HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-06-19 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES -FINAL
CITY OF IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
JUNE 5, 2012 — 8:15 am
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL — CITY HALL
Members Present: Lyra Dickerson, William Cook and Paul Hoffey
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Karen Jennings, Chief Andy Rocca, Tracy Robinson
Others Present: None
lumaim
3.
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL (become effective only after separate Council
action):
None
CALL TO ORDER:
Meeting called to order at 8:15 a.m. Lyra Dickerson chaired the meeting.
FIRE DEPARTMENT PROMOTIONAL TESTING:
The only item of business was promotional testing for the positions of Deputy Fire Chief,
Battalion Chief, Fire Captain and Fire Lieutenant.
Following an opportunity for questions from the Commissioners Hoffey moved and Cook
seconded that the process be approved and administered as recommended by staff. All
were in favor.
OLD BUSINESS:
None
NEW BUSINESS:
Jennings informed the Commission that with Police Officer interviews concluding by the
end of June and the next Police Academy starting in late August, they will be contacted
regarding availability for a meeting for the first week of July for the commission to
review and certify the hiring list.
Dickerson offered an official welcome to new Commissioner Hoffey.
ADJOURNMENT:
Cook moved to adjourn, Hoffey seconded and the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 a.m.
Board /Commission: Civil Service Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2012
(Meeting natal
NAME
TERM
EXPIRES
3/27112
6/5/12
O/E =
Absent/Excused
NM =
No Meeting
- -- =
Not a Member
Lyra Dickerson
4/7/14
X
X
Bill Cook
4/1/13
X
X
Elizabeth Cummins
4/4/12
X
- --
Paul Hoffey
4/4/16
- --
X
KEY: X =
Present
O =
Absent
O/E =
Absent/Excused
NM =
No Meeting
- -- =
Not a Member
AM f-Tro
3b(2)
•��
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED
MAY 3, 2012 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Charlie Eastham, Anne Freerks, Phoebe Martin, Paula Swygard,
John Thomas, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Caroline Dyer
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen, Denny
Gannon
OTHERS PRESENT: Glenn Siders, Brian Fink, Kevin Den Adel, Jason Mascher, Ernest
Kellems, Meigen Fink, Changmin Ding, Charles Thiede, Dan
Black
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission voted 5 -1 to recommend approval of REZ09- 00003, an application
submitted by Southgate Development Company for a rezoning from Medium Density
Single Family Residential (RS -8) zone to High Density Single Family Residential (RS -12)
zone for approximately 4.29 acres of property located on Walden Road, west of Mormon
Trek Boulevard with the following conditions:
1. At the time of development, the storm water management system will be designed
and constructed in accordance with the City Engineer's design standards
including the required detention and outlet criteria.
2. At the time of development, the storm water management system will be designed
in a manner that will not exacerbate storm water drainage issues on adjacent
properties.
3. Development will be in general compliance with the submitted concept plan
regarding site layout, lot configuration, and building orientation and units will be
developed with double garages.
4. Access to all of the units shall be from a rear lane that connects to Walden Road.
5. No direct vehicular access shall be allowed from Mormon Trek Boulevard, and at
the time of development, a minimum of six visitor parking spaces will be provided
wherever they fit on the lot.
The Commission voted 6 -0 to recommend approval of REZ12- 00007, an application
submitted by The University of Iowa for a rezoning from Neighborhood Public (P1) zone
to Institutional Public with a Central Business Service Zone Overlay (P2 /CB -2) for
approximately 1.3 -acres of property located south of Harrison Street between Clinton
Street and Dubuque Street.
(45 day limitation period: May 18, 2012)
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
Freerks welcomed the newest Commissioner, Phoebe Martin and asked her to introduce
herself.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 2 of 18
Martin said she was born and raised in Iowa City, and she felt that serving on the Commission
was an appropriate move to make as a resident of the city.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
REZONING ITEM
REZ09 -00003 Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Company for
a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS -8) zone to High Density Single
Family Residential (RS -12) zone for approximately 4.29 acres of property located on Walden
Road, west of Mormon Trek Boulevard.
Howard said the applicant has requested to reactivate this application that was originally filed in
2009. She said they requested deferral at that time pending resolution of issues involving storm
water drainage. She explained that they were trying to reach an agreement with the Walden
Court Homeowners Association to allow storm water from the proposed development to connect
into and drain through the private storm sewer in Walden Court but were unable to come to
agreement. She said the applicant has now devised an alternative system of managing the
storm water by directing the water from a storm water basin along an overland swale that will
extend along the MidAmerican gas pipeline easement south to the public storm sewer system
along Rohret Road. The applicant has submitted a new concept plan showing how this
stormwater management system would be constructed. Howard showed the Commission a map
of the property and said that the developable part of the property is quite sloped from north to
south and is about 700 feet in width but quite narrow in depth. She explained that the dog leg on
the property is a MidAmerican gas pipeline easement. She said that the City Engineers Office
has reviewed the new concept plan for storm water management and has agreed to allow this
type of design provided that at the time of development the drainage system is designed to
meet all the City's engineering standards. She reminded the Commission that this is a request
for rezoning, and it is not a platting at this time. Howard said this property is about 4.2 acres,
and the concept plan is for approximately 18 townhouse style units. She explained that to
develop under a High Density Single Family Residential (RS -12) zoning designation, they will
have to come back for a platting process and divide that into individual single family lots. She
explained that the RS -12 zoning will allow the units to be attached but they will have to be
divided into separate home lots. She said the density is about 4.2 units per acre and while this
proposed residential density is at a level that would be allowed under the current Medium
Density Single Family Residential (RS -8) zoning designation, the lot configuration and
topography make it difficult to develop detached single family homes or duplexes, which are the
allowed types in the RS -8 zone. She said the RS -12 zoning will allow more flexibility in
clustering the units along these limited street frontages and avoid construction of a cul -de -sac,
which would be costly and land- consuming and would not add to the neighborhood street
connectivity. She said that by clustering the units and limiting the amount of paving, more of the
lot will remain open space and can be used to manage storm water run -off and provide an
amenity for the residents.
Howard said that for the reasons above and for those included in the staff report, staff is
recommending approval of this rezoning with a number of conditions. She said that staff
recommends that REZ09- 00003, a request to rezone approximately 4.29 acres of property from
RS -8 to RS -12, be approved subject to a conditional zoning agreement that specifies the
following:
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 3 of 18
1. At the time of development, the storm water management system will be designed and
constructed in accordance with the City Engineer's design standards including the
required detention and outlet criteria.
2. At the time of development, the storm water management system will be designed in a
manner that will not exacerbate storm water drainage issues on adjacent properties.
3. Development will be in general compliance with the submitted concept plan regarding
site layout, lot configuration, and building orientation.
4. Access to all of the units shall be from a rear lane that connects to Walden Road.
5. No direct vehicular access shall be allowed from Mormon Trek Boulevard, and at the
time of development, a minimum of three visitor parking spaces will be provided along
the rear lane near the units that front on Mormon Trek Boulevard.
Howard directed the Commission's attention to the concept plan that is being proposed and told
them that it's very similar to the one that was presented in 2009 except for the storm water
drainage concept. She explained that the proposed drainage system is basically a storm water
detention basin that outlets into a drainage swale through the pipeline easement. She indicated
that Denny Gannon from the City Engineer's Office was in attendance at the meeting and
invited him to describe in more detail how the drainage system would work and answer any
questions the Commission might have.
Denny Gannon of the City Engineer's Office said the applicant is proposing a detention basin or
two that would detain water, retain it and then let it out slowly and he indicated on a map where
it would outlet. He said it would flow in a drainage swale to the west and then south and then get
picked up at that point by the City sewer system along Rohret Road.
Howard asked Gannon to describe how the overland swale might help some of the drainage
issues that residents in Walden Court are currently experiencing.
Gannon said the water would be intercepted by the detention basins and be detained in a dry
bottom basin and would flow out much slower than normal.
Howard explained that one of the differences between the current proposal and the original one
is that the applicants have received permission from MidAmerican to use the easternmost
portion of the gas pipeline easement for the drainage swale.
Freerks asked Gannon if he thought this would help the problem property owners in the area
talked about in 2009.
Gannon said it would help with the stormwater that flows down the hill from north to south by
capturing it in a constructed basin and releasing it more slowly through the swale. He said
because MidAmerican has three underground pipes running through the easement, they won't
allow an underground storm sewer pipe, but they will allow an overland drainage swale.
Eastham asked if the drainage swale would function as effectively as a pipe system in terms of
draining water from the detention basin.
Gannon said the storm sewer system would be the best, but the next best option is a drainage
swale directed toward the public stormsewer on the north side of Rohret Road.
Eastham asked why a Swale isn't as effective as a pipe.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 4 of 18
Gannon explained that if water is in a pipe it's contained, and if it's in a swale, the top is
uncontained.
Eastham asked if the engineering standards that would have to be followed in constructing the
swale would mean that there would be a very small probability that water would overflow the
banks of the swale.
Gannon said the swale would be designed to contain the water and that he doesn't see a
problem with this system.
Thomas asked how the water is directed to the detention basin.
Gannon explained that the detention basin is the lowest point on the property, and the water is
directed by grading to the basin.
