit
flexibility in the use and design of the structures and land in situations where conventional
development may be inappropriate and where modification of requirements of the underlying zone
~vill not be contrary to the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, inconsistent with the
Comprehensive Plan as amended, nor harmful to the surrounding neighborhood.
Since development and adoption of the South District Plan, there have been four other District
Plans developed by the residents of those areas and adopted by the City Council as part of the
Comprehensive Plan. Participants are told by staffthat their involvement is important because it
will be the guide by which land use decision making will occur by poricy makers for the next
decade. If participants of these adopted District Plans feel that their work and recommendations
that were approved by the City Council continue to be ignored, the essence of the process has been
lost and it is likely that future district planning efforts will find it difficult to recruit any
participation.
The neighborhood associations have played a huge role in encouraging participation in the district
planning process over the past 10 years. Please allow us to continue to be enthusiastic and
supportive of this process as the remaining five district plans are generated, remaining
confident that the City Council will continue to support the language developed and approved
by the residents of that district and the City Council.
Sincerely,
Members of the Neighborhood Council of Iowa City
V ~ Page 1 of I
Marian Karr
From: Lou Ann Lathrop [Ioulathrop@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 7:']9 PM
To: council@iowa-city,org
Subject: response to Franklin letter
Dear Council Members:
I am in receipt of the letter sent out by Karen Franklin regarding the Southgate property issue, In it she addresses two
statements that I brought up in the public meeting. One was on the reason Buyers like homes without side windows and
the other was regarding backyard use and Buyers love of that space. My reason for bringing up both issues was due to
several remarks made by other parties stating that l) people want neighborhoods where they can see through the
windows and view their neighbors and 2) that neighborhoods with homes built with garages stickin9 out up front are not
neighborly. This may not have anything to do with why staff wants the building code changed but it was in response to
negative statements made by others about the way houses are currently designed. I felt that the past and current Buyers
of these types of designed homes needed to be stated. Thank you for your time and consideration in my response. Lou
Ann Lathrop
1/20/04
11 South Gilbert
P.O. Box 3396
Iowa City, Iowa 52244
HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333
Fax: (319) 358-2443
E-mail: hbaofic@cs.cem
HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION www. iowacityhomes.cem
by promoting standard~ for
January 18, 2004
Mayor Ernie Lehman
Iowa City City Council Members
410 E Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
RE: Editorial for Press Citizen
Dear Mayor Lehman and Council Members:
Attached is an editorial that is being sent to the Press Citizen. This piece is being sent to
you for your review and consideration. The editorial was written based on concerns
related to design standards for Sandhill Estates and proposed design standards for the
Iowa City Development Code.
We appreciate your consideration and support of this issue.
Sincerely,
2004 President
Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association
Attachment ~ ~--
4/,]Hiated with National Association of Home Builders & Home Builders A ssociatiott q]' Iowa
,4 ild '
Greater Iowa rea Home Bu ers ,4ssociation
Press-Release ..... Iowa City, Iowa
Guest Opinion
Contact: Rob Phipps - 2004 President
631-3950
The Press Citizen editorial of January 9th regarding the Sandhill Development project
highlighted the fundamental problem with the City Planning staff's efforts to impose
mandatory residential design standards on single family residential housing. The Greater
Iowa City Area Home Builders Association voiced its concern with this initiative in an
October letter to the City Council. We commend the Press Citizen for rightly criticizing
and heightening public awareness of this misguided proposal.
The proposed mandate on the Sandhill project requiting garages be placed in specific
locations in single-family homes is misguided and sends the wrong message to both
home buyers and businesses in our community. It is an unnecessary and arbitrary
regulation that will lead to market inflexibility and increased cost for prospective
homebuyers. There are those within City government who believe the cost will be
minimal. However, any time a regulation is passed limiting the options available to
builders and home buyers, it creates inherent and unavoidable inflexibility not only in the
individual home but throughout the entire development. What is worse is that this
unnecessary increase in cost is borne disproportionately by first time homebuyers.
