HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-03-24 Public hearing NOTICE 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 24"~ day of March, 1998, in the Civic
Center Council Chambers, 410 E. Washington
Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at which hearing the
(uncil will consider the following items:
An ordinance conditionally changing the
zoning designation on a 4.46 acre tract
located at 500 Foster Road from Interim
Development Single-Family Residential
(IDRS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay-8 (OSA-8)
to permit 35 dwelling units and approving a
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development
Plan.
2. An ordinance conditionally changing the
zoning designation on approximately 41 acres
located between lower West Branch Road and
Court Street extended, approximately 4/5th
mile we~t of Taft Avenue from Low Density
Single-Family Residential (RS-5) to Medium
Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) for
29.1 acres and Low Density Multi-Family
Residential (RM-12) for 11.9 acres.
3. An ordinance changing the zoning designation
on approximately 24.12 acres from Interim
Development (IDRS) to Sensitive Areas
Overlay-5 (OSA-5) and approving a
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan
for property located at the east terminus of
Hickory Trail.
4. An ordinance approving the preliminary OPDH
pan for Walnut Ridge, Parts 6 and 7, a 66.68
acre, 20-lot residential subdivision located at
the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file
for public examination in the Office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN k. KARR, CITY CLERK
ppdadmin\3-24nph.doc
Prepared by: Melody Rockwell, Assoc. Planner, City of Iowa City, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5251
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY CHANGING THE
ZONING DESIGNATION ON A 4.46 ACRE TRACT
LOCATED AT 500 FOSTER ROAD FROM INTERIM
DEVELOPMENT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (IDRS)
TO SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY-8 (OSA-8) TO
PERMIT 35 DWELLING UNITS AND APPROVING A
PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT
PLAN.
WHEREAS, Norwood C. Louis II and Betty Louis,
as property owners, and H&O, LLC, as contract
purchasers, hereinafter collectively "Applicant", have
applied to rezone the 4.46 acre parcel to OSA-8 to
permit development of the tract for a planned
housing development of 35 dwelling units, including
a 24 unit multi-family residential building, five
duplexes and .an existing single-family residence; and
WHEREAS, the density of the proposed
development is consistent with the density of two to
eight dwelling units designated for this area in the
Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed design of the preliminary
Sensitive Areas Development Plan provides a wider
spectrum of housing types and more common open
space than would be achieved through a standard
subdivision; and
WHEREAS, the north portion of the property
contains a stream corridor and critical and protected
slopes, as defined by the City's Sensitive Areas
Ordinance, necessitating a Sensitive Areas Overlay
rezoning and submittal of a Sensitive Areas
Development Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning and preliminary
Sensitive Areas Development Plan design will allow
the development of up to 35 dwelling units on the
parcel, and except for the stormwater management
detention facility, development on the site will not
occur within the stream corridor or on the critical and
protected slopes on the property; and
WHEREAS, the preliminary Sensitive Areas
Development Plan filed by the Applicant in asso-
ciation with the rezoning request, and revised and
resubmitted to the City on February 26, 1998, is
Ordinance No.
Page 2
agreed to by the Applicant as being representative of
its intentions with respect to development of the
property, and shall serve as a basis upon which to
review final development plans, grading plans,
construction drawings, legal papers and any other
plans or legal documents required by the City
regarding the development of the property; and
WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414.5 (1997) provides
that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable
conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning
request, over and above existing regulations, to
satisfy public needs directly caused by the requested
change; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant acknowledges that
certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to
ensure appropriate planned residential development
that will not negatively impact the surrounding
residential neighborhood and to ensure a
development similar in appearance to that indicated
on the plans and elevations submitted by the
Applicant and date-stamped February 26, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has agreed to develop
this property in accordance with the terms and
conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement to
ensure appropriate planned residential development
similar in appearance to that indicated on the plans
and elevations submitted by the Applicant and date-
stamped February 26, 1998.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE
CITYI COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA:
SECTION I. APPROVAL. Subject to the terms and
conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein,
the property legally described below is hereby
reclassified from its present classification of IDRS to
OSA-8, and the preliminary Sensitive Areas
Development Plan submitted by Applicant for Louis
Condominiums is hereby approved:
A portion of Lot 1, Louis First Subdivision,
Iowa City, Iowa, as recorded in book 15, at
page 56 of the records of the Johnson
County, Iowa Recorders Office, more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast Corner of
Section 4, Township 79 North, Range 6 West
of the Fifth Principal Meridian; Thence
S01°25'00"W, 1305.00 feet on the east line
of said Section 4 to the North line of
Government Lot 7 in said Section 4; Thence
N90°00'00"W, 1464.00 feet on the North line
of Government Lots 6 and 7; Thence
S30°25'00"E, 144.68 feet to the North Corner
Ordinance No.
Page 3
of said Lot 1 and the Point of Beginning;
Thence S30°34'55"E, 442.97 feet along the
Northeasterly Line of said Lot 1; Thence
S01°13'47"W, 279.23 feet along the East line
of said Lot 1 to a point on the Northerly Right-
of-Way line of Foster Road; Thence
S65°09'32"W, 18.81 feet along said Right-of-
Way Line; Thence Southwesterly 218.98 feet
along said Right-of-Way line on a 342.00 foot
radius curve, concave Northwesterly, whose
215.26 foot chord bears S83°30'07"W;
Thence Northwesterly 49.68 feet along said
Right-of-Way line, on a 233.00 foot radius
curve, concave Southwesterly, whose 49.59
foot chord bears N84°15'49"W; Thence
S89°37'41 "W, 31.63 feet along said Right-of-
Way line to the Southeast Corner of Lot 2 of
said Subdivision; Thence N00°22'19"W,
330.53 feet along the East line of said Lot 2;
Thence continuing NO0°22'19"W, 268.49 feet
to a point on the Northwesterly line of said Lot
1; Thence N47°17'OO"E, 131.23 feet along
said Northwesterly line to the Point of
Beginning, and also:
Beginning at the Northeasterly corner of
said Lot !, Thence S47°17'00"W, along the
Northerly line of said Lot 1, 131.23 feet;
Thence N23°58'08"W, 233.73 feet, to a point
on the North Line of said Gov't Lot 7; Thence
N89°53'51"E, along said North Line 118.12
feet; Thence S30°34'54"E, 144.68 feet to the
Point of Beginning.
Said tracts of land contain 4.46 acres
more or. less and are subject to easements and
restrictions of record.
SECTION II. 7ONING MAP. Upon final passage,
approval and publication of this Ordinance as
provided by law, the Building Official is hereby
authorized and directed to change the zoning map of
the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this
conditional zoning change.
SECTION III. CONDITIONAL ?ONING AGREEMENT.
Following final passage and approval of this
Ordinance, the Mayor is hereby authorized and
directed to sign, and City Clerk to attest, the
Conditional Zoning Agreement between the Applicant
and the City.
SECTION IV VARIATIONS. The following variations
from the requirements of the underlying RS-8 zone
have been approved as part of the preliminary
Sensitive Areas Development Plan:
Ordinance No.
Page 4
A. A 24-unit building will be permitted at a height
that exceeds the 35-foot maximum building
height requirement.
B. Instead of only one principal structure being
permitted on the lot, seven residential structures
will be permitted on one lot; a 24-unit multi-
family residential structure, five duplex units and
one existing single-family residence.
C. The paving width of the private street within the
development will be reduced. The private street,
Louis Place, is intended for two-way traffic.
Instead of a twenty-eight foot wide paved
surface, back-of-curb to back-of-curb (BC-BC),
the street shall be a minimum of twenty feet
(20') in width, and will have a seven-inch deep
Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) surface. Three-
inch integral roll curbs will define the edges of the
paved surface of the street.
SECTION V. CERTIFICATION AND RECORDING.
Upon passage and approval of this Ordinance, and
after execution of the Conditional Zoning Agreement,
the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
certify a copy of this Ordinance and the Conditional
Zoning Agreement for recording in the Office of the
Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the expense of
H&O, LLC, all as provided by law.
SECTION VI. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of
ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION VII. SEVERABILITY. If any section,
provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged
to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjucication
shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a
whole or any section, provision, or part thereof not
adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION VIII. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance
shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and
publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this day of
MAYOR
ATTEST:
cFY CLE .K X? /
ppdadmin\ord\louisord.doc
Prepared by: Melody Rockwell, Assoc. Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5251
CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a Municipal
Corporation (hereinafter "City"), Norwood C. Louis II and Betty Louis, husband and wife, as
property owners and legal title holders, and H&O, LLC, as contract purchasers, (hereinafter
collectively "Applicant ").
WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested that the City rezone approximately 4.46 acres
from Interim Development Single-Family Residential (IDRS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay-8
(OSA-8) to permit.35 dwelling units on property located at 500 Foster Road; and
WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning will allow variations to the requirements of the
underlying (RS-8) zone, including allowing 1) a multi-family residential building, 2) a building
that exceeds the 3§-foot maximum height requirement, 3) seven dwelling units on one lot
instead of the maximum of one principal structure per lot, and 4) a private street with a
reduced pavement width and rolled curbs; and
WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning with the requested variations will allow a wider
spectrum of housing types and more common open space than would be achieved through
a standard subdivision, and except for the stormwater management facility, development
within the sensitive areas on the north portion of the site will be avoided; and
WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414.5 (1997) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose
reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above the
existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs directly caused by the requested
change; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant acknowledges that certain conditions and restrictions are
reasonable to ensure appropriate planned residential development that will not negatively
impact the surrounding residential neighborhood, and to ensure a development similar in
appearance to that indicated on plans and elevations submitted by the Applicant and date-
stamped February 26, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has agreed to use this property in accordance with the terms and
conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement to ensure that appropriate planned
development issues are addressed.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual promises contained herein, the Parties agree
as follows:
Norwood C. Louis II and Betty Louis, husband and wife, are the property owners and
legal title holders of property located at 500 Foster Road, and H&O, LLC is the contract
purchaser of the subject property, which property is more particularly described as
follows:
A portion of Lot 1, Louis First Subdivision, Iowa City, Iowa, as
recorded in book 15, at page 56 of the records of the Johnson County, Iowa
Recorders Office, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast Corner of Section 4, Township 79
North, Range 6 West of the Fifth Principal Meridan; Thence S01°25'00"W,
1305.00 feet on the east line of said Section 4 to the North line of
Government Lot 7 in said Section 4; Thence N90°00'O0"W, 1464.00 feet on
the North line of Government Lots 6 and 7; Thence S30°25'00"E, 144.68
feet to the North Corner of said Lot 1 and the Point of Beginning; Thence
S30°34'55"E, 442.97 feet along the Northeasterly Line of said Lot 1;
Thence S01°13'47"W, 279.23 feet along the East line of said Lot 1 to a
point on the Northerly Right-of-Way line of Foster Road; Thence
S65°O9'32"W, 18.81 feet along said Right-of-Way Line; Thence
Southwesterly 218.98 feet along said Right-of-Way line on a 342.00 foot
radius curve, concave Northwesterly, whose 215.26 foot chord bears
S83°30'07"W; Thence Northwesterly 49.68 feet along said Right-of-Way
line, on a 233.00 foot radius curve, concave Southwesterly, whose 49.59
foot chord bears N84°15'49"W; Thence S89°37'41"W, 31.63 feet along
said Right-of-Way line to the Southeast Corner of Lot 2 of said Subdivision;
Thence N00°22'19"W, 330.53 feet along the East line of said Lot 2; Thence
continuing NO0°22'19"W, 268.49 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line
of said Lot 1; Thence N47°17'OO"E, 131.23 feet along said Northwesterly
line to the Point of Beginning, and also:
Beginning at the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 1, Thence
S47°17'00"W, along the Northerly line of said Lot 1, 131.23 feet; Thence
N23°58'08"W, 233.73 feet, to a point on the North Line of said Gov't Lot 7;
Thence N89°53'51 "E, along said North Line 118.12 feet; Thence
S30°34'54"E, 144.68 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Said tracts of land contain 4.46 acres more or less and are subject to
easements and restrictions of record.
Applicant acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure appropriate planned
development that will not negatively impact the surrounding residential neighborhood,
and to ensure a development similar in appearance to that indicated on plans and
elevations submitted by the Applicant and date-stamped February 26, 1998. Further,
the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (1997) provides that the City of Iowa
City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request,
over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs directly caused
by the requested change. Therefore, Owner and Applicant agree to certain conditions
over and above City regulations as detailed below.
In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property with variations to the
requirements of the underlying zone, the Applicant agrees that development of the
subject property will conform to all other requirements of the underlying RS-8 zone, as
well as the following conditions:
o
o
The Applicant providing easements for water, sanitary sewer, stormwater
management, storm sewer and utilities, and the Applicant paying the applicable
water main extension fee, a fee in lieu of sidewalk construction (if the City
determines that a sidewalk along Foster Road is required), escrow for'right-of-way
trees, escrows for other required public improvements as appropriate, and the fee in
lieu of neighborhood open space land dedication prior to administrative approval of
the final Sensitive Areas Development Plan and the issuance of building permits for
the subject property.
The Applicant implementing the development plan such that the building footprints
and exterior building materials for the five duplexes and the 24-unit multi-family
residential building are constructed in substantial compliance with the site plan,
elevations and floor plans date-stamped February 2(~, 1998.
c. The Applicant providing a tree protection plan for City review and approval prior to
administrative approval of the final Sensitive Areas Development Plan.
The Applicant acknowledges that the conditions contained herein are reasonable
conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (1997), and that said
conditions satisfy public needs which are directly caused by the requested zoning
change.
The Applicant acknowledges that in the event the subject property is transferred, sold,
redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will conform with the terms of this
Conditional Zoning Agreement.
The Parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be
a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full force
and effect as a covenant running with the title to the land unless or until released of
record by the City. The Parties further acknowledge that this Agreement shall inure to
the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives and assigns of the Parties.
Applicant acknowledges that nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be
construed to relieve the Applicant from complying with all applicable local, state and
federal regulations.
The Parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by
reference into the Ordinance rezoning the subject property; and that upon adoption and
publication of the Ordinance, this Agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County
Recorder's Office at the expense of H&O, LLC.
Dated this day of , 1998.
By:
H&O, LLC, Contract Purchasers
Michael Hodge
By:
CITY OF IOWA CITY
Ernest W. Lehman, Mayor
By:
Dean Oakes
Attest:
Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
Property Owners,
Norwood. C. Louis II and Betty Louis, husband and wife
By:
Norwood C. Louis, II
By:
Betty Louis
STATE OF IOWA
JOHNSON COUNTY
)
) ss:
)
On this day of , 19 , before me,
, a Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, personally
appeared Ernest W. Lehman and Marian K. Karr, to me personally known, and, who, being by
me duly sworn, did say that they are the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of
Iowa City, Iowa; that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of the
corporation, and that the instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of the corporation, by
authority of its City Council, as contained in (Ordinance) (Resolution) No.
passed by the City Council, on the day of , 19 , and
that Ernest W. Lehman and Marian K. Karr acknowledged the execution of the instrument to
be their voluntary act and deed and the voluntary act and deed of the corporation, by it
voluntarily executed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
My commission expires:
STATE OF IOWA )
) SS:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On 'this day of , 19 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for said County, in said State, personally appeared Michael E. Hodge and
Dean Oakes, to me known to be the identical persons named in and who executed the within
and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same as {his/her/their)
voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
My commission expires:
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this day of , 19 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for said County, in said State, personally appeared Norwood C. Louis II
and Betty Louis, husband and wife, to me known to be the identical persons named in and
who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed
the same as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
My commission expires:
ppdadmin\agt\louiscza.doc
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Item: REZ97-0011. Louis Condominiums
Prepared by: Melody Rockwell
Date: October 16, 1997
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Property owner:
Contact persons:
Requested action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
H & O, LLC
711 S. Gilbert
Iowa City, IA 52240
319/354-3355
Norwood C. Louis
500 Foster Road
Iowa City, IA 52245
319/338-3438
Mike Hodge
Hodge Construction
711 S. Gilbert
Iowa City, IA 52240
319/354-3355
John Cruise, Attorney
920 S. Dubuque Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
319/351-8181
MMS Consultants, Inc.
1917 S. Gilbert Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
319/351-8282
Rezoning from ID-RS to OPDH-12;
revised to OSA- 12
To allow 40 dwelling units of mixed
residential types, including a single-
family residence, flats, townhouses and
a 24-unit multi-family residence
500 Foster Road
4.46 acres
Existing land use and zoning:
Surrounding land use and zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
Applicable Code requirements:
File date:
45-day limitation period:
SPECIAL INFORMATION:
Public utilities:
Public services:
Transportation:
Physical characteristics:
Residential/vacant; ID-RS/RM-12
North - Residential, vacant; ID-RS, RFBH
East - Residential, vacant; ID-RS
South- Residential, vacant, golf
course; ID-RS, RS-5, RM-20
West - Residential, vacant; RM-20, ID-
RS
Low Density Single-Family Residential;
2°8 dwelling units per acre
Stormwater Management, Zoning Chap-
ter, Sensitive Areas Ordinance, Grading
Chapter
June 26, 1997; complete application
submitted September 26, 199 7
November 10, 1997
With public improvements projected to
occur over the next two years, city
water and sewer will be available to the
site.
Police and fire protection will be provid-
ed by the city. Refuse collection for
the development will be provided by a
private hauler.
Access for this site is on Foster Road,
which connects to Dubuque Street, an
arterial street. Foster Road and the
Foster Road/Dubuque Street intersec-
tion will require improvements as devel-
opment occurs in the Peninsula Area.
A high, grassy knoll, the majority of
which is relatively flat, but has steep
wooded slopes along the east and north
boundaries of the property. A grove of
mature Kentucky Coffee trees are locat-
ed in the north part of the grassy knoll,
and mature trees are clustered near the
existing, possibly historic residence on
the site. The area designated for storm
water management is located on steep
wooded slopes within a stream corri-
dor.
Sensitive Areas Ordinance:
The Sensitive Areas Inventory Map -
Phase I indicates that the north portion
of the property contains slopes greater
than 25% and a stream corridor within
the designated stormwater manage-
ment area on the northwest portion of
the site. The wooded area on the prop-
erty is not two acres or greater in size.
A grove of trees exists in the north part
the site. A Sensitive Areas Develop-
ment Plan and Sensitive Areas Overlay
rezoning is required for this site.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant H & O, LLC, on behalf of property owner Norwood C. Louis, is requesting a
rezoning from Interim Development - Single-Family Residential Zone (ID-RS) to Sensitive Areas
Overlay (OSA-12) to allow a 4.46 acre residential development of 40 dwelling units, including
1 existing single-family residence, 15 flats/townhouses and a 24 unit apartment house.
Access to the proposed development, Louis Condominiums, would come from Foster Road.
Since the submission of the rezoning request in July 1997, an off-site area immediately north
of the subject property that contains critical slopes and a stream corridor has been
incorporated into the proposed planned development area to provide stormwater management
for the property. Due to the sensitive features in that area, the applicant has revised the
original rezoning request from OPDH-12 to SAO-12. In accordance with the Sensitive Areas
Ordinance, both the Planned Housing Development Overlay (OPDH) requirements and the
Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) regulations apply to the application.
ANALYSIS:
Zoning Chapter. The applicant has submitted a rezoning request for a planned residential
development with a mix of housing types at a density of slightly less than 10 dwelling units
per acre. The purpose of planned development overlay rezoning is "to permit flexibility in the
use and design of structures and land in situations where conventional development may be
inappropriate and where modifications of the underlying zone will not be contrary to the intent
and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended,
or harmful to the surrounding neighborhood." The design of the Louis Condominiums
development locates the townhouse and apartment structures on the relatively flat portion of
the 500 Foster Road property, away from the wooded steep slopes along the north and east
boundaries of the property. The parking area shown to the north of the proposed 24-unit
apartment building would displace mature trees as would the proposed entry drive at the east
edge of the property. The private street is shown on the plan as 22-feet wide, and one east-
west access lane is 18 feet wide. The site plan has been redesigned since it was first
submitted so that not all the Kentucky Coffee trees on the north portion of the site will be
displaced. (Most of the area to be paved to the rear of the apartment building is also an area
that the City has designated for construction of a sanitary sewer line.) The site plan has also
been revised to provide for approximately a half acre of private open space in the interior of
the development.
The applicant recently submitted the required list of the "requested variations from the
particular zone in which the tract of land is located," and a narrative statement indicating why
the zone should be changed from ID-RS to OPDH-12. One variation includes allowing a four-
story condominium structure that would exceed the maximum building height of 35 feet; the
building is proposed to be 48 feet high in the front and 58 feet high in the rear to accommo-
date a lower level parking garage. The other variation has to do with the width of the streets,
which are proposed to be private streets that are narrower than standard, local streets; 22
feet and 18 feet wide instead of 28 feet wide. The site design reduces the amount of
impervious surface on the site by reducing the amount of building coverage, narrowing the
width of the street pavement, and providing underground parking within the footprint of the
proposed apartment building.
In evaluating the zoning change request, staff has examined the compatibility of the use with
existing land uses and zoning in the area, and has attempted to gauge the appropriateness of
changing the zoning designation from an "interim development" [holding zone] status, and
from single-family residential to a mix of one single-family residence, 15 flats/townhouses and
a 24-unit residential building. Allowing a higher density zoning than five to eight units per
acre may be suitable in that the proposed townhouses within the planned development would
be consistent with the existing townhouse and multi-family residential development to the
west, would be set back from Foster Road a minimum of 35 feet or buffered from Foster Road
by the landscaped acreage and outbuildings associated with the existing single-family
residence and have steep, wooded ravines as a natural buffer on the east and north.
The 24-unit apartment building contrasts from the surrounding and proposed development
primarily in terms of building style, mass and intensity of use. Locating the apartment house
at the opposite end of the development from access to a public street is not ideal for
minimizing through traffic within a residential development. These concerns are offset in part,
because the multi-family residential building is proposed to be set at an elevation that is eight
feet lower than the nearest townhouse building on the adjoining property to the west, the
pitch of the roof and the exterior facade of the building have been designed to reduce the
appearance of the building's bulk and height, the building would be set at some distance from
Foster Road and buffered on the north and east by steep wooded slopes, and the clustering
of density allows for the provision of common green space within the development.