Thomas asked if ground would be sloped to drain water to the detention basin.
Gannon said they would probably build roof drains that could be piped directly to the basin but if
not, then the slope of the land would take the water to the basin.
Thomas said there was a lot of impervious material in that area and asked if the water running
off it would then just go downhill.
Gannon said the detention basin would intercept it.
Eastham asked if this proposed system is unusual in either design, intent or function.
Gannon replied that it was not.
Eastham asked if this system would have any effect on the properties to the west of the
proposed development.
Gannon reiterated that if the water is directed to a drainage swale, the water will then proceed
into the storm sewer system located along Rohret Road.
Eastham asked if this concept will relieve any backyard flooding that's occurring now for the
properties to the west.
Gannon said he could not answer that because he isn't familiar with the current issues.
Howard asked if it will have to be designed in a manner that won't exacerbate drainage
problems on other properties, which is a question of many concerned residents.
Gannon affirmed this.
Freerks said that in a letter opposing this application it states that the holding area behind units
four and five has steep slopes and is inches away from their sidewalk.
Howard said she sees nothing in the concept indicating that arrangement but that it is only a
concept plan.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 5 of 18
Eastham asked if Walden Road is designed to accommodate traffic from this proposed
development.
Howard said that in 2009 the transportation staff analyzed the proposal and determined that the
proposed development would not unduly impact the traffic situation in the neighborhood. She
added that any time you have a curb cut, it will reduce on- street parking but this is designed as
a narrow rear access lane so it wouldn't have as much impact as a cul -de -sac, which is what
would have to be built under the current zoning category.
Thomas said the allowed housing types in the RS -8 zone are single - family and duplexes.
Howard said that duplexes are permitted only on corner lots in an RS -8 zone and in this
unusually shaped lot, there really are no corners.
Thomas asked if townhouses are allowed in an RS -8 zone.
Howard said they are not allowed in an RS -8 zone unless it's a Planned Development (OPD).
She noted that this proposal for approximately 18 townhouses would be at a density that is
compatible with the current RS -8 Zone and a similar development could be approved through a
planned development process. She said the RS -12 zoning designation allows attached single
family dwellings (townhouses) by right as long as they comply with the standards in the zoning
code.
Thomas asked Howard to confirm whether the proposed number of units could be permitted
under the current RS -8 zoning.
Howard said hypothetically the same number of units could be approved through the planned
development process with the existing RS -8 Zoning designation. However, she noted that the
applicant has opted to request a rezoning to RS -12 instead of going the planned development
route.
Thomas asked how they determined the number of parking stalls.
Howard said each unit would have parking behind it for the residents, but there was a concern
expressed that there would be insufficient visitor parking, particularly for the units that front on
Mormon Trek, where no on- street parking is allowed. She said that the discussion in 2009
regarding the number of visitor parking spaces revolved around striking a balance between
paving more of the property for parking versus maintaining more open space for the residents
and how much visitor parking was truly necessary when there will be multiple parking spaces
behind each unit.
Freerks asked if the process is to have a City Engineer verify that this system will not make
storm water drainage issues on adjacent properties any worse, as mandated in the conditional
zoning agreement or does the applicant have to pay for a private engineer.
Howard explained that at the time of applying for a subdivision plat the applicant must design all
infrastructure to meet the City standards and those designs are reviewed by the relevant City
departments. The applicant will have to hire their own engineer to design the development, but
that the City Engineer's office reviews the plat and the construction drawings to make sure that
they meet the City's standards. She said there is both a preliminary and a final platting process
and at the final platting phase, an applicant has to provide actual construction drawings, which
are reviewed by the Public Works Department. She said there would also be on -site inspections
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 6 of 18
during development and construction from both the Building Department and the Public Works
Departments.
Eastham asked if the preliminary plat application would be reviewed by the Commission.
Howard confirmed that a public hearing is required for a preliminary plat. She also explained
that the final plat must comply with the preliminary plat, and if it does, it must then be approved
by the City Council.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Glenn Siders of Southgate Development Company said he would be available to answer any
questions.
Brian Fink of 44 Coll Court said his is a property that adjoins the easement along the west side
and the problems he speaks of are the same for the two adjacent properties. He said that the
drainage is a long -term problem for those residents on the west side. He said it's persistent
between rains. He said the cul -de -sac he lives on all slopes down to the corner at the south end
of the gas pipeline easement, and that was the outlet for the drainage for that entire area. He
explained that the pipeline easement is shared space for water disposal, and the south part is
the lowest, flattest part of the easement. He said at that point, the water from this area has to
cross the easement, cross the applicant's property completely and then go to a box out in front
of Walden Court. He said there is a tremendous amount of water that comes from the west. He
referred to pictures and letters explaining the problem that he had sent to the Commission. He
explained that the problem property owners have along the easement is that the groundwater
level rises and spreads onto adjacent properties, which makes a good portion of their properties
completely unusable. He said that twenty -five years ago when his subdivision was built there
was a plan that was approved but at some point there was a design flaw which led to the
problem they have with water drainage. He remarked that he was surprised to see an overland
swale system proposed, as in the engineering report from 2009 it states that at the time of
development the storm water management system will be required to be in a pipe system. He
said he thinks the swale system will introduce potentially large amounts of new water into a flat
area with a history of chronic, insufficient drainage. He wanted to know if the swale was going to
be graded above the ground or into the ground because there is a creek -like channel that runs
across this area and when it's running full bore, how will the swale not create a barrier to all the
water that comes in from the west as it was designed to do. He wants to know if they proposing
overland swale because MidAmerican won't allow an underground pipe. He said given the
sensitive areas of the southern part of the swale, minimum engineering standards do not apply.
He said whatever is designed for the applicant's property has to account for all the water
entering from the west. He said there can be no blockage, or back -up or additional restriction or
that violates the condition of the zoning proposal. He said moving some or all the run -off water
from several acres to a narrow, concentrated pipeline easement of 100 feet wide seems like an
obvious design flaw. He said that the result may be a worsening of retained water issues
experienced by he and his two neighbors, and anything in the proposal to introduce new run -off
from the east must provide consideration for drainage feeding from the twenty properties to the
west. He said the developer has the burden of proof that the current proposal won't create
additional harm. He asked who will bear the responsibility if in five years the worst happens and
the water level rises substantially in their backyards and what will be the recourse for the
property owners. He said he has observed excessive water in his backyard for the fourteen
years he has lived there, and he thinks it's doubtful that this above ground swale will contain all
the new water. He urged the Commission to hold the developer accountable.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 7 of 18
Fink said that since the water from Coll Court has to flow across the pipeline easement to the
box in front of Walden Court does the developer plan to incorporate that volume of water into
the new drainage swale coming from the north and east.
Freerks asked Siders to respond to the question of if the drainage that comes down to the
proposed area where there's a new storm drainage system, does the applicant intend to hook
up to that system.
Siders pointed out the swale area and the existing storm sewer system and said that they aren't
anticipating piping this water. He pointed out an area and said they are not going to run pipe to
there.
Kevin Den Adel of 54 Coll Court who lives in the house just south of Fink said that Fink already
addressed many of the same concerns he has. He said he also wanted people to understand
that the land slopes from Walden down to Rohret north to south, but also into his backyard,
which is the main source of their problem. He said his concern is that if there is more water
going through that area, given the existing slope in his backyard, it's probable that conditions
will worsen. He said the other issue is the condition that the proposed drainage swale will not
exacerbate current conditions. He said he thought the City Engineer had said that he wasn't
sure what impact that might have on the current situation, so he doesn't see how that condition
will be met. He thinks it might get back to the question of how you measure that. He asked what
the property owners will be required to do if they think that the situation worsens following
construction of the swale.
Greenwood Hektoen explained that this is a concept plan at this point, so Gannon doesn't know
the calculations at this time. She said if they were found to violate the design standards after
construction it would be a violation of the conditional zoning agreement and the City would
pursue a remedy to the infraction.
Den Adel asked what would happen if it didn't violate the design standards but the design
standards weren't designed to meet the condition of not exacerbating the damage.
Freerks said that's what the proposed CZA includes so the ultimate goal is that no matter what,
it makes none of the property owners' problems worse and if that is the case there is action that
can betaken.
Greenwood Hektoen noted that at the time the land is subdivided there will be additional
agreements and obligations imposed upon the applicant.
Den Adel asked if there was a statute of limitations.
Greenwood Hektoen said that typically a conditional zoning agreement runs with the land so
those obligations remain in perpetuity.
Den Adel said it would make him feel better as a homeowner in that area if the developer would
have had conversations with the property owners and listened to their concerns
Freerks explained that he is referring to the Good Neighbor Policy, which is voluntary.
Greenwood Hektoen reminded him that at the time the property is platted, he can come back
and make sure that his concerns are addressed.
