HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-11-15 Public hearingMike McLaughlin
(ph): 319-631-3853
It has come to my attention that the redefinition of the word Household in the proposed
zoning code, Title 14, Chapter 9, Article A, which would reduce the permitted roomers
and unrelated individuals by one in some zones, is a change in the text of the zoning
requirements. This has been confirmed4~ith the Ci.ty Attorney's office. In the current
city code, Title 14, Chapter 6, Article B, Section 2, rezoning, a change in land use
regulations, is defined in three forms: A. a comprehensive revision or modification of the
zoning text and map, B. a text change in zone requirements, C. a change in the map. At
a minimum the new proposed zoning code would be a text change in zone requirements,
from the current code, if not also a comprehensive revision.
Therefore it is my belief that the zones proposed to have a density change, such as it is
proposed to reduce the roomers and unrelated individuals by one in the RNS-12(formerly
RNC-12), RM-12, RNS-20(formerly RNC-20), RM-20, are due the process outlined in
the City pamphlet, A Citizen's Guide to the Rezoning Process. This is the same process
that we recently experienced when the CB-2 landowners were notified of the proposed
rezoning for their property. In general all property owners within 300 feet of the
proposed area(s) need to be notified by mail and signs posted in the area providing notice
of a rezoning proposal, with contact information. All publications to date have
announced this proposal as a new zoning code At this time, the position of the City
Attorney's Office is to not interpret the changes, from the current code to the proposed
code, as a rezoning. Therefore, the City Attorney's office has not been receptive to allow
notarized petition signatures as a means to protest such rezoning, denying the process due
the property owners.
At this time I request that the definition of Household and all other related definitions,
including but not limited to nonconforming residential occupancy, all related Chapters,
Articles, Sections and Subsections be stricken, until the time that City staff may present
this as a rezoning and by its required protocol. Further discussion and passage of these
cites in this proposal would result in an ineffective code and not be legally binding.
rezoning request. You can provide comments Petitions should include: · ACitizen's
orally (in person at the formal meetings) or in · Notarized signatures and addresses of the
protesting property owners.
writing. . Specific objections to the proposed G id h
Written comments for the Planning and rezoning may be attached to the petition in tie to te
Zoning commission must be received bY the a separate letter. Rezoning
Planning Department no later than Wednesday
eight days prior to the commission meeting to Who can sign the petition?
ensure that they are included in the packet of · Property owners within 200 feet of the
information. To contact the Planning and subject pr°petty (An °wner list is avail' Process
zoning Commission, send an email to able at the Department of Planning and
planningzoning~iowa-city, org or send a letter Community Developmen0.
addressed to the Commissions at 410 East · Other concerned citizens can sign a
Washington Street, Iowa City IA 52240. petition, but their names should be sub-
mitted separately.
Written correspondence for the City Council
must be received by the City Clerk's office by How is the petition filed?
the Wednesday prior to the formal meeting in · The petition must be filed with the City
ordex in order to be included in the council Clerk no later than the Wednesday before
packet. To contact the City Council, send an the public heating for inclusion in the City
email to council~iowa-city, org Or send a Council packet, or the petition may be
letter addressed to the council at 410 East presented at the heating itself.
Washington Street, Iowa City IA 52240.
Contact information for individual Council Stay Informed
members may be found at www~icgov, org/city
You can view agendas of all of the City's Boards
council.htm, and Commissions and City Council at ICGOV. org.
All correspondence submittefi after the dead- To receive notification when new agendas or
lines listed above will be hand-distributed to minutes are posted on the website visit http://
the Commission or Council. www. icgov, org/subscribe, asp. The agendas will
include Staff Reports, Site Plans, etc. Agendas are
Protest of Rezoning also available in the City Clerk's Office.
Under Iowa law, if the owners of 20 percent or For more information on urban planning visit:
more of the area located within 200 feet of the http://www, icgov, org/pcd/urbanplanning Understanding and
proposed rezoning oppose it, the zone change
may only occur with a a/a vote (6 out of the 7 Participatingin the Process
members) by City Council. It is necessary to
submit a written protest petition to the City no
later than the closing of the public hearing I City of Iowa City
before the City Council. Petition forms may ~,~.---=~.
Planning & Community Development
be obtained at the Office of the City Clerk, 356-5230
City Hall, at 410 East Washington Street.
CiTY OF IOWA CITY
Z oning is the tool by which local govern amendments and District Plans. The formal
ent can control urban form by specifying Planning and Zoning meetings are held on the
e building use, size, and placement on a first and third Thursday of each month at 7:30
property. A rezoning is a process that changes p.m. in Emma J. Harvat Hall in City Hall.
the zoning of a property or group of properties. The Zoning Process
Work sessions are sometimes held the Monday
The City Council makes land-use and zoning before the formal Planning and Zoning meetings.
decisions for Iowa City after receiving a recom- The work sessions are a time for Planning and
mendation fi:om the Planning and Zoning Corn- ~ ~ Zoning Commission members to share informa-
mission.
I Proposed Rezoning I tion and discuss items of business. While the
I
work sessions are open to the public, they are not
What happens in the rezoningprocess? ~ a time for citizen input. The number of Planning
I Neighborhood Notification ] and Zoning meetings where a rezoning is dis-
A change in zoning will typically affect the . I cussed depends upon the complexity of the issues
density, intensity, or permitted use of a property. ~
involved.
The City's Comprehensive Plan, compatibility
with surrounding zones, and adequacy of city Staff Review & Report City Council
infrastructure and services are all factors consid-
ered in determining ifa rezoning is appropriate~ "' ~ The City Council ~akes final decisions on appli-
cations for rezoning, street vacations, annexations,
Public input is important in this process, so with P la n n in g & Z o n in g C o m m is s io nand subdivision (:levelopment, and the adoption of
any request for a rezoning, the public is notified 4} Inform el m o·tlng planning documents. Before making that deci-
by a number of means. When a rezoning applica- :! Form·l m.tlng{·} sion, however, the Council reviews the recom-
tion has been submitted, City staff sends notifi- ' ) h · · r · ta ff re p ort · mendation from the Planning and Zoning C om-
b) hear appllcantldeveloper
cation by letter to all thc owners of property ¢) heerpublic view· mission and hears opinions from both the general
located within three hundred (300) feet of the a} Reco",mendatlon to Council public and property owners affected.
boundaries of the proposed rezoning site. This
notice includes information about the request, a ~ Work sessions are generally held the Monday
City staff contact (name, phone, and ·mail), and before the formal City Council meetings. The
the tentative date and location of the Planning City C o u n c il work sessions are a time for Council members to
and Zoning Commission meeting. A sign is also ~}ln fo rm · I m e etlng share information on agenda items. While the
posted on the property advising the public that a :} Formal meetlno work sessions are open to the public, they are not
a) hear appllc·ntldeveloper
rezoning has been applied for. b) he·r public view· a time for citizen input. The formal City Council
meetings are typically held on the first and third
Planning and Zoning Commission ; Tuesday of each month at 7:30 p.m. at the Emma
J. Harvat Hall in City Hall, 410 East Washington
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviews Z o n i n g D e c is io n Street. The City Council may have up to three
applications and staff evaluation/recommenda- T h · CIty C o u n oil m u st vote th re·public hearings for a rezoning.
tions for rezoning, street vacations, annexations, ti.,,, In order to approve ·
and subdivision development; hears opinions r·zon lng. How can Iparticipate in the process?
from both the general public and property
owners affected; and makes recommendations to Public input is important in order for the Planning
the City Council. In addition, the Commission and Zoning Commission and the City Council to
makes recommendations on Comprehensive Plan completely understand the issues related to a
14-6B-2 14-6B-2
bath and toilet facilities available for the specialized trade or commercial courses,
exclusive use of the occupant(s) or for not elsewhere classified, but not academic
communal use and, in addition, the occu- training. Specialized nondegree granting
pants may have access to a communal schools, not elsewhere classified, such as
kitchen and/or dining room. music schools, dramatic schools, language
schools and civil service and other short
SALVAGE YARD: An area where waste and term examination preparatory schools.