Comprehensive Plan. This property is right on the edge of an area designated by the
Comprehensive Plan for medium density development; 8-16 dwelling units per acre. The
proposed development with slightly less than ten dwelling units per acre is consistent with
the current Comprehensive Plan designation for this area, and with the guideline in the
proposed Comprehensive Plan that encourages residential development with a mix of housing
types at a slightly higher density than five dwelling units per acre. The higher than minimum
density may be considered acceptable in that this area is close to the central core of the city,
and has been designed to provide compact, residential development that minimizes
displacement of sensitive features on the property. Another consideration is the residence,
which the property owner states was built around the time of the Civil War, will be preserved
as will the low density appearance of that portion of the property. However, as discussed
below, more details regarding the design of this development are needed to determine its
appropriateness in this location.
5
Stormwater Management. Preliminary stormwater management calculations have been
submitted and are being reviewed by the Public Works Department. The applicant is
proposing to reconstruct an earthen dam on the property to the north to provide stormwater
detention. Approximately one-half acre of the stormwater detention facility area is proposed
to be acquired by the applicant, and is part of the property requested for rezoning. The
remainder of the stormwater management facility area will be incorporated into an off-site
easement. An agreement approved by the City Attorney's office will need to be entered into
by the property owners to the north, the applicant and the City concerning the construction
and maintenance of the stormwater management detention facility.
A major issue concerning the stormwater management area is how construction of the
detention basin will impact the wooded slopes and stream corridor. The applicant should
adhere to the requirements of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance in demonstrating the impact of
the proposed facility on the sensitive features on the site, and what means will be taken to
minimize the impact, to provide buffers and to restore natural areas through a replanting plan.
The applicant's engineer has been requested by staff to detail or describe the extent of
construction of the stormwater pipe and the dam restoration in terms of minimizing impacts
on the critical slopes, woodlands and stream corridor. The applicant should also indicate on
the site plan where the stormwater management easement area is in relation to the gas
pipeline easement to the north.
Public Utilities. Water and sanitary sewer lines will become available as the water plant is
developed to the north. The extension of these utilities to the site provides some justification
to change the zoning on this property from its current interim development status.
Streets. According to the city traffic engineer, the access point to Foster Road, a public
street, meets sight distance requirements. This development will impact Foster Road, but
Foster Road is scheduled to be reconstructed/widened in relation to possible development of
city-owned property in the peninsula area. The additional right-of-way and construction
easement needed by the City for the Foster Road widening project are shown on the site plan.
With a projected vehicle trip generation of 240 per day, this development will also contribute
to the need for the Dubuque Street/Foster Road intersection reconstruction and signalization
project.
Staff considers the 22-foot wide pavement width for the private street and the 18-foot wide
access lane as sufficient for the size of development that is proposed, and given that through
traffic is not proposed or desired. The wooded ravines and stream corridor along the north
and east edges of the subject property would make street connections to the north and east
prohibitively expensive and environmentally unsound. Due to the Fire Department's concern
about the lack of apparatus turnaround provisions to serve the proposed multi-family
residential building on the north part of the property, a plaza has been incorporated into the
site design south of the multi-family residence to allow for an emergency access turnaround.
Sidewalks. Sidewalks are shown on the plan along the private street, but not along Foster
Road. Staff recommends that a sidewalk along Foster Road be shown on the site plan, and
that monies be paid for the sidewalk to be constructed with the Foster Road reconstruction.
Open Space. About one-half acre of private open space is shown on the plan, which is
consistent with the overlay rezoning requirement that the "location and area of proposed open
space areas either to be dedicated for neighborhood open space, or to be held in common
should be designated on the plan." The amount of neighborhood open space required to be
dedicated for this 4.46 acre property at a SAO-12 level of density would be .29 acres or
approximately 12,632 square feet. The Parks and Recreation Commission will review this
case. Given the small amount of land involved, it is likely to recommend that fees be paid in
lieu of land dedication.
SAO Des~qn. The applicant submitted a concept plan for informal review by staff prior to
submitting this rezoning request (see attached concept plan). Staff indicated that the
increased density and general layout of the project might be appropriate if the dwelling units
were designed to minimize the dominance of the garages and the amount of paving associated
with the townhouse units. Staff also indicated that the proposed multi-family building should
be designed to fit into the scale of existing development in the area.
The applicant revised the original plan by removing six townhouse units and replacing them
in the proposed 24-unit, four-story building, which was previously proposed to contain 18
units in a three-story building. This revision helped to create private open space in the center
of the site and removed some of the paving and garage doors associated with the townhouse
units. Staff has asked the applicant to improve the appearance of the proposed streetscape
further by using design techniques to minimize the dominance of the garages in the
streetscape.
Some of the ways in which the appearance of the streetscape can be improved include placing
second floor living space above the garage so that more of the housing unit is visible from the
street, placing the front pedestrian entry flush with or in front of the garage so the garage
does not protrude in front of the dwelling, and dividing the one large garage door into two
smaller doors. The four units proposed north of the existing house might be improved by
designing them so that their fronts face the open space and the garages are designed as if
they were alley entries from the proposed 18-foot wide lane.
Staff has asked the applicant to submit complete set of elevation drawings and a \
comparative elevation of the height of the proposed four-story building and the nearest
existing townhouses on the neighboring property. These are needed so that staff and the
Commission can assess the compatibility of the proposed development with the existing
neighborhood. If the proposed four story building is determined to be out-of-scale when
compared to the existing townhouses, and the appearance the streetscape is not improved
through redesign of the garages, then the proposed density of development may prove to be
incompatible or unsuitable for this site.
Although staff believes that an increased density with a mix of housing types may be
appropriate in this area, we feel that design improvements are needed if this proposed
development is to be compatible with the surrounding area. The applicant needs to provide
further information about the design of the buildings and adherence to the Sensitive Areas
Ordinance design guidelines.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the requested rezoning of 4.46 acres located at 500 Foster Road from
ID-RS to SAO-12 be deferred pending resolution of the deficiencies listed below, and
resolution of compatibility and sensitive areas issues.
DEFICIENCIES:
1. All required street trees should be shown on the plan.
2. A complete set of building elevations needs to be submitted.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
Current Site Plan
Preliminary OPDH-1 2 Plan/Letter Listing Variations from Underlying Zone and Reasons
for Zoning Change
Original Site Plan for Louis Condominium
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
ppdadmin\stfrep\970011 MR.wp5
LOCATION MAP
REZQ7-0011
500 FOSTER ROAD
p ~
RFBH
ID RS
ISITE
LOCATION
ID RS
RM
RS 5
RM 20 -~
C)TY
PARK
P
RS 12
MILL
RS 5
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 30, 1998 (for February 5, 1998 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting)
To: Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Melody Rockwell, Associate Planner
Re: REZ97-0011. Louis Condominiums Rezoning
On October 16, 1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission was asked to consider an
application for a rezoning to allow 40 dwelling units of mixed residential types, including a
single-family residence, flats, townhouses and a 24-unit multi-family residential building on
a 4.46 acre property located at 500 Foster Road. At that meeting, the applicant, H & O,
LLC, requested a deferral to allow time for the site plan and elevations for the Louis
Condominiums project to be revised. Recently, staff has received two amended versions
of the site plan (Attachments 4 and 5) and a set of elevations for the multi-family building
as well as the front elevations for the proposed duplexes (Attachments 6 and 7). There
has not been sufficient time for a complete staff evaluation of the revised plan and
elevations, but staff felt it would be helpful to outline the major changes the applicant has
made to the project design.
Density. First, the overall density of the project has been lowered from 40 to 35 dwelling
units. In the revised proposal, two apartment units have been dropped from the multi-
family residential building, and the 15 townhouse/flats have been changed to 6 duplexes
(12 dwelling units). Thus, the rezoning request has been changed from OSA-12 to OSA-
8. This density level is consistent with both the former Comprehensive Plan and the
newly-approved Comprehensive Plan designation for this area for 2-8 dwelling units per
acre.
Multi-Family Building Design. The proposed height of the multi-family building has been
reduced by 3.5 feet on the west and 4 feet on the east side of the building. This has
been accomplished by designing a dormer level on the fourth floor and reducing the
number of dwelling units from 6 to 4 at that level. In effect, the building will have more
of an appearance of a three and a half story building, instead of full four floors as
originally designed. The orientation of the building has been changed to place the parking
level on the east side of the building and to have the entrance to the south. Elevations of
the west and south sides of the building have been submitted for the Commission's
review. An elevation of the east side of the building where the parking entrance is located
should also be submitted by the applicant. The multi-family building design and the
proposed exterior building materials have been changed to have a more urban appearance
2
that is similar to the Cornerstone Apartments building that is located on South Capitol
Street in the relatively high density PRM zone. The originally-proposed
redwood/limestone/stucco building materials may be more appropriate and less imposing
for this wooded, lower density setting (Attachment 3).
Duplex Design.
The change from 15 townhouses/flats to six one-story duplexes (12 units) has resulted
in a larger footprint per unit. This combined with the way in which the duplexes are
located on the property along a street ending in a hammerhead turnaround have
diminished the amount of common open space as well as the perception of its
availability for use by all the residents within the development. As presently designed,
it appears the proposed open space will function primarily as the back yards for the
two duplexes that face east. The original design allowed for a more centrally located,
interior courtyard of open space within the development.
The concern about the garages of the duplexes dominating the streetscape has been
minimally addressed in that the revised elevations for the duplexes have porches added
to bring the entrances closer to the street instead of being inset away from the street
as is shown on the site plan. Staff would encourage the applicant to bring the front of
the house even with or projecting slightly in front of the garages to diminish the
imposing aspect of the garage doors on the streetscape. This could be accomplished
by lengthening the dining room, or by shifting the outside half of the floor plan forward
so that the rear decks are inset into instead of extending from the rear of the duplex.
Finally, the orientation of the most southeasterly duplex with the rear elevation of the
house facing Foster Road should not be encouraged along this gateway to the
peninsula area that is intended to be developed as a model neighborhood. This
situation could be addressed by shifting the west-facing duplexes to the north so that
the side elevation of the most southeasterly duplex faces Foster Road, or by orienting
the duplex so that it is parallel to Foster Road and the rear elevation is redesigned to
appear to be the front of the residence, similar to the existing, historic house located
on the property.
Street Design.
The other major change made to the site design is the location of the access road
along the west lot line instead of having the road to the east as originally proposed.
(Attachment 4) Placing the private drive along the west lot line raises concerns about
the lack of space on the Louis property to provide an adequate buffer between the
traffic on the street and the rear of the townhouses on the Fomon property
immediately to the west. The new design essentially creates a double-frontage lot
effect for those townhouses, while adding extraneous paving and diminishing the
common open space available on the site. The westerly alignment places the drive
only 120 feet (centerline to centerline) from the drive on the Fomon property. Because
it is anticipated that Foster Road will be a major collector street in the future, the
amount of spacing between drives intersecting with Foster Road should be maximized.
3
Given the traffic that is expected will be generated on these properties and the
potential for turning conflicts and confusion when drives are placed too close together,
staff would advocate that the drive be placed further to the east.
Another, perhaps preferred alignment for the drive is the more easterly alignment
shown on the site plan submitted last October (Attachment 2), because it has
adequate sight distance, would reduce the amount of paving required for development
of the site, allow for more common open space, would maximize the distance between
the driveways intersecting with Foster Road, and would provide more direct access for
fire and emergency vehicles.
Another possibility was shown on an interim revision of the site plan (Attachment 5)
where Louis Place was located further to the west, but not adjacent to the west lot
line. This alignment would allow for improved sight distance, adequate distance
between the private access drives and room to provide a screening buffer and fencing
between the private drive and the residential property to the west. As shown on the
site plan, it would still bring the private street close to the townhouse units to the
north, and would add extraneous paving to the property that reduces the amount of
common open space for the development. If this alternative were selected, staff
would suggest realigning the north portion of the private drive along the west lot line
so there is enough space for effective screening, and requiring vegetative screening
and fencing along the length of the west boundary that parallels Louis Place. Staff
would also suggest that the open space that remains should be set apart from the
east-facing duplexes through walkways and landscaping and by designing the rear
elevations of the east-facing duplexes to appear as the front of the residences facing
onto the open space. This will increase the perception that the open space is not an
extension of the back yards of the east-facing duplexes, but is available for use by all
of the residents of the Louis Condominiums development.
Mature Tree Protection. There are a number of mature trees on the site near Foster Road
and a grove of mature Kentucky Coffee trees located north of the proposed multi-family
building. The plan does not indicate any protection measures for these trees. Any
advantage in having the more westerly alignment of the access drive to avoid construction
of a street through the mature frontage trees, appears to be offset by the proposed
location of the most southeasterly duplex and the routing of water and sewer lines where
those trees are located.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The revisions to the Louis Condominiums development plan have improved the proposal in
that the density has been lowered to an RS-8 level. However, as stated above, staff has
concerns about the building designs and the access drive alignment that are now being
proposed by the applicant. Certain deficiencies (listed below) still remain to be addressed.
To allow for a more complete staff review of the planned development and to address the
concerns and deficiencies outlined in this memorandum, staff recommends that
consideration of the requested rezoning and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for the 500
Foster Road property be deferred.
4
DEFICIENCIES:
The applicant should submit east elevation (parking entrance side) for the multi-family
residential building, and the side and rear elevations for the duplexes.
The applicant should submit the draft agreement with Mr. and Mrs. Collins concerning
the storm water management area, and with the City a party to the agreement, to the
City Attorney's office for review and approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. October 1997 Site Plan
3. October 1997 Multi-Family Building Elevations
4. January 1998 Revised Site Plan
5. January 1998 Interim Revised Site Plan
6. January 1998 Multi-Family Building Elevations
7. January 1998 Duplex Front Elevation and Floor Plan
8. January 10, 1998 Letter/Petition from Neighboring Property Owners and Tenants
9. January 30, 1998 Letter from Neighboring Property Owner David B. Fomon
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Planning & Community
Development Department
ppdadmin\memos\louis.doc
PROPOSED 1
BASIN CONTROL
685.~
posa~:r
OTHERS
ACRE ACQUISITION FOR STORM
AND PIPING
/
/
-711 --
/
AC11'VITY I$ PROPOSED TO BE
~ ~T UNE N'~D M1HIN 1HE UMIl~ 0F ~ 1/2 A~
A ~E~PA~A'~ DOCUMENT ~U~OUENT TO
I~ ~0/~1 BY STA.IC'F I:)ltlO~ TO 114[ PtJBUC h~A.I~NO ON THiS PI.A.N.
BA~N CONTROL ~CTUR[ ANO PIPING
Unit BLDG
WESTERLY 1.~77 ACR~ (
ORIGINA~ LOT 1. NOT I)~ ~ · .
DEVEL~PMEI,~T ~
LOT '
H~JS~
Preliminary
'
LOUIS
MM$ CON~ULTAFrI~ INC.
1917SouLh Gllber~ St
lo~a' CRy. IA~ 52240
Ion City,
n r~r~,,-
LOCATION MAP NOT
LEOE~
:RLY 1~"77 ACR
lag LOT 1, NOT tN
OPMENT ·
Unit
ent
high
high
EXIST
SHED
---r-
I
''
I
I
'JAN 20
P.C ~ DEPARTMENT
I
t'=NOHT t[I.EV'ATION
JAN ~0
l
wood d~ck
living bedroom master master i bedroom living
room 2 bedroom bedroom i :~ room
.e front elevation ·
BR~UGGEMAN
wOOd deck
wood deck
dining ~ moster - bedroom living
room room C; "~-~- I bedroom '. 2 room
~_J garage , garage. lb J
--open to
below
loft
down
-I open to
' -~-- ' below
..... ~i :i'- ~1-'
moste. O~
bedroom
bedroom
~T
860 s.t.
second floor plan ~2-~:o'
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
February 11, 1998
To:
Planning and Zoning Commission
From:
Melody Rockwell, Associate Planner
Re:
REZ97-0011. Louis Condominiums
In a letter dated February 10, 1998, Mike Hodge, representing the applicant H&O, LLC,
requests that the Planning and Zoning Commission defer its consideration of the requested
rezoning to its meeting of March 5, 1998. The attached February 6 letter to Mr. Hodge
outlines the guidance the Commission offered at its February 5 meeting on the issues of
density, the multi-family building, the duplexes, the drive alignment, common open space
and trees. The site plan and building elevations are being revised in response to the
Commission's comments, but have not been completed at this time, so cannot be reviewed
at the Commission's February 19 meeting. Staff concurs with the applicant's request for a
deferral, and notes that the letter from Mr. Hodge constitutes a waiver of the 45-day
/imitation period to March 5, 1998.
Attachments:
1. February 10 Letter of Waiver
2. February 6 Letter Summarizing February 5 Commission Comments
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
February 6, 1998
Mike Hodge
H & O, LLC
711 S. Gilbert Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
Dear Mr. Hodge:
Last night, the Planning and Zoning Commission heard comments from the public
concerning the Louis Condominiums project, and then offered the following guidance:
Density. Although two Commission members felt the density should be reduced to an
RS-5 level, most of the Commissioners appeared comfortable with the current proposed
density level of 8 dwelling units per acre.
Multi-family Building. Most of the Commission felt the height of the multi-family building
should be reduced. One member suggested that the height be reduced by at least one
full floor, and there appeared to be general concurrence with that suggestion.
However, one member thought the multi-family building should be eliminated in favor of
townhouse and/or duplex development that is similar in density and building size to the
residential development on the property west of the Louis property.
Duplexes. The Commission expressed a preference for the elevations of the two-story
duplex or having a mix of two-story/one-story duplexes, because that design diminishes
the dominance of the garages along the streetscape. The Commission agreed that the
most southeasterly duplex shown on the site plan should be relocated so that the rear
of the building does not face Foster Road.
Drive Alignment. The Commission indicated a definite preference for the more easterly
alignment for the access drive. One member recommended only one access point from
the Louis Condominium development to Foster Road - using the east alignment only;
eliminating the Louis driveway and tying access from the Louis residence into the east
access drive.
Open Space. Several Commission members felt the site plan should be designed to
enhance the common open space available for use by the residents of the Louis
Condominium development.
Trees. The Commission asked that a tree protection plan be provided for the remaining
Kentucky coffee trees to the rear of the property, and for any mature frontage trees
that can be preserved.
The main concerns seemed to center on the size of the multi-family building and the
alignment of the access road. Secondarily, the Commission was concerned about the
410 KAST WASIIIN(;'I ON .g'l RFET · I()~,~A ~'l~l''1, IOg¥'A 52240-1826 · (319) 356-5000 ~ FAX 1319) 356-5009
orientation of the most southeasterly duplex, the streetscape, common open space and
tree preservation. In addition to the concerns identified by the Commission, staff continues
to recommend that the dining room of the one-story units be extended so that the
residential portion of the structure is even with the front of the garages.
Please call me at 356-5251 as soon as possible to discuss whether you will be able to get
a revised site plan and elevations submitted by Tuesday, February 10. This will allow time
for staff review before sending the packet to the Commission next Friday, February 13, for
the February 19 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. It is important that the notes
on the site plan are updated and accurate so that the project is not held up due to technical
deficiencies, and that a complete set of elevations is submitted for the Commission's
consideration. If you need to take more time to respond to the Commission's concerns,
just let me know, and forward a letter waiving the 45-day limitation period at least to
March 5. Also, please let me know if you would like to meet to go over the Commission's
concerns, or discuss alternative proposals for the Louis Condominium project.
Sincerely,
Associate Planner
Dean Oakes
Larry Schnittjer
John Cruise
Bud Louis
Robert Miklo
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
February 26, 1998 [for March 5, 1998, Commission meeting]
Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission
Melody Rockwell, Associate Planner
REZ97-0011. Louis Condominiums Rezoning
On February 5, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Commission heard comments from the
public concerning the Louis Condominiums project, and offered guidance to the applicant,
H & O, LLC concerning the proposed density, building height and designs, site design, drive
alignment, open space and tree preservation for the project. The main concerns centered
on the size of the multi-family building and the alignment of the access road. In response,
the applicant has made revisions to the site plan and building designs as follows:
Density. The density is still proposed to be 35 dwelling units per acre, which is an RS-
8 density for the 4.96 acre site. Two dwelling units have been added to the multi-
family building; it is now proposed to be a 24-unit building instead of a 22-unit building.
One duplex (two units) has been removed from the site plan. This allows for more
green space between the new housing units and Foster Road, and eliminates the
problem associated with the previous site plan of having the rear of a duplex facing
Foster Road.
Multi-Family Building. The multi-family building has been reduced to three stories,
which is one story less than the original proposal for a four-story building, and one-half
story less than the last proposal presented to the Commission. The building height on
the west side is now 36 feet high for the south, west and north sides of the building,
and 45 feet high on the east ( parking garage entry) side; respectively, one-half foot
higher than the 34.5-foot height and one foot higher than the 44-foot height of the
three and a half story multi-family building that was proposed to the Commission on
February 5. In addition, the building has been lengthened by 22 feet from 110 feet to
132 feet in length and widened by four feet from 84 feet to 88 feet in width to
accommodate four three-bedroom units and four two-bedroom units on each of the
three floors (24 units/60 bedrooms). This compares to the previous proposal with the
three and a half story building, which had six three-bedroom units on each of the first
three floors and four two-bedroom units in the dormer half-story above (22 units/62
bedrooms).