Jason Mascher of 45 Coll Court said he was there representing his wife and his neighbors, and
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 8 of 18
they would like their concerns noted and carefully considered. He said they are concerned that
the proposal will increase drainage issues that they have. He said he understands from his
neighbors that Southgate used this property as a storage ground for dirt before the time that.
fencing was required to prevent erosion. He said the dirt that has been stockpiled over the years
has flooded into the backyards of the Walden Court residents as evidenced by past letters to the
City. He said that water flushed that dirt down this ravine and silted this ravine in. He said that
many years ago there was a plan in place for the drainage, but the plan has changed partly
because of this silted ravine. He invited the Commission to come out to the property to see the
elevation and the grade issues.. He said that from his and Den Adel's backyards it is evident
that the silting of that ravine has created a low spot in their backyards and almost his entire
fence line is unusable space. He said there is a creek -like channel from his yard in an area he
pointed out on the map that goes across the ravine. He said another property owner had
pointed out that the water from the front of houses that he pointed out on the map and comes
around the street and comes down into a basin he pointed out on the map. He said that's the
only basin and when it rains, there's a heavy stream that flows into it. He said his concern is
with the drainage swale proposal that goes north to south on the east side of the property he
pointed to on the map, there will issues where even if the ravine is graded to meet the main
swale, during heavy rains this rain will back up into the ravine flat and into his yard and those of
his neighbor Den Adel. He asked that the Commission consider this storm water system very
carefully. He asked if the three additional parking spots were per unit or for the whole proposed
complex.
Freerks answered that it was for the entire complex.
Mascher said that he is concerned because typically these types of proposed homes support
three or four students. He said with the proposed development, more parking spaces will be lost
along Walden Road, which is fairly busy with spare parking spots from the townhomes located
on the north side of the street. He asked if the public can participate in the design review
process.
Freerks said that there isn't a design review process for this per se but she said that appropriate
City staff look at the plan and make sure that it's workable in their areas of expertise. She said
after that it comes to the Commission, and the public is welcomed to have comment at that time.
She said even though the applicant chose not to use the Good Neighbor policy previously, it's
never too late.
Mascher said his concern with the drainage swale is that it's going to create problems with the
existing drainage channels that feed into the stormwater inlet in front of Walden Court. He said
that with no certainty about this system, there will be problems down the road and then what
kind of recourse will the homeowners have. He said that if the Commission came out to the
property, they could be witness to how the area started out if indeed in a number of years the
problem worsens. He said that because Eastham had an interest in this property when this
application originally came before the Commission, he had recused himself. He asked if he still
had an interest and what it was.
Eastham explained that his interest last time was that he is on the board of a non - profit that was
in negotiations with the applicant about purchasing this property. He said those negotiations are
not in effect now.
Mascher asked if Eastham was still on the board.
Eastham affirmed that he was.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 9 of 18
Mascher asked if there are other drainage swales in Iowa City.
Greenwood Hektoen asked Gannon to address that question as well as if the proposed system
would have to be designed to accommodate the existing situation as well as the new
development.
Gannon replied that his understanding is that the swale will be a path for the outlet of the storm
water detention basin constructed on the applicant's property. He said it will be cut into the
ground so that the water coming from the detention basin, which the subject property drains to,
will be contained in the drainage swale channel and directed to the City storm sewer.
Greenwood Hektoen asked if his calculations factor in any existing water.
Gannon said he would assume so. He said he knows there are other drainage swales in town.
He said there is an existing natural drainage -way at the Eastside Recycling Center that is
probably larger than the proposed swale.
Howard asked if there is anything in the record about the previous design for the other
subdivisions in the neighborhood so it would be clear if something designed is not functioning
properly.
Gannon said he would have to look at the records.
Mascher remarked that it is only a presumption that the three additional parking spaces won't
worsen the traffic, and that is not much comfort to the people living in the neighborhood as once
it's done, it can't be taken back, and there will be no recourse. He said he and his wife would
like this property developed, but with careful consideration of all the parties affected. He said
they see no need to up zone the property as its current zoning of RS -8 will keep with the theme
of its surroundings, single family residences and duplexes. He said he thinks that OPD is a
feasible option, and that should also be considered.
Freerks explained that OPD could create something exactly like what is being proposed.
Mascher said if you reduce the number of units and the people living there driving, OPD would
address some of the factors.
Freerks said that in an OPD you could have as many units as are being proposed.
Howard explained that the existing zoning is RS -8 and that allows approximately eight units per
acre. She said the current proposal shows about four units per acre, so under the current RS -8
zoning a planned development could be designed with the same density as in the proposal. She
said with a planned development all of the units could be on one lot, and it wouldn't have to be
subdivided into individual home lots. She said with an RS -12 zoning designation each unit while
it would be attached to the adjacent unit, would be considered a single family home with its own
lot and could be sold just the same as would a detached single family home. She said if the
Commission feels that the parking issue should be addressed, this is the time to do it during the
rezoning. She said the requirement for a single family home is one parking space per home, but
that doesn't mean that's all there would be. Howard said that typically many single family homes
as well as townhouses like the ones proposed will have a two -car garage behind with the
potential space for an additional two cars parked behind the garage on the driveway. However,
she said there's no guarantee that would be the case unless the Commission makes it a
condition to have a certain number above and beyond the one parking space that is required.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 10 of 18
Freerks said that in regard to a previous remark from Mascher about four students potentially
living in these proposed units, technically there should be no more than three unrelated people
there. She reminded him that it's important for the neighbors to report any suspected over -
occupancy to the City so that it can be investigated.
Miklo clarified that another difference between the RS -12 zone and a planned development is
that the latter would require that a specific building design for each building would have to be
submitted and reviewed.
Ernest Kellems of 2432 Walden Court Condominiums said they have been trying for two years
to resolve the drainage situation but Southgate never got back to them. He pointed out two
small detention basins on the map and said they lie about four to six feet into the ground and
contain a standpipe. He asked where they are draining to because he doesn't know of any
storm sewer unless it is possibly a large cement beehive that he indicated on the map. He said
along the north side of his property there is a sidewalk with a berm built along it, which he
indicated in a photo. He said there is a twenty -five to forty percent grade there on the hill from
the north to the south. He said at one time the berm was as high as three or four feet, but in
some places now it's only one or one and one -half feet high. He said when Southgate mowed
the last time, the equipment destroyed one of the standpipes. He said on his side of the
sidewalk, his homeowners association has put in a French Drain behind four of the buildings,
which cost them several thousand dollars to do. He said it solved some of the problems.
Kellems wants to know who is going to take care of the proposed detention basins.
Greenwood Hektoen said that typically when properties are subdivided those obligations are on
the owner or sub - divider until they're installed and then they are passed on to a homeowners
association.
Kellems asked if this would be a homeowners association or would it be individual lots.
Greenwood Hektoen said that at this stage it is a concept plan, but if there are common areas,
which the concept plan shows, there would have to be some sort of association.
Kellems pointed to several areas on the concept plan that he said looked like detention basins
and asked for some clarifications on which ones were actually detention basins.
Howard indicated which lines on the concept plan were the detention basin and which were
lines that indicated sensitive slopes. She asked Siders to confirm that the proposed basin would
be a dry bottom basin that would not retain water like a pond. Siders nodded.
Kellems asked if there will be a berm along the sidewalk so there won't be water coming across,
because several people in his association have had to tear out sheetrock and put in new floors.
He said as far as the swale is concerned, his area on the west end of the condominium complex
is much higher than the yards across the swale to the west so he doesn't have a problem with
the water going around the end, in fact, he thinks it's a very good solution as long as they can
get the water appropriately directed.
Siders addressed the question of the small pits that Kellems raised. He pointed to two
properties on the map and said that years ago dirt from one was borrowed to develop the other.
He said the two pits that are currently there were created because a number of years ago when
Walden Court was developed, drainage issues were identified, i.e., watershed sheeting off the
hill. He said the remedy was to dig these pockets with and add ADS pipe to catch the water. He
said he thinks the pipe goes underground and hooks into the private storm sewer system in
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 11 of 18
Walden Court. This private storm sewer stops short of the property line. He said that system
was created through an agreement between Southgate and the developer of Walden Court.
Siders confirmed that there would be a homeowners association for the proposed development,
which would be responsible for the maintenance of all the common areas. He pointed out an
area on the map that is generally the location of the proposed detention basin. He said they
haven't gotten into design of the basin but he thinks that along the bottom of the basin
something higher will have to be built to capture and stop the water to create the hole, which in
his opinion would be a berm. Siders said he didn't know what the beehive structure is, but he
knows that it is not part of a storm sewer system.
Eastham asked which property the sidewalk is on.
Siders said it is on both properties. He said it was supposed to all be on the Walden Court
property, but when it was constructed, it crossed onto the Southgate property.
Eastham asked if the ADS pipes that connect to the Walden Court storm sewer system will be
removed with construction.
Siders said if they want them removed, they will do so, otherwise they will plug them.
Meigan Fink of 44 Coll Court said that for the past thirteen out of the fourteen years she has
lived at this address, at least one -third of her yard has been unusable. She said her children
can't play in that part of the backyard due to the heavy amount of water. She said from spring
though November the usability of her yard and her two neighbor's yards is severely
compromised. She mentioned that a neighbor to the south can't even use his yard. She said her
biggest concern is how drainage will work for both the existing water and the extra water coming
from the proposed development. She wanted to know who will be accountable when and if
problems arise. Fink pointed to the sidewalk north of Walden and asked if that sidewalk will
continue on. She said she thought it would be very sad if the developer came in and cut down
all the woods in the easement because it's a beautiful area. She said she hoped the decision
that the Commission makes won't make the problems worse than they already are.