discarded or salvaged materials are bought, Establishments primarily engaged in operat-
sold, exchanged, baled or packed, disas- lng dance studios and schools.
sembled, stored or handled, including the
dismantling or "wrecking" of automobiles or SETBACK LINE: The line beyond which the
other vehicles or machinery. A "salvage wall of a building or structure shall not pro-
yard" is also a house wrecking yard, used ject.
lumberyard and place for storage of sal-
vaged building materials and structural SPECIAL EXCEPTION: A principal or ac-
steel materials and equipment, cessory use, a yard modification or a modi-
fication of parking and stacking spaces
SCHOOL, GENERALIZED PRIVATE IN- allowed when the provisions of subsection
STRUCTION: A private school which in- 14-6W-2B of this chapter are met and
cludes any of the following: elementary and where the board of adjustment determines
secondary schools below university grade that the facts and conditions specified else-
(ordinarily grades I through 12), including where in this chapter as those permitting
denominational and sectarian schools, the exception exist.
kindergartens and military academies. Col-
leges, universities and professional schools STACKING SPACE: An asphalt, concrete ~ ~'~
granting academic degrees and requiring at or similar permanent dust free surface de-
least a high school diploma or equivalent signed to accommodate a motor vehicle
general academic training for admission, waiting for entry to an auto oriented use
Junior colleges and technical institutes and located in such a way that a parking
requiring at least a high school diploma or space or access to a parking space is not
equivalent general academic traii3ing for obstructed. A "stacking space" must be at
admission and granting associate academic least nine feet (9') in width and nineteen
degrees, certificates or diplomas, feet (19') in length.
SCHOOL, SPECIALIZED PRIVATE IN- STOREFRONT: The ground level frontage
STRUCTION: A private school wl~ich in- of a building in which there is located a
cludes any of the following: establiSh, ments single business directly behind the frontage.
primarily engaged in offering data process- The length of the storefront is measured
lng courses in programming and in comput- from the outside edge of the exterior walls
er and peripheral equipment operation, of the building, or if there are multiple busi-
including keypunch operation. Establish- nesses located in a single building, from the
ments primarily engaged in offering courses centerline of the wall that separates the
in business machines operation (except business from another business, public
data processing), office procedures and area, or other area not occupied by the
secretarial and stenographic skills. Estab- business.
lishments primarily engaged in offering
January 2004
r. ou)a Cit:y
14-6B-2
14-6B-2
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION: An organization sells to customers for business or personal
having a religious purpose, which has been ~
granted a federal tax exemption as a sec-
tion 501(c)(3) organization under the inter- REZONING: A change in land use regula-
hal revenue code, as amended, including tions. Rezonings can take three (3) forms:
churches, rectories, .meeting halls, schools
and the facilities related to their use. A. A comprehensive revision or modifica-
: ~ tion of the zoning text and map;
REMODELED/REPAIR: Any improvement in
a building which is not a structural alter- B. A text change in zone requirements;
ation, or
RESPONSIBLE PARTY: A person, who C. A change in the map, i.e., the zoning
resides in and provides room and board in designation of a particular parcel or
an elder family home. The responsible party parcels.
may be, but is not required to be, an elder.
ROOF: The top covering of a building con-
RESTAURANT: An establishment where the structed to shield the area beneath from the
principal business is the preparation and weather. The term "roof" includes the term
dispensing of edible foodstuffs and/or bev- "canopy".
erages primarily for consumption on or off
the premises. Restaurants where the food- ROOFLINE: The highest point of the coping
stuff and/or beverages are dispensed pri- of a flat roof, the deck line of a mansard
marily for off site consumption are consid- roof or the midpoint between the eaves and
ered "carryout/delivery restaurants". "Drive- ridge of a saddle, hip, gable, gambrel or
throUgh restaurants" are restaurants that ogee roof.
have drive-through or drive-in facilities.
Drive-through restaurants are considered ROOMER: An occupant of a rooming house
"auto and truck oriented uses" and as such or rooming unit who is not a member of the
are only allowed in zones where auto and family of the rooming house operator. A
truck oriented uses are allowed. "roomer" shall also mean an occupant of a
dwelling unit who is not a member of the
RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT: An establish- family occupying the dwelling unit.
ment engaged in selling merchandise for
personal or household consumption and ROOMING HOUSE: Any dwelling, or that
rendering services incidental to the, sale of part of any dwelling, containing one or more
the goods. Such establishments will have rooming units in which space is let by the
the following characteristics: the estabhsh- owner or operator to four (4) or more room-
ment is usually a place of business and ers.
engaged in activities to attract the general
public to buy; the establishment buys or ROOMING UNIT: Any habitable room or
receives, as well as sells, merchandise; the group of adjoining habitable rooms located
establishment may process its products, but within a dwelling and forming a single unit
such processing is incidental or subordinate with facilities which are used or intended to
to sales; the establishment is considered be used primarily for living and sleeping but
retail in the trade; and the establishment not for cooking. A "rooming unit" shall have
January 2004
Iowa City
Date: November 10, 2005
To: City Council
From: Kadn Franklin, Director,
Re: Zoning Code amendments and schedule
Attached is a matrix of the various issues the Council has addressed for possible amendment to
the Zoning Code proposal. In this memorandum, I am only addressing the issue of lot width.
Given your direction to retain the lot widths in the current Code and to eliminate any garage
placement standards, the staff needs further direction.
It was apparent in our discussion on Tuesday that a majority of the Council was interested in
having a small-lot single-family zone and in having a zone which allowed a mix of attached and
detached housing options. The small lot single-family zone would be the RS-8 zone and the
zone permitting a mix of housing would be the RS-12 zone.
The Council has also indicated an interest in retaining the lot width standards from the current
code and eliminating the garage placement standards for detached single family homes. Is it
also your intention to retain the lot width standards from the current code for attached
dwellings? If there is a desire to reduce the lots further than what is allowed currently for
attached housing, what standards, if any, do you want in the code to address traffic circulation
and vehicular access?
In the current Code, the minimum lot width in the RS-5 zone is 60', in the RS-8 zone it is 45',
and in RS-12 it is 45'. Currently, in these zones there are no specific lot width standards for
duplexes and attached single-family. In our current code, the lot width for all uses in RS-12 is
45', which precludes the viability of townhouse development. Any townhouses we have
(Mormon Trek Village, Windsor Ridge north of Court) were accomplished through a planned
development.
The lot width and size standards for attached single family and duplexes in the table on p.16
were arrived at based on the understanding that there would be standards that address the
specific issues that arise when you have high density neighborhoods with very narrow lots. We
understand from your discussions that you would also like to avoid future situations such as
what has occurred on Jema Court where there are narrow lots with single car garages and little
on-street parking available. As currently drafted in the proposal, lot widths for attached single-
family housing in the RS-12 zone will be allowed to be even narrower than Jema Court. Lots as
narrow as 20 feet would be allowed by right, with up to 6 townhouse units attached. If standards
are not in place to address vehicular access and on-street parking, it may result in
neighborhoods that have problems of crowding and lack of on-street parking even worse than
Jema Court (see attached drawing).
The reduction in lot widths for attached single family dwellings was included in the proposal to
enable townhouse development, but also assumed there would be some standards in the
resulting neighborhoods for vehicular access and traffic circulation.
In order to retain the flexibility in the Code to have townhouses by right at the 20' lot width, we
would advise including a provision for attached single family that would require alley access for
any lots that are less than 45 feet wide, which is the basic lot width of RS-12. A similar
provision for alley access should be added for duplexes on lots less than 80 feet wide, because
November 10, 2005
Page 2
there are two dwelling units per lot. Without such provisions and with the changes the Council
has proposed, the resulting development could include rows of townhouses or duplexes with
single car garages, with little or no room on the street for parking. This type of development
would be allowed by right with no oversight by the City Council.