While the number of stories has been reduced by one-half story and the number of
bedrooms has been decreased by two with the revised building design, the mass of the
multi-family building has been increased, the height has been increased slightly, and the
number of dwelling units within the building has been increased by two. The revisions
do not address the concerns about the size of the multi-family building that were
expressed at previous Commission meetings. Staff notes that the exterior design and
proposed building materials have been changed to create a more interesting, less urban
appearance than the previous designs for the multi-family building. Staff recommends
REZ97-0011. Louis Condominiums Rezoning
February 27, 1998
Page 2
that the building materials be labeled on the elevations of the multi-family building, and
if approval is granted for this project, that it be conditioned to require that the
construction of the multi-family building will be consistent with the design and
materials shown on the elevations date-stamped February 26, 1998. While the
combined use of stone, stucco, brick and wood and the increased use of windows and
screened-porches on the exterior walls may be more compatible and attractive for the
proposed setting and neighborhood, it should be noted that these exterior design
changes may not override the concerns about building size.
Duplexes. The applicant proposes to have the two duplexes nearest the multi-family
building be a two-story/one-story mix, a design that adds more interest to the
streetscape, brings the residential portion of the structure closer to the street, provides
an intermediate building height between the one-story flats and the three-story multi-
family building, and is more compatible with the townhouse buildings on the adjacent
property to the west. The applicant has also indicated the possibility of having a one-
story/two-story duplex near Foster Road. The two-story design also creates a slightly
smaller footprint and allows for more flexibility in site design, including orienting the
buildings so that none of them are rear-facing onto Foster Road. Additionally, the
applicant has redesigned the floor plan of the one-story duplex to lengthen the dining
room and porch roof. This brings the residential portion of the structure closer to the
street which somewhat reduces the dominance of the garages along the street.
Access Street Alignment. The private street has been relocated on the site plan to its
original, more easterly alignment. As previously acknowledged, this alignment has
adequate sight distance, would reduce the amount of paving required for development
of the site, would allow for more common open space, would maximize the distance
between high use access drives intersecting with Foster Road, and would provide more
direct access for fire and emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has requested that
an adequate turnaround for a 40-foot long fire truck be incorporated into the north part
of private drive, Louis Place.
At the property owner's request, the applicant has not closed the driveway access
onto Foster Road for the Louis residence, but has indicated that the portion of the Louis
driveway that has direct access to the property to the west will be removed. There
should be a note on the site plan to that effect. This will limit the use of the Louis
driveway essentially to one household.
Open Space. With the realignment of the private street to the more easterly location,
additional private open space has been provided in the west part of the site. It has
been demarcated from the rear yards of the duplexes facing the private street and
connected to the multi-family building and other residences on the site by pedestrian
pathways that intersect in a garden focal point within the open space. The size of this
area is shown on the site plan to be slightly more than one-half (.6) acre. Another
common open space indicated on the site is north of the multi-family building; a .3 acre
area overlooking the ravine. Although it's not labeled as such on the site plan, the
southeast corner of the site near Foster Road could also serve as a common open
space for the development. It will provide a wide, green setback of more than 80 feet
between the new residences and the Foster Road paving. Overall, the revised site plan
REZ97-0011. Louis Condominiums Rezoning
February 27, 1998
Page 3
provides a comparable amount of common open space to the one acre on the original
site plan, especially if the ample setback area along Foster Road is considered.
On the revised site plan, the applicant has shown a golf cart storage shed northeast of
the multi-family building. Because it is at a lower elevation, it will not be readily visible
from Foster Road or the property to the west, but with the removal of the trees for the
interceptor sewer construction, it is likely to be visible from the east. It would be
advisable for the applicant to submit elevations of the golf cart structure for the
Commission to review.
The original neighborhood open space calculation for the Louis Condominiums was
based on an RM-12 density level. Because the density level has been reduced, the
neighborhood open space required for this development is also reduced from .29 acre
(12,632 square feet) to .16 acre (6,969.6 square feet). Given the small amount of
land required for public open space for this development, the Parks and Recreation
Commission has recommended that a fee be paid in lieu of land dedication in this case.
Tree Protection. Existing trees on the site that will be during the development process
have been marked on the site plan with an X, and a note has been added to the plan
stating that "construction fencing shall be installed in accordance with requirements of
the tree protection section of 'SAO' around all trees not marked on this plan for
removal..." There was inexpert staff identification of black locust trees at the north
end of the site as Kentucky coffee trees. It has been noted on the site plan that "it
may be necessary to remove the three southerly small locust trees in the vicinity of the
north end of the 24 unit building. The four large locust trees shall be preserved." Staff
would prefer to have a tree protection plan that designates the trees to be preserved,
and shows where the protective fencing will be placed in relation to those trees. This
would make it more clear for the contractors in the field and the city inspector to
implement the protection of the trees to be preserved.
The preliminary stormwater calculations for the revised site plan have been approved by
the Public Works Department. Construction plans and a grading plan will need to be
submitted by the applicant and approved prior to Council consideration of the preliminary
Sensitive Areas Development Plan. Prior to approval of the final Sensitive Areas
Development Plan, all utility easements will need to be recorded and fees and escrows
paid; the one-half acre area designated for on-site stormwater management will need to be
conveyed to the applicant and a copy of the recorded deed submitted to the city; and a
separate, certified off-site easement plat for the off-site stormwater management
easement area will need to be recorded.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Although the size of the multi-family building is quite large in comparison to surrounding
structures, staff finds that it does provide for a wider spectrum of housing types within the
neighborhood than a standard residential subdivision would. The revised site and building
designs appear to provide for a quality residential development at a reasonable density
level. Therefore, upon resolution of the deficiencies and discrepancies listed below, staff
recommends approval of REZ97-0011, a rezoning of 4.46 acres from Interim Development
REZ97-0011. Louis Condominiums Rezoning
February 27, 1998
Page 4
Single-Family Residential (IDRS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay-8 (OSA-8) to permit 35
dwelling units for property located at 500 Foster Road, and approval of a preliminary
Sensitive Areas Development Plan, subject to:
The applicant submitting a grading plan and construction plans for review and approval
by the'Public Works Department prior to Council consideration of the preliminary
Sensitive Areas Development Plan.
The applicant will provide utility easements for water, sanitary sewer and stormwater
sewer; pay the water main extension fee, sidewalk fee (if a sidewalk along Foster Road
is required), escrow for right-of-way trees, escrows for other required public
improvements, and the fee in lieu of neighborhood open space land dedication prior to
administrative approval of the final Sensitive Areas Development Plan.
3. The building footprints and exterior materials for the five duplexes and the 24 unit
multi-family residential building will be consistent with the site plan, elevations and
floor plans date-stamped February 26, 1998.
4. The applicant will provide a tree protection plan for review and approval by the city
prior to administrative approval of the Sensitive Areas Development Plan.
o
The applicant will receive approval for the design and placement of the golf cart
storage structure by the city prior to administrative approval of the Sensitive Areas
Development Plan.
DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES:
1. The building materials should be accurately labeled on the elevations for the duplexes
and multi-family building date-stamped February 26, 1998.
2. An adequate turnaround for a 40-foot long fire truck should be incorporated into the
north part of the private street, Louis Place.
3. A note should be added to the plan stating that the portion of the existing driveway
connecting the Louis property to the property to the west will be removed.
4. Elevations for the proposed golf cart storage building should be submitted for the
Commission to review.
jw/memlmr-hodge.doc
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
LL · IRESTERLY ]~7 ACRES OF
:(
Preliminary Sensitive Areas Development
ou s Condominiums
Iowa
(~o) ~4-~
LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE ·
LEGEND AND NOTES
Plan
City, Iowa
City of Iou City
~ 02/24~8 ~[R~ ~[m~ P~ ~ ~ ST~ ~NO~S ~RE~D PER
M
Preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan
Louis Condominiums
Iowa City, Iowa
~S ~~r~s.
~ (:sty, ~ (:~e) ~
I!r
I
1
'1
· front elevation ·
I
BRUGGEMAN
FEB 2 6 19~'"
p.~ r-, "'?PARTMENT
RECEIVED
FB 2 6 19~ 3
west elevation
.!
elevation · "'<,
front elcvat ion
~,'£CEIVED
FEB 26 19~ ~
BRUGGEMAN
RECEIVED
FEB 2
o.~.~. ~-~P~-~Z~-/s o u t h
¢ I cvat ion %J~-~'D
north/south elevation
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Iowa City
20 November 1997
Dear Commissioners:
We, the undersigned members of the Stonewall Townhouse Association, would like to reiterate
our opposition to the rezoning of Mr. "Bud" Louis's property. on Foster Road. While we do
not contest Mr. Louis' right to develop his land, given the umque natural setting of the parcel
under question we believe that the public has a strong interest in having criteria other than
purely financial ones dominate discussions of rezoning. During our recent meeting, the con-
sensus was reached to express to the Commission the following concerns.
We continue to be troubled by the proposal to significantly increase the density of the
peninsula. The proposed development appears particularly ill-timed, given that an in-depth
study of the pensinsula has not yet been undertaken. However, if the current and, in our view,
wise notion prevails that the land immediately to the west of us should be held to low density
development, we see no good reason to increase the density of the land immediately to the east
of us.
In our view, rezoning in order to allow higher density development would not be compatible
with the unique natural setting which we all treasure and want to preserve. We are not con-
vinced, for example, that the density proposed will not have a significant--and negative--
environmental impact. We are concerned, first, with the water holding problems that will be
created by the amount of impervious surfaces inevitable in such a high density development.
It is not clear to us that even an improved dam and holding pond will adequately take care of
the amount of water that could, under particular weather conditions, run off the steep slopes.
Second, we are concerned with the threat to the stability of the steep slopes or "bluffs" that the
grading and building will entail. One has only to look at the costly, unsightly and environ-
mentally damaging measures currently being undertaken on north Dubuque Street to "prop up"
the collapsing slope or "bluff" behind the two apartments to worry about the proposed dense
building near the edge of a "bluff" or slope. We are sure that the developers responsible for
the "Bluff Apartments" did not anticipate this grave and expensive environmental problem, and
in the current instance we are not convinced that there will not be a similarly negative, even if
unintended, impact to the sensitive natural area that the proposed dense development will
cover.
We reiterate our concern regarding traffic and the ingress and egress from the "pensinsula."
Even if Foster Road is improved, this will not change the fact that in times of disaster (who
would have predicted the last flood?) our ability to leave and return to our homes in a safe and
timely manner will be seriously compromised. Setting aside those exceptional but important
cases, our sense is that people did not buy property in this naturally beautiful area with the
expectation that there would be long lines of traffic every time we would attempt to leave the
"peninsula."
For these reasons we strongly urge the Commission not to amend the Comprehensive plan and
to refuse the rezoning request for this sensitive piece of land. Thank you for taking our con-
ceres into consideration as you make your decision.
Yours sincerely,
Joyce Chiles
560 Foster Road
Pete Wilson
562 Foster Road
Wendelin Guenther
57 o Foster Road
Nancy Dill
572 Foster Road
Michael Dill
3 ~ecember 1997
Planning and Zoning Commission
Iowa City, Iowa
gttn: ,vIelody Rockwell
Dear b~rs. Rockwell:
J'~ECEIVED
DEC 0~3 ~997
Thank you for forwarding the letter from
the three members of the Townhouse Association and allowing
me to comment on it. These three couples plus possibly Ooyce
Chiles who was included but did not sign the lette~ represent
one of five buildings on the acerage. 25 families live on the
original 12 acre development. ~one of the other faz~lies
have registered any objection, in fact Dave~Foman, who owns_
the two townhouses between the new development and the one
owned by the townhouse association, has said he has no objection
at all to the plan for the remaining 3.9 acres.
The letter was written November 20 and I
am sure the members of the Stonewall Townhouse Association
had not seen the new plans which lower the height of the
building in question and also lower the density of the project.
I see no way that their building could be affected by the s~Drm
water plan. I also see no connection with this project and the
work behind the Dubuque Street apartments.
This leaves only the concern regarding
traffic on the pensinsula. This new traffic is years away and
when the city does develope the ground west of here they plan
to widen Foster Road to handle the traffic.
I hope that all the changes will be ready
so we can go forward on theDecember 19th meeting. Thane you again
for yourhelp.
Sincerely yours
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Iowa City
Iowa City, Iowa
10 January 1998
Dear Commissioners:
We would like to express our continued objections to the rezoning of the 4.46 acres at 500
Foster Road.
In his 3 December letter to Ms. Melody Rockwell and in response to our 20 November letter
to you, Mr. Bud Louis stated that there were only three members of the Stonewall Townhouse
Association who objected to the density of the proposed development on his land. This per-
ception is not accurate. At the 16 October meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
Mrs. Margaret MacDonald expressed the 'long history of neighbors in the peninsula working
to keep a beautiful environment in that part of the city' (p. 5). As the attached list of signa-
tures of residents on north Foster Road attests, both owners and renters in this area share the
deep appreciation of the unique natural characteristics of the peninsula expressed by Mrs. Mac-
Donald. Once density is increased and asphalt is applied on this environmentally sensitive area
it is impossible to turn back, as Commissioner Gibson implied at the 16 October meeting (p.
4).
While we await the revised plan we must reiterate our opposition to the proposed apartment-
like condominium construction. Although the builder refers to the multi-unit building as a
condominium, on p. 7 of the 17 October minutes both Commissioners Gibson and Starr quite
naturally referred to this construction alternately as 'the big apartment building' and ~the pro-
posed apartment house. ' While such a building may be called a condominium and might
actually initially be sold as such, it is our strong concern that it may evolve, and perhaps quite
rapidly, into rental property. Given that now even some units in the Idyllwild complex are
being rented out because of a lack of buyers we wonder about the realistic demand for more
condominiums on the peninsula. Our concern with respect to the true status of this multi-unit
building is reinforced by the fact that twenty years ago, at the time Mel and Joyce Chiles were
considering purchasing their townhouse, Mr. Bud Louis assured them that the units contiguous
to the Stonewall Townhouses would also be condominiums. These units, now managed as
apartments by Mr. Dave Foman, were never sold as condomimums but rather were rented out
from the beginning as apartments. This unfortunate history diminishes our willingness to
accept at face value Mr. Louis's assurance that the units his developer is proposing to construct
will be owner-occupied units.
Our objection here stems from two principal concerns. First, rental property tends to be of an
even higher density than condominium units: as we already experience first-hand on North
Foster rental units are often shared by a number of individuals, often students, who each have
their own cars. Therefore, should the apartment-like condominium indeed become a bona fide
apartment building, the negative impact on parking on the alread~ narrow su'~ets of the pro-
posed development, and especially on traffic on the peninsula, will be even more considerable
than might otherwise be anticipated. Second, in the vast majority of cases renters take less
pride of ownership in their units than owners, while apartment complex owners often perceive
a f'mancial disincentive to maintain the units with the same care as individual owners.
We would like to close by reiterating our concern for the environment. We have been shocked
and disturbed by the number of large, old trees that in recent days have been destroyed in con-
junction with the construction of the sewer line. Although we understand that some tree plant-
ing is included in the proposed development plan, these would necessarily be young trees.
They cannot be compared with those older trees that would most likely. be destroyed by the
construction of the apartment-like condominium on the edge of the ravine. Therefore, we ask
the Commissioners to protect the environment from further degradation by refusing the rezon-
ing request to allow high density development so near to these sensitive ravine slopes.
Thank you for your kind consideration of our concerns.
Yours sincerely,
Joyce Chiles
560 Foster Road
Pete and Amy Wilson
560 Foster Road
Wendelin Ouenmer
570 Foster Road
Mike and Nancy Dill
572 Foster Road
We the undersigned, residents of west Foster Road, do hereby express our opposition to the
proposed fezorang of 4.46 acres owned by Norwood C. to permit the construction of approxi-
mately 40 dwelling units located at 500 Foster Road.
Address:
Name:
Address:
Name:
Address:'
A~ess:~5~
Ad~ss:
m~ess:
N~e:
January 30, 1998
City of Iowa City
Planning and Community Development
Attn. Melody Rockwell
410 East Washington St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Melody,
Thank you for taking the time to meet with me yesterday regarding the proposed Louis Condominium
Development on Foster Road.
As we discussed, Fomon Apartments is not opposed to the development of the property as it currently
stands with 34 units. However, we are strongly opposed to the location of the access drive to the
development as proposed in the revised plan of 1/29/98.
This revised plan now shows the access drive located adjacent to our east property line 35'- 40' from the
back doors of our two buildings. Not only do we object to the location of the access drive based on the
close proximity to our buildings but also for the privacy and most importantly the safety of our tenants.
We have a number of families with small children who use the backyard as a play area. Several of the
families have put in swing sets and play equipment which would now be, if the current plan was
approved, just a few feet away from a busy drive servicing 34 units.
In the initial plan the access drive was located on the east side of Mr. Louis's property between his
personal residence and his east property line. This location for the access drive would obviously be our
preference. Not only would this alleviate our concerns but it would also create a larger "open green
space" between the two properties.
In addition, it would seem that if the access drive for Louis Condominiums was to enter the property as in
the initial plan and end with a circular drive at the guest parking area for the 22 unit building, it would
not only be more cost effective for the developer but more efficient and less expensive to maintain for the
future homeowners of Louis Condominiums.
In closing, we would urge the Planning and Zoning Commission to require the developer to locate the
access drive to the east of Mr. Louis's personal residence as it was originally planned.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Property Manager
Fomon Apartments
cc: Bud Louis
NOTICE 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 24~h day of March, 1998, in the Civic
Center Council Chambers, 410 E. Washington
Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at which hearing the
Council will consider the following items:
1. An ordinance conditionally changing the
zoning designation on a 4.46 acre tract
located at 500 Foster Road from Interim
Development Single-Family Residential
(IDRS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay-8 (OSA-8)
to permit 35 dwelling units and approving a
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development
Plan.
An ordinance conditionally changing the
zoning designation on approximately 41 acres
located between lower West Branch Road and
Court Street extended, approximately 4/5"'
mile west of Taft Avenue from Low Density
Single-Family Residential (RS-5) to Medium
Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) for
29.1 acres and Low Density Multi-Family
Residential (RM-12) for 11.9 acres.
3. An ordinance changing the zoning designation
on approximately 24.12 acres from Interim
Development (IDRS) to Sensitive Areas
Overlay-5 (OSA-5) and approving a
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan
for property located at the east terminus of
Hickory Trail.
4. An ordinance approving the preliminary OPDH
pan for Walnut Ridge, Pads 6 and 7, a 66.68
acre, 20-1ot residential subdivision located at
the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file
for public examination in the Office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
ppdadmin\3-24nph.doc
Prepared by; Soott Kugler, Assoc. Planner, City of Iowa City, 410 E. Washington Slmel, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5243
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING
CHAPTER BY CONDITIONALLY CHANGING
THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF APPROXI-
MATELY 41 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN
LOWER WEST BRANCH ROAD AND COURT
STREET EXTENDED, APPROXIMATELY 4/5
MILES WEST OF TAFT AVENUE FROM LOW
DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-
5) TO MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL (RS-8) FOR 29.1 ACRES AND
LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
(RM-12) FOR 11.9 ACRES.
WHEREAS, the applicant, Arlington, L.C. is
owner and legal title holder of property located
between Lower West Branch Road and Court
Street extended, approximately 4/5 miles west of
Taft Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested that
the City rezone approximately 41 acres located
between Lower West Branch Road and Court
Street extended, approximately 4/5 of a mile west
of Taft Avenue, from RS-5, Low Density Single-
Family Residential to RS-8, Medium Density Sin-
gle-Family Residential (29.1 acres) and RM-12,
Low Density Multi-Family Residential (11.9
acres); and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Com-
mission has reviewed the request and finds that,
provided that necessary infrastructure in installed
and that the neighborhood design concepts in-
cluded in the Comprehensive Plan are adhered to
in the design of the development, the request is in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, Iowa Code ~j414.5 (1997) pro-
vides that the City of Iowa City may impose rea-
sonable conditions on granting an applicant's re-
zoning request, over and above existing regula-
tions, in order to satisfy public needs directly
caused by the requested change; and
WHEREAS, the applicant acknowledges and
agrees that certain conditions and restrictions are
reasonable to ensure that adequate infrastructure
is provided by the applicant for the development
and that the development is in substantial con-
formance with the neighborhood design concepts
as contained in the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has agreed to de-
velop the property in accordance with the terms
Ordinance No.
Page 2
and conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agree-
ment which outlines the applicant's obligations
with regard to the adequate provision of infra-
structure, including the extension of Court Street,
and specifies the need for a future planned de-
velopment housing oveday (OPDH) rezoning of
the property to assure the development of the
property in accordance with the neighborhood
design concepts as contained in the Comprehen-
sive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA THAT:
SFCTION I. APPROVAl. Subject to the
terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning
Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated by
reference herein, the property legally described
below is hereby conditionally reclassified from its
present classification of RS-5, Low Density Sin-
gle-Family Residential, as follows:
a. The property legally described below is
hereby conditionally reclassified from its present
classification of RS-5, Low Density Single-Family
Residential to RS-8, Medium Density Single-
Family Residential:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER
OF THE FRACTIONAL SECTION 7,
TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 5 WEST
OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,
IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA:
THENCE N90°00'00"E, ALONG THE
NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER AND THE CENTERLINE OF
LOWER WEST BRANCH ROAD SE, 769.10
FEET; THENCE S00°29'08"E 1,574.57
FEET; THENCE S78°01'44"W, 71.29 FEET;
THENCE S66°32'35"VV, 111.74 FEET;
· THENCE S89°26'34"W, 192.41 FEET;
THENCE N12°33'05"W, 90.93 FEET:
THENCE N36°32'34"W, 90.93 FEET;
THENCE N48°32'03"W, 70.25 FEET;
THENCE S22°33'33"W, 713.11 FEET, TO A
POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID
SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE
N0002g'08"W, 2,085.94 FEET, TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OF
LAND CONTAINS 29.1 ACRES, AND IS
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RE-
STRICTIONS OF RECORD.
b. The property legally described below is
hereby conditionally reclassified from its present
classification of RS-5, Low Density Single-Family
Residential, to RM-12, Low Density Multi-
Residential:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTH-
WEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST
Ordinance No.