Changmin Ding of 2611 Walden Road said his main concern is about the traffic and the parking
because currently his neighbors are all single families with many children riding bicycles and
playing in the area. He wanted to know if the new buildings would be rentals or single family
dwellings. He said there are already cars that park along Walden Road.
Charles Thiede of 1232 Jensen Street said that on Walden Road there are three school buses
every day as well as the City bus, and it's a pretty tight corner onto Jensen Street. He said he is
concerned about the traffic that many units would generate.
Siders pointed to the concept plan and explained that they will all be townhouse units, they will
have a double stall garage behind each unit as well as space for two cars in the driveway
behind each garage. He said all the end units would most likely be three bedrooms and all the
interior units would be two bedrooms. He said visitor parking will be something to be worked out
with staff.
Brian Fink reiterated that all of their water comes from the west and has to cross the entire
easement. He pointed to his storm sewer on the map and explained how the storm water runs
across the area. He said however the swale is designed, it must accommodate the water from
the west and if it's an above ground grade, it will cut this water off and there will be no place for
their water to go. He asked if the water will be directed to a point he indicated on the map and
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 12 of 18
how will it then be directed into the new storm box. He reiterated that as a condition of approval
the storm water situation must be improved or must not be worsened.
Mascher asked if the developers have talked about the issues the residents have had or are
currently having and if they plan on doing anything in terms of not preventing their water from
reaching the storm drain.
Siders said many of these same issues were raised when the application was first made in
2009. He said Southgate has made their engineering firm aware of the concerns of the
neighbors to the west as well as the problems at Walden Court. He said they haven't gotten into
the design stage yet, but he does know that they will not be putting up a berm to block their
water in an area he indicated on the map. He pointed to an area on the map and said they will
put a ditch along there, and he's guessing that they will be below the overland channels that are
there now. He said the location of MidAmerican's gas pipes had limited other options they had
investigated. He said they don't anticipate clear cutting any trees. He said they will do what they
have to do to accommodate the drainage and outlet situation on Southgate's property, which will
in turn make a significant improvement on the Walden Court property and may minimally
improve the situation for the properties to the west as well. He said he thinks they will be
lowering a high water table on a property he pointed to on the map by putting in a swale.
Eastham asked about the trees along Mormon Trek and on the south end of the Southgate
property.
Greenwood Hektoen explained that the trees adjacent to the sidewalk that runs east to west are
on the Walden Court property.
Kellems indicated on the map where the sidewalk ends.
Eastham asked the staff what happens if there are long -term problems.
Howard explained that when a subdivision is platted, the subdivider makes an agreement with
the City about infrastructure and the development itself and sets up the homeowners
association, if necessary. She said through that agreement, the responsibility falls to whomever
it was assigned in that agreement.
Freerks closed public hearing.
Freerks said she thought perhaps they should take some more time, but put it before the
Commission to see what they wanted to do.
Freerks asked for a motion.
Weitzel moved to approve REZ09- 00003, an application submitted by Southgate
Development Company for a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential
(RS -8) zone to High Density Single Family Residential (RS -12) zone for approximately
4.29 acres of property located on Walden Road, west of Mormon Trek Boulevard.
Eastham seconded.
Freerks invited discussion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 13 of 18
Weitzel said the chance to correct existing problems begins with development, so it's worth
pursuing the solution by moving forward.
Eastham said he walked this parcel two or three years ago, and he is familiar with the issue of
insufficient drainage for the properties to the west. He said this proposal is compatible with the
Comprehensive Plan for this sub -area. He said infill development always creates the possibility
of increased traffic, but at the same time, all the streets are designed to accommodate that
additional traffic. He said there are going to be four parking spaces per unit, and that's standard
for most townhome developments throughout the community. He said additional parking spaces
are a good idea, as well as a balance between them and open spaces. Eastham said the
Walden Woods property owners will be better off with the construction of a detention basin, and
he said he is confident that the City Engineers will fulfill the condition that the storm water
management system would be designed in a manner that would not exacerbate storm water
drainage issues on adjacent properties, which would include those properties to the west. He
said that the City Engineers have a lot of experience designing these drainage systems, and
they have been very successful. He said he thinks the drainage for the Walden Court properties
will be improved, and he said he is confident that the City Engineers will assure there is no
deterioration of water drainage draining from properties to the west.
Thomas said the emphasis in the application seems to be focused on the water that is currently
draining from the main body of the property to the south. He said he hasn't heard how the
issues flooding along the north /south corridor will be improved with the detention basin and
wants to know where the failure in the existing system is that is causing it.
Freerks said that was also a question she had and was interested in checking with the records
to see how the existing systems function. She said she wanted to know if there are swales in
other areas and how they work. She said she's not necessarily opposed to rezoning but she
does have some concerns about both the water situation and the parking. Freerks said perhaps
they should attach some parking requirements to each of the development areas to the west
and east. She said she would like more information on the silting issues and how they would
come into play. She said her hope is that whatever happens to the property, it will not only keep
things the same, but improve them. She said something has happened here that isn't working
and how do they make someone fix a problem that really isn't their problem. She said she still
has questions. She said she would like to see something happen here, but she just isn't
confident about the drainage issues.
Thomas agreed. He said perhaps the degradation of the ravine over time is a critical reason
why there is flooding on the rear of the lots. He said he hasn't heard anything from either the
City or the applicant about how the creation of the swale is going to address the flooding that is
occurring now. He said he thinks the detention basin should address the problems with the
properties to the south but he is concerned about the properties to the west. Thomas said that
he's concerned about the length of the driveway and visitors not finding parking when they drive
its length. He remarked that there isn't much street frontage so street parking is at a minimum.
Freerks reminded the Commission that at this point they are talking about rezoning.
Howard said if they want to require more than one parking space per unit, this would be the time
to do so.
Thomas asked what staff recommends.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 14 of 18
Howard noted that the applicant has said there will be townhouses with two -car garages but
there's no guarantee that will be the case, and this would be the time to set conditions.
Miklo said that from this concept plan, parking for the individual units should be no problem. He
pointed to an area on the map and said perhaps making it a bit wider than twenty feet would
create more alcoves for parking along the side.
Freerks said she is considering increasing the required visitor parking to six to eight as opposed
to three and perhaps having something at or near each building site area.
Thomas said essentially there is a cul -de -sac road going in and out. He said that in other
developments in the neighborhood, the cul -de -sacs terminated in either a planting circle or
there's an open view. He said in the concept plan, the drive terminates at a unit.
Howard said these would have to be designed so the front door faced the street, and a
requirement of the zoning would be that the garages would be in the rear. This would be
designed as a rear alley, not a street or cul -de -sac.
Weitzel moved to amend his original motion to propose six guest spaces wherever they
fit on the lot.
Eastham seconded.
Eastham asked Miklo if now would be the appropriate time to require four parking spaces per
unit.
Miklo said it is addressed in that the recommendation is that the applicant follows the concept
plan, although that plan doesn't show garages.
A vote was taken and the amendment was added 6 -0.
Eastham again asked Miklo if they want to be sure to end up with four parking spaces per unit,
the Commission would have to specify that now.
Miklo said that was correct, because unlike storm water management, parking is not addressed
in the platting process.
Greenwood Hektoen said the Commission could move to amend the requirement of general
compliance with the concept plan to read general compliance with the concept plan with regard
to the parking shown.
Siders asked to speak. Greenwood Hektoen said he could if it was okay with the Commission
since the public hearing was closed.
Siders said he was fine with a zoning condition that requires double car garages, since that is
what they intend to build.
Eastham moved to amend the third condition to read "Development will be in general
compliance with the submitted concept plan regarding site layout, lot configuration, and
building orientation and units will be developed with double garages.
Weitzel seconded.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 15 of 18
A vote was taken and the amendment was added 6 -0.
Howard recommended that the Commission might want to take a straw poll because if it's a
three -three tie, the rezoning request would fail.
Swygard said her biggest concern is the properties to the west and the drainage there, and she
understands that the only guarantee is that it will not make things worse. She said one of her
biggest questions is about maintenance and the responsibilities of the homeowners association.
She said she is still is a bit undecided.
Freerks said she is willing to move forward with the application. She said she thinks it's in the
best interest of Southgate to have all the things taken care of, because they don't want things
held up at the point of platting either. She said it is a requirement that these issues are not made
worse, and her hope is that they are made better, and she is willing to go forward because of
the amendments the Commission has added.
Weitzel said he is in favor of going forward.
Eastham said he is in favor too.
Thomas said he is not comfortable with the fact that there's a problem on the west side. He said
no one has explained to him why the flooding is occurring.
Weitzel asked if it was part of the subject property that was causing the flooding. He said he
didn't think it was and he doesn't see how water on the one property could cause flooding on
the other.
Thomas said that's what he doesn't know. He said that water is draining down that panhandle to
the catch basin at the bottom of the image on the screen. He said from what he's been hearing
that there may have been soil deposition and debris and lack of maintenance that's preventing
that water from draining to the catch basin, and so it's backing up.
Weitzel said what he was hearing was comments that water was coming from the west and
pooling up at the back of the lots, and that's a problem that's existed since the houses were
built.