The current Iowa City Zoning Ordinance contains absolutely no provision mandating
design standards on residential single family dwellings. This is not by accident. Single
family dwellings have a special significance in our community and Iowa City has a proud
tradition of respecting the rights of prospective homebuyers to choose the design of their
own homes. The City Planning staff's dictating where homeowners may place their
garages violates the traditional respect afforded to private homeowners as well as
builders' ability to meet customer demands.
Further, there is no economic risk for the Planning staff and our City government should
a proposed housing design fail to please customer demands and thereby fail to sell in the
marketplace. That risk is shouldered by our local builders, developers and realtors. They
have assumed the risk and the responsibility of meeting customer demands by investing
their own capital into each housing project. Our local building industry professionals are
the closest to the consumer and have the best idea of what home shoppers want - not the
City staff. It would be wrong for the City to now begin dictating how single family
homes must look.
Perhaps what is most objectionable about the proposal is that its justification is based
simply on the aesthetic judgment of the City Planning staff. Essentially, the City staff
has substituted their judgment for that of builders, architects, realtors and most
importantly prospective homeowners. Perhaps the staff of the City Planning department
feels current Iowa City homes and developments are repugnant and unattractive. They
have used vague phrases such as "livability" and "pedestrian friendly" to give this
proposal an air of legitimacy. However, as the Press Citizen and the HBA have
recognized, this new regulation is rooted in nothing more than aesthetics. Reasonable
people frequently disagree as to what they find attractive. However, a City that mandates
to citizens that their homes must appear a certain way because the City believes them to
be more attractive is a poor excuse for imposing a regulation. It best to entrust the
prospective homeowner, rather than the City, to determine what is pleasing to them when
they are looking to construct or purchase a new home.
If this design standard is approved by Council as part of the Sandhill development, it
would establish a dangerous precedent. It effectively confers upon the Planning staffthe
authority to determine ultimately how single family homes should aesthetically appear.
The issue is not one of the health and safety of the home, but rather how a home looks.
The City staff is presently undertaking a rewrite of the City's Development Code. The
same residential design standards being imposed upon Southgate are also being
incorporated into the rewrite of the Development Code. Such invasive and unnecessary
ordinances have no place in our local government.
As the Press Citizen noted, Southgate has already worked in good-faith to accommodate
both City planners as well as neighborhood concerns with the development. However,
the City staff has decided to place one more obstacle in the way of the project. At a time
when it is paramount that our elected officials look at ways to grow our local economy
and expand our tax base, they are considering passing an unnecessary regulation based on
mere aesthetics that will only add to the cost of doing business in Iowa City. There is no
compelling reason to impose this new mandate. The Home Builders Association strongly
encourages the Council to reject this new regulation and the dangerous precedent it
establishes.
~ Q.., Page I of 2
Marian Karr
From: Steven Nelson [steven-nelson@uiowa.edu]
Sent: Friday. January 16. 2004 '12:18 PM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: Sandhill Estates
An editorial ("Council faces its first test over Sandhill") in the Friday, January 9, 2004 edition of the Iowa City
Press Citizen is incomplete in describing the issues at hand ("The Sandhill Estates development is at a standstill
because city officials want architectural design changes.") The suggestion ("A minor question of aesthetic taste
only contributes to the perception that Iowa City is an anti-business town.") is completely off base and without
justification.
The issue before the city staff; Planning and Zoning commission, and city council is how to implement the
guidelines in the South District and the City Comprehensive Plan. The Plan states: "As housing density
increases and lot sizes are reduced, attention will need to be paid to design issues such as garage and driveway
locations, to assure that the new neighborhoods are attractive and livable." Addressing design issues is a
requirement of all the district plans and Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed Sandhill Estates development is probably the most pro-business move in Iowa City in a long
time. Southgate Development, city staff; and concerned neighbors have worked for months on compromises in
this development to promote the protection of the environment. This plan preserves a portion of the very rare
sand prairie, uses a conservation design plan that features the prairie, and restricts the urban sprawl that devours
agricultural land. A higher density housing allowance will be used that minimizes development costs by putting
most houses in a relatively small area. This is a bold new direction for housing development in Iowa City on a
scale that has not been attempted before. It IS a pro-business development that maximizes return on investment
and provides needed housing for future job growth in Johnson County.