Staff also needs some direction on the single family bonus density provisions. The Council did
not discuss whether you wanted to keep the bonus density provisions for detached single family
homes. Given your direction to delete the garage placement standards and retain the existing
lot widths, we will delete subparagraphs 1.a, 2.a, and 3.a. from the bonus density provisions on
p. 21. We recommend retaining 1.b, 2b, and 3b. to provide an option for developers wishing to
do smaller lots with alleys.
If the Council does not want to require alley access for any of the circumstances noted above,
we recommend the reductions in lot width and the bonus density provisions be eliminated and
we revert to the current Code, using the planned development process to enable smaller lot
development. The planned development process would allow the Council to carefully consider
on a case-by-case basis any implications of a proposed higher density development on
neighborhood traffic, congestion, on-street parking and circulation.
Schedule
With the input we have received to date regarding amendments to the Code, we believe we can
make the necessary changes to the proposed Code in time for the Council to give a revised
proposal first consideration on December 13th. We may be able to respond to additional
comments from the Council that may arise during your meetings of Nov. 14 and 15 and still
make this schedule; this, of course, will depend upon the substance and complexity of the
issues raised. We cannot guarantee a draft for consideration on Dec. 13 for any items raised
after Nov. 15.
Our expectation is that the Council will set times for additional meetings in December to
complete consideration of the Code in this calendar year.
Cc City Manager
Planning & Zoning Commission
Bob Miklo
Karen Howard
Eleanor Dilkes
Marian Karr
~ ~o
Marian Karr
From: Garry and Betsy Klein [the3rdiowa@mchsi,com]
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 9:31 AM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: Zoning Code Tweaking
I wish I could be at the council meeting next Tuesday, however, I will be in Arkansas at
that time. I offer these thoughts regarding the first four items that are on the list of
suggestions that are contested by the LDC from a perspective of what is needed to
encourage more affordable housing in neighborhoods.
The proposed zoning code is in need of, as Ernie likes to say, tweaking. However, it is
clear that the council is considering tweaks that could hurt current and future
neighborhoods. By keeping zoning frontages much the same in all residential zones, the
cumulative effect is to reduce the amount of affordable housing(that which can be afforded
by persons earning 80% of the area median income) that can be built in our city--which we
all acknowledge is a problem.
According to Karin Franklin on 9/19/05, "We hired Duncan and Associates to do an analysis,
which was completed in 2001. That is this document (the Duncan Analysis), which was
affirmed by the City Council in 2001, and at that time the Council gave us direction to
proceed with drafting an ordinance that followed what was outlined in this analysis."
Members of the council at that time were Ernie Lehman, Mike O'Donnell, Dee Vanderhoef,
Connie Champion, Ross Wilburn, Irvin Pfab, and Steven Kanner. Simple math indicates that
at least two of you were supporters of the Duncan report and subsequent ordinance (the
revised zoning code)Karin alluded to. It seems incongruous that you would have changed
your minds or perhaps, having seen the "product", you've had a change of heart?
According to Bob Brooks also on 9/19, "we looked back at these documents [the
comprehensive plan, district and neighborhood plans] and the Duncan report as kind of our
bible and direction and our road map as to where we wanted to be. So, that is what we kept
going back to each time...and I would encourage everyone who looks at the zoning code - it
can not stand by itself. You need to go back and look at what the community vision is and
what the future that the citizens wish for in the community to be able to understand and
appreciate some of the things that we did." Clearly the vision of the community of 1997
through 2001, when two or more of you were on the council is what is being questioned by
the current council.
Mike O'Donnell mentioned frequently that the cost per square foot for building is $110 to
125 per square foot. However, that is an average. If you consider most larger homes have
more "air" per square foot than smaller homes, the cosn to a builder is proportionally
less than for builders than building smaller homes, and this allows for a larger profit
margin. Only through more compact development of houses per acre can a builder hope to
recover the costs and have a reasonable amount of profit--a.k.a. "incentive".
What developers are fighting against is actually counter to what many in our community
need, but not their own self-interest. A good question to ask of the Land Development
Council members who support leaving things "as is" is would they make a commitment to
developing 10 to 15% of a development for affordable housing voluntarily? To work toward a
solution that works for the most in the community, we need to move from a "all or
nothing" mentality to one of a "win-win".
If a compromise is not reached such that the frontages are on average, are not reduced or
set asides are agreed to, no more affordable housing will be built and the number of
persons waiting for assisted or affordable housing will get longer and longer. Please
consider this as you serve as stewards of our community.
Garry Klein
628 2nd Ave.
( ASOF EM~ER 10 2005)
NOv , '
14-2A - Single Family Residential Zones (and associated provisions in 14-4B)
~ .~ :Informal
propo~ ow NO
ed Amendmeht ExPlanat tes' S~ Meeting
Qu&~tiohs!commen~ 10'31,0~,,
Table 2A-2 (p.16) In the current Code the minimum lot width in the RS-5 See attached memo Council indicated
Dimensional Requirements Zone is 60 feet. regarding questions interest in making
in the Single Family about the density bonus this amendment
Residential Zones - In the The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended options, to the proposed
RS-5 Zone, change the increasing the minimum lot width to 70 feet to code.
minimum lot width for accommodate 3-car garages, a feature increasingly
detached single family common in the RS-5 Zone and to acknowledge the
dwellings from 70 feet to general pattern of development in the RS-5 Zone. The
60 feet. Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
allowing a reduction in the lot width to 60 feet
Requestor: Steve Gordon - provided the width of the garage takes up no more
Land Development Council than 50% of the length of the front fa~;ade of the home
and provided the garage is not located forward of the
front facade of the home.
Table 2A-2 (p.16) In the current code the minimum lot width is 45 feet See attached memo Council indicated
Dimensional Requirements wide. regarding questions interest in making
in the Single Family about the density bonus this amendment
Residential Zones - In the The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended options, to the proposed
RS-8 and RS-12 Zones, increasing the minimum lot width to 55 feet to co~le.
change the minimum lot accommodate two car garages with enough
width for detached single remaining lot width for residential aspects of the
family dwellings to from 55 home, adequate area for front yard open space, street
feet to 45 feet. trees, and on-street parking.
Requestor: Steve Gordon, The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
Land Development Council allowing a reduction in the lot width to 45 feet
provided the width of the garage takes up no more
than 50% of the length of the front fa~;ade of the home
and provided it is not located forward of the front
facade of the home.
3 14-4B-4^-2 and 14-4B-4^- The Planning and Zoning Staff has questions regarding Council indicated interest in
3 and 14-4B-4^-5 (pp. Commission has recommended the new lot width standards for changing the following
176-184) In all the single reducing the lot requirements to townhouses and other attached standards:
family residential zones, make it easier to build duplexes, housing and how these relate · Delete the requirement that
remove the "design attached single family houses, and to the Council's discussion each dwelling unit be
provisions" for duplexes townhouses by right, without having about modifying the garage demarcated by a porch,
and attached single family to go through the planned standards. See attached canopy, or transom and
(townhouses). development rezoning process, memo. sidelight windows.
However, in order to address issues · Delete the garage placement
Requestor: Steve Gordon, of building bulk, traffic circulation and standard and allow the length
Land Development Council access, on-street parking, and of the garage wall to be up to
pedestrian safety, the Commission 60% of the length of the
has recommended certain minimum street-facing building fa(;ade.
standards. These standards are · Delete the sentence that
intended to replace the negotiated specifies how wide the trim
process that currently occurs during should be around windows,
the planned development rezoning doors, and roof eaves.
process.