Thomas reiterated that something is preventing that water from draining and clearly that
development was not developed with that being the expectation.
Freerks commented that nothing is going to improve if nothing happens.
Thomas said he had an issue with the language stating it won't exacerbate the problem and he
understands that in respect to the properties to the south because the water is draining overland
to the lower elevations. He said that the issue on the west side, though, is a separate problem
that he doesn't understand the reason for. He said it's difficult for him to say that they won't
exacerbate the storm water issues but we have a problem that's not being solved by the
detention basin.
Eastham said he shared many of Thomas's concerns but the City Engineers are going to look
carefully at whether or not flooding in the back yards of properties to the west is being caused
by water coming from the parcel in question. He said what he heard was some property owners
on the west saying that water in their back yards was coming primarily from just to the north and
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 16 of 18
areas to the west of their properties. He said he does agree with Thomas that they don't have a
clear engineering study of why residents' back yards on the west side are wet all the time. He
said he doesn't understand what authority the Commission would have to address that if it was
not being caused by the subject property under consideration for rezoning.
Weitzel said he doesn't want to be in the position to tell someone that every time they develop a
property they have to do a region -wide analysis of storm water drainage and solve everyone
else's problems.
Thomas said he understands, but flooding is occurring on this property.
Weitzel stated that it isn't the subject property.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5 -1 with Thomas voting no.
Freerks explained that the Commission will see this again at the platting stage. The rezoning
request will now be forwarded to City Council and everyone will have another opportunity to
give feedback at that time as well.
Greenwood Hektoen said this rezoning item would likely be heard at the June 5th City Council
meeting.
REZ12- 00007: Discussion of an application an application submitted by The University of Iowa
for a rezoning from Public (P) zone to Community Business Service (CB -2) zone for
approximately 1.3 -acres of property located south of Harrison Street between Clinton Street and
Dubuque Street. (45 day limitation period: May 18, 2012)
Miklo said the Commission heard a full staff report at the informal meeting, so his report tonight
will be a short one. He said this property is zoned Public (P) and is being leased and possibly
transferred in the future to a private entity, it must be rezoned to one of the zoning districts. He
said the applicant has proposed Central Business Service Zone (CB -2), which is compatible
with the existing Comprehensive Plan for the area. He said staff anticipates with the Riverfront
Crossings there will be some new zoning designations in the area that would have
characteristics similar to the CB -2 zone.
Freerks asked why MldWestOne Bank is applying for the special exceptions while the property
is owned by the University of Iowa. She asked if it's common for whoever is leasing the property
to apply.
Miklo said that it was.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Dan Black of MidWestOne Bank said that he is here to answer any questions. He said they will
try to get the CB -2 zoning and operate temporarily for two or three years in the Sabin Building
and then build on Harrison and Clinton.
Miklo clarified that since the property is still owned by the University the CB -2 designation is an
overlay zone but if it's transferred to private ownership in the future it would become a CB -2
zone without the P designation.
Freerks closed public hearing.
Freerks asked for a motion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 3, 2012 - Formal
Page 17 of 18
Eastham moved to approve REZ12- 00007, an application submitted by The University of
Iowa for a rezoning from Neighborhood Public (P1) zone to Institutional Public with a
Central Business Service Overlay (P2 /CB -2) zone for approximately 1.3 -acres of property
located south of Harrison Street between Clinton Street and Dubuque Street.
(45 day limitation period: May 18, 2012)
Swygard seconded.
Freerks invited discussion.
Freerks said she thought this was a fine solution to a problem that started with flooding. She
said she does encourage potential re -use of the building in long -term.
Weitzel said in the interest of flood recovery, he is going to support the motion, but he hopes
that there is a creative solution to preserve Sabin and redevelop it and use the rest of the lot as
well.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: April 5.2012:
Eastham moved to approve the minutes.
Weitzel seconded.
The motion carried 6 -0.
OTHER:
Freerks thanked out -going Commission member Beth Koppes for her service and time and
presented her with a certificate of appreciation.
Weitzel explained to the Commission what had transpired at the City Council meeting that week
regarding zoning items.
Freerks went over the list of Commission representatives to attend the Council meetings and
explained to Martin how that system worked.
Miklo spoke about an upcoming training opportunity being held at the public library on May 22
and said he would email the Commission with details.
ADJOURNMENT:
Eastham moved to adjourn.
Weitzel seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 6 -0 vote.
z
O
F5
CO)�
i�
20
O 0
V LU
zW�
V
O
ZN
Na0
06 z
O W
z
za
z
a
J
a
a
z
P
W
W
O
LL
O
z
W
W
O
z
QXX'!XXXX
0
04
MXXXO
XX
I
XXXX
XXX
wo
CDxxox
X
X
X
X
I
xxx
X
X
N
M
X
X
X
�
i
X
X
X
W
CO
CO
M
N
1--
In
In
M
exxxxIXXX
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
<D
X
X
X
X
I
X
X
X
N
W
N
!e
X
X
X
X
i
X
x
x
N
Lu
app
CD
r
X
XXX
I
X
X
X
CjQYc/�aO0C�j�
Z
Q
Q
W
ZwwwMNr--ooM
_
w
WILP:
W
�N
7Lu
Wad
I-x00000000
�
'Lo
W
ci
Q
a
C�QYtn
�y00ac��
?
�vjw
Q
Q
W
_
W
CL
02�
ZimUiLL
W
01=-�
O
z
W
W
O
z
7 7
O O
7 7
-oO v0
0 0 o O
X C X C
W
C +-' o
co (D O 0o .0 0
o
de z " .0
n n w W
xOOz XOOz
w w
Y Y
QXX'!XXXX
0
04
MXXXO
w
XXX
ti
N
X
X
X
X
!
X
X
X
N
M
Z4
XXXX
1
I
X
X
X
W
CO
CO
M
N
1--
In
In
M
� X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
W
W
}
Q
Z
X
W
a
Z
Lu
app
�O0
CjQYc/�aO0C�j�
Z
Q
Q
W
W
_
w
WILP:
W
�N
7Lu
Wad
zawwYMCO)
7 7
O O
7 7
-oO v0
0 0 o O
X C X C
W
C +-' o
co (D O 0o .0 0
o
de z " .0
n n w W
xOOz XOOz
w w
Y Y
MMMMIrm
3b(3)
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED
MAY 17, 2012 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Caroline Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Anne Freerks, Phoebe Martin,
Paula Swygard, John Thomas, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Karen Howard, Sarah Holecek, Andrew Bassman
OTHERS PRESENT: Marc Moen, Pam Michaud
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission voted 6 -1 (Thomas opposed) to recommend approval of VAC12- 00003, a
request to vacate air rights starting at approximately 16 feet, 8 inches above grade for a
4' x 44' section of public right -of -way in City Plaza that extends along the west property
line of the subject property at 114 S. Dubuque Street and a 4' x 56' section of public right -
of -way in Blackhawk Park that extends along the north property line of the subject
property.
The Commission voted 7 -0 to recommend that a letter be forwarded to the Johnson
County Board of Adjustment recommending approval of CU12- 00001, a request for a
conditional use permit to establish a temporary, portable concrete batch plan on a 12.74
acre lot located at 5085 Herbert Hoover Highway NE.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
REZONING ITEM
VAC12- 00003: Discussion of an application submitted by Marc Moen for a vacation of the public
right -of -way located adjacent to 114 S Dubuque Street.
Howard said this is a vacation of air rights that starts at approximately 16 feet, 8inches above
grade for a 4 foot by 44 foot section of public right -of -way in City Plaza along Dubuque Street
that extends along the west property line of the subject property at 114 South Dubuque Street
and a 4 foot by 56 foot section of public right -of -way in Blackhawk Park that extends along the
north property line of the subject property. She displayed a vacation exhibit. She said this
request is being made so the building can cantilever over the public right -of -way.
Howard explained that the vehicular circulation standards are really not applicable, as the only
vehicular traffic would be emergency vehicle allowances in the City Plaza. She said that staff
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 17, 2012 - Formal
Page 2 of 11
feels that pedestrians will not be impeded by this vacation since the air rights start around
seventeen feet above the ground, and the cantilevered building wall will serve as a canopy to
provide pedestrians shade and protection from weather as well as providing some better
opportunities for signage at the store front level. She said that because the City has not had a
lot of these requests for buildings to cantilever over public right -of -way, careful consideration
should be given to this application in regard to the potential impact on the resource as to
whether it will result in some public benefit. She said staff has noted a number of public benefits
that they feel are created by allowing this vacation. She said one is that it creates the
opportunity for a better retail storefront, in particular because of all the mechanical systems that
have to go into the first level of the building and the space constraints of this specific building.
She said on a larger site, a cantilevered building would be able to fit into the private property line
by recessing the storefront, but in this case, given the small size of the property, doing that
would push the retail storefront back which would further limit the retail area that is already
constrained due to the requirements for two elevators, two stair towers, elevator lobby,
mechanical room, fire control room, etc. She said the other benefits to the proposed projection
into the ROW are that it allows additional Class A office space on the second, third and fourth
floors of the building. Providing opportunities for new employers in the downtown area is an
important economic development goal of the City. The proposed vacation and resulting
cantilevered building will also provide enough additional living space in the residential units to
allow the balconies to be recessed within the building wall, which staff feels creates a more
aesthetically pleasing and functional building design and more useable outdoor space for the
tenants without sacrificing the quality of the interior living space. Howard said that it is a City
goal to attract a more permanent resident population in the downtown area, and creating
residential units that are attractive to long -term residents is important.