Page 3
QUARTER OF THE FRACTIONAL SEC-
TION 7, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 5
WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL ME-
RIDIAN, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY,
IOWA; THENCE S00°29'08"E, ALONG THE
WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST
QUARTER, 2,085.94 FEET, TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE
N22°33'33"E, 713.11 FEET; THENCE
S48°32'03"E, 70.25 FEET; THENCE
S36°32'34"E, 90.93 FEET; THENCE
S12°33'05"E, 90.93 FEET; THENCE
N89°26'34"E, 192.41 FEET; THENCE
N66°32'35"E, 111.74 FEET; THENCE
N78°01'44"E, 71.29 FEET; THENCE
S00°29'08"E, 722.27 FEET; THENCE
SOUTHWESTERLY 592.02 FEET, ALONG
A 2,886.05 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CON-
CAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, WHOSE 590.98
FOOT CHORD BEARS S85°34'06'~/V;
THENCE S79°41'30"W, 182.16 FEET, TO A
POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID
SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE
N00°29'08"W, ALONG SAID WEST LINE
289.17 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGIN-
NING. SAID TRACT OF LAND CONTAINS
11.9 ACRES, AND IS SUBJECT TO
EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF
RECORD.
SFCTION II. TONING MAP. The building of-
ficial is hereby authorized and directed to change
the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa to
conform to this amendment upon the final pas-
sage, approval and publication of this ordinance
as provided by law.
SFCTION III. CONDITIONAl TONING
AGRFI=MFNT. Following final passage and ap-
proval of this ordinance, the Mayor is hereby
authorized and directed to sign, and City Clerk to
attest, the attached Conditional Zoning Agree-
ment between the Applicant and the City.
SFCTION IV. CFRTIFICATION AND RF-
CORDING. Upon passage and approval of this
Ordinance, and after execution of the attacjed
Conditional Zoning Agreement, the City Clerk is
hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy
of this Ordinance and the Conditional Zoning
Agreement for recordation in the Office of the Re-
corder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Applicant's
expense, all is provided by law.
SFCTION V. RFPFALFR. All ordinances
and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provi-
sions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SFCTION VI. SFVI=RABILITY. If any sec-
tion, provision or part of this Ordinance shall be
adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such
adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Or-
Ordinance No.
Page 4
dinance as a whole or any section, provision or
part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti-
tutional.
SI=CTION VII. FFFFCTIVF DATF. This Or-
dinance shall be in effect after its final passage,
approval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this ~ day of
,19
MAYOR
A'Iq'EST:
CITY CLERK
(/~City~'s O~~
Prepared by: Scott G. Kugler, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319)356-5243
CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a Municipal
Corporation (hereinafter "City), and Arlington L.C. (hereinafter "Applicant").
WHEREAS, the applicant, Arlington, L.C. is owner and legal title holder of property located
between Lower West Branch Road and Court Street extended, approximately 4/5 miles west of
Taft Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested that the City rezone approximately 41 acres located
between Lower West Branch Road and Court Street extended, approximately 4/5 of a mile west
of Taft Avenue, from RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential to RS-8, Medium Density
Single-Family Residential (29.1 acres) and RM-12, Low Density Multi-Family Residential (11.9
acres); and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the request and finds that,
provided that necessary infrastructure is installed and that the neighborhood design concepts
included in the Comprehensive Plan are adhered to in the design of the development, the request
is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, Iowa Code ,~414.5 (1997) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable
conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in
order to satisfy public needs directly caused by the requested change; and
WHEREAS, the applicant acknowledges that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to
ensure that adequate infrastructure is provided by the applicant for the development and that the
development is in substantial conformance with the neighborhood design concepts as contained
in the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has agreed to develop the property in accordance with the terms and
conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement which outlines the applicant's obligations with
regard to the adequate provision of infrastructure, including the extension of Court Street, and
specifies the need for a future planned development housing oveday (OPDH) rezoning of the
property to assure the development of the property in accordance with the neighborhood design
concepts as contained in the Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual covenants and promises contained herein, the
Parties agree as follows:
Arlington, L.C. is the owner and legal title holder of property located between Lower
West Branch Road and Court Street extended, approximately 4/5 miles west of Taft
Avenue, which property is more particularly described as follows:
Parcel A (RS-8) Parcel:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE FRACTIONAL SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH,
RANGE 5 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IOWA CITY,
JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA: THENCE N90°00'00"E, ALONG THE NORTH LINE
OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND THE CENTERLINE OF LOWER WEST
BRANCH ROAD SE, 769.10 FEET; THENCE S00°29'08"E 1,574.57 FEET;
THENCE S78°01'44"W, 71.29 FEET; THENCE S66°32'35"W, 111.74 FEET;
THENCE S89°26'34"W, 192.41 FEET; THENCE N12033'05"W, 90.93 FEET:
THENCE N36°32'34"W, 90.93 FEET; THENCE N48°32'03"W, 70.25 FEET;
THENCE S22°33'33"W, 713.11 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF
SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE N00°29'08"W, 2,085.94 FEET, TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OF LAND CONTAINS 29.1 ACRES,
AND IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
Parcel B (RM-12 Parcel):
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE FRACTIONAL SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH,
RANGE 5 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IOWA CITY,
JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA; THENCE S00°29'08"E, ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, 2,085.94 FEET, TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING. THENCE N22°33'33"E, 713.11 FEET; THENCE S48°32'03"E,
70.25 FEET; THENCE S36°32'34"E, 90.93 FEET; THENCE S12°33'05"E, 90.93
FEET; THENCE N89°26'34"E, 192.41 FEET; THENCE N66°32'35"E,
111.74 FEET; THENCE N78°01'44"E, 71.29 FEET; THENCE S00°29'08"E,
722.27 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 592.02 FEET, ALONG A 2,886.05
FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, WHOSE 590.98 FOOT
CHORD BEARS S85°34'06"W; THENCE S79°41'30"W, 182.16 FEET, TO A
POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE
NO0°29'O8"W, ALONG SAID WEST LINE 289.17 FEET, TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OF LAND CONTAINS 11.9 ACRES, AND IS
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
Applicant acknowledges and agrees that the City wishes to satisfy public needs directly
caused by the requested change by ensudng that adequate infrastructure is provided for
the proposed development, and by ensuring that the development conforms to the
neighborhood design concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the
Applicant agrees to certain conditions over and above City regulations as detailed
below.
In consideration of the City's changing the zoning designation on the subject property,
Applicant agrees that development of the subject property will conform to all of the
requirements of the applicable zones as well as the following additional conditions:
ao
Upon the City's completion of the extension of Court Street to the west boundary
line of the above-described property, the applicant shall be responsible for all
construction of and expense associated with extending said arterial street and its
associated infrastructure, including but not limited to, grading, paving, water
main, storm water drainage and sewer, sanitary sewer, landscaping and
electrical, to the east property line of the above-described property prior to the
issuance of any building permit on the subject property. The parties agree that
the obligation to construct said Court Street extension and install the
infrastructure herein shall be in accordance with the City's specifications, and the
Applicant shall not be deemed acting as the City's agent during the original
construction and installation of said extension and infrastructure. Further,
nothing in this agreement shall be construed to impose any requirement on the
City to construct and install the extension and infrastructure at issue herein.
Lastly, the parties agree that the obligation to construct the extension and install
the infrastructure described herein shall remain on the Applicant or its successor
in interest, and be a lien on the above-described property until completion by the
Applicant or its successor in interest, and until acceptance by the City, as
provided by law.
bo
Prior to any development on the subject property, the applicant shall submit and
obtain approval of Planned Development Housing Overlay (OPDH) rezoning
applications for each zoning parcel. Development plans associated with these
applications shall be prepared and reviewed based on the neighborhood design
concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan.
The Applicant acknowledges and agrees that the conditions contained herein are
reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code § 414.5 (1997), and that
said conditions satisfy public needs which are directly caused by the requested zoning
change.
o
The Applicant acknowledges and agrees that in the event the subject property is
transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will conform with the
terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement.
The Parties acknowledge and agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be
deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall
remain in full force and effect as a covenant running with the title to the land unless or
until released of record by the City. The Parties further acknowledge that this Agreement
shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives and assigns of the
Parties.
Applicant acknowledges that nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be
construed to relieve the Applicant from complying with all applicable local, state and
federal regulations.
Dated this
The Parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by
reference into the Ordinance rezoning the subject property; and that upon adoption and
publication of the Ordinance, this Agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County
Recorder's Office at the Applicant's expense.
day of ,1998. / -' '~-"~)~~, ~'~~... ~,~/'."~'~
/"
ARLINGTON, L.C.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
By:
Gary Watts
By:
Emest W. Lehman, Mayor
By:
John Moreland
Attest:
Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
STATE OF IOWA )
) SS:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On' 'this day of , 19 , before me,
, a Notary Public in and for the State of
Iowa, personally appeared Ernest W. Lehman and Madan K. Karr, to me personally known, and,
who, being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the
City of Iowa City, Iowa; that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of the
corporation, and that the instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of the corporation, by
authority of its City Council, as contained in (Ordinance) (Resolution) No. passed
by the City Council, on the day of , 19 , and that
Emest W. Lehman and Madan K. Karr acknowledged the execution of the instrument to be their
voluntary act and deed and the voluntary act and deed of the corporation, by it voluntarily
executed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
STATE OF IOWA )
) SS:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this day of , A.D. 19 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, personally appeared Gary Watts to me personally
known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he are the in said corporation executing the
within and foregoing instrument to which this is attached, that (no seal has been procured by
the said) corporation; that said instrument was signed (and sealed) on behalf of (the seal affixed
thereto is the seal of said) said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors; and that the said
and as such officers acknowledged the
execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of said corporation, by it and by
them voluntarily executed.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
STATE OF IOWA )
) SS:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this day of , A.D. 19 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, personally appeared John 'Moreland to me personally
known, who, being by me duly swom, did say that he are the in said corporation executing the
within and foregoing instrument to which this is attached, that (no seal has been procured by
the said) corporation; that said instrument was signed (and sealed) on behalf of (the seal affixed
thereto is the seal of said) said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors; and that the said
and as such officers acknowledged the
execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of said corporation, by it and by
them voluntarily executed.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
February 13, 1998 (for February 19 meeting)
Planning and Zoning Commission
Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
REZ97-0019. Gary Watts' Rezoning Request on Court Street Extended.
At the February 5 meeting staff recommended approval of a revised application submitted
by the applicant, subject to conditions. However, the Commission raised some concerns
regarding the size of the proposed RM-12 zone along Court Street extended. In response
to these concerns, an alternative recommendation is provided below, which more clearly
states the future OPDH review of the proposed development of these lots will be based on
the neighborhood design concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REZ97-0019, a request to rezone approximately 41 acres located
between Lower West Branch Road and Court Street extended, approximately 4/5 of a mile
west of Taft Avenue, from RS-5 to RM-12 (11.9 acres) and RS-8 (29.1 acres) be approved,
subject to a conditional zoning agreement outlining the applicant's obligations regarding the
extension of Court Street and requiring approval of a future OPDH application for each
parcel prior to development of the property, to be prepared and reviewed in accordance
with the neighborhood design concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan.
Approved by: ~
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Item: REZ97-0019. Windsor Ridge, between Lower
West Branch Road and Court Street Extended
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Contact person:
Requested action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing land use and zoning:
Surrounding land use and zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
Applicable Code requirements:
File date:
Prepared by: Scott Kugler
Date: February 5, 1998
Gary Watts
Arlington L.C.
568 Highway 1 West
Iowa City, Iowa 52246
Phone: 354-0581
MMS Consultants
1917 S. Gilbert St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Phone: 351-8282
Rezoning from RS-5 to RM-12 (12.4
acres and 4.9 acres) and RS-8 (23.7
acres)
To increase the density permitted on
the subject property
Between Lower West Branch Road and
Court Street, extended, approximately
4/5 mile west of Taft Avenue.
Approximately 41 acres
Undeveloped, RS-5
North:
East:
South:
West:
Agricultural, RS (County);
Agricultural, RS (County), RS-5
(City);
Undeveloped, RS-8 (City);
Agricultural, RS (County).
Residential, 2-8 dwelling units per acre
Chapter 14-7, Land Subdivisions
November 13, 1997
2
45-day limitation period:
Waived (date not specified in letter)
SPECIAL INFORMATION:
Public Utilities:
City sewer and water are available.
There is a potential sewer capacity
issue that will have to be resolved at
some point in the future (see
Infrastructure discussion in body of
staff report).
Public Services:
Police and fire protection will be
provided by the City.
Transportation:
The nearest bus route is the Court Hill
route, which passes through the
intersection of Court Street and
Petersen Street, one block west of
Scott Boulevard.
Sensitive Areas Ordinance:
The Sensitive Areas Inventory map
does not indicate that any potential
sensitive areas exist on this site. The
drainageway present 'on the property
does not meet the definition of a
stream corridor. The existence of
areas regulated under the Sensitive
Areas Ordinance, such as steep slopes,
will be investigated in more detail when
the area is subdivided and more
thorough information is submitted by
the applicant.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant, Gary Watts, on behalf of the property owner Arlington, LC, is requesting the
rezoning of approximately 41 acres of property located between Lower West Branch Road
and Court Street, extended, and approximately 4/5 miles west of Taft Avenue. This property
was annexed in 1993 along with the rest of the Windsor Ridge Subdivision property, and
zoned RS-5 at that time. The applicant is requesting that 23.7 acres of the property be
rezoned to RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, and that two parcels be rezoned
to RM-12, Low Density Multi-Family Residential - a 12.4 acre parcel located along Court
Street extended, and a 4.9 acre parcel located along Lower West Branch Road at the
northwest corner of the property. No conceptual site plan illustrating how the areas may be
developed was submitted.
ANALYSIS:
This application will be reviewed in terms of its consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, its
compatibility with the existing and potential development on surrounding properties, the
ability of the existing and planned infrastructure in the area to accommodate the proposed
land uses, and the relationship of the proposed zoning classifications to the conceptual street
layout provided by the applicant.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map suggests residential
development at 2-8 dwelling units per acre for this property. The area proposed for RS-8
zoning is consistent with this recommendation, but the proposed RM-12 zoning is not.
However, the Land Use Map is intended to be a general guide for development throughout
the city, and should not be the only factor considered when determining a proposals
conformance to the Plan. The Plan also contains a number of neighborhood design concepts
on pages 19-25 which are aimed at building diversity into residential neighborhoods,
discouraging large, monotonous single-use developments in favor of a mix of housing types
which provide housing opportunities for a broader spectrum of the City's population.
Analysis of the application should include an assessment of its conformance to these
concepts, as well as the Housing and Land Use & Urban Pattern goals and strategies found
on pages 44-48 of the Plan.
Analysis of the southerly RM-12 parcel should consider the planned extension of Court Street
as a future City arterial street (see Infrastructure section below). In addition to the policies
suggesting a mix of housing types within neighborhoods, there are also statements regarding
the location of multi-family housing along arterial streets, and more efficient and compact
design, and the importance of building design where multi-family development is to be
integrated into areas of lower density development. The Housing Goals and Strategies note
that a well-planned neighborhood should contain both owner-occupied and rental, single-
family and multi-family housing. In addition, the Land Use & Urban Pattern Goals and
Strategies call for multi-family development near neighborhood commercial centers, and
zoning parcels in advance of development to achieve the desired mix of housing. A CN-1
zone is located at the intersection of Court Street extended and Taft Avenue, less than Y2
mile east of this site. Staff feels that despite the proposal's inconsistency with the density
recommendations of the Land Use Map, the rezoning of some property along Court Street to
RM-12 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, provided that care is taken in the design
of the development to ensure that the higher density area fits well with likely development on
the surrounding single-family parcels.
The proposed rezoning of the 4.9 acre parcel at the northwest corner of the property is more
difficult to justify. The parcel is not located along an arterial street, and is much farther
removed from this neighborhood's CN-1 zone. Lower West Branch Road is not included on
the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan, nor is it anticipated that it will ever become a City arterial
street. Rather, it is seen as a collector street for this general residential area, with Scott
Boulevard, Court Street, Taft Avenue, and Herbert Hoover Highway making up the arterial
street system. Although the additional RM-12 zoning would result in a higher density for the
overall neighborhood and would contribute to the variety of housing types in the area, staff
feels that the location of multi-family zoning needs to be considered carefully and follow the
neighborhood design concepts included in the plan in order to be successfully integrated
within a neighborhood. In addition, much of the property located along Lower West Branch
Road between this site and Scott Boulevard is located in the County and undeveloped. The
development potential for these properties has not been studied. Staff does not recommend
rezoning parcels along Lower West Branch Road for multi-family development at this time.
The growth policy contained in the Comprehensive Plan suggests that for new developments
at the perimeter of the City, the impact of increased vehicular traffic on streets at or near
capacity within the City will also factor in the decision making. Although that language is
contained within the annexation policy, it would also be appropriate to consider this issue
when dealing with an increase in density on property to be developed in outlying areas.
While increasing the potential density of property located in this area will lead to additional
traffic along other portions of Court Street, staff feels the increase will be moderate along the
portions of the street that are nearing capacity. An analysis of the projected traffic impact is
included in the attached memorandum from JCCOG Transportation Planner Jeff Davidson.
In general, the proposed rezoning would provide for alternative housing types within the
Windsor Ridge neighborhood. So far, this area consists of only larger, higher cost single-
family homes, although areas of townhouses, apartments, and a neighborhood commercial
center are planned as Court Street is extended through to Taft Avenue. The duplex or small
lot single-family development that would be permitted in the RS-8 area, as well as the multi-
family development that would be permitted in the RM-12 zone along Court Street would add
diversity to the neighborhood and appear to be in conformance with the policies contained in
the Comprehensive Plan, provided that the design of these areas is carried out in a manner
which is compatible with surrounding single-family areas. A conditional zoning agreement
requiring that these parcels be subject to future OPDH reviews prior to development, would
help to achieve this. However, staff feels that rezoning the 4.9 acre parcel at the northwest
corner of the property for multi-family development would not consistent with these policies.
Compatibility with Surrounding Properties: There are existing parcels along Court Street that
are planned for multi-family development. Approximately 12 acres of property at the
northwest corner of Court Street and Taft Avenue is zoned RM-12. In addition, a concept
plan submitted in 1994 when the CN-1 parcel was zoned at this intersection indicated that
townhouses would be integrated into the design of the neighborhood commercial center, and
that the RS-8 parcel located immediately south of the subject parcel would be a future OPDH
and consist of a series of apartment buildings. Staff feels that RM-12 zoning at the south
end of this property is consistent with proposed development on nearby properties along
Court Street.
This property is surrounded on three sides by property located outside of the corporate limits.
However, all of the surrounding properties are located within the current growth boundaries,
and it is anticipated that at some point in the future these areas will be annexed and
developed within Iowa City. In this scenario, Lower West Branch Road would serve as a
collector street within a residential neighborhood bounded by the above mentioned arterial
streets. Based on the neighborhood design concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan,
lower density development should occur within the interior of a neighborhood, and multi-
family development should be limited to properties along arterial streets, in the vicinity of
neighborhood commercial zones, or adjacent to major open spaces within a neighborhood
(see attached Neighborhood Design Concepts illustration from the Comprehensive Plan). The
parcel at the northwest corner of this property does not meet any of these criteria, nor does
5
staff anticipate development on adjacent properties substantially altering the general
development scheme in the area.
Infrastructure Issues: The subject property currently is not served by an arterial street.
However, the extension of Court Street east to the Windsor Ridge property line is
programmed in the CIP for construction in 1998. The applicant will be responsible for
extending the street from this point east to Taft Avenue. The extension of Court Street will
open up the property in this area for development, including the subject parcel. The extended
Court Street at the south end of this property will be able to accommodate the proposed RM-
12 development being proposed at that location.
Public Works has indicated that there is a sewer capacity issue that will need to be resolved
at some point in the future. Monitoring of current flow levels of an existing sewer line along
Ralston Creek between Scott Park and Court Hill Park will begin this spring to help to
determine how soon this segment of the sewer line will need to be improved. Staff
anticipates that it will be some time before upgrades are needed. However, the applicant
should be put on notice that at some point in the future development may have to be delayed
to allow this capacity issue to be corrected, depending on the pace of development upstream
from this segment of the sewer and where this sewer upgrade project is placed within the
Capital Improvements Program.
It has already been mentioned that Lower West Branch Road is planned to be a collector
street in this area rather than an arterial street. It is currently a two lane roadway with a chip
seal surface. Development of the northern portion of the subject property and others along
Lower West Branch Road may result in the need for the improvement of this street to City
collector street standards at some point in the future. Given the number of property owners
involved and the fact that it is an existing street, it is not reasonable to expect that the street
will be improved as properties develop with the City paying the oversize cost, as typical with
collector streets. At the time of development of the northern portion of the property, the
developer should be expected to contribute their fair share toward the future improvement of
this roadway.
Proposed Zoning Boundaries: The applicant has submitted a conceptual street layout for this
property which was prepared to determine appropriate locations for the proposed boundaries
between the RM-12 and RS-8 zones. As mentioned above, staff feels that the proposed RM-
12 zone at the northwest corner of the site should be eliminated from the plans. The
boundary between the southerly RM-12 zone and the balance of the property should be
looked at closely to provide an appropriate transition between the two areas. Currently, the
zone boundaries are proposed to be defined by the centerline of the streets and a natural
drainageway that traverses the property. While the boundary along the natural drainageway
appears to be appropriate, staff questions the use of the centerlines of the streets as the
boundary between the two zones. A better transition between different density residential
uses can be provided if it occurs at the rear of lots rather than on opposite sides of the street.
Staff feels that unless a concept plan is submitted that illustrates how this transition will
occur with the proposed boundaries, the boundaries should be shifted south a depth of one
lot to allow a similar scale of development on each side of the street. This would result in a
smaller area of RM-12 zoning, but would likely provide a better transition between the two
areas when developed.