4 Remove provision 14-2A-6 The Planning and Zoning Staff has questions regarding The Council indicated interest in
(p. 19), which states that Commission has recommended that the new lot width standards for eliminating the garage
"on lots less than 60 feet in lot sizes and lot widths be reduced townhouses and other attached placement standard that states
width, garages and off- below what is currently required in housing and how these relate that garages must be flush with
street parking areas must order to provide opportunities for to the Council's discussion or recessed behind the front
be located so that they do more affordable housing types, such about modifying the garage fa~:ade of the dwelling.
not dominate the as townhouses, duplexes, and zero standards. See attached
streetscape..." lot line dwellings. The standards for memo, The Council indicated interest in
vehicular access were included to changing the garage wall
Requestor: Steve Gordon, address issues specific to standard so that the length of
Land Development Council development of smaller, narrower the street-facing garage wall can
home lots, both for detached homes be up to 60% of the length of the
and attached homes and street-facing building fa~;ade,
townhouses, rather than 50% as stated in the
proposed draft.
14-2C - Commercial Zones
~ I~fo~mal Me~fi~g
proposed, i ~ Explanatory NOteS S~ff QueSti0nSlcomments ~
Amendment ~
5 Insert the Central The Planning and Zoning Commission Staff requests clarification from the City Council indicated
Business Service (CB- recommended that the CB-2 Zone be Council regarding what form the CB-2 interest in making this
2) Zone back into the eliminated from the Zoning Code, because it Zone should take in the new code. change.
Zoning Code did not seem to support the vision in the Does the Council wish to modify any
Comprehensive Plan for areas surrounding of the development standards for this
Requestor: City Council downtown Iowa City. zone.
6 Table 2C-2(a) (p. 63) The Planning and Zoning Commission This is a typo in the recommended
Correct error in the recommended that the minimum lot area per draft that should be corrected.
recommended draft dwelling unit in the CN-1 Zone be 1 unit per
regarding the 1,800 square feet of lot area. The
residential density recommended draft states 1 unit per 2,725
allowed in the CN-1 square feet of lot area. This should be
Zone. corrected.
Requestor: City Staff
14-4E - Nonconforming Situations
Pr0p0sed Amendment ExPia~at°~ N~tes Staff QuestiOnsl comments Meeting 10. Informal
i · 31~5,
7 (pp. 230, 231) Amend the The City Council is concerned that using How will an appraiser determine the Council
Damage and Destruction "assessed value" would not be a very fair market value of the structure if it indicated
clauses in 14-4E-5E and 14- accurate measure of value lost if a structure has been destroyed? interest in
4E-6C, so that the assessment was destroyed, making this
of value is based on fair amendment.
market value rather than on
assessed value.
Requestor: City Council
14-5A -Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards
propb~d A~ndment ExPlanatorY~ote~ Staff Qu~sti0hSl comme,ts ihformal Meeting 10.31~5~
8 Table 5A-2 (p.243) Add a Homeless shelters currently Group Living uses require 25% of Council indicated interest in
25% bicycle parking do not have a requirement required parking for bicycle parking, making this change.
requirement for Community fo~ bicycle parking and the This is a use that is comparable to
Service - Shelter Uses Council discussed the need homeless shelters with regard to
for such parking, demand for bicycle parking.
Requestor: City Council
14-51 - Sensitive Lands and Features
prOpOsed Amendment EXplafiatory-NOtes Staff Questi~$1COmments Informal Meeting
9 Clarify that sites that have This was the intent of the Clarifying language can be added to Council indicated interest in
regulated sensitive features recommended draft, this effect, making this change.
that trigger a Level II
Sensitive Areas Review must
go through the approval
process for a planned
development, but are not
required to comply with
approval criteria for a planned
development, unless
modifications to the
underlying zoning regulations
are requested.
Requestor: Mike Pugh, Land
Development Council
14-5K - Neighborhood Open Space Requirements
: informal Meefin~ :~-I
: ~r~P°~d ~end~ent ~ EXPlana{ory NOtes* i, ~ff ouestionsl~om~en~ 10~31-05
10 14-5K-6 (p. 343) Use of Rather than require land With this change, the City will City Council indicated interest
Funds paid in lieu of land dedication in subdivisions where need to set up a system to in making this change.
dedication - Amend this there is no open space determine the owners of the lots
section so that any funds appropriate for a neighborhood within a subdivision and refund
paid in lieu of land dedication park, the City collects fees any remaining fees to those
that have not been spent equivalent to the cost of the land owners.
within the allotted period of that otherwise would have been
time be automatically dedicated. The funds are then
refunded to property owners, used to purchase more suitable
rather than requiring them to parkland or trails in close
apply for a refund, proximity to the subdivision or
the funds are used to improve
Requestor: Mike Pugh, Land an existing parks or trails in the
Development Council area.
The ordinance specifies that
property owners within the
development can request a
refund of these fees if they have
not been used within the allotted
period of time.
14-8D - Planning and Zoning Commission Approval Procedures
Prop°sed Amehdme~t E~planato~' N~t~s, Staff Informal Meeting
. Questions/COmments 10'31~5
11 Amend 14-8D - Planning and Zoning Four votes are required to approve The language in the Code Council indicated
Commission Approval Procedures Comprehensive Plan amendments, is confusing. For interest in making
Zoning Map and Text Amendments, consistency and clarity, this change.
Amend clauses in 14-8D-3F, 14-8D-5E, and Planned Development Overlay staff recommends
14-8D-7C-2b (pp. 376, 378, 381), that Rezonings. amending these clauses.
refer to the specific number of votes
required for consideration.
Requestor: Dan Smith, Land
Development Council, City Staff
12 Amend 14-8D - Planning and Zoning This requirement has been city policy Staff recommends this
Commission Approval Procedures for a number of years, but there are change.
instances where the Planning and
Amend requirement for City Council to Zoning Commission has declined
meet with the Planning and Zoning Council's offer for a discussion, due to
Commission in cases where they particular circumstances of the case or
disagree with P&Z's recommendation to where they feel their recommendation
indicate that a meeting is not required if was clear and no further discussion is
the Planning and Zoning Commission needed.
declines the Council's offer to meet.
Requestor: City Staff
10..... ;'
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 5th day of October, 2005, in
Emma J. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street,
Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at
the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider:
An ordinance amending Title 14 entitled "Unified
Development Code" by repealing chapters 4, 6
and 9 and replacing them with the new Title 14
Zoning Code, amending portions of chapters 1
and 5, renumbering chapters 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10
and 11, and repealing Chapter 12.
A Copy of the proposed ordinance is on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
~-tJ
1//1.5
~~
/() /(0
~
_/~ -if)
un !O/Ig
1,1/
~ -/;zJ j;~
. ".-iJJ
f)Yr:CtuuJ
1/;
~
(A/lt10ta-V
11/'1
--------
Prepared by: Mitchel T. Behr, Asst. City Attorney, 410 E Washington St, Iowa City, IA 52240
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14 ENTITLED "UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE" BY:
REPEALING CHAPTERS 4, 6 AND 9 AND REPLACING THEM WITH THE NEW TITLE 14 ZONING
CODE, AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTERS 1 AND 5, RENUMBER, lNG CHAPTERS 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8,
10 AND 11, AND REPEALING CHAPTER 12.
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan provides a vision for future development of Iowa City's
neighborhoods, commercial and industrial districts and public spaces; and
WHEREAS, the Plan envisions healthy neighborhoods providing an array of housing options for the
city's diverse population, preservation of historic neighborhoods and landmarks, attractive and vibrant
commercial districts, economically sound industrial districts, preservation of environmental assets and
accessible trails, parks and open space; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code adopted in 1983 does not contain the tools necessary to implement the
vision of the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, after considerable deliberation and public discussion, the Planning and Zoning
Commission has recommended approval of a new Zoning Code based on the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to update the Zoning Code to implement the Comprehensive
Plan; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend other chapters of the Code to be consistent with the proposed
Zoning Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA:
SECTION I. The Code of Ordinances of the City of Iowa City, Iowa is hereby amended as follows:
A. By repealing Title 14, "Unified Development Code," Chapter 4, Land Control and Development,"
Chapter 6, "Zoning," and Chapter 9, "Development Fees," and substituting in lieu thereof the "TITLE 14,
ZONING CODE" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
B. By renumbering Title 14, Chapter 8, "Airport Zoning," to Title 14, Chapter 6 within the "TITLE 14,
ZONING CODE" attached hereto.