She said for the reasons above staff finds that the proposed vacation meets the criteria for right -
of -way of vacations as outlined in the City Code and therefore, staff recommends approval of
VAC12- 00003, a request to vacate air rights starting at approximately 16 feet, 8 inches above
grade for a 4 foot by 44 foot section of public right -of -way in City Plaza that extends along the
west property line of the subject property and a 4 foot by 56 foot section of public right -of -way in
Blackhawk Park. Howard showed some photos of the property that the applicant had sent in.
Eastham asked if the City ever wanted to change Dubuque Street back into an active street,
would this building affect the ability to do that.
Howard said that nothing about the cantilever would prevent that, since it was for air rights, not
fee title to the land.
Eastham asked how allowing this building to protrude would affect the ability to develop the
adjoining space to the north.
Howard said that City Council has already determined that that site will not be sold for
development and will remain a public park.
Eastham asked what the fire department said in terms of being able to access this building or
nearby buildings and if this building would affect their ability to get their equipment in.
Howard explained that this application was reviewed by all relevant City departments, including
Fire and Public Works because one consideration is whether emergency vehicles can access a
site. The Fire Department indicated no objections to the vacation request. She said the fire lane
in the pedestrian mall is in the center of the mall so they are not impeded. She remarked that
access could also be gained by using the alley.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 17, 2012 - Formal
Page 3 of 11
Thomas asked if there had been any vacations of this sort in the downtown area.
Howard said they have requests for temporary use of right -of -way for things like stoops and
canopies but to her knowledge this is the first request for a building projection over the public
right -of -way.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Marc Moen of 221 East College Street #1301 said as they worked through the process of
designing this building they originally had a sheer wall that came down to the pedestrian mall
but they were starting to shrink the office space by the nature of the mechanical systems they
had to fit into that space. He said the architects presented this cantilever design as a much
more pedestrian friendly design than walking by fourteen floors of sheer glass. He said by using
this concept they could keep the retail space at 2,000 square feet comprising the mezzanine
and the main floor. Moen said the goal of this project besides retail and office space was to do
residential units that would be more entry level in the mid to low $200,000 range but would still
be true one - bedroom units. He said they were having a great deal of difficulty getting three units
per floor without the cantilever, and that other designs for balconies were not so appealing as
this one with 100 square foot balconies recessed into the living area and accessible from both
living room and bedroom, making these units much more salable as condos rather than
leasable as apartments. He said they have had huge buyer interest since showing the revised
plan. He said at the pedestrian level it becomes a much more pedestrian - friendly human scale
with the cantilever. He said there's a big demand for Class A office space downtown, and
there's been a lot of interest in being able to buy these office spaces as opposed to leasing
them.
Freerks said she's excited about the project, and she's familiar with the space. She said she has
a concern about the line of sight, because as you stand in front of the building to the south you
look all the way to Iowa Avenue. She thinks it's important to be able to have that view continue
even up to the third floor so there is a clean line of sight as there is on this historic and very
public thoroughfare, because once it's there and it bumps out, it really does change the way
things look. She said she's not opposed to the project, but is concerned about this one aspect of
it.
Moen replied that they bought the building to the south to make sure it doesn't come down and
are doing restoration work on it. He said he went to the site to measure and see if the subject
project would conflict with that building and to some degree it does block the upper stories. He
said there many areas around town with these kinds of "bump- outs" that have never been
addressed and he named some of them — the public library, Plaza Towers, Neuman - Monson
Architectural Offices. Moen said they explored various alternatives with the architects but
because of where the mechanical equipment has to sit on the second and third floors of the
proposed building, there's no way to gain that back if the cantilever isn't started on the second
floor. He said they have consolidated all their properties so it's all downtown and he is not
personally troubled by this situation, and he has a lot of interest in making sure that what's done
downtown is exciting. He said their architects also have a vested interest in downtown as that is
where there office is. Moen said he personally loves the juxtaposition of modern buildings and
historic buildings.
Freerks again said that altering the line of sight at that level will be permanent and she wonders
if there is a better way to go about the building.
Moen said his architects told him this is the best design they could formulate as pertains to
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 17, 2012 - Formal
Page 4 of 11
getting it to feel comfortable and attracting people to the retail space.
Martin asked how many stories the proposed building has.
Moen replied that it has fourteen stories with two -story units on the top level.
Martin asked what the square footage was for the residential units.
Moen said they ranged from about 750 feet to 1150 feet, and office space is about 2300 feet per
level.
Freerks asked if trees on the pedestrian mall to the west will stay there.
Moen said he didn't believe the cantilevering would affect any of the trees on the pedestrian
mall, and their intent is to redo the (Blackhawk) park in front of the building.
Eastham asked if it's possible to consider different dimensions for the amount of cantilever on
either side of the building; for example, providing a greater building projection over Blackhawk
Park and less over City Plaza.
Moen said they looked at both two and three foot cantilevers, which didn't achieve anything, and
up to an eight foot cantilever. He said he understands Freerk's concerns. He said he instructed
his architects to reduce the size of the cantilever to the least amount of cantilever that would
allow them to do what they need to do upstairs, and that's what they did. He said the goal is to
take a site that is 40'x80' and take it from a building assessed at one -half million dollars to a
building that will be assessed at ten million dollars.
Freerks said the Commission will have discussion now because it's important for the applicant
to be able to respond to the Commission.
Wietzel said he's not concerned in the least with the line of sight.
Martin said from the pictures she's seen that amount of space looks appropriate and
architecturally pleasing. She said she doesn't think it would have a big impact on line of sight in
any direction. She said she thought that a smaller cantilever might make the building look
strange.
Thomas said he has concerns about the precedent- setting aspect of this project in that there is
a sort of sacredness about the public right -of -way of the pedestrian mall, and this will break the
integrity of the space. He said he has no issue with the cantilever to the north, as it's
perpendicular to Dubuque Street and will not be distracting or part of any longer building wall.
He said he wouldn't mind having the cantilever along that side widened in order to meet the
applicant's floor area needs. He said the one on the west side, though, does concern him. He
remarked that perhaps the balcony depth is not adequate at only four feet. He said that perhaps
there would be a benefit to widening the cantilever on the north side of the building to meet the
need without the cantilever on the west side. He said that his sense is that the views to the west
would not be that interesting.
Moen commented that in fact the views to the west are spectacular.
Dyer said the intensity of the sun on the west might be a problem.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 17, 2012 - Formal
Page 5 of 11
Moen said they will use light- diffusing shades and the residents will be able to choose the
porosity.
Eastham asked if the applicant had evaluated making the cantilever longer on the north side
and less on the west side.
Moen stated that they had, and the building looked terrible. He said by adjusting cantilevers the
entire structural system would have to be redesigned. He said it's very complicated. He said in
all the design discussions, the architects have worked with their mechanical engineers to
evaluate all the options, and the design they have now is the best one.
Eastham asked for Moen's comments on the change of sight view from the Sheraton Hotel
entrance to the north.
Moen said he thinks it's insignificant. He said there are also many, many trees in the pedestrian
mall, so there's really not a clear sight line there now.
Howard stated that there have been recent inquiries about the possibility for permanent building
projections into the public ROW as the city has become more urban. However, the City has not
developed specific standards for weighing the costs and benefits of these proposals, so have
been looking at other cities and codes to see how they have dealt with it. She said they talked to
the City of Des Moines to see how they do the vacation of the air rights as well as how it's
structured to pay for those rights. She said staff has also looked at other larger urban areas to
see how these types of requests are reviewed and what standards are applied; for example, the
distinction between a request for a projection of a building over the right -of -way versus a small
projection like a balcony. She said the staff reviewed the subject vacation request carefully,
keeping in mind public goals and needs for the public right -of -way and making sure there was a
real public benefit to what occurred as a result of the vacation. She said that the International
Building Code does allow for building projections above fifteen feet above the ground.
Eastham asked if the international standard is set at that number because humans don't look
higher than that.
Howard stated that the reasons for the International Building Code to set this standard is
probably for more practical reasons, such as for clearance for vehicular traffic. However,
Howard said there is a lot of research on what the view shed is for a typical pedestrian. She said
most people don't see the upper levels of buildings when they are walking. She said thirty feet is
typically what you see peripherally when walking and experiencing buildings. She stated that the
design review standards for the pedestrian mall are all geared toward ensuring a quality
pedestrian environment.
Dyer asked how wide the balconies are on Plaza Towers.
Moen said he believed they are about eight feet in depth. He said on the proposed building they
will be smaller in depth than Plaza Towers, but much larger than most you see in New York City
or in other urban areas. He stated that he thought they would be very usable for the residents.
Dyer asked if with the new building there will be a change from being a blank wall along
Blackhawk Park to being a retail entrance for the new building.
Moen said there will be retail entrances on both the park and pedestrian mall sides.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 17, 2012 - Formal
Page 6 of 11
Dyer asked if there is a basement and if there is any storage other than the small closet in the
apartments.