Summary: In evaluating the requested rezoning, staff feels that both the proposed RS-8 and
the southerly RM-1 2 requests appear to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, provided
that the design of these developments are carried out in a manner that is consistent with the
neighborhood design concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan, and in a manner that
will be compatible with surrounding single-family development. Conditioning the approval of
these requests on the approval of future OPDH applications would help to achieve this, yet
grant the density increases for these parcels at this time before the surrounding property is
developed. Both the Comprehensive Plan and the Community Housing Forum Report suggest
zoning land in advance of development as a way to increase the density of an overall
neighborhood while providing fair notice to all persons who may be purchasing property in the
vicinity. There appears to be adequate infrastructure in place to accommodate the
development of these parcels, although a potential sewer capacity problem could arise as
development occurs at some point in the future, and improvements to Lower West Branch
Road may be needed as this and adjacent properties are developed. Staff does recommend
that the proposed RM-12 parcel at the south end of the property be scaled back to allow a
more appropriate transition between the RM-1 2 and RS-8 areas being proposed.
Staff feels that the proposed RM-12 zone at the northwest corner of the property along
Lower West Branch Road is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Lower West
Branch Road is not intended to be a future arterial street, and there are no other factors
present within the area which would indicate that multi-family zoning would be appropriate in
this location. Staff recommends that this 4.9 acre parcel be incorporated into the applicant's
request for RS-8 zoning on other portions of this site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REZ97-0019, a request to rezone approximately 41 acres located
between Lower West Branch Road and Court Street extended, approximately 4/5 miles west
of Taft Avenue from RS-5 to RM-12 and RS-8 be partially approved, subject to a conditional
zoning agreement outlining the applicant's obligations regarding the extension of Court Street
and other issues as follows:
1. Staff recommends that the request to rezone 12.4 acres at the south end of the property
be approved, subject to the northern zone boundary being moved south a depth of one lot
along the streets shown on the conceptual street layout to provide a better transition
between the RM-12 and RS-8 zones, and conditioned upon approval of a future OPDH
application for the development of the subject property; and
2. Staff recommends that the request to rezone 4.9 acres at the northwest corner of the
property be denied; and
3. Staff recommends that the request to rezone 23.7 acres to RS-8 be approved, and
expanded to include the 4.9 acre parcel at the northwest corner of the site (28.6 acres
total), conditioned upon approval of a future OPDH application for the development of the
subject property.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map.
0
Rezoning exhibit.
Conceptual road alignment with contours.
Memorandum from JCCOG Transportation Planner Jeff Davidson regarding
volume impact of proposed rezoning.
Neighborhood Design Concepts illustration from the Comprehensive Plan.
traffic
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
;C 2
~ RM
c°"~i~ ~0
I OPDH-12
I
'~ _~PDH 8
I
SITE LOCATION' South of Lower West Branch Road SE
REZ97-0019
LOWER WEST BRANCH ROAD $E
~ _= 280.00'
L = 123.84'
CH = 122.84'
S35'51'48'E
~ = 45~16'16"
TR= 230.00'
95.91'1t
L 181,7,.'3'
CH = 177.04'
POINT OF
BEGINNING
TRACT 5
STREET _ _E _X_T_E_ _N _S_I _0_ N_ _ _( =AST ) /-- _ _ _ _ _ _~
]V[]v[S CONSULTA.,NTS, INC ~ PER Cl~ RENEW
Iowa City, Iowa (519) 351-8282 ~
LRS ~
H: ~ARCHIVE~97dwg~4100~4146008Z
Sheet Title:
REZONING EXHIBIT
Project 33tie:
POE. SE 1/4 SEC 7-79-5
IOWA CITY, IOWA
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 30, 1998
To:
From:
Re:
Scott Kugler, Urban Planning Division
Jeff Davidson, JCCOG Transportation Planner "~'//
Traffic Volume Impact of proposed Windsor Ridge rezoning 97-00019
I have examined the proposed Windsor Ridge rezoning of 17.3 acres from RS-5 to RM-12, and
23.7 acres from RS-5 to RS-8. Under the existing RS-5 zoning the total of 41 acres has an
estimated trip generation of 133 vehicles per day. Under the proposed rezoning the 41 acres
has an estimated trip generation of 396 vehicles per day. This is a projected increase of 263
vehicles per day if the property is rezoned.
The Iowa City Comprehensive Plan states that consideration of a rezoning should take into
account the impact additional traffic generation will have on existing overburdened arterial
streets. Court Street is the arterial street that will be most directly impacted by the proposed
rezonings. Current traffic volumes on Court Street are as follows:
Court Street Average Daily Traffic Volume
Between Muscatine and Seventh Avenue:
Between Seventh Avenue and First Avenue:
Between First Avenue and Friendship Street:
Between Friendship Street and Scott Boulevard:
8,300 (1994)
7,800 (1994)
5,469 (1997)
3,370 (1997)
The majority of traffic generated by the Windsor Ridge parcels will use Court Street for access
to the rest of the community. At each intersecting arterial street a certain percentage of vehicles
will be diverted off of Court Street, so that the impact to Court Street as one proceeds further
from Windsor Ridge is diminished. The Level of Service C capacity of a two-lane undivided
arterial street without turn lanes in a residential setting (such as Court Street) is 7,000 vehicles a
day. Traffic volumes in the 7,000 to 10,000 vehicles per day range begin to experience delays
during peak periods. This is the situation with Court Street west of First Avenue; east of First
Avenue Court Street has relatively unencumbered traffic conditions.
The proposed Windsor Ridge rezonings will have a greater impact on Court Street than the
existing zoning in that we project an additional 263 vehicles per day would be generated from
the site. The greatest impact on Court Street would be on that section which has capacity to
absorb the additional traffic volume, between First Avenue and Scott Boulevard. The impact of
the proposed rezoning on the portion of Court Street west of First Avenue, which has more
serious capacity concerns, will be modest.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Im\rnem\jd 1 ~28.doc
NFIGHBORHOOD DESIGN CONCFPTS
U# of BOULEVARD STREET DESIGN with
laMacaped median to improve the
ieethetic quality of arterial streets
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTER
Deign cul-de-sacs so that side yardi
abut arterial streetl rather then rear
yardi. This provldee fm more privacy
in the rear yardi and · more attractive
itr eetl~Bpe.
LANDSCAPED BUFFERS along arterial
streets where double-frontage
lots carmot be avoided
Provide for ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
site, if justified
Accomodate REGIONAL/COMMUNITY
features and components
HIGHER DENSITY HOUSING along a~terials
and adjacent to major open spaces
within the neighborhood
Neighborhood Commercial
AplrtmlntS
] Townhouses
MODIFIED GRID street ~an~n alew~
luff~l CO~I wilhlo
nelghbo~mod while di~ging
cut-through uafflc
U# of All EYS permits imMIm', narrow~
lots, ik)wlng the Ixesmvatlo~ of
OlDeft Iplce and natural Well withOUt
sacrificing density
Presage ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE
AREAS
SMALL 4-B UNIT APARTMENT BUILDINGS at
the intersections of coilecrM and
arterial streets
Limited use of CUL-DE-SAC street
design abutting ertlrills end where
environmental features limit use of
modified grid
Possible SMALL SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL ZONE (convenience ate'el.
if justified
Flguf® 3.
NOTICE 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 24"' day of March, 1998, in the Civic
Center Council Chambers, 410 E. Washington
Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at which hearing the
Council will consider the following items:
1. An ordinance conditionally changing the
zoning designation on a 4.46 acre tract
located at 500 Foster Road from Interim
Development Single-Family Residential
(IDRS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay-8 (OSA-8)
to permit 35 dwelling units and approving a
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development
Plan.
2. An ordinance conditionally changing the
zoning designation on approximately 41 acres
located between lower West Branch Road and
Court Street extended, approximately 4/5th
mile we,~t of Taft Avenue from Low Density
Single-Family Residential (RS-5) to Medium
Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) for
29.1 acres and Low Density Multi-Family
Residential (RM-12) for 11.9 acres.
An ordinance changing the zoning designation
on approximately 24.12 acres from Interim
Development (IDP, S) to Sensitive Areas
Overlay-5 (OSA-5) and approving a
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan
for property located at the east terminus of
Hickory Trail.
4. An ordinance approving the preliminary OPDH
pan for Walnut Ridge, Parts 6 and 7, a 66.68
acre, 20-1or residential subdivision located at
the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file
for public examination in the Office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
ppdadmin\3-24nph.doc
Prepared by: Scott G. Kugler, Assoc. Planner, 410 E. Washington ~t, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5243
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING
CHAPTER BY CHANGING THE ZONING
DESIGNATION OF 24.12 ACRES LOCATED AT
THE EAST TERMINUS OF HICKORY TRAIL
FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT (ID-RS) TO
SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY - LOW DENSFrY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (OSA-5).
WHEREAS, the applicant, Plum Grove Acres,
Inc., has requested that the City rezone
approximately 24.12 acres of property located at
the east terminus of Hickory Trail from Interim
Development (ID-RS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay
-- Low Density Single-Family Residential (OSA-
5); and
WHEREAS, the Sensitive Areas Development
Plan associated with this application notes that
environmentally sensitive areas, including a
stream corridor, wooded areas, and regulated
slopes, will be protected; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning
Commission has recommended denial of the
proposed rezoning due to the existence of a prior
Conditional Zoning Agreement under which the
applicant and City agreed that secondary access
was required prior to further rezoning or platting of
the subject property, the current lack of secondary
access to the property and surrounding
neighborhood, and the necessity of district
planning to ensure ordedy, sustainable
development; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the lack
of secondary access to the property and
surrounding neighborhood, as well as the lack of
district planning in the area, but finds that the
availability of additional residential lots in this
neighborhood outweighs the need for secondary
access to the property and district planning in the
area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA:
SFCTION I. APPROVAl. The zoning
designation for the following described property is
hereby amended from its current classification of
Interim Development (ID-RS) to Sensitive Areas
Overlay- Low Density Single-Family Residential
(OSA-5), and the requirements of the prior
Conditional Zoning Agreement dated April 19,
Ordinance No.
Page 2
1988, regarding the provision of secondary
access prior to further rezoning or platting of the
following described property is hereby released,
as follows:
Beginning at the North quarter comer of
Section 12, Township 79 North, Range 6
West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Johnson
County, Iowa; Thence S00°10'32"W, along
the East line of the Northwest quarter of said
Section 12, a distance of 333.60 feet;
Thence S89°04'17"W, 659.09 feet to the
Southeast comer of Lot 108 of First and
Rochester, Part 3 as recorded in Book 30 at
Page 60 in the Office of the Johnson County
Recorder; Thence N06°15'43"E, along the
East line of First and Rochester, Part 3, a
distance of 277.70 feet to a point on the
Northerly right-of-way line of Hickory Trail;
Thence Northwesterly, 35.25 feet along said
Northerly right-of-way line along a 385.53
foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly,
whose 35.23 foot chord bears N81°07'09"W;
Thence N11°30'00"E, along said East line,
162.53 feet; Thence N05°00'00"W, along
said East line, 254.63 feet; Thence
N11°39'36"E, along said East line, 251.82
feet; Thence N08°00'00"W, along said East
line, 315.29 feet; Thence N00°00'00"W,
along said East line, 399.07 feet to the
Northeast comer of Lot93 of First and
Rochester, Part 3 and a point on the North
line of the Southeast quarter of the
· Southwest quarter of Section 1, Township 79
North, Range 6 West of the 5th Principal
Meridian; Thence N88°26'44"E, along said
North line, 635.22 feet to the Northeast
comer of Southeast quarter of the Southwest
quarter of said Section 1; Thence
S00°32'00"E, along the East line the
Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter
of said Section 1, a distance of 1,325.33 feet
to said Point of Beginning, containing 24.12
acres and is subject to easements and
restrictions of record.
SI=CTION II. ?ONING MAP. The Building
Inspector is hereby authorized and directed to
change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City,
Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final
passage, approval and publication of this
Ordinance as provided by law.
SFCTION III. CFRTIFICATION AND
R!=CORDING. After passage and approval of the
Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized
and directed to certify a copy of this Ordinance for
recordation in the Office of the County Recorder
of Johnson County, Iowa, at the Applicant's
expense, all as provided by law.
SFCTION IV. RFP!=A~ I=R. All ordinances
and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provi-
Ordinance No.
Page 3
sions of this Ordinance am hereby repealed.
SFCTION V. SI=VFRABILITY. If any section,
provision or part of the Ordinance shall be
adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such
adjudication shall not affect the validity of the
Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or
part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti-
tutional.
SFCTION VI. FFFFCTIVF DATF. This Ordi-
nance shall be in effect after its final passage,
· approval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this ~ day of
,1998.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
HOLLAND LAW OFFICE
300 Brewery Square
123 North Linn Street
P.O. Box 2820
Iowa City, IA 52244
C. JOSEPH HOLLAND
LARS G. ANDERSON
319 -354-0331
FAX 354-0559
March 16, 1998
Scott Kugler
Dept. of Planning and Community Development
City of Iowa City
410 East Washington
Iowa City, IA 52240
RE: First and Rochester Parts 4-6
Dear Scott:
I will be out of town from the 14th through the 23rd.
writing this letter as I leave town.
I am
On behalf of the applicant for approval of this rezoning and
preliminary subdivision plat, I want to request that the public
hearing on this be deferred.
Since I will not return until very shortly before the
hearing scheduled on March 24, I will not have the opportunity to
study the protests which you told me were filed against the
rezoning. I would like to have the opportunity to review those,
as well as your computations establishing that the number of
protests filed exceeds 20% of the area of property located within
200 feet of the boundary of the subdivision. As you know, I
first became aware of that late on the morning of March 13, the
day before my departure. I later had the opportunity to talk
this over with my client and we desire some additional time to
study that issue and assess our position in light of the
information you have provided.
Page 2
I trust you will take care of this in my absence.
appreciate your cooperation and help with this.
CJH~ka~'
cc: Bruce Glasgow
Larry Schnittjer
I
Very truly yours,
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
February 13, 1998 (for February 19 meeting)
Planning & Zoning Commission
Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
REZ97-0007/SUB97-0014. First & Rochester, Parts 4-6.
At its November 6 meeting, the Commission deferred this item indefinitely at the request of
the applicant. Staff recommended denial of this application at that meeting based on the
fact that the extension of First Avenue would be delayed for at least two years as a result
of the November 4 referendum. Staff felt that in the absence of the First Avenue
extension and an additional means of access to the general neighborhood, that the City's
secondary access guidelines were not being met and no additional development should be
approved. A conditional zoning agreement between the City and the developer which was
signed in 1988 when First and Rochester, Part Three was rezoned indicated that no
development should occur on the subject property until secondary access is provided.
The applicant, Plum Grove Acres, has requested that his item be placed back on the
Commission's agenda for the February 19 meeting, and is requesting a vote at that
meeting. The applicant questions the City's secondary access guidelines and how they
apply to this property, and also feels that the conditional zoning agreement referenced
above does not preclude the City from approving additional development in this area. The
applicant feels that time and circumstances have changed and that the need for these
building lots and housing stock outweigh the negatives associated with the lack of
secondary access. The applicant is correct in stating that the terms and conditions of the
1988 conditional zoning agreement can be amended if all parties that were involved in the
agreement agree to the changes. Therefore, the item has been placed on the February 19
agenda for consideration by the Commission.
The proposed plat and sensitive areas development plan are in general conformance with
the City's subdivision regulations. There are a few minor typographical corrections needed
on the plat, which should be addressed prior to the February 19 meeting. A copy of the
original staff report regarding this item and a follow-up memorandum are attached for the
Commission's review. Please note that the proposed street width of Tamarack Trail is now
28 feet, consistent with the current street standards, rather than 25 feet as recommended
by the Department of Planning and Community Development. The Planning staff feels that
there are good arguments for a narrower street width in this location, and the design
guidelines contained in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance allow for such a reduction, however,
Public Works does not agree and recommends that the 28 foot wide standards be adhered
to. If this rezoning and plat are to be approved, the Planning staff recommends that it be
subject to the resolution of the street width issue prior to consideration of the final plat for
2
this property. A grading plan will need to be approved prior to Council consideration of this
item.
Staff continues to recommend denial of the subdivision and rezoning based on the lack of
secondary access to the property. There are approximately 132 dwelling units currently
located along First Avenue and cul-de-sacs or no outlet streets accessing First Avenue.
There are also 6 undeveloped RS-5 lots and 5 undeveloped RM-12 lots, totaling
approximately 8 acres, which could be developed with no additional City review other than
building permit and site plan reviews. This brings the potential number of dwelling units
along this corridor to over 230 units, depending on the density of development on the RM-
12 parcels. The proposed development would increase this number by 45 units, with no
guarantees that secondary access will be provided to the area via First Avenue or another
route in the near future, if ever. The City's secondary access guidelines permit the
establishment of a single-access situation if it is a temporary situation and there is a high
probability that secondary access will be provided within a reasonable time. However, that
is not the case in this situation.
The point of single access for this area is at the intersection of First Avenue and Rochester
Avenue. Since First Avenue is an arterial street, the single access at this point is less of a
concern than if it were a local street in terms of traffic. However, to the north of this
intersection First Avenue crosses Ralston Creek at a point where there is the potential for
the street to be blocked by high water, restricting emergency vehicle access to the area at
these times. There is a regional storm water management facility located just downstream
from the crossing, and there have been reports of problems with the culvert under the
roadway becoming clogged with debris and water backing up upstream from the street
crossing. Ralston Creek has demonstrated a history of flooding and is a cause for concern
in this area. The City's secondary access guidelines state that potential physical barriers to
access are to be considered when determining whether or not secondary access is
required. Staff is of the opinion that the current situation requires a secondary access prior
to the development of additional lots in the area. A copy of the City's secondary access
guidelines are attached for review.
Staff has also been receiving complaints about the amount of traffic along Hickory Trail,
which would provide the only access to the subject property from First Avenue. Hickory
Trail is designed as a local street in terms of its width, but is serving as a collector street in
the area due to its configuration and because it is the only outlet to First Avenue. The
extension of First Avenue would not have addressed the traffic situation along Hickory
Trail. However, staff feels that the traffic situation along Hickory Trail is something that
the Commission should take under advisement when considering additional development in
this area.
Staff's concerns regarding secondary access in this area are not new. On a number of
occasions as this general neighborhood was developed, staff recommended that street
connections out to Rochester Avenue be made. However, in each case, cul-de-sacs were
permitted to be platted and this connection has never occurred. Staff also inquired about
the possibility of the City acquiring or condemning an additional access from this property
to Rochester Avenue through intervening property to the east. However, the City Council
at that time decided not to pursue that option. We now have a situation where street
access to the area is not adequate and development should not occur until it can be
3
provided. Given the situation with First Avenue and past statements made by surrounding
property owners, it appears unlikely that secondary access can be provided to the area
soon.
Although the extension of First Avenue would not have provided direct secondary access
to the property in question, it would have provided a second arterial street route into the
neighborhood, and would have removed the creek crossing as a factor when determining
whether or not secondary access is required. In the absence of this or any other means of
secondary access to this neighborhood, staff recommends that the proposed rezoning and
preliminary plat be denied, and that no changes be made to the previous conditional zoning
agreement that applies to the subject property.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REZ97-0007/SUB97-0014, a request to rezone 24.12 acres from
ID-RS, Interim Development, to OSA-5, Sensitive Areas Overlay, and for a preliminary plat
of First and Rochester, Parts 4-6, a 45-1ot residential subdivision located at the east
terminus of Hickory Trail, be denied.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map.
2. Preliminary plat and sensitive areas development plan.
3. September 18, 1997 staff report, without attachments.
4. October 31, 1997 staff memorandum, without attachments.
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
LOCATION MAP' First & Rochester, Parts 4,5,6REZ97-0007
PRELIMINARY PLAT & SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FIRST AND ROCHESTER SUBDIVISION - PARTS 4 -
tow~ City, Io'~a
6
i1 I
~o~ I| I
I
LOCATION I~IAP NOT TO SCALE
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Item: REZ97-0007/SUB97-0014. First &
Rochester, Parts 4-6; Preliminary Plat &
Sensitive Areas Development Plan
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Contact person:
Requested action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing land use and zoning:
Surrounding land use and zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
Applicable Code requirements:
File date:
45-day limitation period:
Prepared by: Scott Kugler
Date: September 18, 1997
Plum Grove Acres, Inc.
834 N. Johnson St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52245
Phone: 338-1365
MMS Consultants
1917 S. Gilbert St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Phone: 351-8282
Sensitive Areas Overlay rezoning and
preliminary plat approval
To allow a 45-1ot residential subdivision
At the eastern terminus of Hickory Trail
24.12 acres
Vacant, ID-RS
North: Vacant, ID-RS;
East: Vacant, ID-RS;
South: Residential, PDH-5;
West: Residential, RS-5.
Low density residential @ 2 - 8 dwelling
units per acre.
Section 14-6-K1, Sensitive Areas
Ordinance. Chapter 14-7, Land
Subdivisions.
August 12, 1997
September 26, 1997
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant, Plum Grove Acres, Inc., is requesting a rezoning from ID-RS, Interim Development,
to OSA-5, Sensitive Areas Overlay, and preliminary plat approval of First and Rochester, Parts 4-
6, a 24.12 acre, 45-1ot residential subdivision located at the east terminus of Hickory Trail. The
proposed plat is an extension of earlier portions of the First & Rochester subdivision located to the
west. The property contains a woodland, a stream corridor, and steep and critical slopes, and
therefore requires a Sensitive Areas Overlay rezoning and a Sensitive Areas Development Plan.
Development within this area has not occurred in recent years due to secondary access
constraints. It was determined that no additional development should occur in this area until First
Avenue is extended to provide a second means of access for the neighborhood. This application
was submitted in anticipation of this occurring next construction season and allowing the
development of additional property in this area. With the future of the First Avenue extension
uncertain at this point, it should be made clear that this property cannot be developed until this
street extension occurs. Staff's recommendation will be subject to the extension of First Avenue. If
the street construction project does not proceed, staff feels that this property should remain ID-
RS.