C. By renumbering and renaming Title 14, Chapter 7, "Land Subdivision."
D. By renumbering Title 14, Chapter 1, "Streets, Sidewalks and Public Right of Way" and amending
it as follows:
1. Section 14-1A-7 is deleted in its entirety and substituted in lieu thereof is the following: "No
person shall construct or cause to be constructed any encroachment into or over the public right of way,
except as specifically allowed by City Code. For any such encroachment into or over the public right of
way that is specifically allowed by City Code, including signs, buildings, and other structures, a Use of
Public Right-Of-Way Agreement must be signed by the property owner and approved by the City as a part
of the approval process."
2. Section 14-1B is deleted in its entirety and substituted in lieu thereof is the following:
Before any person shall cut any curb on any street in the City, the person shall first obtain an Access
Permit from the Department of Public Works, which permit shall be issued only on condition that the curb
cutting be done in accordance with the provisions of Article 14-5C of the City Code, Access Management
Standards.
3. Section 14-1C-2 is deleted in its entirety and substituted in lieu thereof is the following:
Sidewalks must be located within the public right-of-way so that the line of the inner edge of the sidewalk
is one foot from the property line. In cases where there is practical difficulty meeting this location standard,
the City Engineer may modify the location of a sidewalk.
4. Section 14-1C-3A is deleted in its entirety and substituted in lieu thereof is the following:
Sidewalks must be constructed, reconstructed and repaired in accordance with the Iowa City Municipal
Design Standards, as amended.
5. Section 14-1C-3C is deleted in its entirety and substituted in lieu thereof is the following:
The City Engineer may order the repair, replacement, or reconstruction of a public sidewalk upon written
notice and as provided by State Law. Such order and written notice shall constitute issuance of a permit
as required in subsection B, above.
6. Section 14-1E-1 is deleted in its entirety.
Ordinance No.
Page 2
7. Section 14-1E-2 is renumbered to 14-1E-1 and amended by deletion of the definitions for
"Sign" and "Signs in Public Places" and substitution in lieu thereof the following definitions: "SIGN: As
defined in Article 14-9C, Sign Definitions" and "PUBLIC PLACE: Any public street, way, place, alley,
sidewalk, park, square, plaza and City-owned right of way or any other public property owned or controlled
by the City and dedicated for public use."
8. Section 14-1E-3 is deleted in its entirety and substituted in lieu thereof as section 14-1E-2
is the following: "RESTRICTIONS: No privately-owned signs shall be placed on or over a public place,
except as provided for in Section 14-5B-10 of the City Code."
9. Section 14-1E-4 is deleted in its entirety.
E. By renumbering Title 14, Chapter 2, "Public Utilities and City Right of Way."
F. By renumbering Title 14, Chapter 3, "City Utilities."
G. By renumbering Title 14, Chapter 10, "Standards For Public Works Improvement Projects."
H. By renumbering TiUe 14, Chapter 11, "Penalties."
I. By deleting Title 14, Chapter 12, in its entirety.
J. By renumbering Title 14, Chapter 5, "Building and Housing" and amending it as follows:
1. Section 14-5H is deleted in its entirety, and substituted in lieu thereof is the "SITE PLAN
REVIEW" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION II. ZONING MAP. Upon final passage, approval and publication of this Ordinance, as provided
by law, because this ordinance renames "Residential/Office Zone (R/O)" to "Mixed Use Zone (MU)",
"Neighborhood Conservation Residential Zone (RNC-12)" to "Neighborhood Stabilization Residential Zone
(RNS-12)", "Neighborhood Conservation Residential Zone (RNC-20)" to "Neighborhood Stabilization
Residential Zone (RNS-20)", and "Public Zone (P)" to "Neighborhood Public Zone (P-l)" and "Institutional
Public Zone (P-2)," the Building Official is hereby authorized and directed to change references on the zoning
map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, accordingly.
SECTION Ill. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION IV. SEVERABILITY. 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 unconstitutional.
SECTION V. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and
publication.
Passed and approved this __ day of ,20 ....
MAYOR Approved by
ATTEST:cITY CLERK (~ity Attorney s Office
S:/LEGAL/Mitch/B/Zoning Code Rewrite/Ordinance/New Zoning Code Ordinance
ZONING CODE text
Previously distributed in 9/20/05 Regular City Council
Meeting Folder
Agenda Item # 4a
Electronically under "ordinance" subfolder
Pages 1-438
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
Site Plan Review
CHAPTER 1. INTENT AND APPLICABILITY
It is the purpose of this Title to establish a procedure which will enable the City to review
certain proposed improvements of property within the City in order to ensure the orderly and
harmonious development of property in a manner that will:
A. Promote the most beneficial relation between present and proposed uses of land;
B. Allow development of property commensurate with the present and foreseeable availability
and capacity of City facilities and services; The following factors shall be considered in
arriving at a conclusion concerning proposed development of property:
1. The projected population of the proposed development or the proposed intensity of
use and the effect the proposal will have on the capacity of existing water and
sanitary sewer lines to avoid overloading existing systems;
2. Zoning regulations at the time of the proposal;
3. The City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and other specific community plans;
4. The City's plans for future construction and provision for public facilities and services;
and
5. The existing and planned City facilities and services for the area which will be
affected by the proposed site use.
C. Ensure compliance with the City Code, as amended, including applicable zoning
regulations, approved subdivision plats, public works standards, and public safety
standards;
D. Encourage adequate provision of surface and subsurface storm water drainage in order to
assure that future development and other properties in the City will not be adversely
affected;
E. Provide screening of parking, truck loading, solid waste disposal and outdoor storage areas
from adjacent properties;
F. Provide for orderly, safe, and efficient circulation of traffic in the development and
throughout the City;
G. Minimize adverse environmental impacts on the developing property.
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
A, Site Plan Review Required
1. The standards in this Title are in addition to those required by the Uniform Building
Code, as amended, and apply to commercial, industrial, and multi-unit residential
development.
2. Site plans must be submitted, reviewed, and approved by the City according to the
provisions of this Title prior to the issuance of a building permit for any development
on any lot, tract or parcel of land as those terms are defined in Title :1.4, Zoning Code,
except as exempted below.
B. Exemptions
Site Plan Review is not required for the development of one single family dwelling or one
two-family dwelling or related accessory structures in any zoning district. However, such
uses and structures are not exempt from other applicable provisions of the City Code,
including requirements of the Uniform Building Code, as amended.
C. Major Site Plans
Major site plans are required for all of the following types of development:
1, Construction of over 12 units residential development and any additions or alterations
to existing development containing over 12 units residential; or
2. Over 10,000 square feet of nonresidential floor area.
D. Minor Site Plans
Minor site plans are required for all development that does not require a major site plan,
except as exempted in subsection B, Exemptions, above.
E. Sensitive Areas Development Plan
A Sensitive Areas Development Plan may be required for properties containing
environmentally sensitive features as set forth in Article 14-5T of the City Code, Sensitive
Lands and Features. The requirements and exemptions for regulated sensitive features are
set forth in Article 14-5]:. Level ! Sensitive Areas Review shall be in accordance with the all
procedures and approval processes set forth in Chapter 2 of this Title, except for Section
18-2-2, Submittal Requirements. Submittal requirements for Level ! Sensitive Areas Review
are set forth in Article 1~-5T, based on the type of regulated feature(s) that exist on the
subject property.
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
CHAPTER 2. PROCEDURES AND SUBMITTAL
REQUIREPlENTS
An application for site plan approval for all development shall be submitted to the City and shall
meet the following requirements:
A. A minimum of two copies of minor site plans and four copies of major site plans containing
all required information.
B. The required review fee, as established by resolution of the City Council, shall accompany
the application for site plan approval.
C. Within twenty-four hours of submitting an application for major site plan approval, the
applicant shall post notice of intent to develop on the site. The notice to be posted will be
provided by the City and shall be posted as directed by the City.