Moen said there is no basement and very little storage.
Pam Michaud of 109 S. Johnson Street said she's very tuned in to high -rise buildings recently
as there will be a four story building next to her residence soon. She asked if the Central
Business (CB -10) zone has a ten story height limit.
Howard said it has a FAR limit of ten but you can have a taller building than 10 stories and still
have an FAR less than 10. She said in the CB -10 Zone, there is technically no height limit,
however, there is a height limit imposed by the FAA as determined by the airport overlay. She
said FAR generally doesn't always speak to the height of the building. For example, Plaza
Towers is 14 stories tall, but has an FAR much less than 10.
Michaud said when speaking of the pedestrian -level experience and how shops are going to be
vibrant, perhaps forgotten is the shadow that's going to be cast by the proposed building. She
said although City Council didn't regard that as important, from Fall Equinox through Winter
Solstice through Spring Equinox that shadow is going to be up to six hundred feet long and
would stretch to Schaeffer Hall and to Ecumenical Towers in the winter, and fall on Prairie
Lights at noon. She said she didn't see how that would make for a vibrant shopping area if it
was in solid shade. She said Mr. Moen has every right to build a building there, but she thinks it
is going to affect the sense of vibrancy. She said although no one else is present tonight, there
is a concern out in the community that it's a very large statement in that location. She said it
would be great if it wasn't adjacent to a park. Michaud said it was a very attractive building and
she liked the size of the units and office space and retail space should be a nice addition to
downtown. She said it's just the height of it next to a public park that concerns her.
Freerks closed public hearing.
Freerks asked for a motion.
Weitzel moved to approve VAC12- 00003, a request to vacate air rights starting at
approximately 16 feet, 8 inches above grade for a 4' x 44' section of public right -of -way in
City Plaza that extends along the west property line of the subject property at 114 S.
Dubuque Street and a 4' x 56' section of public right -of -way in Blackhawk Park that
extends along the north property line of the subject property.
Dyer seconded.
Freerks invited discussion.
Eastham said he has spent some time in the City Plaza area trying to determine what effect this
building, with or without its four foot cantilever, would have on the various views. He said he
concluded that for him personally he was not able to convince himself that extending the
building four feet past the property line about sixteen feet above the ground level would have
much of an adverse impact on the view down Dubuque Street toward Iowa Avenue. He said he
also feels that these are very personal standards, and he has no real way of trying to
incorporate them into his decision. He said he's satisfied with fire and safety and that there
would be no eventual adverse impact on reclaiming this street if that ever were to happen. He
said the City -owned property to the north would not be developed, so for all these reasons, he is
supporting the application.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 17, 2012 - Formal
Page 7 of 11
Swygard said she will support the request because the public benefits, and the goals of the City
as far as economic development and attracting permanent residents downtown will benefit from
allowing the cantilever to go forward. She said she wouldn't be able to support the vacating of
air space in every situation, but in this case she can.
Weitzel stated that vacations, particularly of this scale and nature should be considered
particular to the site and purpose and public gain. He said this is a very constrained space, and
the amount of changeover in potential tax base is phenomenal. He said there are not a lot of
very tall buildings in downtown Iowa City, and that it will not become Manhattan any time soon.
He said there is at least seventy percent of the street view that is not impeded, and there are six
other historic buildings that are still visible from Washington Street with no impedance. He said
that this building will not make the Blackstone Building ineligible for the National Register. He
said it does impede part of the view shed, but he thinks that the public benefit outweighs that
small part. He said that the University has an awning that is eight feet wide hanging off the
Jefferson Building, which blocks a huge amount of space.
Freerks countered by saying that an awning can more easily be removed versus a projection of
a building wall, and that's a big difference.
Thomas said he is concerned about the precedence setting aspects of this. He stated that in his
opinion the opportunity for reclaiming floor space was preferably to the north rather than to the
west, because that's the wall where any additional need could have been changed. He said in
his view the need was created by the building design. He said the applicant knew this was a
small site and that if they went taller they would need more mechanical systems, and the
expectation would be that you're going to have to solve those issues. He said to then find at
some point in the design process that it wasn't going to work is in a way changing the rules of
the game. He says he supports the project, but he can't support the vacation because it is
precedent setting. He said the attorney's commented that it is not a legal issue but a political
one, and he doesn't think any more issues are needed that are going to be resolved in a political
forum. He said this line is established and people conform to what they have for the history of
this town and he would prefer to preserve that line.
Dyer said she shares Thomas's concern about being asked to vacate this space after the whole
project is approved as opposed to the applicant saying in the beginning it would be easier to do
this cantilever to design the building and the Commission could approve or not at that point. She
said she's not ready to vote against it but she finds it frustrating to be at this point where all the
Commission's suggestions are met with the response that they won't work. She said if this had
proceeded in the other order with the developer requesting the vacation before the building was
fully designed, they wouldn't be the situation they are in.
Martin said she is in support of the cantilever, and she's not sure it's precedent setting, since
other ones would undergo the same scrutiny as this one has.
Freerks said she supports the project completely because she thinks this kind of development is
crucial in creating and maintaining a vibrant downtown, bringing a constant mix of people into
the community and creating a mix of old architecture and new. She said she feels like she is
being asked if they can redesign something at the last minute when she's not knowledgeable
enough to design. But she wishes the sightline could preserved. She said she is torn. She said
she could say no in protest or she could show that she respects and appreciates the potential
here as well as the tax base. She said she'd like to think that this won't be the norm. She said
she will support it but she wishes the Commission wasn't in the situation they are in right now
but knows that there are many factors that have created this situation.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 17, 2012 - Formal
Page 8 of 11
Eastham said he agrees that this is very late in the design of this building to be looking at
vacating air rights and he's not sure if the developer is responsible for the sequence of events or
if that is the nature of the process that's in place He said if the latter is true, it would be a good
idea to change the process so an air rights vacation would come into play much earlier in the
approval process. He said that there aren't any design criteria to guide the Commission in
talking about using air rights. He said that new standards would be helpful in the future for the
development south of downtown and for future buildings downtown.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-1 with Thomas voting no.
Conditional Use Item
CU12- 00001: Discussion of an application submitted by Croell Redi -Mix Inc. to establish a
portable concrete batch plant to support the paving operations on Interstate 80 on Lot 3
Sharpless Subdivision located at 5085 Herbert Hoover Highway NE.
Bassman said this site is to the west of the Sharpless Auction Building and is bound by
Interstate 80 to the south and Herbert Hoover Highway northeast to the north and agricultural
land to the east. He said the site and most of the land in Fringe Area B lies outside of Iowa
City's projected growth area. He said since the property is located within the city's extra-
territorial review area, the County Zoning Ordinance requires the City's review and comment on
the application. He said the Fringe Area Agreement states that agricultural uses at this site are
preferred, but since the use is temporary and construction could be completed as early as
November according to County staff, therefore the City was not too concerned about this
temporary use. He stated that the County has reviewed the water and sewer, soil and erosion
and dust control measures taken by the applicant. He said the applicant has indicated that all
areas disturbed during use would be restored. He said the permit for the storm water prevention
pollution plan is limited to three years, and the batch plant must be removed within 180 days of
completion of the construction project along Interstate 80. He stated that staff recommends that
a letter be forwarded to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending approval of
CU12- 00001, a request for a conditional use permit to establish a temporary portable concrete
batch plant.
Freerks opened public hearing.
(No public comment on this item)
Freerks closed public hearing.
Weitzel moved to approve CU12- 00001, recommending that a letter be forwarded from the
Iowa City Council to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending approval
of CU12- 00001, a request for a conditional use permit to establish a temporary, portable
concrete batch plan on a 12.74 acre lot located at 5085 Herbert Hoover Highway NE.
Eastham seconded.
Freerks invited discussion.
Freerks said this doesn't conflict with the Fringe Area Agreement and she thinks it's always best
to have something like this as close to the location as possible. She said it sounds like an ideal
site. She also noted that the land will have to be re- seeded once the operation ceases, and the
use will be required to be removed within 180 days of completion of the road project.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 17, 2012 - Formal
Page 9 of 11
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: April 30 and May 3,2012:
The Commission agreed to defer approval of the minutes until the next meeting so they would
have more time to review them, since the discussion was so extensive during the last meeting.
Howard noted that it should not be a problem to defer since after the long discussion at the last
Commission meeting the applicant agreed that now that he has approval from the Commission,
he will have his engineer go out to the property to meet with the neighbors about their concerns.
Therefore, the applicant requested to delay sending this item for Council consideration until they
had time to meet with the neighbors. Therefore, Howard said it would not be a problem to vote
on the minutes at the next meeting of the Commission.
Eastham moved to defer consideration of meeting minutes for April 30 and May 3 to the
next meeting of the Commission.
Swygard seconded.
The motion carried 7 -0.
OTHER:
Thomas said there has been a lot of concern about shadows with the Marc Moen project at 114
S. Dubuque Street and that it will project shadows onto Blackhawk Park, the primary sunny spot
in the downtown area. He said Chauncey Swan Park could also be affected. He would like to
raise the issue of a sunshine ordinance and said it's something they should be thinking about as
the downtown is developed.
Howard said that City Council did require Moen to do a shadow study, which was presented to
the Council. She said they also did one when Plaza Towers was constructed. Howard said that
she agreed that a shadow study is something that is helpful when larger buildings are proposed.
She said City Council has required it when there's been a development agreement for the larger
buildings, but there is no general requirement in all cases. She said with the Riverfront
Crossings Plan staff has asked the consultants to indicate where it's appropriate to have taller
buildings. She said HDR(the consultant) looked at many of the downtown buildings, and the
plan that will be adopted or considered will have a downtown component that will show the more
historic buildings and where it's more appropriate for taller towers.
Thomas said he is referring mainly to shadows cast in public parks and open public spaces.
Eastham asked if shadow studies were expensive.
Howard said that she believed that it would be fairly simple for an architect that is familiar with
the project to do that kind of study.
Freerks asked if this will be proposed and put into the Code soon.
Howard said this would be a worthwhile topic for discussion at the time a new zoning ordinance
for the downtown area is considered.
Thomas said that in San Francisco a study is done for any building over 40 feet tall and the
Planning Department does the shadow analysis.
Howard said that given that staff resources are more limited in Iowa City, if a requirement is
established, it should probably be done by the project architect or engineer.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 17, 2012 - Formal
Page 10 of 11
ADJOURNMENT:
Weitzel moved to adjourn.
Eastham seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 7 -0 vote.
z
O
U)
Uo
20
Ou
V LU
z LOU
ZZN
Na
06 Z
cD LU
z
za
Qz
J
a
0
z
W
W
Q
O
a
z
W
W
O
LL
K
mxxo
;
xxxx
�XXXXXXXX
i
XXX
Q
-XX
X
X
i
XXXX
X
X
X
N
Qxxox
:
xxx
==
COCOMNf�tOtOM
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
La
MXXXD
w
i
XXX
Fx00000000
CD
XXXX
i
XXX
M
w
t0
XXXX
Q
z
X
i
X
X
X
N
J=
QO
N
XXXX
(Q<w
i
XXX
p
`XXXX
r
g
i
XXX
W
LU0N
aH2~
�Q0U
W
CQ
=w
�w(OCOMNI�IOtOM
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
W d
�-x00000000
In
to
to
to
0
0
w
ti
Q
a
C>QYyZQNW
QN
LudPWIL
20CW-
2wmwa
O-
zcwU.e
U)
3
a
z
W
W
O
LL
K
7 7
O O
7 7
va v0
mO (D0
N
C y E � C y
aQQz 2.0<zi
u n w u u w
XOOz XOOZ
w w
Y Y
mxxo
;
xxxx
Mxxx-
i
XXX
N
X
X
X
x
i
X
X
X
N
M
V-xxxx;xxx
==
COCOMNf�tOtOM
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
Fx00000000
W
w
}
Q
z
X
W<
z
J=
QO
(Q<w
ady
p
g
W
LU0N
aH2~
�Q0U
W
CQ
=w
z
>-
W
wOJ
w
e2NF
-3:
7 7
O O
7 7
va v0
mO (D0
N
C y E � C y
aQQz 2.0<zi
u n w u u w
XOOz XOOZ
w w
Y Y
Approved Minutes
April 2012
MINUTES
SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION
APRIL 26, 2012
ROOM 103, IOWA CITY /JOHNSON COUNTY SENIOR CENTER
Members Present: Jay Honohan, Daniel Benton, Rose Hanson, Chuck Felling,
Mark Holbrook
Members Absent: Sarah Maiers, Michael Lensing
Staff Present: Linda Kopping, Kristin Kromray, Michelle Buhman, Emily
Light, Tom Markus
Others Present: Jo Hensch, Howard Hensch, Lynn Hungerford
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after
separate Council action):
The Commission voted 5 -0 to recommend increasing membership fees effective
July 1, 2012 as follows:
City: $33 Single; additional family member, $20
Johnson County: $60 Single; additional family member, $36
Out of County: $96 Single; additional family member, $58
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 PM. Honohan chaired the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MARCH 15, 2012 MEETING:
Motion: To accept the minutes from the March 15, 2012 meeting. Motion
carried on a vote of 5/0. Benton /Holbrook.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS:
Holbrook will attend the May 15th City Council meeting. Honohan will attend a
Johnson County Board of Supervisors meeting.
3b(4)
Approved Minutes
April 2012
STEERING COUNCIL REPORT:
Felling reported that the last Steering Council meeting was largely dedicated to
planning the Steering Council Spring Forum, which was held on April 20th. Felling
noted the Community Outreach Committee is continuing to meet with outside
organizations. Buhman and some Outreach Committee members met with a
group of seniors at the Coralville Rec Center during their monthly potluck to talk
about Senior Center programs and services. Another committee is working on a
fundraising project with local photographer, Peter Feldstine. Feldstine, who
worked on the Oxford project, will be taking pictures of seniors for a calendar or
other project. The program committee is working on getting the Summer Program
Guide out. Program Guides will be mailed the week of May 21St
DISCUSSION AND RECONSIDERATION OF PARTICIPANT FEE
STRUCTURE:
Honohan reported that he and Kopping met with Tom Markus regarding the
membership fee increase. The $15 increase across all membership types puts a
larger percentage increase on Iowa City members. Markus explained that due to
the majority support the City of Iowa City provides to the Senior Center through
property taxes, the percentage increase to Iowa City residents should be smaller
than members who live outside of Iowa City. The Commission discussed a new
fee schedule that was handed out, and is attached to these minutes.
Holbrook inquired if the grant from the county is from tax revenue generated from
incorporated or unincorporated areas. If the grant is from both incorporated and
unincorporated taxes this means that Iowa City residents tax dollars are being
used twice to fund the Senior Center and further necessitates a smaller
percentage increase for Iowa City residents.
Motion: To recommend increasing membership fees effective July 1, 2012
as follows:
City: $33 Single; additional family member, $20
Johnson County: $60 Single; additional family member, $36
Out of County: $96 Single; additional family member, $58
Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Benton /Holbrook.
OPERATIONAL HANDBOOK RECOMMENDATIONS:
Benton and Felling reported they gave their recommendations to Kopping.
Honohan and Kopping will meet to review his recommendations.
Approved Minutes
April 2012
OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW:
Kopping reported there have been a number of repairs recently in the kitchen
including the steam kettle, garbage disposal, walk in cooler, and a waste piping
leak. In addition the kitchen has been disposing of much more cardboard.
Kopping is going to speak with the director of Elder Service's regarding an
additional cardboard pickup.
Kopping reported that Craig Buhman is obtaining quotes for the plaster repair for
the grand staircase walls.
Light reported that the Advanced Care Planning appointments are starting to fill
and there have been a number of informational meetings.
Buhman reported that Friday April 27th there will be three programs; an art show
opening, a speaker discussing Sudan, and the Sudanese Choir will perform. On
May 4th the Senior Center will have a dance sponsored by Friends of the Center
with music by the Dale Thomas Band. On May 12th the Senior Center will hold an
Irish Ceili dance with music by the Beggarman. May 29th will be the first day of
registration.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion: To Adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Felling /Benton.
U) N
N r
� O
O N
� Q
'a Q
N
O
L
Q
Q
O
•y
N
.E
L
v�
L N
� LL
d
/4) C N
V w T
C = N
N Q
O
N
N
T
LO
T
T
00
T
O
T
O
N
0)
co
T
co
0)
T
ti
T
f`
T
LO
N
X
X
X
X
X
It
O
O
LO
w
X
X
X
X
X
X
M
CO
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
N
X
X
X
X
X
T
N
N
q4T
M
M
N
Cl
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
x
W
E
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
L
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
Y
�
O
C
O
O
fA
CO)
C
O
O
(C
C
N
O
m
O
J
cu
W
=
=
o
N
N
U
=
N
L
N
Y
L
m
co
L
>%
U_
L
0
cu
cu
Z
U
U)
N L
m
X C E
W N
O O O O N
N -0 -0 O O
d Q Q Z Z
II II
II II W � II
XOOz
Y
Approved Minutes
April 2012
Senior Center
Fee Increase Options
April 26, 2012
Prepared by Linda Kopping
Current Fee Structure \ Number of Members
f 4 M
Single
1 S H
N 9PP 1 J G
o
1SCVUnt *TataV FamIl, CcslR
Discount
y
City -32% 4
$33 ($23,727)
$20
$53 ($13,992)
$37,719
ATB
MM,`t�r
$60 ($10,080)
$36
$96 ($6,144)
$16,224
rO t of C+un
$96 ($1,920)
60 (I ii7z 4
$154($308)
$2,228
60% 4 ATB
*Each family membership represents two people
FY12 YTD Membership Revenue: $31,857
FY11 Membership Revenue $35,503
Example
Single
Cost of Family
Total for Family
Estimated
Discount
Revenue
City -32% 4
$33 ($23,727)
$20
$53 ($13,992)
$37,719
ATB
County 50% 4
$60 ($10,080)
$36
$96 ($6,144)
$16,224
ATB
Out of County
$96 ($1,920)
$58
$154($308)
$2,228
60% 4 ATB
Total Estimated
$56,171
Revenue