ANALYSIS:
Sensitive Areas Overlay Rezoning: This rezoning request will be evaluated in terms of its
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, including the Neighborhood Open Space component of
the Plan, its compliance with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other requirements of the Zoning
Chapter, and its compatibility with surrounding developed and undeveloped properties.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan calls for residential development at 2-8 dwelling
units per acre in this location. This plan would result in a gross density of just under 2 units per
acre, with limited development potential on portions of the property due to the presence of
wooded steep and critical slopes and a stream corridor. With these areas discounted, the
development appears to be consistent with the comprehensive plan in terms of density. Density
could have been increased by incorporating the clustering options detailed in the design
guidelines of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, but the applicant chose not to do so.
Neiqhborhood Open Space: The Neighborhood Open Space Plan, which has been incorporated
as a component of the Comprehensive Plan, notes that there is a deficit of 11.14 acres of open
space within the Upper Ralston Creek district, but that the deficit is not pressing until development
occurs within this area. With the possible extension of First Avenue and Captain Irish Parkway in
the near future, providing a second means of access for much of this area, this district may see
increased development pressures in the next few years. Staff feels it is important to begin looking
closely at the open space needs for this district now if the goals of the Neighborhood Open Space
Plan are to be realized.
The Neighborhood Open Space Plan suggests that open space be provided within this district in
three ways: 1) by creating a 7 acre central park along Ralston Creek, 2) by creating a 3-4 acre
park in the north part of the district, and 3) by creating a greenbelt trail along Ralston Creek. This
plan was not in place when earlier portions of the First and Rochester subdivision were created,
and thus these items were not addressed. There is relatively little land remaining to the east of this
tract along Ralston Creek that is not constrained in some way by topography or by the presence
of the creek and its flood plain (see attached topographic map). The City needs to begin thinking
about acquiring open space in this area if the seven acre park mentioned above is going to be
located centrally within this residential neighborhood. One option would be for the City to acquire
all of the property south of Hickory Trail for public open space. However, purchasing this land will
likely be cost prohibitive at this time. An alternative option being recommended by staff (detailed
below) would result in land dedicated to the City that would provide for a potential trail, would
retain a natural buffer along the creek to address water quality, and could be the beginning of the
suggested seven acre park if continued onto adjacent properties as they develop. If land is not
acquired on this property to begin assembling this park area, any park that is developed will be
well removed from much of this neighborhood.
3
A total of .55 acres of open space is required by the Neighborhood Open Space Ordinance. This
area must be generally located above the flood way and be determined to be acceptable by the
City. In addition, the City has been attempting to gain control of as much of the creek floodways
as possible in recent years to address future maintenance and flood management concerns. As
with a number of other subdivisions approved recently (East Hill, Walden Hills, Galway Hills,
Scott-Six Industrial Park, and Windsor Ridge are examples), staff feels it is reasonable to
condition this rezoning from ID-RS to OSA-5 on the dedication of the Ralston Creek floodway, and
is recommending that this occur. As mentioned above, this would not be counted toward the
neighborhood open space requirement of .55 acres.
By definition, the stream corridor contained on this property corresponds with the floodway. The
Sensitive Areas Ordinance requires that a 30 foot wide natural buffer be maintained beyond the
stream corridor. The area contained within this buffer and a proposed access from the buffer to
Hickory Trail equals approximately .55 acres. In an effort to preserve a natural buffer along the
creek, and to allow a potential trail to be located in this area, staff recommends that the 30 foot
wide stream corridor buffer and an access to Hickory Trail along the east line of Lot 115 be
dedicated to the City to meet the neighborhood open space requirements for this subdivision. The
development of a trail along Lot 115 may require additional land to be dedicated from the adjacent
property to the east before it can be constructed, but staff envisions the extension of this open
space onto the adjacent property to achieve a neighborhood park in the future, as recommended
in the Neighborhood Open Space Plan. Sufficient area should be available in the future to
construct a trail connection in this location. The applicant has incorporated these
recommendations on the proposed plat. In addition, the Parks and Recreation Commission has
reviewed the proposal and concurs with staff's recommendation regarding the open space.
The developer has expressed concerns about the City's maintenance of the stream corridor
behind the building lots on the south side of Hickory Trail. It may be possible to coordinate the
development of this property with the planting of native vegetation within the outlot to be dedicated
to provide a better stream buffer and address the applicant's concerns about the appearance of
this area. Staff has discussed this with the Parks and Recreation Director and will continue to
investigate this possibility. Another alternative might be for the developer to plant this area with
native vegetation in a manner that is satisfactory to him and acceptable to the City before
dedicating the outlot.
Sensitive Areas Ordinance: The environmentally sensitive features that exist on the property are
generally being avoided by the development. Building lots located along the north side of Ralston
Creek are located outside of the stream corridor and buffer, which as mentioned above are to be
dedicated to the City. Conservation easements along the wooded slopes on either side of
Tamarack Trail at the north end of the property are being provided and are intended to protect the
sensitive features located in these areas from unnecessary encroachment. Temporary fencing will
be installed in these locations to avoid grading in these areas during development. Unwooded
steep and critical slopes located along the west side of the south half of Tamarack Trail will be
impacted by development, but the Sensitive Areas Ordinance suggests that priority be given to
wooded slopes when determining which areas are to be disturbed and avoided by development.
In general, the proposed plan appears to be in conformance with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance.
Neiqhborhood Compatibility: Most of the surrounding properties have been developed a single-
family residential areas meeting the requirements of the RS-5 zone, with the exception of the
property immediately to the south which contains attached condominium units with a similar
density. It is anticipated that undeveloped properties in the vicinity will also be developed at a
similar density. The proposed development appears to be compatible with the existing
development in the area, and should not have an adverse impact on the development of adjacent
undeveloped properties.
4
Preliminary Plat: The proposed preliminary plat contains deficiencies that must be addressed
before the Commission can forward a recommendation to City Council. Staff recommends
deferral until these items are addressed. In addition, a Grading Plan is required and should be
approved prior to Council consideration of the plat.
Open Space/Sensitive Areas: The requirements of the Neighborhood Open Space and Sensitive
Areas Ordinances are discussed at length above. Outlot A is being proposed to be dedicated to
the City, which would satisfy the Neighborhood Open Space requirements and give the City
control of the floodway. The dedication of the outlot and the platting of conservation easements
being proposed would provide adequate protection for the sensitive features located on the site
and satisfy the requirements of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. The Grading Plan should illustrate
the areas to be protected and fenced during construction activities, and should provide for an ADA
accessible grade over the trail access portion of Outlot A so that this does not require grading on
the adjacent lot in the future.
Street Desiqn Issues: The proposed plat includes the extension of Hickory Trail east to the east
line of the property, to be extended further east when the next property develops. It also includes
the platting of two new streets, Tamarack Trail and Tamarack Place. Tamarack Trail is a very long
street that is to be continued into the property to the north. Due to the topography on either side of
the property, no other street connections to the east or west are practical. The property to the
north is zoned ID-RS, but with the construction of Captain Irish Parkway, potential land uses in
this area may be reexamined. The eventual extension and connection of Tamarack Trail to the
future street system to the north is not a certainty. Therefore, a turnaround is being provided at
the end of the street to allow emergency and service vehicles to turn around when using this
street. A hammer-head type turnaround is being proposed by the applicant. The lots containing
the turnaround will not be developed until the road is extended and the turnaround no longer
needed. A note on the plat specifies this.
If Tamarack Trail does connect to other residential areas in the future, this long, straight roadway
could result in excessive speeds through the development. There is very little room to incorporate
any curves or intersections into the design of the street to help slow traffic. One method of making
it more difficult to comfortably speed through the neighborhood is to narrow the street. This affects
the driver's perception of a street and how fast one is comfortable driving. In addition, any vehicles
parked on the street or traveling in the opposite direction are a bit more difficult to maneuver
around and require slower speeds. Staff feels that there are good arguments for constructing
many residential streets at less than the current requirements of 28 feet, and in this situation 25
feet is adequate and may help to reduce speeds on this roadway. The preliminary plat indicates
that both Tamarack Trail and Tamarack Place are to be 25 feet in width. However, Public Works
and the Fire Department have indicated that they are opposed to reducing the street widths in
these areas, and may provide information illustrating their concerns for the Commission's review
associated with this application.
The table on the following page was taken from a publication prepared by the Center for
Watershed Protection for the Metropolitan Washington (D.C.) Council of Governments in 1995,
and illustrates street requirements as recommended by the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the Institute of Transportation Engineers
(ITE). The table also contains recommendations proposed by the Center for "headwater streets,"
which refers to local streets as the "headwaters" of the transportation system, not to streets
located near the headwaters of stream corridors. The publication notes that the amount of
impervious surface contained within a watershed has a direct impact on the amount of stream
bank erosion and water quality that occurs within the watershed, and that the greatest share of
impervious surface in most communities consists of paved areas such as roads and parking lots.
The report notes that in most cases residential streets are overdesigned and allow motorists to
travel at higher speeds than is desirable in a residential neighborhood, and advocates the use of
narrower residential streets to address both problems (this is only one of a growing number of
5
publications that suggest narrower street widths in residential areas). The planning staff has
advocated this position in the past, and is hopeful that street standards will eventually be changed
to address these concerns. In the mean time, the planning staff will continue to encourage the use
of narrower streets where it feels they are necessary or reasonable. In this way the narrower
streets can serve as "tests" to be evaluated when considering changes to the street standards in
the future.
Condensed Summary of National Design Standards for Residential Streets.
Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection, The Center for Watershed Protection, 1995.
Design Criteria AASHTO
Residential Street Categories 1
Minimum Street Width
Additional Right-of-Way
Design Speed, Level Terrain
Curb and Gutter
Cul-de-sac Radii
Turning Radii in Cul-de-sac
26 ft. min.
ITE
3, depending on land
use density
22-27 ft.>2 du.
28-34 ft. > 2-6 du.
36 ft< 6 du.
24 ft. 24 ft.
30 mph 30 mph
Generally Generally required
required
30 ft. 40 ft.
20 ft. 25 ft.
Headwater Streets
4, depending on ADT
16 ft. (>100 ADT)
20 ft. (100-500 ADT)
26 ft. (500-3,000 ADT)
32 ft. (> 6 du./ac.)
8 to 16 ft.
15 to 25 mph
Not required on collectors
30 ft.
17 ft.
The Sensitive Areas Ordinance and the Subdivision Regulations both provide for the possibility of
reducing the street standards within a development. In addition, it appears that even the AASHTO
and ITE standards allow for streets of less than 28 feet in residential areas. The Planning staff
recommends that the standards be reduced for Tamarack Trail and Tamarack Place to 25 feet.
Storm Water Mana.qement: Storm water management is not required for this subdivision because
it is already being provided in a regional basin down stream from this development.
Secondary Access: The extension of First Avenue to Captain Irish Parkway to Dodge Street will
provide a secondary access for this overall neighborhood, allowing additional development to
occur in this area. However, the future of these street projects is uncertain. Final approval of this
subdivision should not be granted until these arterial street projects are underway. Without these
two street connections, no additional development should be occurring in this area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
If the First Avenue/Captain Irish Parkway road construction project does not proceed, staff
recommends that REZ97-0007 be denied. If the project proceeds, staff recommends that REZ97-
0007, a request to rezone 24.12 acres located at the east terminus of Hickory Trail from ID-RS to
OSA-5, be approved subject to the conservation easement and public open space dedications
shown on the Sensitive Areas Development Plan for this property.
Staff recommends that SUB97-0014 be deferred pending resolution of the deficiencies and
discrepancies listed below. Upon approval of these items, staff recommends that the request for
preliminary plat approval of First and Rochester, Parts 4 through 6, a 24.12 acre, 45-1ot residential
subdivision, be approved, subject to: 1) the approval of REZ97-0007; 2) approval of a Grading
Plan prior to Council consideration of the preliminary plat; and 3) subject to the bids being let for
the First Avenue and Captain Irish Parkway road construction projects prior to the approval of a
final plat for this subdivision.
DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES:
1.
6
A Grading Plan is required. Erosion control measures are not shown on plat or Sensitive
Areas Development Plan, but can be covered on the Grading Plan.
Some of the text on the plat is not readable (near Lot 115).
The dashed line between Outlot A and Lots 109 through 115 should be a solid line so that it
is clear that it is a lot line. Also, it should be more clear that the narrow access along Lot
115 is a part of Outlot A.
Remove the shading from Outlot A (does not appear to be illustrating anything in particular).
In the note about the turnaround on Tamarack Trail, a period should be placed after the
word "AROUND" to make it clear that it is the lots that will not be improved immediately,
and not the turnaround itself.
Additional items as identified by Public Works when reviewing the revised plat.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
Location Map.
Preliminary Plat/Sensitive Areas Development Plan.
USGS Map of Project Area.
ppdadmin~sffrep\firstroc.doc
Approved by:
Kar~ Franklin, Director,
Department of Planning and
Community Development
~'~'~,,~..~a~;~.~.~Z~.~,~;,,.,,,.~,~,.~,, PRELIMINARY PLAT a SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN
:~'~a"~a~,~.~;~,m;~aw" FIRST AND ROCHESTER SUBDIVISION - PARTS
.... ~ ............................ Iowa City. Iowa
,_~--~..-' ..- .. / , , ~.~;~'~"'."..'.'.',,~:.. .......'~'.,'. , ,',' , , , , ,. ',
~ .' ' _-. ~ ..... . ...... ~ '~"~ - -' '- ' ' L-'x-'~. -; :..-.C-'~'~ /,- '-;. ~- ~'. , .... ' ~ - _ ,
~,',~ :_- ....~i~_~'- _ - . -~. -~' . ........ . ../; ~.~.--;_ - -~ :- >- -
~'~ .......-.~. =..--..:.. - ~. .~'. ~. , . '~-'.~
...... . ..... r,~T ~[~: · ;
. . . : _.
~%~ ....> . . . : ~ ..~-"
~' ~ ,.I '- ~- ~ .... ~' i
, - . ~ ~ - l-~, ~' .~ ~ . . , ~ ; . ,,w; ~' , .
·: .... . ...... ' .; -.i
~ o.!~,, ),'/ ' ';"~"" --'~' ' - LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE
,',, ,'!l ,,. ',,,.:.~-i....'-~ ;
:;.. ,o;~. ~ - -
~TANDA~D L~GEND AND NOTES
T $0 N
T 79 N
4el 4
40' 00"
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 28, 1997
To: Bob Miklo, Senior Planner
From: Rick Fosse, City Engineer ~
Re: First and Rochester Part 4-6, Width of Tamarack Trail
There has been a recommendation to pave Tamarack Trail at a width of 25'
rather than the standard width of 28'. The recommendation is based on
concerns that the street alignment may encourage higher speeds and the
narrower width will be a means of calming the traffic and thereby making the
neighborhood more livable. Public Works and Engineering do not support a 25'
width for the following reasons.
Based on experience in our community, narrower streets do not offer these
advantages over their wider counter parts. In fact, the majority of complaints
received are from our narrower streets: Kimball Road (21'), Sheridan Avenue
(25'), Friendship Street (25'), Dover Street (25'), Wayne Avenue (25'),
Greenwood Drive (25'), Hollywood Boulevard (25') and Woodside Drive (25').
All agree that the underlying concern about speeding is safety. Our speed
studies show that traffic is not traveling slower on 25' streets (see attached
data), but residents are certainly more concerned on these streets. I expect this
is because their comfort level for safety is lower than residents living on 28' wide
streets. From the perspective of the resident, there is greater concern about
traffic traveling on narrower streets.
An example of the difficulties associated with 25' streets can be seen in the City
of Seattle. In response to concerns form residents, Seattle has implemented an
extensive traffic calming program even though most of their residential streets
are 25' wide. One of their measures of success is a reduction in mid-block
collisions. This is typically not a problem on 28' streets.
Aside from safety, the width of a street can impact the efficiency with which
public services are provided. With the exception of plowing snow, all municipal,
school bus and emergency services are better provided on a 28' wide street.
These service providers support the 28' width.
In summary, based on speed studies conducted in our community, 25' wide
streets do not promote lower speeds than their wider counterparts. In addition,
based on where complaints come from, narrower streets have a greater degree
of resident dissatisfaction with traffic. Based on this, it is unlikely that reducing
the width of Tamarack Trail will have a positive impact on the livability of the
neighborhood. We can also expect that a 25' width will reduce the efficiency of
most services provided to the residents.
CC:
Chuck Schmadeke
Jeff McClure
Doug Ripley
Andy Rocca
LOCATION
600 Benton Street
1300 Dover Street
3000 Friendship Street
600 Greenwood Drive
2200 Hollywood Blvd
500 River Street
1100 Sheridan Avenue
800 Woodside Ddve
100 S. Clinton Street
600 N. Gilbert Street
2300 Lakeside Drive
300 Macbride Road
1200 Teg Drive
1500 Teg Drive
2700 Walden Road
PAVEMENT WIDTH
25'
25'
25'
25'
25'
25'
25'
25'
31'
36'
28'
36'
36'
28'
85TM % SPEED
32
32
30
32
31
32
30
31
25
32
32
30
32
33
25
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
November 24, 1997
Planning & Zoning Commission
Jeff Davidson, Asst. Director, Dept. of Planning & Community Development
Review of City of Iowa City secondary access guidelines
In 1992 staff was directed by the Commission to develop a standard for when a secondary
means of access should be required to a development. This direction was a result of ongoing
residential subdivision issues, and a recognition that the City's previous secondary access
standard of 29 lots (based on the maximum cul-de-sac length under the old R1-B zoning
classification) was inadequate to address all situations. A proposed policy was developed with
five specific standards for evaluating secondary access. The Commission decided that the
proposed policy should be used as a guideline, but not be adopted by the City Council.
The 1992 secondary access guidelines have served us fairly well, and have essentially become
a de facto policy for dealing with secondary access issues. The guidelines use traffic volume,
physical features, pedestrian-motor vehicle conflicts, and special populations for gauging when
secondary access should be required. The guidelines also permit a single means of access as a
temporary condition.
The only element of the guidelines that has occasionally been called into question is the
collector street traffic volume of 2,500 vehicles per day. This is considered the point at which
additional development will overburden the street with traffic. There are neighborhoods within
the city, particularly on underdesigned collector streets, which consider 2,500 vehicles per day
to be an excessive traffic volume. Last year staff considered modifying this number, but after
deliberation decided to make no change.
Attached is a copy of the 1992 memorandum which was deliberated by the Commission. Our
current secondary access guidelines are summarized on the last page. In light of continuing
secondary access issues, and unfamiliarity with the guidelines by some members of the
Commission, we thought it would be good to have a brief overview at your December 1 work
session. Bring any questions you have to the meeting.
CC:
Karin Franklin
Bob Miklo
ppdad min\mem\secondac.doc
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 12, 1992
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Jeff Davidson, Asst. Director of Planning & Community Development
Re: Re-evaluation of City of Iowa City Secondary Access Policy
The City's policy regarding secondary access is part of a larger set of policies which govern
subdivisions and additions of property to the city. The dghts of the City to control land use
decisions were enacted by statute in 1931 and incorporated into Section 409A of the Code of
Iowa. The rationale for the statute is summarized in the following 1969 excerpt from the Iowa Law
Review.
Once an area of the City is developed, the cost of change becomes prohibitive,
and it becomes evident that a subdivider has cast the pattern for the future of the
community. Since urbanization of raw land at the City's edge is now the most
important development area, it is here that the most significant public influence
should be exerted. Although the individual subdivider may see his particular
subdivision as a complete unit, the planning agency or commission must
necessarily view it as a segment of an entire community.
The excerpt goes on to say that for the general health of the community the city must ensure that
public services and facilities can be provided to new subdivisions and additions in an effective
manner. This specifically includes streets which can handle the anticipated traffic which will be
generated.
Existing Policy
The City's policy on secondary street access is summarized on page 67 of the Iowa City
Comprehensive Plan, attached for your information. The focal point of this policy is the following
statement:
The need for secondary access will be determined by the following factors
including but not limited to the size of the subdivision, the topography of the land,
the density of housing, the adequacy of existing streets serving the area, and the
existing and projected development of adjacent land.
This provides a broad policy statement on the City's requirements for secondary access to
subdivisions. This policy has become necessary because of the pattern of residential
development which has evolved over the past 30 years. Traffic concerns have given increasing
favor to discontinuous street systems in newly developing areas.
2
A look at an Iowa City street map illustrates this pattern of development. The pre-1965 areas of
the city are characterized by grid street systems. A grid street system provides many alternatives
for traffic to circulate. Post-1965 developments are characterized by much less continuity in the
street system, an obvious effort to decrease traffic on residential streets. This is epitomized by
the cul-de-sac, a street design which provides for no circulation of traffic. A sedes of cul-de-sacs
puts pressure on the connecting "spine street," which must bear the brunt of all the traffic
generated by the cul-de-sacs.
There are varying opinions as to whether a residential area should have one or several entrances.
As summarized in the ULI publication Residential Streets, the advantages of multiple access
points include:
Reduced congestion and internal traffic volumes due to alternative routes.
Diffusion of traffic impacts to the external road system.
Continuity in the internal street system for service, delivery, and maintenance vehicles.
The advantages of a single access point include:
Elimination of through traffic and shortcutters.
Increased security.
A greater sense of neighborhood identity.
The rationality of the City's secondary access policy was established in the 1981 Iowa Supreme
Court case Oakes Construction Co. v. The City of Iowa City, Iowa. This was an appeal of a
District Court judgment upholding disapproval by the City of a preliminary subdivision plat. The
Supreme Court upheld the City's position of the necessity for secondary access to a 44 dwelling
unit subdivision. Testimony from City staff members outlined the following reasons why a single
means of access to the proposed subdivision would be inadequate:
The ability of the overall street network in the vicinity to circulate traffic would be
inadequate.
It would exacerbate existing traffic problems and negatively impact the adjacent
neighborhood.
Emergency vehicle access would not be adequate.
Non-local traffic would be added to a street with an elementary school.
As previously stated, the vagueness of the Comprehensive Plan language has led to varying
interpretations of when a secondary means of access should be required to a development. On
occasion City staff has used a specific standard of 29 lots as being the point at which secondary
access should be required. It is believed this originated from a calculation based on a 900 foot
cul-de-sac under the City's former R1-B zoning classification. It is clear that a blanket standard
such as this is not acceptable for all circumstances.
Proposed Standards for Requiring Secondary Access
It is recommended the City's policy or~ secondary access be based on the existing language in
the Comprehensive Plan, but that there be more specific standards on when secondary access
should be required. Staff has proposed the following checklist of cdteria for consideration.
3
Secondary access shall be required if a proposed development will result in any portion
of. the single access road being overburdened with traffic. "Overburdened" shall be
defined as a projected traffic volume which exceeds the midpoint design volume as
designated in the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan for a local or collector street:
Local street: 500 vehicles per day
Collector street: 2500 vehicles per day
Projected traffic volumes shall be determined by taking the most recent Average Dally
Traffic count which is available, and adding to it projected traffic generation using the Trip
Generation manual published by the Institute of Traffic Engineers. In the absence of a
recent traffic count, projected traffic volumes shall be calculated by using the ITE trip
generatibn rates for both existing and projected development.
A secondary means of access may be required when there are physical. features which
would inhibit emergency vehicle access if the sihgle means of access were blocked.
These physical features may include but are not limited to: slopes of 8% or greater,
floodplains as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, wetlands as
designated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a bridged or culverted waterway,
vegetation with a trunk diameter over two inches, a grade separated highway, or a
railroad.
A secondary means of access may be required if the street which would provide the single
means of access is a local or collector street, along which there are existing or proposed
facilities that would create pedestrian-motor vehicle conflicts. These facilities may include
but not be limited to schools, daycare centers, and parks.
,.
Secondary access may be required when there are special populations along the single
access road that increase the probability of emergency vehicle access being required.
These special populations may include but not be limited to elderly persons or persons
with disabilities.
o
For a situation requiring secondary access, a single means of access. may be permitted
as a temporary condition. A temporary condition shall be defined as one where there is
a written assurance from the City Council or a private developer that the road which would
provide secondary access will be constructed within three years.
I will be present at your November 2 meeting to discuss this matter. If these standards meet with
your approval, staff will develop language suitable for the City's subdivision regulations.
jccogtp\2ndaccs.mmo
CONDITIONAL ~ONING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Iowa
City, Iowa (City], and Plum Grove Acres, Inc., an Iowa Corpo-
ration (Developer).
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, Developer owns a tract of land located in the
northeast part of Iowa City, Iowa, legally described as fol-
lows:
Com~enc~ng at the Southwest Corner of the
Southwest Quarter of Section 1, Township 79
North, Range 6 West of the Fifth Principal
Meridian; Thenc- N00e01'00"W, 660.0~ feet;
Thence N89°35'03"F, 1,297.55 feet; Thence
N00°43'22"W, 2&3.95 feet; Thence
S89°43'16'E, 302.29 feet to the Northeast
Corner of Lot 73 of First and Rochester,
Part T~o and the Point of Beginning; Thence
N00°25'll"E
NBB"05'46"E
N01"22'5B"E
NBB"26'44"E
S00°32'00"E
S00°10'32"W
S89°04'17"W
N04'55'26"W
S88'54'34"W
N00o05'48"W
287.94 feet; Thence
187.87 feet; Thence
112.41 feet; Thence
810.19 feet; Thence
1,325.33 feet; Thence
333.60 feet; Thence
829.09 feet; Thence
12.25 feet; Thence
474.00 feet: Thence
83.75 feet to the Southeast
Corner of Lot 53 of said Part Two; Thence
N09'22'53"E, 242.84 feet along the Easterly
Line of said Part Two; Thence N18"35'00"E,
356.00 feet alon~ the Easterly Line of said
Part Two: Thence N04"15'00"E, 321.25 feet
along the Easterly Line of said Part Two;
Thence N25"38'14"E, 261.75 feet along the
Easterly Line of said Part Two; Thence
N00'25'~l'E, 23.47 feet along the Easterly
Line of said Part Two to the Point of Be-
ginning.
Said tract of land contains 42.54 acres, more or less, and is
~ub~ect to easements and restrictions of record and for conve-
nience is hereinafter referred to as "Development Land"; and
W~EREA$, Developer has applied to fezone the Development
Land from the Interim Development-Residential Single Family
(IDRS) classification to the Low Density Single-Family Residen-
tial (RS-5) zone; and
WHEREAS, the sole means of street access to the Develop-
ment Land is via First Avenue and Hickory Trail; and
W~EREAS, Deweloper has been unable to secure property
through which to provide a secondary means of access to the
City's street system; and
-2-
WHERFAS, it is City's policy, ba~ed upon ~afetv concerns,
to limit development in at,as where secondary acces~ is neither
available nor olanned: and
WHEREAS, the parties have aareed that twenty-seven (27~ is
the maximum number of sinale family residences which may be
allowed on the Development Land before $-condarv street access
is provided to the area; and
WHEREAS, Developer and City have now agreed to address
said reservations and objections by reducina the area of land
to be rezoned to a portion of the Development Land consisting
of 18.43 acres, more or less, lega!lv described as follows:
Commencing at the Southwest Corner of the
Southwest Quarter of Section 1, Township 79
North, Ranae 6 West of the Fifth Principal
Meridian; Thence N00°01'00"W, 660.00 feet;
Thence N89°35'03"E, 1,297.55 feet; Thence
N00"43'22'W, ~63.95 feet; Thence
S89"43']6"E, 302.29 feet to the Northeast
Corner of Lot 73 of First and Rochester,
Part Two and the Point of Beginning: Thence
N00*25'll"E,
NSg°05'46"E,
NOl'2?'58"E,
N88°26 44"E,
SO0°00 00'E,
S0~°00 00"E,
SII"39 36"W,
S05°00 00"E,
Sl1'30 00"W,
287.94 feet; Thence
187.87 feet; Thence
112.41 feet; Thence
175.00 feet; Thence
399.07 feet; Thence
315.29 feet; Thence
251.82 re-t; Thence
254.63 fe-t; Thence
162.53 feet; Thence
Southeasterly 35.25 feet, along a 385.53
foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly,
whose 35.23 foot chord b,ars S81e07'09"E;
Thence S06°15'43"W, 277.70 feet; Thence
S89~04'17"W, 170.00 feet; Th-nce
N04"55'26"W, 12.25 feet; Thence
S88"54'34"W, 474.00 feet; Thence
- NO0°05'48"W, 83.75 feet to the Southeast
Corner of Lot 53 of said Part Two; Thence
NO9°22'53"E, 24~.84 feet along the Easterly
Line of ~aid Part Two; Thence N18°35'00'E,
356.00 feet along the Easterly Line of said
Part Two; Thence N04'lS'00"E, 321.25 feet
along the Easterly Line of said Part Two;
Thence N25"38'14"E, 261.~5 f,et along the
Easterly Line of said Part Two: Thence
N00:25'll"E, 23.47 feet along the Easterly
Line of said Part Two to the Point of Be-
ginning.
For convenience, the above 18.43 acres, more or less, is here-
inafter referred to as the "RS-5 Tract'. Further, City and
Developer have agreed that no further rezonin~ or subdivision
of the Development Land shall be allowed until a secondary
street access is provided to the Development Land.
-3-
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Developer aaree as follows:
1. City agrees to the rezoning of the RS-5 Tract as le-
gally described above to Low Density Single Family Residential
(RS-5) zoning classification.
2. Developer agrees that City shall not be obligated to
fezone or approve subdivision plats for any more of the Devel-
opment Land (except the RS-5 Tract) until secondary street ac-
cess has been provided to that Development Land.
3. City and Developer agree that prior to the issuance
of building permits for lots in the RS-5 Tract, Developer shall
file and obtain City approval of a subdivision plat or plats,
and shall contract for and install such public improvements as
the City may require pursuant to its ordinances, rules, and
regulations.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
Conditional Zoning Agreement to be executed as of this 19th
day of April
ATTEST:
MarXan K. Karr, City ~-lerk
McDonald, Mayor
PLUM GROVE ACRES, INC.
/ -' .0 ~,~
R~uce .R. Gla~gou, P.r~sident
--~' ~ ~J
STATE OF IOWA )
) SS:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this !Pth d~v of April , 1988, before me, the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, per-
sonally appeared John McDonald and Marian K. ~arr, to me per-
sonally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that they
are the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, cf said municipal
corporation -xecuting th- within and foregoing instrument; that
the seal affixed hereto is the seal of maid municipal cot-
March 3, 1998
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
IOWa CITY, IOWA
We, the undersigned, are owners of property within 200 feet of the exterior boundaries of
the proposed Parts 4 - 6 of the First and Rochester Subdivision. In accordance with Iowa law,
we formally protest the rezoning of this subdivision from ID-RS, Interim Development, to
OSA-5, Sensitive Areas Overlay.
Our reasons for this protest are three:
(1) there is no clear street plan, without which we are concerned that the traffic
generated by this subdivision will severely overload Hickory Trail;
(2) the open space provided for is functionally unusable, being located in a wetlands
area with poor access from residential lots; and
(3) storm water drainage has not been adequately addressed, and we believe an already
serious yard flooding and erosion problem would become much worse.
Very briefly, we are concerned that lacking a street plan, the area will be developed in
such a way as to overload Hickory Trail, which will ostensibly become a major collector street
for the entire area north of Ralston Creek. Hickory Trail was not designed to play this role in a
safe and satisfactory manner. The area already has a significant deficit of neighborhood open
space; and with the substantial increase in traffic forecast for First Avenue, open space within
the area defined above takes on even greater importance. In the summer of 1993, the
designated 100-year floor limits were exceeded twice and again in the spring of 1996. With the
increased run-off development of Parts 4 - 6 will bring, Ralston Creek would be overtaxed, and
more frequent local flooding and erosion are certain to occur.
More planning needs to occur before this areas is ready to be developed.
Attachments
Signed/Notarized petitions
TO:
PROTEST OF REZONING
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
IOWA CI'Pt', IOWA
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of the property
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent or more of the
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
Parts 4 - 6 of the First and Rochester Subdivision.
STATE OF IOWA )
) ~:
JOHNSON COU~ )
7 '
On this ~day of ~ ,19 ~ , before me, ~e undersigned~ a Not~ Public in and
f~ said Count. and State., personaN appeared ~ ~~/ and
~l~ ~// to me known to be ~e identi~ persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing ins~ument and acknowledged ~at they executed the same
as tl~eir volunta~ a~ ~d deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
) es:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this ~1 day of ~ ,19(:/'7, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for_said County and State, personally appeared /J/~ ~CLr'/EO/3 and
~ ~, ~' 4t.Y'I,_~O/3 to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
execute'a the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their '~luntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
TO:
PROTEST OF REZONING
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
IOWA CITY, IOWA
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of the property
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent or more of the
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
Parts 4 - 6 of the First and Rochester Subdivision.
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the
members of the council, all in accordance with §414.5 of the Code of Iowa.
Owner(s) of
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this ~---/"~'day of ,_5~_. ,19 ~"7, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared ~,~,rl~fr~_ ']~(::~j1..~ and
~;{c.O~- ~OL~/ to me known to be the identical persor~s named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their vo!untan/act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
By:
Owner(s) of
Property Address ~...~
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this ~'/"~dday of ~ , 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notan/Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared ._~"~//'~ /.~/.~./' and
t~z~/Y.~K~ ~..z~W to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
TO:
PROTEST OF REZONING
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
IOWA CITY, IOWA
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of the p¥~perty
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent or more of the
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
Parts 4 - 6 of the First and Rochester Subdivision.
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the
members of the council, all in accordance with §414.5 of the Code of Iowa.
Owner(s) of Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNI'Y )
On this 2-/~ay of _.~ , 19 q 7, before me., the und. ersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and alale, personally appeared ~v'~,~ ~1~-../3 and
~V~ ~cbq to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
' Own~r(s) of - ~
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
Property Address;/ ? /
STATE OF IOWA )
)
JOHNSON COUNTY )
.On thi.s,~/ day of ~ , 19 q , before m_,~e, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
~*o,r~sa, ia ,~ounty and S.tate, personally appeared .-/~;;~n ~t3rJ~/ and
~'1. ~/3 I'~OJ')rl~ to me known to be the identical prersons named in and who
exebuted the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
PROTEST OF REZONING
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ~ '~'
IOWA CITY, IOWA '~:>--~' '~ ~
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area ~;~e 13qrop 'e~
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent ~[i~_ ~or~.of {1~
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of t~e pro~rty for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
Parts 4 - 6 of the First and Rochester Subdivision.
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the
members of the council, all in accordance with §414.5 of the Code of Iowa.
Property AddresSJ
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
-
On thisZ/ ay of ~ ,19q7, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared /V~Q.r~',JT'Qtl ~ i~. {~)~-.Q(-~3 and
to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed ~.he within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their volunt~,~y act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
Owner(s) of
Property Ad~dres~'~s
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this ~-/'5~'day of ,~*~-1~'~ ,19 ~/7, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared '~'~r'~) ~o~ and
~l'/3~J 1~O.5.~--/3 to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
PROTEST OF REZONING ~ co
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ~-- ~ ~
IOWA CITY, IOWA ~.:_. co ~
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area~f t'he~operty
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent or mol~ of the
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
Parts 4 - 6 of the First and Rochester Subdivision.
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the
members of the council, all In accocdance with §414.5 of the Code of Iowa.
~'~
Owner(s) of Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this ~-/~day of ~2.~: ,19 (~7', before me, the undersigned, a Notan/Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared K.~"l~ri c_'~rl(3r~.Y'o, rl and
to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed *J~e within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as [heir voluntar~ act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
By:
Owner(s) of
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
)
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this day of ,19 , before me, the undersigned, a Notan/Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared and
to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
TO:
PROTEST OF REZONING
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
IOWA CITY, IOWA
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of the property
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent or more of the
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
Parts 4 - 6 of the First and Rochester Subdivision.
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the
members of the council, all In accordance with §414.5 of the Code of Iowa.
Owner(s) of
Property Addres~
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this 2l 5+day of '-~-J:~= ,19c~7', before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared ~ ~71r1~.-~ /cEjq~_.. and
to me known to be the identical per~'"bns named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Owner(s) of
Notary Public In and for the State of Iowa
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this ~l ~day of ~ , 19 ~7, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared ~D.(~,t/iC{.. J~'or~'p.(}~)l,'Oc.~ and
,-~).0/1~ ~rKgn~;~'oc.K to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed,
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
TO:
PROTEST OF REZONING
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
IOWA crrY, IOWA
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of the property
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent or more of the
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
Parts 4 - 6 of the First and Rochester Subdivision.
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the
members of the council, all In accordance with §414.5 of the Code of Iowa.
.~..~..- - .- ~'~ / ~ .-~ /
as president of the Rochester Hills
Condominium Association.
Owner(s) of
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
) 85:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this ~-q~'~ay of .~,~,~ , 19 q-/, before me, the undersigned, a Notan/ Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared '~V'L"L(fC4'1 .~F~O"~.:-'-'5 and
to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
At its annual meeting on September 25, 1997, the Rochester Hills Condominium Association
voted to direct its president, Warren Sparks, to sign this petition. The Association owns the
land along the southern boundan/of the property in question.
NOTICE 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 24"' day of March, 1998, in the Civic
Center Council Chambers, 410 E. Washington
Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at which hearing the
Council will consider the following items:
1. An ordinance conditionally changing the
zoning designation on a 4.46 acre tract
located at 500 Foster Road from Intedm
Development Single-Family Residential
(IDRS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay-8 (OSA-8)
to permit 35 dwelling units and approving a
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development
Plan.
2. An ordinance conditionally changing the
zoning designation on approximately 41 acres
located between lower West Branch Road and
Court Street extended, approximately 4/5"'
mile west of Taft Avenue from Low Density
Single-Family Residential (RS-5) to Medium
Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) for
29.1 acres and Low Density Multi-Family
Residential (RM-12) for 11.9 acres.
3. An ordinance changing the zoning designation
on approximately 24.12 acres from Interim
Development (IDRS) to Sensitive Areas
Overlay-5 (OSA-5) and approving a
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan
for property located at the east terminus of
AnHickory Trail.
ordinance approving the preliminary OPDH
pan for Walnut Ridge, Parts 6 and 7, a 66.68
acre, 20-1or residential subdivision located at
the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file
for public examination in the Office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
ppdadmin\3-24nph.doc
Prepared by: Scott G. Kugler, Assoc. Planner, 410 E.
Washington Slmet, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5243
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CHAP-
TER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNA-
TION FOR APPROXIMATELY 66.68 ACRES
LOCATED AT THE NORTH TERMINUS OF
KENNEDY PARKWAY BY APPROVING A NEW
PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
HOUSING (OPDH) PLAN FOR PARTS 6 AND 7
OF WALNUT RIDGE, IOWA CITY, IOWA.
WHEREAS, the applicant, Southgate Develop-
ment Co. on behalf of property owners Dorothy J.
Kisner & 'John W. and Barbara Kennedy, have re-
quested that the City rezone approximately 66.68
acres of property located at the north terminus of
Kennedy Parkway by approving a new Pre-
liminary Planned Development Housing (OPDH)
plan for Parts 6 and 7 of Walnut Ridge, Iowa City,
Iowa; and
WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning will allow
residential development on the subject property
similar in character to that which exists on adja-
cent properties; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Planning and
Community Development and the Planning and
Zoning Commission have reviewed the proposed
rezoning and Planned Development Housing
(OPDH) plan and recommend approval; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Council that the
property remain subject to the terms and condi-
tions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement ap-
proved on January 8, 1991 by Ordinance 91-
3485, and recorded in Book 1197, Page 107 of
the Johnson County Recorder's Office.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA:
SFCTION I. APPROVA~. The following property
located in the Planned Development Housing
Overlay Zone (PDH-1), is hereby rezoned subject
to the terms and conditions of the Conditional
Zoning Agreement previously approved on Janu-
ary 8, 1991 by Ordinance 91-3485, and recorded
in Book 1197, Page 107 of the Johnson County
Recorder's Office, and subject to an updated pre-
liminary Planned Development Housing (OPDH)
plan:
Commencing at the Southwest Comer of
the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest
Ordinance No.
Page 2
Fractional Quarter, of Section 7,
Township 79 North, Range 6 West, of
the Fifth Principal Meridian; Thence
N00°23'09"E, along the West Line of the
East One-Half of the West Fractional
One-Half of said Section 7, 2981.61 feet,
to the Point of Beginning; Thence
continuing N00°23'09"E, along said
West Line, 2321.80 feet, to the
Northwest Comer, of the Northeast
Quarter, of the Northwest Fractional
Quarter, of said Section 7; Thence
N88°30'17"E, along the North Line of
said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest
Fractional Quarter, 1320.00 feet, to the
Northeast Comer thereof; Thence
S00°22'54"W, along the East Line of
said East One-Half of the West
Fractional One-Half of said Section 7,
2239.44 feet; Thence N89°37'06"W,
129.48 feet; Thence N83°38'19"E, 60.08
feet; Thence N78°39'30"W,-443.62 feet;
Thence. S81°20'49"W, 239.43 feet;
Thence S69°05'17"W, 491.81 feet, to
the Point of Beginning. Said tract of land
contains 66.68 Acres, more or less, and
is subject to easements and restrictions
of record.
SFCTION II. VARIATIONS. The following
variations .from the requirements of the RR-1
zone have been approved as part of this revised
preliminary PDH plan:
A. Reduction of the right-of-way width of
Kennedy Parkway, a collector street, from
66 feet to a minimum of 6Ofeet.
B. Modification of the City's street standards
and specifications for collector streets to
permit a pavement width of 28 feet, back of
curb to back of curb, for. the undivided
portions of Kennedy Parkway. Where the
two lanes of this street are separated by
vegetative islands, each of the divided lanes
shall be a minimum of 22 feet back of curb
to back of curb.
C. Reduction of the pavement width for all other
streets from 28 feet to 25 feet, back of curb
to back of curb.
D. Reduction of the pavement width for all
cul-de-sac loops to a minimum of 22 feet,
back of curb to back of curb.
E. No provision for public sidewalks adjacent to
streets within the subdivision, except
Kennedy Parkway.
F. Kennedy Parkway shall have a four foot
wide sidewalk, constructed by the
developer, on only one side of the proposed
right-of-way. This walk shall be continuous
from a point on Melrose Avenue to the point
where Kennedy Parkway intersects the west
Ordinance No.
Page 3
boundary of the subdivision.
SFCTION III. ?ONING MAP. The Building
Inspector is hereby authorized and directed to
change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City,
Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final
passage, approval and publication of this Ordi-
nance as provided by law.
SFCTION IV. CFRTIFICATION AND RF-
CORDING. After passage and approval of the
Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized
and directed to certify a copy of this Ordinance for
recordation in the Office of the County Recorder
of Johnson County, Iowa, at the Applicant's ex-
pense, all as provided by law.
SFCTION V. RFPFAI FR. All ordinances and
parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions
of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SFCTION VI. SFVFRARILITY. If any section,
provision or part of the Ordinance shall be ad-
judged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such ad-
judication shall not affect the validity of the Ordi-
nance as a whole or any section, provision or part
thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
SFCTION VII. FFFFCTIVF DA'r!=. This Ordi-
nance shall be in effect after its final passage, ap-
proval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this day of
,1998.
MAYOR
A'CI'EST:
CITY CLERK
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 30, 1998
'ro:
Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
Be:
REZ98-0001/SUB98-0001. Walnut Ridge, Parts 6-9.
Southgate Development Company has submitted a revised OPDH plan and preliminary plat
for Parts 6-9 of Walnut Ridge, located on the north side of Melrose Avenue, east of
Highway 218. A plan and plat for Parts 5-9 was approved by the City in March of 1994.