Iowa City is not alone in considering increased housing density. Communities across the nation are adopting
this progressive concept. Planners are recognizing factors, such as "aesthetic taste" which affect property values
in such new designs. Although aesthetically pleasing design standards in neighborhoods do not have an intrinsic
monetary value, they are not minor values or valueless. Consider the builders cost of building a house as the
actual value. Then add in factors such as location near schools, shopping, bus routes etc. and derive the real
value of the house. The neighborhood design not only adds to the value, it is a quality factor which enhances the
real value to yield the true market value. The market value is the value which generates tax revenue for the city,
and return on investment for the developer.
As housing becomes more dense, housing types in clustered neighborhoods become a ever increasing quality
factor. Experience has shown that garage dominated streetscapes have a detrimental effect on housing values.
Why? Aesthetic appeal? The garage becomes the dominating structure in the lot. Concrete driveways become
the predominant landscaping on the lot, with the flowers and trees in the back of the house. Windows facing the
street are non-existent. The house becomes sterile, devoid of human activity. The perceived poor quality factor
reduces the market value. The market value of the house is less than its intrinsic real value. The tax revenues are
below expectations.
Although bold in concept as a housing development, there are no guarantees Sandhill Estates will succeed.
1/20/04
Page 2 of 2
Housing design standards in higher density areas that maintain the aesthetic appeal are known to improve the
quality and acceptability of the neighborhood. Design standards do not detract but only improve the
development. There is disagreement on design standards. City staff and P&Z have been working for months and
years to conceptualize standards. Citizens, staff; and council in 1997 agreed on the need to include design
standards when they collectively wrote and adopted the South District plan. Only 80 of the proposed lots meet
the RS-5 standard lot size, nearly 300 are below standard lot size On smaller, denser housing lots, house design
does impact a neighbor and the neighborhood. We can not dictate good choices, but we can restrict poor
choices. It is our responsibility to take steps now to maximize the potential value of the proposed development.
Housing design standards in dense, clustered neighborhoods is a win-win situation for both developers and
residents. This is sound business practice.
It is indeed ironic that a few months ago Southgate Development went to the city, asked for and received TIF
financing to revitalize its investment in the south district. Not financing to build new structures, but financing to
remodel and increase the AESTHETIC appeal of existing structues. It is ironic that City Council granted
Southgate money for aesthetics a short while ago but is now hesitating to consider
aesthetic factors which will improve the new development. It is ironic that Southgate Development is asking for
exemption from factors which improve return on its investment. It is ironic that the Press Citizen recommend a
course of action which is detrimental to business, the tax base of the city, and the welfare and future of the city
and its citizens.
The proper course of action is for the City Council to remain firm in its commitment to its staff; commissions,
and citizen's recommendations. It needs to uphold the planned development concept presented in the South
District Plan and the City Comprehensive Plan. The City Council needs to remain firm in its responsibility to
maximize the tax base of the city. It needs to remain committed to good business practice that helps insure the
success of businesses. In order for Iowa City to remain positive for both its businesses and residents, Southgate
Development needs to read and understand the city's district plans and Comprehensive Plan. The Press Citizen
needs to understand the real issues and recommend a proactive course of action that protects and maintains the
integrity of our community.
I am Steven Nelson. I wrote and approve this message because I believe in Iowa City and its residents and I
want to do my best in advocating real estate development that assures a prosperous future for Iowa City, its
businesses, and its residents.
Steven Nelson steven-nelson~uiowa.edu
1033 Sandusky Dr. stevennelson2~mchsi.com
Iowa City, IA 52240
Home: 319-354-1762 Work: 319-356-7202
1/20/04