A. I~Jnor Site Plan
Minor site plans submitted for approval must include information as specified below:
1. Date of preparation and north arrow.
2. A scale no smaller than one inch equals one hundred feet (1" = 100')
3. Legal description or street address of the property.
4. Name and address of the owner of record of the property, the applicant and the
person(s) preparing the site plan, and the name and address of the applicant's
attorney, if any.
5. Property lines with dimensions to the nearest one-tenth of a foot (1/10') and total
square footage or acreage of the site.
6. Total number and types of dwelling units proposed, proposed uses for all building,
total floor area of each building and any other information which may be necessary to
determine the number of off-street parking and loading spaces required by Title 14,
Zoning Code.
7. Location and exterior dimensions of all existing and proposed structures or additions,
including setback distance from property boundary lines and distance between
structures.
8. Location, grade and dimension of all existing and proposed paved surfaces, including
parking and loading areas, entrance and exit drives, pedestrian walkways, bicycle
storage areas, dividers, curbs, islands and other similar permanent improvements.
9. Location of all existing and proposed outdoor recycling, trash, solid waste, and
dumpster areas and methods of screening such areas.
:1.0. Location and type of all existing and proposed signs. Proposed signs may require a
separate sign permit (See Article 14-5B, Sign Regulations).
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
1.1. Plans and proposed methods for the prevention and control of soil erosion for the
development.
:1.2. A landscaping plot plan is required indicating all existing trees eight inches or larger
in diameter measured at a point six inches above the ground level. In addition, the
plot plan must distinguish the existing or proposed trees or landscaping intended to
satisfy tree requirements or screening requirements of the City Code (See 14-5A-5I,
Landscaping and Tree Requirements within Parking Areas and Z4-SE, Landscaping
and Tree Standards, and any other applicable screening required according to Title
14, Zoning Code.)
:L3. Location of the following features of the site:
a. Streams and other water bodies, including wetlands;
b. Areas subject to flooding from a ZOO-year event;
~.4. Location, amount and type of proposed lighting, fences, walls or other screening.
15. A detailed lighting plan and photometrics layout which shows the location, type,
height, and intensity of all existing and proposed exterior lighting on the property.
The photometrics layout must show the foot-candles generated by all lights on the
property and provide the total outdoor light output as measured in initial lumens from
all bulbs used in outdoor light fixtures. The lighting plan and photometrics layout
must comply with the standards specified in Article Z4-5G, Outdoor Lighting
Standards.
16. Location and specifications for any existing or proposed aboveground or below-
ground storage facilities for any chemical, salts, flammable materials or hazardous
materials.
~.7. Other data and information as may be reasonably required by the Building Official.
B. Major Site Plans
Submittal information for major site plans must include all the information contained in
subsection A of this Section, plus the following additional information:
1. Existing and proposed contours at intervals not to exceed 5 feet provided at least 2
contours are shown. Contours of neighboring properties must be provided when
deemed necessary by the City.
2. When deemed necessary by the City, a complete storm water runoff plan, including
grades and/or elevations of storm sewer systems, direction of surface flow, detention
areas, outlet control structures and devices and storm water calculations (See Article
15-3G, Storm Water Collection, Discharge, and Runoff).
3. Location and size of existing and proposed utilities, including water, sanitary sewer,
storm sewer, gas, electrical telephone, cable TV, plus all existing or proposed fire
hydrants.
4. A typical cross section of all proposed streets, alleys and parking areas showing
roadway location, type of curb and gutter, paving and sidewalks to be installed.
5. A complete traffic circulation and parking plan.
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
A. The City shall review and approve, review and approve with conditions, or review and
deny all site plans submitted under this Title within 21 working days after application,
without requiring submission of the plan to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
B. Upon submission of a major site plan, the Building Official shall promptly convey a copy of
the major site plan to the Department of Public Works and the Department of Planning
and Community Development for their review and comments. The Departments of
Planning and Community Development, Public Works and Housing and Inspection Services
shall review the site plan to determine if the design conforms to the standards set forth in
this Article. The Departments of Planning and Community Development and Public Works
shall forward their recommendations to the Department of Housing and Inspection
Services within ten (10) working days after date of submission of a major site plan to the
c~ty.
C. For major site plans, the Department of Housing and Inspection Services or those owners
of 20 percent or more of the property location within 200 feet of the exterior boundaries of
the proposed development site may request a review by the Planning and Zoning
Commission. The request must be in writing and must be filed with the Building Official
within 20 days of submission of the original application or within 20 days of the posting
requirements set forth in Section 18-2-1, above, whichever is later. When such a request is
received, the Planning and Zoning Commission may review and approve, review and
approve with conditions, or review and deny said plan within 20 working days of receipt of
the written request for Planning and Zoning Commission review. The Commission's scope
of review shall be the same as that of the Building Official and the Department of Housing
and Inspection Services.
D. Upon site plan approval by the Building Official or the Plan and Zoning Commission, a
building permit may be issued.
The approval of any site plan shall remain valid for one year after the date of approval. The
approved site plan shall be null and void if a building permit has not been issued within one
year of the site pan approval or if actual construction has not commenced within eighteen (:[8)
months of the site plan approval. "Actual construction" shall mean that the permanent
placement of construction materials has started and is proceeding without undue delay.
Any approved site plan may be amended in accordance with the standards and procedures
established herein. However, the Building Official may waive such procedures and fees in the
event the Building Official determines that the proposed amendment involves only a minor
change in the approved site plan and is in compliance with the site plan review standards. For
the purposes of this Section minor changes may include, but are not limited to the following:
A. A change to move building walls within the confines of the smallest rectangle that would
have enclosed each originally approved building, to relocate building entrances or exits or
to shorten building canopies.
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
B. A change to a more restrictive use, provided there is no change in the amount of off-street
parking as originally approved.
C. A change in angle of parking or a parking aisle width, provided there is no reduction in the
amount of off-street parking as originally approved.
A change in location of the ingress and egress drives of not more than 100 feet, provided
such change is approved by the City and is in compliance with the provisions of Article 14-
5C, Access Management Standards.
E. A substitution of plant species, provided the substituted species is similar in nature and in
screening effects and is otherwise in compliance with City Code requirements.
F. A change in type and design of lighting fixture, provided there will be no change in the
intensity of light at the property boundary and the proposed fixture is in compliance with
the applicable provisions of Article 14-6G, Outdoor Lighting Standards.
Il. A change to increase peripheral yards.
H. The replacement of paved areas with landscaping, provided adequate parking facilities are
retained.
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
CHAPTER 3. SITE PLAN DESIGN STANDARDS
All site plans submitted for City approval must comply with the following design standards.
These standards are the minimum standards necessary to safeguard the public health, safety,
aesthetics and general welfare of the City and are necessary to fulfill the intent of the Zoning
Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan as amended and other specific community plans.
A. Drainage
The design of the proposed development shall make adequate provision for surface and
subsurface drainage to limit the rate of increased runoff of surface water to adjacent and
downstream property so that the proposed development will not substantially and
materially increase the natural flow onto adjacent downstream property.
B, Utility Connections
The design of the proposed development shall make adequate provision for connection to
water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, electrical and other public utility lines within the
capacity limits of those utility lines.
C. Fire Safety
The design of the proposed development shall make adequate provision for fire protection
and for building placement, acceptable location of flammable materials and other
measures to ensure fire safety.
D. Erosion and Sedimentation Control
The design of the proposed development shall comply with the standards for erosion and
sedimentation control established in the City design standards in order to protect adjoining
or surrounding property. The development plan shall consider the topography and soils of
the site to achieve the lowest potential for erosion.
E. Landscape Preservation
So far as practical, the landscape shall be preserved in its natural state by minimizing tree
and soil removal and by topographic modifications which result in maximum harmony with
adjacent areas. Structures and other site improvements shall be located in such a manner
that the maximum number of trees are preserved on the site. The development plan shall
identify existing trees to be preserved and trees to be removed and shall specify measures
to be utilized to protect trees during construction. To the extent reasonably feasible, all
wetlands shall be retained in their natural state or consistent with their functions and
values or be replaced with a wetland of equal or greater value.