The plan approved at that time is very similar to the current plan. The proposed changes
involve the removal of two lots near the intersection of Kennedy Parkway and Burr Oak
Court, and the expansion of a public access and common open space outlot. Both the
current and previous plans are attached for review. The removal of a private lane off of
Burr Oak Court which was to have provided access to two flag lots (former lots 68 and 69)
results in a decrease of one lot and a larger outlot and pedestrian access easement to the
north of the remaining lots. On the east side of this intersection, two lots are being
combined into one (former lots 71 and 72) and another outlot area expanded. Other than
the renumbering of the lots due to the reconfiguration of property lines near this
intersection, there appear to be no other changes to the plan. The alignment of the public
streets and lot lines appears to be identical to the previous plan. Staff views these
changes as relatively minor and recommends approval.
Infrastructure issues for this subdivision, such as street and right of way widths, sidewalk
locations, and cul-de-sac length were determined during previous rezoning and development
applications. The existing portions of the subdivision have been developed based on these
decisions. Staff does not feel that these items need to be revisited at this time, as the
proposed changes will not impact any of these items. To summarize, due to the low
density of development a number of the street widths and right of way widths were
reduced, cul-de-sacs of over 900 feet in length were permitted for Shagbark Court (within
Part 5) and Chestnut Court, and sidewalks were waived for all streets except along the
east and north sides of Kennedy Parkway.
Secondary access was discussed in the 1994 staff report, but was not a part of the
discussion at the formal Planning and Zoning Commission meetings, according to the
minutes from those meetings. At that time, staff raised concerns about the development
of the northern portion of the property, and felt that the City should have some assurance
that a connection to Camp Cardinal Road to the west could be accomplished within a
reasonable time. However, this recommendation was not reflected in the motion approving
the plan and plat by the Commission, nor in any ordinance or resolution adopted by City
Council. Although the record is somewhat unclear, it appears that at some point a
requirement for secondary access was dropped, perhaps at one of the Commission's
informal meetings. Staff recommends that given the low density of the development and
the design of Kennedy Parkway, which is periodically divided by a center median that
allows greater emergency vehicle access by decreasing the likelihood that this roadway will
be fully blocked, secondary access not be required at this time. The design of the
development does provide for the future extension of Kennedy Parkway to the property to
the west.
Due to the current workload, Public Works has not yet had an opportunity to fully review
the plan and plat submitted with this application. However, since this is a rezoning
application and the changes are relatively minor, staff placed the item on the agenda for
discussion of the February 5 meeting. If the plan is reviewed and it is determined that it
can be voted on at the February 5 meeting, staff will advise the Commission and it can
proceed to vote if it wishes, or defer to allow for two public discussions of the item. If the
plan is not ready to be voted on at the February 5 meeting, this item should be deferred
until the February 19 meeting. The 45-day limitation period for this item expires on March
5, 1998. At the time this staff report was issued, the only deficiency identified had to do
with the names of two of the proposed streets which are already used in other parts of the
City. These duplicate street names, Chestnut Court and Ironwood Place, apparently were
not noticed when this plan was reviewed previously. However, streets using these names
have been platted and built in the Pepperwood Addition within the South Planning District,
and cannot be used in this development. Alternative street names should be proposed for
these two streets.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REZ98-0001/SUB98-0001, a request for a revised preliminary
OPDH plan and preliminary plat for Walnut Ridge, Parts 6-9, a 66.68 acre, 42-1ot residential
subdivision located at the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway, be deferred pending the full
review of the plan. Upon completion of this review and resolution of any deficiencies
identified, staff recommends that this item be approved, and that all other conditions
attached to previously approved plans for this area not modified by the current application
remain in effect.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map.
2. Proposed preliminary OPDH plan and preliminary plat.
3. Previously approved preliminary OPDH plan and preliminary plat.
DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES:
The names Chestnut and Ironwood have both been used previously within the
Pepperwood Addition. Alternative street names should be proposed.
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
Amended Preliminary Plat & OPDH Plan
1
:~i'~.- '.. .V/f/ --'
.... ~z '/' '~
'~TM ~ LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
February 13, 1998 (for February 19 meeting)
Planning and Zoning Commission
Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
REZ98-0001/SUB98-0001. Walnut Ridge Parts 6 & 7.
At the February 5 meeting, staff noted that the previously approved preliminary plat and
OPDH plan for this property had expired, and that the existence of critical slopes and a
woodland at the northwest corner of the site required a Sensitive Areas Overlay rezoning
and possible revisions to the plan in this location. In response, the applicant has submitted
a revised OPDH plan and preliminary plat for only Parts 6 and 7, and has designated Parts 8
and 9 as an outlot for future development. The design of the northwest corner of the site
would be addressed in a future application, which will have to account for the requirements
of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. A stream corridor is located within the subdivision
boundaries at the south end of Part 6, which will require that a sensitive areas site plan will
have to be submitted and approved prior to Council consideration of the preliminary plat. It
does not appear that the existence of the stream corridor will have any impact on the
design of the subdivision or the development of the adjacent lots.
The revised plan is being reviewed by staff to determine whether or not is in compliance
with the City's subdivision regulations. If the plat and plan are in order by the February 19
meeting, the Commission can vote on this item and send it on to City Council. If not, a
waiver of the 45-day limitation period will be needed if this item is to be deferred. The
street and lot configuration appears to be identical to Parts 6 and 7 as shown on the plat
reviewed by the Commission at the February § meeting. As noted at that time,
infrastructure issues were discussed during past approvals of development plans for this
property, and staff recommends that these decisions continue to apply to this
development, since parts 1 through 5 have already been constructed or final platted.
These issues include:
1. Reduction of the right-of-way width of Kennedy Parkway, a collector street, from '66
feet to a minimum of 60 feet.
2. Modification of the City's street standards and specifications for collector streets to
permit a pavement width of 28 feet, back of curb to back of curb, for the undivided
portions of Kennedy Parkway. Where the two lanes of this street are separated by
vegetative islands, each of the divided lanes shall be a minimum of 22 feet back of curb
to back of curb.
3. Reduction of the pavement width for all other streets from 28 feet to 25 feet, back of
curb to back of curb.
4. Reduction of the pavement width for all cul-de-sac loops to a minimum of 22 feet, back
of curb to back of curb.
No provision for public sidewalks adjacent to streets within the subdivision, except
Kennedy Parkway.
Kennedy Parkway shall have a four foot wide sidewalk, constructed by the developer,
on only one side of the proposed right-of-way. This walk shall be continuous from a
point on Melrose Avenue to the point where Kennedy Parkway intersects the west
boundary of the subdivision.
These items were listed as variations from the requirements of the RR-1 zone in the
ordinance approving Parts 5-9 of this development in 1994. Staff feels it is appropriate to
carry these items over for the rest of the development.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REZ98-OOO1/SUB98-0001, a request for a preliminary plat and an
amended preliminary OPDH plan of Walnut Ridge, Parts 6 and 7, a 20-lot residential
subdivision located at the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway, be deferred pending staff
review and approval of the most recent plat and plan submitted by the applicant. Upon
staff approval of the plat and plan, staff recommends approval, subject to the approval of a
sensitive areas site plan and a grading plan prior to Council consideration of the preliminary
plat.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map.
2. Preliminary plat and revised preliminary OPDH plan.
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
! I
I
I
I
ID-ORP
p
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
IDRS
P
SITE LOCATION: Walnut Ridge, Parts 6-9REZ98-0001 & SUB98-0001
OUT'LOT C~
RESERVED FOR ~
" FUTURE DEVE
69
71
PLA/' pLAN ^PPRO~,ED /
GRAPHIC SCALE
1
NOTICE 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 10th day of March,
1998, in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at
which hearing the Council will consider the
following:
)An ordinance amending Title 14, Chapter
6, "Zoning," Article E, "Commercial and
Business Zones," Section 2, Neighborhood
Commercial Zone (CN-1) regarding size
restrictions on restaurants.
2. An ordinance amending the approved
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development
Plan for Lot 51 of Walden Hills, containing
2.9 acres and located within the OSA-8,
Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone at the
northeast corner of Shannon Drive and
Irving Avenue.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file
for public examination in the office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
ppdadmin/nph0223.doc
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
March 13, 1998 (for March 19 meeting)
Planning and Zoning Commission
Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
CN-1 Zone Restaurant Regulations - Occupancy Threshold
At the March 5 meeting, the Commission recommended approval of proposed amendments
to the CN-1 zone regarding the size limitations on restaurants. The Commission
recommended that the existing threshold for determining whether or not a restaurant
requires a special exception, a floor area threshold of 2,500 square feet, be replaced with a
threshold based on a building occupancy of 100 persons.
The City Council held a public hearing on this item at its March 10 meeting. As a result of
the discussion that took place at the public hearing, the Council requested that the
Commission consider establishing the occupancy threshold at 130 persons rather than at
100 persons. The Council has continued the public hearing on this item to its March 24
meeting. The Council has requested that the Commission review the proposed change and
provide a recommendation for the Council to consider at its March 24 meeting.
The February 19 packet contains a staff memorandum explaining in detail why an
occupancy threshold of 100 persons was felt to be appropriate, and included a table
containing information on existing Iowa City restaurants and their occupancy loads or
seating capacities. A copy of a letter from Kirsten Frey suggesting an occupancy threshold
of 130 persons is also attached for your review.
As noted in the February 19 memorandum, staff's research indicates that based on the
restaurants included in the table, an estimated 30 square feet of total restaurant floor area
can be expected per occupant in a typical restaurant (this includes all components of the
restaurant), although this number can fluctuate in either direction based on the design of
the floor plan of a particular restaurant and how efficiently kitchen and storage spaces are
utilized. Using this number and an occupancy threshold of 130 persons, one would expect
that a typical restaurant of about 3,900 square feet could be constructed without the need
for a special exception. Staff has noted that it is not necessarily the size of the building
that houses the restaurant that is cause for concern, but rather it is the intensity of the use
and the level of traffic generated that needs to be carefully managed. However, making
the above comparison helps to put the proposed change in perspective and allows some
comparison between the existing floor area threshold and the occupancy threshold being
proposed. Staff feels that the proposed change would clearly result in an increase in the
scale and intensity of restaurant uses permitted in the CN-1 zone without a special
exception.
NIICHAEL W. KENNEDY
~OHN O. CRUISE
STEVEN C. ANDERSON
KIRSTEN H, FRE¥
KANDIE K. BRISCOE
KENNEDY, CRUISE, ANDERSON & FREY, L.L.P.
LAWYERS
B2o s. DUBUQUE STREET - P.O. BOX
IOWA CITY. IOWA
March 3, 1998
City Council Members
City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
AREA CODE 3lB
TELEPHONE 351-BIBI
FAX 351-0605
OF COUNSEl
CHARLES A. BARKER
CITY OFFi££
Re:
Proposed Amendment to the Ordinance Regarding
Restaurants in the CN-1 Zone
Dear Council Members:
I represent Plum Grove Acres, Inc. It is my understanding
that you have before you for your consideration proposed amend-
ments to the CN-1 zone provisions of the zoning ordinance. I
would like to talk to you briefly about these proposed amendments
and the issue of restaurants in the CN-1 zone in general.
It is my understanding that you have been presented with a
proposed ordinance dealing with the appropriate size of restau-
rants in this commercial neighborhood area. I would like to urge
your favorable consideration of this proposed ordinance. In its
report, the Iowa City Staff asked you to develop an ordinance
that is well thought out and not merely designed to address the
Deeds of one restaurant owner. At the same time, City Staff goes
into great detail about the history of that one restaurant owner
and his attempts to obtain a special exception to operate a res-
taurant in a CN-1 zone in eastern Iowa City. I agree that the
ordinance should be designed to meet the needs of the community
as a whole and not the needs of the individual. However, the
story of that one restaurant owner is a prime example of why this
amendment to the ordinance is necessary.
The City Staff report points out that in 1996, approval of a
special exception was granted to Steve Kohli on behalf of John
and Ada Streit for a restaurant with 3,376 square feet and a 35
space parking lot with eleven spaces land banked. When a build-
Page -2-
March 3, 1998
ing permit was sought on the project, the applicant was told that
because there was a basement on the building plans, there was
more than 3,376 square feet in the building and, as a result, the
permit was denied. A new special exception request was filed
which included the area of the basement in the square footage
calculations. This request was denied, despite the fact that the
number of tables in the proposed restaurant in both applications
was the same.
The restrictions on the CN-1 zone are designed to make sure
that commercial uses within the area are consistent with the
neighborhood feel of the area and are not too intensive for the
surrounding residential property. In this case, the impact on
the neighborhood between the applications had not changed at all.
The foot print of the building was exactly the same; the number
of parking spaces was exactly the same; and the number of tables
was the same. The only difference was the inclusion of a non-
public basement storage area and office space in the square foot-
age calculations -! a change that has absolutely no impact on the
surrounding neighborhood.
As the attachment to this letter clearly points out, there
are 72 units of apartments and townhouses to the north of the
proposed site, 96 units to the south, 78 units to the west, and a
possible 60 or more units to the east. The net result is that at
least 548 people live within walking distance of the proposed
restaurant. This is clearly a perfect location for a restaurant
as anticipated by the commercial neighborhood zone.
Given the goals of the CN-1 zone and the restrictions on the
commercial uses therein, the use of an occupancy load requirement
makes more sense than the use of a square footage requirement.
The occupancy load tells us how many people the commercial use
can accommodate, which is directly tied to the restaurant's im-
pact on the neighborhood. The only real question is what occu-
pancy limit should be established for those uses which do not re-
quire a special exception.
With respect to the proposed ordinance before you, I would
like to point out a few things. First of all, in the Staff's re-
port to the Planning and Zoning Commission, a copy of which has
been presented to you, the Staff lays out 11 restaurants that it
believes clearly meet the intent of the CN-1 zone. This memoran-
dum, however, uses seating numbers for four of those restaurants
rather than occupancy figures so the occupancy numbers in this
chart are understated.
Page -3 -
March 3, 1998
Second, City Staff points out that these 12 restaurants
clearly meet the intent of the CN-1 zone and should therefore be
used as references for determining what the appropriate limit on
occupancy should be. The staff then goes on to state that those
with high occupancy loads may be pushing the limit of the CN-1
zone. This statement clearly evidences faulty logic. The whole
purpose for looking to these restaurants as benchmarks is to de-
termine what the occupancy limit should be. One cannot say that
they are perfect examples of CN-1 restaurants except for the fact
that their occupancy levels are too high when the whole purpose
of looking at the restaurants is to determine an appropriate oc-
cupancy level.
Furthermore, one restaurant that is located in the CN-1 zone
has been left off this list. Jimmy's Brick Oven Caf~ has 3,126
square feet and has seating for 195 people. Its occupancy would
be even higher. In light of the fact that this restaurant was
approved in the CN-1 zone, it must be suited and appropriate for
the zone. Thus, we believe the appropriate occupancy limit at or
below which no special exception is required should be 130 per-
sons.
Finally, as long as you are considering whether or not to
amend this ordinance, it seems to me as though you might as well
correct other deficiencies in the existing ordinance at the same
time. The ordinance currently limits the total floor space used
by restaurants to 20% of the total commercial floor space in the
CN-1 zone. Other sections of this ordinance have been amended to
reflect the fact that this limitation is to "existing or pro-
posed" commercial space. Without this amendment, the issue of
what types of uses are acceptable in a CN-1 zone depends entirely
upon building order.
In summary, my client, Plum Grove Acres, Inc., respectfully
requests that you pass this ordinance by changing the eligibility
requirements to be based upon an occupancy load figure rather
than a square footage figure and that you establish the maximum
occupancy load at 130 persons. We are also requesting that you
change the ordinance to include the word "existing or proposed"
so that the second half of the ordinance will read as follows:
"and the total floor area allocated to restaurant use will not
exceed twenty percent (20%) of the existing or proposed total
public commercial floor area in a CN-1 zone."
I thank you for your time spent on this problem. I plan on
attending the City Council session to discuss this issue with you
in more detail and I will be available to answer your questions
Page -4-
March 3, 1998
at that time.
eration.
Once again, I thank you for your time and ¢onsid-
Very truly yours,
Kirsten H. Frey
KHF/kas
cc: Bruce R. Glasgow
John A. Streit
kfS'\ 1626594';
COURT HILL - SCOTT BOULEVARD PART IX
The area in question is surrounded by several multi-family
uses including:
NORTH: 52 apartment units and 20 townhouses
SOUTH= 72 apartment units and 22 townhouses
WEST~
36 apartment units, 26 duplexes and 16 units in existing
4-plexes
EAST: 7 vacant lots and 5 acres zoned for multi-family
Thus, this restaurant site is currently surrounded by 246
existing apartments and townhouses and has the possibility of
being surrounded by an additional 60 units. Assuming that there
are two persons per dwelling unit, at least 548 persons would be
within walking distance of the proposed restaurant site.
kfS\o62b5948
NOTICE 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 10th day of March,
1998, in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at
which hearing the Council will consider the
following:
1. An ordinance amending Title 14, Chapter
6, "Zoning," Article E, "Commercial and
Business Zones," Section 2, Neighborhood
Commercial Zone (CN-1) regarding size
restrictions on restaurants.
2~ An ordinance amending the approved
~,___~ preliminary Sensitive Areas Development
Plan for Lot 51 of Walden Hills, containing
2.9 acres and located within the OSA-8,
Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone at the
northeast corner of Shannon Drive and
Irving Avenue.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file
for public examination in the office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
ppdadm~n/nl;~O~-"3~ -,oc
NOTICF OF PUBIIC HFARING
TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED
PERSONS:
Public notice is hereby given that the City of
Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on
the City's FY99 Iowa DOT Consolidated Transit
Funding grant application. The application will be
for approximately $296,635 (3.3495%) in state
transit assistance formula funds to be used for
operating and/or purchasing capital items for Iowa
City Transit during FY99. Said application will
also include a listing of projects to be applied for in
FY99 from the Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) Section 5307 and/or Section 5309
programs. The FTA Section 5307 program
provides federal funds to be used for the
operating and capital needs of Iowa City Transit.
Section 5309 is a discretionary capital funding
program. Section 5307 and/or Section 5309
projects to be applied for in FY99 include (federal
share):
1. Operating assistance approximately
$194,443.
2. Construct multi-use parking facility, transit
hub, & neighborhood commercial center
(Proposed for FTA Livable Communities
Funding) - $2,000,000
3. Methane abatement for transit facility &
parking lot - including repair of floor drains &
mechanical systems - $320,000
4. Transit vehicle maintenance & overhaul [up to
20% of maintenance costs] - $110,900
5. Purchase paratransit software and hardware
- $64,000
6. Replace roof on transit facility - $64,000
7. Purchase radio equipment for paratransit
vehicles - $28,800
8. Replace 5 bus shelters & pads - $24,000
9. Purchase office equipment for paratransit
operations - $12,800
10. Replace steam cleaner at transit facility -
$3,600
11. Purchase replacement sweeper/scrubber for
transit facility - $28,000
TOTAL FEDERAL FUNDS = $2,822,543
Additional projects may be added before the
public hearing is held.
The public hearing will be held at 7:30 p.m. on
March 24, 1998, in the Council Chambers of the
Iowa City Civic Center, 410 E. Washington Street,
Iowa City.
A preliminary application will be on file March
20, 1998, at the JCCOG Transportation Planning
Division Office, Iowa City Civic Center, 410 E.
Washington Street, Iowa City, and may be
inspected by interested persons. Any questions
or comments regarding the application, the
projects, or the public hearing, should be directed
to Kevin Doyle, JCCOG Assistant Transportation
Planner (319-356-5253).
These projects will not have any significant
detrimental environmental effect on the area and
no persons or businesses will be displaced by
these act'n/flies. The projects are in conformance
with the JCCOG Urbanized Area Transit Plan for
the Iowa City Urbanized Area.
Any interested persons may appear at the public
hearing for the purpose of making objections or
comments. Wdtten comments will be accepted by
JCCOG at the above address through the date
and time of the hearing specified above. This
notice is given by the City Council of the City of
Iowa City, Iowa.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA
jccogtp\fy95sta~lCTnph.doc
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS,
SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT
AND ESTIMATED COST FOR
MORMON TREK CONCRETE PAVEMENT
REHABILITATION PROJECT
IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA
TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED
PERSONS:
Public notice is hereby given that the City
Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will con-
duct a public hearing on plans, specifications,
form of contract and estimated cost for the con-
struction of the Mormon Trek Concrete Pavement
Rehabilitation Project in said City at 7:00 p.m. on
the 24th day of March, 1998, said meeting to be
held in the Council Chambers in the Civic Center
in said City.
Said plans, specifications, form of contract and
estimated cost are now on file in the office of the
City Clerk in the Civic Center in Iowa City, Iowa,
and may be inspected by any interested persons.
Any interested persons may appear at said
meeting of the City Council for the purpose of
making objections to and comments concerning
said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of
making said improvement.
This notice is given by order of the City Council
of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and as provided by
law.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
PH-1
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON
PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF
CONTRACT AND ESTIMATED COST
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE
SCANLON GYMNASIUM COMPLEX IN
MERCER PARK, IN THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA
TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER PERSONS IN-
TERESTED:
Public notice is hereby given that the City
Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will
conduct a public hearing on plans, specifica-
tions, form of contract and estimated cost for
the construction of the Scanlon Gymnasium
complex in Mercer Park in said City at
7:00 p.m. on the 24th day of March, 1998,
said meeting to be held in the Council Cham-
bers in the Civic Center in said City.
Said plans, specifications, form of contract
and estimated cost are now on file in the office
of the City Clerk in the Civic Center in Iowa
City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any
persons interested.
Any persons interested may appear at said
meeting of the City Council for the purpose of
making objections to said plans, specifications,
contract or the cost of making said improve-
ment.
This notice is given by order of the City
Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
parksrecJres/scar~n.doc
NOTICE 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 24th day of March,
1998, in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa;
regarding the intent to dispose of 1702
California Avenue, also described as Lot 36,
Part 1-A Mount Prospect Addition, to the
tenant family.
Persons interested in expressing their views
concerning this matter either verbally or in
writing will be given the opportunity to be
heard at the above time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
h isadmin/n p,h(Y226.doc