F. Vehicle and Pedestrian Circulation
The design of vehicle and pedestrian circulation shall be provided for safe and convenient
flow of vehicles and movement of pedestrians and shall, to the greatest extent reasonably
possible, prevent hazards to adjacent streets or property. The City may limit entrances
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
and exits upon adjacent streets in order to prevent congestion on adjacent or surrounding
streets and in order to provide for safe and orderly vehicle movement. The City may limit
street access according to the provisions of Article 14-5C, Access Management Standards.
G, Outdoor Dumpster Areas
Outdoor recycling, trash, solid waste, and dumpster areas shall be in compliance with the
City's solid waste regulations and in compliance with screening requirements contained in
Title 14, Zoning Code. (See 14-4C-2Q, Outdoor Dumpster Areas)
H, Exterior Lighting
Exterior lighting shall relate to the scale and location of the development in order to
maintain adequate security while preventing a nuisance or hardship to adjacent properties
or streets. All exterior lighting must comply with the provisions of Article 14-5G of the City
Code, Outdoor Lighting Standards.
Screening of Equipment
All ground level mechanical and utility equipment shall be screened from public view
according to the provisions of Title 14, Zoning Code (See 14-4C-2N, Mechanical
Structures).
,1. Screening of Storage and Loading Areas
If allowed, all outdoor storage areas must be located and screened according to the
applicable base zone provisions of Title 14, Zoning Code. All outdoor storage areas and
loading/unloading service areas with delivery facilities, including bay doors or docks, which
face or are visible from residential district and the Iowa River shall be screened to a height
of no less than 6 feet and must meet all screening standards specified in Title 14, Zoning,
for outdoor storage and loading areas.
K. Parking Areas
Any parking areas or vehicle storage area designed or intended for use by more than four
(4) vehicles located adjacent to any street shall be separated and screened from such
street by a curbed, planted area as specified in Title 14, Zoning.
L. Sensitive Areas
All sensitive areas development plans must comply with the applicable provisions of Article
14-5I of the City Code, Sensitive Lands and Features.
14. Compliance with City~ State, and Federal Regulations
Site plans shall comply with all applicable City, State, and Federal regulations.
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
CHAPTER 4. ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES
No person shall undertake or carry out any activity or use, including any building demolition,
grading, clearing, cutting and filling, excavating or tree removal, for which site plan approval is
first required by this Title, nor shall such activity proceed prior to obtaining the necessary
permits, including local, County, State and Federal permits. Any violation of this provision is
subject to fines and penalties described in this Title for each day of the violation, from the day
of discovery of the incident until an approved restoration plan or an approved site plan is
granted.
A. The purpose of the performance guarantee is to ensure completion of improvements
connected with a proposed use as required by this Title, including, but not limited to
roadways, lighting, utilities, sidewalks, drainage, fences, screens, wall and landscaping.
B. "Performance Guarantee" shall mean a cash deposit, certified check, or irrevocable
standby letter of credit in the amount of the estimated cost of the improvements, to be
determined by the applicant and verified by the City.
C. Upon issuance of a building permit, the City may require a performance guarantee.
D. When a performance guarantee is required, there shall also be provided a prescribed
period of time within which improvements must be completed.
E. Where a performance guarantee is not required upon issuance of a building permit and
the improvements cannot be completed prior to occupancy or commencement of a use,
the Building Official may issue a temporary certificate of occupancy and require the
applicant to deposit a performance guarantee as set forth above.
F. Upon satisfactory completion of the improvements for which the performance guarantee is
required, as determined by the City, the City shall return the performance guarantee to
the applicant.
G. In the event that the applicant defaults in making the improvements for which a
performance guarantee is required or fails to complete the improvements within the time
prescribed by the City, the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to use the
performance guarantee deposited, together with any interest earned thereon, to complete
the improvements through contract or otherwise. This includes the specific right to enter
upon the subject property to make the improvements. If the performance guarantee is
not sufficient to allow the City to complete the improvements for which the guarantee was
posted, the applicant shall be required to pay the City the amount by which the cost of
completing the improvements exceeds the amount of the performance guarantee
deposited. Should the City use the performance guarantee or a portion thereof to
complete the required improvements, any amounts remaining after completion shall be
applied first to the City's administrative costs in completing the improvements, with any
balance remaining being refunded to the applicant. At the time the performance
guarantee is deposited, the applicant shall enter into a written agreement with the City,
which incorporates the performance guarantee requirements set forth above.
Recommended Draft
9/27/05
Any violation of this Title shall be considered a simple misdemeanor or municipal infraction or
environment infraction as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4 of the City Code.
10
Marian Karr
From: Tim Weitzel or Wendy Robertson [timwendy@avalon.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 2:26 PM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: New Zoning Code
I am writing to express my concern over recent developments regarding the proposed new
zoning code. The proposed code approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission is the
culmination of years of work, public review, and professional analysis by the consulting
firm Duncan and Associates as individuals with advanced degrees in Urban Planning on staff
with the City. When that code came to council for approval, it already incorporated a
number of amendments--most made by the development community. Those changes to could
possibly be called "Tweaks." But the newest proposed changes fly directly in the face of
all that hard work and directly contradict what is need to address the concerns that face
Iowa City today. The proposed changes appear to not be in the best interests of the
citizens of Iowa City, Simply adding more houses to grow the tax base is an outdated
theory of how best to pay the bills. Progressive community across the country have
already shown that a desirable community grows in a manner that is self-sustaining and has
fewer problems than those who continue to build in the manner of sprawling big lot
suburbs. This is what the Duncan Report and modern Urban Planning tells us.
But instead of addressing the common good, the newest set of amendments--the ones that
council seems to be in favor of, are clearly designed to benefit developers and others
associated with new subdivision development. The Duncan Report originally suggested a
voluntary reduction of lot width and a resulting increase in density (and potential
profit) in return for some very basic changes in subdivision design. Those changes,
namely placing garages at the rear of the lot and implementing alleyways, would make for a
much more pleasant street scape that encourages and enhances pedestrian and bicycle
transportation. Simply packing housing into a small space does not actually answer the
question of how to provide affordable housing.
The Broadway apartments complex is an example where density to create affordability
without attention to detail has not been terribly successfully.
The requirement of a Good Neighbor Policy is also essential to allowing those who already
have invested in Iowa City and are living here to have a say in what happens to the land
next door. Not many people will move to a town where they can not be assured that a
plastic plant, or problematic development such as the Broadway Apartments, will not turn
up next door. Similarly, strong historic preservation standards provide assurances to
those of us who have invested our hard-earned dollars and sweat equity into renovating and
stabilizing older neighborhoods that our work and our aspirations will not simply run into
the gutter with overcrowded student housing. Pack any group of people into too tight a
space and you will bring out their worst behavior. Provide people with a pleasant and
dignified place to live and you will encourage them to grow along with the rest of the
community. This is what the visual preference survey told us, and so did a majority of
citizens who participated in it. That was where most residents tired to tell you what
they want. Frankly, many have given up trying to convince you of this. It simply begins
to look like you are going to favor developers no matter what the residents say they want.
It is hard to continually say the same things over and over and unlike those with
financial interests involved in this process many residents are not comfortable speaking
in public or writing to council. I hope you will take this into account in your
deliberations. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Tim Weitzel
THE CITY COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES TO THE
DRAFT ZONING CODE:
· CHANGE THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTHS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY
DEVELOPMENT BACK TO THE DIMENSIONS OF THE EXISTING
CODE IN THE RS-5, RS-8 AND RS-12 ZONES
· IN THE RS-12 ZONE, ALLOW SMALLER LOT WIDTHS THAN THE
BASE WIDTH OF 45', BUT ONLY WITH AN ALLEY TO ENABLE
TOWNHOUSE CONSTRUCTION ON 20' WIDE LOTS
· DELETE THE DESIGN REQUIREMENT FOR A PORCH, CANOPY, OR
TRANSOM & SIDELIGHT WINDOWS TO DEMARCATE THE
ENTRANCE TO ATTACHED SINGLE-FAMILY UNITS
· DELETE THE GARAGE PLACEMENT STANDARDS
· DELETE THE WIDTH SPECIFICATION IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR
TRIM
CHANGE THE GARAGE TO RESIDENCE PROPORTION FROM 50%
TO 60%.
· PUT THE CB-2 ZONE BACK IN THE CODE WITH A HEIGHT LIMIT OF
45'
· CHANGE THE DENSITY ALLOWANCE FOR RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT IN THE CN-1 ZONE FROM 1 UNIT/2725 SQ. FT. TO 1
UNIT/1800 SQ. FT.
· CHANGE THE BASIS FOR DETERMINING THE RIGHT TO REBUILD A
NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE FROM ASSESSED VALUE TO
REPLACEMENT VALUE
· ADD A 25% BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR HOMELESS
SHELTERS
· CLARIFY THE APPLICABILITY OF APPROVAL CRITERIA IN THE
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO SENSITIVE AREA
REZONINGS AS ONLY WHEN MODIFICATIONS ARE REQUESTED TO
THE UNDERLYING ZONING.
· CHANGE THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR REFUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD
OPEN SPACE FEES FROM THE DEVELOPER TO THE CITY.
· CLARIFY THAT ONLY FOUR VOTES ARE REQUIRED FOR PLANNING
& ZONING TO APPROVE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGES AND
REZONINGS.
· INCLUDE A PROVISION ALLOWING THE PLANNING & ZONING
COMMISSION TO DECLINE CONSULTATION WITH THE COUNCIL ON
MATTERS ON WHICH THEY DISAGREE.
· CLARIFY THE NON-CONFORMING RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY
PROVISION TO ENABLE THE OCCUPANCY ALLOWED PER THE
RENTAL PERMIT FOR THE LIFE OF THE PERMIT.
· AMEND THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT STANDARDS TO CLEARLY
ENABLE RETENTION OF ANY EXISTING ACCESS POINT ON A LOCAL
STREET PROVIDED NO SAFETY ISSUES EXIST.
· AMEND THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT STANDARDS TO PERMIT
STREET ACCESS FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EVEN
WHEN AN ALLEY IS AVAILABLE PROVIDED NO SAFETY ISSUES
EXIST.
· DELETE THE PROVISION FOR MANDATORY NEIGHBORHOOD
MEETINGS PRIOR TO CERTAIN LAND USE REQUESTS.
(The developers name and contact information will be included in any
development notification performed by the City.)
2
MEARDON, SUEPPEL ~ DOWNER P.L.C.
LAWYERS
rOBErT N. DOWNER TElePHONE: (3 I 9)338-9222
dAMES D. McCARRAGHER I 22 SOUTH LINN STREET FAX: (3 I 9) 338-7250
Hark t. HAMer
THOMAS d. HOBART IOWA C~Y. IOWA 52240 - 1802 WWVV.MEaRDONLaW.COM
DOUGLAS D. rUPPErT
~HOTHY d. KRUHM WILLIAH L. MEARDON
WILLIAM d. SUEPPEL (
CHArLeS A. MEARDON
DENNIS d. Hr[CHELL OF COUNSEL:
DAVID d. BRIGHT WILLIAM F. SUEPPEL
PETER d. GARDNER HaRGAReTT. LAINSON
ANNE E. DANIELS dean BAF~LeY
November 15, 2005
Mitch Behr
Assistant City Attorney
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Re: Ordinance Amending Title 14 of the City Code
Dear Mitch:
As you know, I have been contacted by a client regarding the applicability of Iowa Code
§ 414.5 to the proposed ordinance amending Title 14 of the City Code. I appreciated
your willingness to take the time this morning to discuss the City's position with me. I
must respectfully disagree with the City's position, however, that the protest provisions
of Iowa Code § 414.5 do not apply. Iowa Code § 414.5 provides in relevant part:
[Zoning] regulations, restrictions, and boundaries may, from time to time,
be amended, supplemented, changed, modified, or repealed .... In case,
however, of a written protest against a change or repeal which is filed
with the city clerk and signed by the owners of twenty percent or more of
the area of the lots included in the proposed change or repeal, or by the
owners of twenty percent or more of the property which is located within
200 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for which the change or
repeal is proposed, the change or repeal shall not become effective except
by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the members of the
council.
Iowa City City Code § 14-6U-6D likewise requires three-fourths of the Council members
to approve an ordinance which amends, supplements, changes, modifies or repeals any
zoning boundaries, regulations, or restrictions if twenty percent or more of the affected
owners have filed a written protest. Because the proposed ordinance will make a
number of substantive amendments and changes to the existing zoning code, I believe
Mitch Behr
November 15, 2005
Page 2
that the written protest provisions of Section 414.5 are applicable. It is also my
interpretation that a written protest may be done on a zoning boundary or classification
basis (for example, 20% or more of the property owners within an RM-12 zone could
trigger the requirement that three-fourths of the Council members approve the
amendments affecting the RM-12 zone).
If I have misunderstood or misstated the City's position, please let me know. I have
advised my client that if he would like to protest the changes he should begin collecting
signatures in order to file a written protest prior to the close of the public hearing on
December 12, 2005.
Very truly yours,
Dennis J. Mitchell
DJM/cu
Copy to:
Greg Allen
Iowa City City Council
City Clerk
Page 1 of 1
Marian Karr
From: Geoffrey Lauer [glauer@biausa.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 4:21 PM
To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org
Subject: Zoning changes - NO
Dear Council Members,
Firstly - THANK you for your service to the community and for allowing input on decisions.
I am writing to ask you to REJECT the proposed changes to the Zoning code that would allow elimination of
the hard-won Good Neighbor Policy wherin developers have to notify neighboring residents of their indented
developments in the planning process.
Also to REJECT reduction of lot width from 70 feet to 60 feet in RS-5 and from 55 to 45 feet in RS-8 without
any concessions toward garages being placed to the side or rear but not facing forward on the lot.
Thanks!
Geoff
Geoffrey M. Lauer
741 Dearborn Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
319-621-7078 Phone
202-478-2966 Fax
g!_auer@biausa.org
11/15/2005
Page 1 of 1
Marian Karr
From: Mason, Marianne [marianne-mason@uiowa.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 4:53 PM
To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org
Subject: zoning proposal
Dear Council Members,
In considering the new zoning proposal, please keep the Good Neighbor Policy requiring developers to notify neighboring
residents of their intent during the planning process. Also, please respect the comments of citizen participants of the visual
preference survey who gave overwhelming approval of the design specifications outlined in the Duncan Report.
Marianne Mason
640 S. Lucas St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
marianne-mason@uiowa.edu
(319) 337-2538
11/15/2005
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 15th day of November, 2005, in
Emma J. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street,
Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at
the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider:
An ordinance rezoning property from Medium
Density Single-Family (RS-8) to Planned
Development Housing Overlay- Medium Density
Single-Family Residential (OPDH-8) for lots
located on Catskill Court within the East Hill
Subdivision.
Copies of the proposed ordinances and
resolutions are on file for public examination in the
office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa.
Persons wishing to make their views known for
Council consideration are encouraged to appear
at the above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of
Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 15th day
of November, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. in Emma J.
Harvat Hall at City Hall of the City of Iowa City,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if
said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of
the City Council thereafter as posted by the City
Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider a
resolution authorizing conveyance of a portion of
right-of-way in an alley in Block 13, County Seat
Addition; a portion of South Madison Street right-
of-way and a portion of Des Moines Street right-
of-way to the University of Iowa without monetary
compensation.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of
Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 15th of
November, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. in Emma J. Harvat
Hall at City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa
City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the
next meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider a resolution of intent to grant
a permanent utility easement in the Peninsula
Neighborhood.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK