The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-20-2006 Planning and Zoning Commission PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Monday, July 17, 2006 -7:30 PM Informal Meeting Iowa City City Hall Lobby Conference Room 410 E. Washington Street Thursday, July 20, 2006 - 7:30 PM Formal Meeting Iowa City City Hall Emma J. Harvat Hall 410 E. Washington Street AGENDA: A. Call to Order B. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda C. Rezoning Item: REl06-00015: Discussion of an application submitted by Hieronymus Square Associates for a rezoning of 1.12 acres of property located at 314 & 328 South Clinton Street from Central Business Support (CB-5) zone to Central Business (CB-10) zone. (45-day limitation period: July 31, 2006) D. Rezoning/Development Item: REl06-00010/SUB06-00008: Discussion of an application submitted by Don Cochran for a rezoning from Interim Development Single-Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Low-Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone, and a preliminary plat and a final plat of McCollister Subdivision, a 2-lot, 9.53-acre residential subdivision located east of South Gilbert Street and west of Sandusky Drive. (45-day limitation period: August 16, 2006) E. Development Item: SUB06-00011: Discussion of an application submitted by ST Enterprises LC for a final plat of Hollywood Manor Part 9, a 12-lot, 4.84 acre residential subdivision located west of Russell Drive and south of Burns Avenue. (45-day limitation period: July 22, 2006) F. Other Items: G. Consideration of the July 6, 2006 Meeting Minutes H. Adjournment Informal Formal Commission Meetin s: September 4 September 18 October 2 September 7 September 21 October 5 STAFF REPORT To: Planning & Zoning Commission Prepared by: Sunil Terdalkar Item: REZ06-00015 314 & 328 Clinton Street Date: July 20, 2006 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Hieronymus Square Associates 328 South Clinton Street Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 338-1294 Contact Person: Kevin Digmann 711 S. Gilbert Street Iowa City, IA 52740 Phone: (319) 631-0548 Requested Action: Rezoning from CB-5 to CB-10 Purpose: Development of a mixed-use residential/commercial building Location: Clinton Street south of Burlington Street Size: Approximately 1.12 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Commercial and Surface Parking - CB-5 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Undeveloped, Surface Parking - CB-1 0 South: Undeveloped, Commercial - CB-5 East: Public/Commercial - P/CB-5 West: Commercial - CB-5 Comprehensive Plan: General Commercial - Near Southside Plan Neighborhood Open Space District N/A File Date: June 16, 2006 45 Day Limitation Period: August 1, 2006 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicant, Hieronymus Square Associates, is requesting approval for rezoning a 1.12-acre property from Central Business Support Zone (CB-5) to Central Business Zone (CB-10) zone. The property is located east of Clinton Street, south of Burlington Street. The area was zoned CB-2 between 1983 and 1992. It was rezoned to CB-5 in 1992 to implement the Near Southside Redevelopment Plan. 2 ANAL YSIS: Comprehensive Plan: In 1992 the City adopted the Near Southside Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan (NS Plan) as a guide for the redevelopment of the area generally bounded by Burlington Street on the north, Gilbert Street on the east, Madison Street on the west and the Iowa Interstate Railway on the south (see attached Near Southside Map). The objective of the NS Plan is to foster redevelopment of the Near Southside while maintaining an economically healthy core in the downtown. To achieve this objective the NS Plan identifies the area between Court Street and Burlington Street as suitable for office and commercial development complemented with upper story residential uses. The NS Plan encourages higher-density residential development in the area south of Court Street. The plan to expand downtown to the south also supports the policy of preserving the historic neighborhoods to the north and east of the central business district by providing a location for growth away from these neighborhoods. The plan further identifies the need for addressing the issues of parking, open space, pedestrian accessibility, traffic circulation, historic preservation and amenities. Convenient pedestrian accessibility has been crucial to the success and vitality of downtown. One of the goals of the redevelopment plan is to protect and enhance the shopping convenience and pedestrian accessibility. As the area south of Burlington Street is seen as the 'Downtown Extension' area, creating adequate linkage between the downtown and the area south of Burlington Street is also critical. To achieve this goal the plan recommends attention to various aspects of development including public improvements in the streetscape and careful attention to building and site design to avoid the creation of "dead spaces" in the streetscape. The City began to implement the NS Plan by adopting the CB-5 zone and applying it to the area generally between Court and Burlington Street in 1992. The relationship between the CB-10 zone north of Burlington Street and the CB-5 zone south of Burlington Street was intended to create a hierarchy of taller buildings and greater intensity of development in the downtown core to the north with a step down in height and intensity to the south. The CB-10 zone allows a floor area ratio (FAR) of 10 while the CB-5 zone has a floor area ratio of 3 with the potential FAR of up to 7 if the developer provides amenities and public benefits as part of the project. The CB-10 zone itself does not have a maximum height limit; however, the Airport Overlay Zone results in a height limit of approximately 12 to 14 stories depending on the ground elevation of the property. The CB-5 zone has a height limit of 75 feet or approximately 6 stories. The CB-10 does not require parking for either commercial or residential development, while the CB-5 zone requires parking spaces for residential development. Concerns about parking are discussed in more detail below. The proposed CB-10 zone conflicts with the current Near Southside policy of providing a step down in height and intensity of development. Staff has identified issues and questions that should be considered if this substantial change in policy and zoning is to be approved as outlined below: Are there public interest considerations that would support a change in policy and therefore a change in zoning? Although the current CB-10 zone allows an FAR of 10 - in reality most of the downtown properties are developed with a floor area ratio of 2 (that is, a 2 story building covering most of a property). There are a few exceptions including the Iowa State Bank Building and the Sheraton Hotel, which are built to an FAR of approximately 5, and the Jefferson Building and the Vogal House, which have an FAR of about 6. The recently constructed Plaza Towers has an FAR of approximately 4.75. Since its construction some citizens have raised concerns about large areas of downtown being redeveloped at such intensity, even though it is far less than allowed by the current CB-1 0 zoning. The downtown core itself does contain historic buildings and buildings that display the storefront features necessary for a successful and vibrant center. This raises a policy question as to whether redevelopment of pccl\Staff Reportslrez06-00015 hieronymus version 2.doc 3 much of the downtown to the height and intensity allowed by the current CB-10 zone would be appropriate. In contrast to the downtown core the current CB-5 area south of Burlington Street, as well as the north side of Burlington Street which is already zoned CB-10, contain few buildings that have the characteristics envisioned for the downtown. In light of these conditions would it be appropriate to encourage a greater intensity of redevelopment by placing CB-10 zoning south of Burlington Street and thus take redevelopment pressure off of the downtown core where the desirable buildings and streetscape traits are already,in place? Should consideration being given to reducing the allowed FAR and/or placing a maximum building height in the downtown core? Another consideration regarding rezoning areas from CB-5 to CB-10 would be the potential benefit of diversifying the mix of housing stock downtown. The residential development that has occurred in the CB-5 zone has been in 3 to 4 story buildings and appears to be marketed primarily as student housing. The success of Plaza Towers demonstrates that there is a market for high-rise residential development downtown. Development of mixed-use buildings with a variety of residential sizes including larger condominiums, as proposed by the application, would help to further diversify the housing stock and land uses in downtown. This would help support the commercial development envisioned for the downtown and the Near Southside by the Comprehensive Plan. The current CB-5 zone south of Burlington Street would allow mixed use buildings but the height limit prevents buildings taller than 6 stories and thus buildings with the views desired for the high-rise condominium market. Rezoning areas to CB-10 may encourage this type of housing or specific plans demonstrating that the applicant will build the desired type of mixed use buildings could be required as a condition of rezoning. If a change in policy is supported by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, which areas should be considered for rezoning to CB-10? The City will be receiving additional requests to rezone areas south of Burlington Street to CB-10. As discussed above the original CB-5 zone was intended to encourage the expansion of downtown between Burlington and Court Street from Gilbert Street west to include the properties on the west side of Clinton Street. The CB-5 zone also extends south along the west side of Gilbert Street (see attached Near Southside map). If the CB-10 zone is expanded there is some logic to limiting it to the area north of Court Street and not extending it south along Gilbert Street. The area between the west side of Clinton Street and Gilbert Street north of Court Street is immediately adjacent to downtown. The City is planning median improvements to Burlington Street that will help direct pedestrian traffic and improve the aesthetics of the corridor. This will help to bridge the two sides of Burlington Street and provide a logic extension of downtown. Are there conditions that should be applied to any areas rezoned to CB-10 to address the parking and urban design issues identified in the NS Plan? The Near Southside Plan also discusses the need for a proper balance of parking and dwelling unit density. To address parking issues the City adopted the Near Southside Parking Facility District. Within the CB-5 zone development is required to pay a fee for 75% of the required parking spaces for residential units. The fee is to be used to support the creation of public parking facilities. Currently the fee is $6,119 per parking space and represents less than 1/3 the cost of building a structured parking space. Because the CB-10 zone requires no residential parking, the fee would not normally apply to areas rezoned to CB-10. To assure adequate parking is provided and to treat development equitably with CB-5 properties that have paid or will pay the fee, staff recommends that as a condition of rezoning, any CB-5 properties located south of Burlington Street that are changed to CB-10, be required to pay the parking impact fee as if they were in the CB-5 zone. To provide further detail to guide implementation of the NS Plan the City adopted the Near Souths ide Design Plan in 1995. The Design Plan's vision for the Downtown Extension area states: "Redevelopment efforts architecturally mirror the existing Downtown area. New structures pcd\Staff Reportslrez06-00015 hieronymus version 2.doc 4 in this district and along Burlington Street reflect the scale, proportion, facade repetition, setbacks, materials, roof lines, color, signage, awnings, and equipment screening elements of the adjacent Downtown.... This character can be further enhanced through implementation of design guidelines and review process to address each of these design elements within the Downtown Extension." To implement this goal the zoning code requires Site Development Standards for the CB-5 and CB-10 zones. Particular attention is focused on street-level building facades in order to prevent fortress-like facades, monotonous streetscapes, and to enhance public safety by providing opportunities for surveillance of the street from the interior of buildings. The code also requires a 1 a-foot setback from the right-of-way line for the first story of buildings that abut Burlington Street. Building columns supporting upper stories may be located within this 1 a-foot setback, provided that an adequate pedestrian passageway is maintained. This is to provide more space for pedestrian movement, and the placement of amenities within and adjacent to the right-of-way to provide a buffer between vehicular traffic and pedestrians along Burlington Street. The applicant has submitted a concept plan showing how they plan to comply with the requirements of the code. The Commission should consider whether the proposed design meets the City's vision: whether it is acceptable as presented or whether the Commission would like to recommend revisions. Traffic Implications: Burlington Street, an arterial street, is one of the highest volume streets in Iowa City. Based on the arterial street access control policy, this property will have restricted access on Burlington Street. The NS Plan recommends implementation of a traffic circulation pattern and control measures that emphasize pedestrian movement-accessibility and safety- over automobiles. These measures include maintaining two-lane streets with minimum lane widths, on-street parking, and maintaining minimum curb-radii. The plan recognizes that maintaining traffic-carrying efficiency of Burlington Street is necessary while providing a convenient pedestrian corridor from the Near Southside Neighborhood to the downtown area. The concept plan submitted by the applicant indicates that a vehicular entrance using the existing east-west alley from Clinton Street will provide access to an approximately 100 space below grade parking area. This alley will be connected to the mid-block north-south alley to connect with Court Street and Burlington Street. The access point on Burlington Street is a right turn 'Exit Only'. The Transportation Planning Division finds that the proposed traffic circulation plan including the limited access to Burlington Street is acceptable. As discussed above the City is planning a landscaped median in Burlington Street to provide for safer pedestrian and vehicular traffic in this area. There are also plans to reconstruct the Clinton Street leg of this intersection to improve the alignment of turning lanes. Infrastructure Needs: To accommodate further development in this vicinity sanitary sewer upgrades are 'necessary. These improvements are required whether or not this proposed rezoning and development are approved and the City will be installing them. Summary: The requested rezoning requires a change in the current policy of creating a step down from a more intensely developed downtown (CB-10) to a downtown extension (CB-5) between Burlington and Court Streets. Staff believes that there is some merit to encouraging more intense development along both sides of Burlington Street to provide an opportunity for mixed use development including high-rise residential uses. The market for such development would be better developed here rather than in the core of downtown where a desirable mix, scale and streetscape are already in place and should be preserved. The Commission must first consider these policy questions before considering the details of the proposed rezoning. If the Commission decides to recommend a change in policy, it should then consider the details of the proposed Hieronymus Square and whether conditions regarding building design and parking requirements should be included in the rezoning approval. pcd\Staff Reportslrez06..o0015 hieronymus version 2,doc 5 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that REZ06-00015 an application submitted by Hieronymus Square Associates for a rezoning of 1.12 acre of property located at 314 & 328 South Clinton Street from Central Business Support (CB-5) zone to Central Business (CB-10) zone be deferred pending policy discussions and a decision regarding the Near Southside Redevelopment Plan. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Near Southside Map 3. Central Business District and Surroundings Map 4. Application materials Approved by: ~ffi, - Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development pcd\Staff Raportslraz06-00015 hieronymus version 2.doc -~ "'-- --- " - I LO - ~ I ------- T- t) ------ 0 T - -- 0 I 1: 0 n ~ 1 --<----- I CD I 0 .... ..... N - I W - a: I r In?<"\r\nnn I -'-~ -' ,'-/ UIIU - / ~h-k !- - - IL ~ tj ~ ~ ~ ~ - tj 1- I lS NO Nll~ I C' 1(\ 1\..1'\ -~ ~.L.''-'Y\J -- . r-,. ~ ~- .A .......... --- . .. J ...... ~ .............. j~ t; 2 ,.. s a.3 Cl:: =:J m lS NOSIO\f~ I J / 1......7 .(~ - 11 ~ ) 'I II I IN~ ~~ a Q ~"\~;~ "'~ ~IJ ~,'" "'~~"" :\ ~~ I ~ Ii' 1 ~ I I f I- "-.. j) ~~ l t- ..- --l ( . ) ( ) I () ~ G I f~ ~ :i a:: ~ J C\I C. f-- (f) f-- Cl:: =:J o U Q) (j '-- ~ '+---- Q Q) [r) ::J . 1: ..... (f) c 0 ..... c .- () (f) co C\J Ct') 06 .q- T- Ct') .. z .0 ~ F--c < I U 0 I ~ f ~ F--c ~ \J) L--... ... ~ (jmm__~ ~ l~ ~ ~ (j IOVV'J --W;~~~I;IC~ .-1 r ._~. J; ~I IU L I I l_mm____----" ..mm____m.] m_ j is 1 NmLJ ~ Q) "0 en ..c +oJ ~ o en :.... ctS Q) Z Z o ~ ~ .....,. * I I M II --, < ~ . CBSJ I ~a" t:r' ~ I~~'~'~ '~~ ~')' i MI' i" P1 --7~ " ...:>1:. ... ~~., ~ ~.....<[rTl :l~~~nc~) [T~'c 31 tl-- ~ ?,i_.Ji<~; _ \ jl _ _ -- i ~==~== 4~r= ,,;i;,~~" ,I ~ CB~;: Ir,L ie=-:-: ~P1_ P1 i~jEj :I:,;~-;; , "' I.l -k..... ~ ~.~ 91 :: ~lt P2 ~~ R~I4"';=~~~E c~, . t~l: '=(J! ~= 1 .. .. ~........ ~ _ f.-.-~ CrnmTST~~ ~ ~'~t!i~ ~ :~~~. - _ Pt~ .~!t " %~~ ~~~~~ ~~J STJ,~~~ijP ~4i ~I;!~~ .--- ~- I I -:rn fl1[< r--J ..~ . _ _ BOWERY S1 , .~Lm ~j ~ ,J I 11 '7J I ~ ~ · .. "',,-n ..~... ~ ~ '-----:-. --1~1 ...~ r-- ~. _. ~ .. -:::::------- ~ IT u '-~. I! _ j~ ~'I - -.... .... , I i L._-I; M ~ 1.::Il I P2 UNIVERSITY D*A OWA AVE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND SURROUNDINGS I I I I :I I J I I I I . . . . . . . . I I I I I I I I I I I I r Application for Rezoning Hieronymus Square 7/14/06 Applicant's Statement Hieronymus Square Associates is requesting the rezoning of the property at 314 and 328 Clinton St. to be rezoned from CB-5 to CB-IO. The purpose of the rezoning is to allow a higher density of development that is a logical and orderly expansion of the Central Business District. The proposed development will be a 285,350 square foot, I3-story mixed-use development including pedestrian-oriented retail on the first floor and office space on the second and third floors. Residential condominium development will occur above the. third floor. Off-street loading and private parking will be provided below the first floor accessed from the alley. An interior pedestrian plaza will be located at the corner of Clinton and Burlington with an open courtyard at the interior of the lot. The open courtyard will have a motor court on the north end for drop-off and deliveries and a landscaped area on the south end with screening for service related functions such as dumpsters, transformers, etc. The development is compatible with surrounding development. It will match the scale and density of Plaza Towers and the Sheraton Hotel one block away and proposed development located across Burlington Street. Located adjacent to the new city parking ramp, there is adequate off-street parking to supplement the underground parking of approximately 100 cars. Additional traffic generated by the development is not expected to have a major impact Burlington St. The project will enhance the values for surrounding properties by creating an attractive urban environment attracting more people to live downtown and generating more business. The estimated construction cost is approximately 40 million dollars. Attached are diagrammatic plans, elevations, and perspective views of the project. Hieronymus Square Associates 328 South Clinton St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 I . . . . . . I I I . . I . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...li //J > . I. " J .1 iii ...]1. ~-_..... 'r7IS[?rT ...... F .'./IIJ , '. T l '''''''.. ii f-....... ! "'''..'--. r-~'"'' .. t" -.,......... .... .+ ..... -,.. .. ill'"'" ......... I...... ., ..-.. j f..-:.. l.~:'l L . ',':' r""." ...._.. ........ ... f ........ L -., " . -.-... r.... -..- '.. I ....... --_. T . ,.... --.~.. ...~ ---. I. ____-1 ..- .. ~ .' 1-'''.' , .-... if U i"ci" ~_., .,., .. ,i' I' ......... ..... ". .. . .-- r/ .' .... '. .... -----'- .... I' . ... ,...... " ..... -- I." ~ ... -",," = ~'f ........ ., . 1../ ...... ..... -.- r .. , . IJ - f-- f-.. ~_..- .. 1-. .... ~ .. .. i..,'''' " .. .. .. 1;-; ,.., ../..\!l7:~ ''I!?' ~>: 'ill ~rt;~ IAI II Ii , .. A A . rjinton elevation o I--___~.I HIERONYMUS SQUARE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I c,iI mt . It~ (Ir 'llililij '''~T I r ==I,~' /: I I I I il " I 1 " , - - ffi , ~1"...j"'1 - f J. -f- - I~ L -- j~ - 1 - I J ,'I lliOl"'i,1 I-- Ij:[ - ._- -- Irt'~ I , I. I '-- + ~,;~' , f~= +(r - ~;':;~ -, - 1\1} .i 1/ - j j , f-=f- - "\'-c'i~ .~= - ~ r II! - ;j;;:'" I fL-'-- j I - j ~- - - ,-,.. - ~ I - - I - - r I-- I' I ""; - I-- r ~- ~ - I-- 1 'r- - I - " ", ~ r - ....-" - -~ fli;;.1wi:. I"'" - ,,' I " If - , I '~; 1- , LJ ,. '.. i-'I--' ~, srj:)!N Sl N i , ir ~ ............. "I'...., ~ III/ ~I II~ fill lA II~~I J II A A 'i I ;iF !;!"-> burlington elevation 0, ,20 HIERONYMUS SQUARE II II II I: II I I, II Ii I. I: . Ii . I I I .. . I I . I I I I . . . I I . HIERONYMUS SQUARE To: Planning & Zoning Commission Item: REZ06-00010/SUB06-00008 McCollister Subdivision GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Contact Person: Phone: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: Neighborhood Open Space District File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: SPECIAL INFORMATION: Public Utilities: Public Services: STAFF REPORT Prepared by: Sunil Terdalkar Date: July 20, 2006 Don Cochran 64 Edgewood Circle Iowa City, IA 52245 (319) 351-7161 Duane Musser MMS Consultants 1917 S Gilbert Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 338-8282 Rezoning from ID-RS/OHD to RS-5/0HD, and preliminary and final plat Development of a 2-lot residential subdivision South Gilbert Street 9.53 acres Residential, Historic Landmark - ID-RS/OHD North: Undeveloped -ID-RM South: Undeveloped, Potential parkland -ID-RM East: Undeveloped, Residential - OPD-5 West: Park, Public - P1 Low density residential Wetherby (S 1 ) July 03, 2006 August 16, 2005 Currently the property uses private septic tank system. Sanitary and sewer infrastructure will be extended from the south to serve both lots. The City will provide Police and fire protection and refuse and recycling collection services. Transit 2 routes Broadway and Lakeside serve the area. The nearest stop is approximately a quarter mile away on Sandusky Drive to the northeast and another stop on Gilbert Street is about half a mile away on Southgate Avenue intersection. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicant, Don Cochran, is requesting a rezoning from Interim Development - Residential zone with a Historic District Overlay (ID-RS/OHD) zone to Low Density Single-Family Residential zone with a Historic District Overlay (RS-5/0HD) for approximately 9.53-acre parcel, located east of South Gilbert Street, west of Sandusky Drive (commonly known as McCollister Farmstead). The McCollister Farmstead is listed in the National Register of Historic Places and it was designated as an Iowa City Historic Landmark in 1996 for its architectural and historic significance. At the time of annexation, the property was zoned as Interim Development - Multi- Family Residential (ID-RM). At the request of the applicant the City rezoned the property from ID-RM to ID-RS and approved a subdivision of two five-acre lots in 2004. In April 2005 the applicant applied to rezone the property to Low Density Single-Family Residential zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD-5) zone and to further subdivide the property into 8 lots. The applicant has now decided not to pursue the planned development, but is requesting approval for a subdivision with only two lots. ANALYSIS: Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The South Distract Plan aims to achieve a mix of housing types - small apartments, townhouses located appropriately adjacent to arterial streets, neighborhood commercial centers, institutional uses, open spaces, and trails with appropriate designs to suit the surrounding single-family housing. This particular property is part of the River Corridor Area within the South District. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the historic nature of this property and designates it for low-density residential development. Most of the surrounding area is also identified as appropriate for low-density residential development. Northeast of the McCollister Farmstead is a completed low density residential development and to the east is the proposed subdivision of Sandhill Estates, which is a planned development of single-family lots. The South District Plan does discuss the possibility of alternative uses of this property to encourage the adaptive reuse of the historic structure. Zonina Analvsis: Current Zoning: The current Interim Development-Residential (ID-RS) zoning permits limited development due to the lack of adequate public utilities. The property also has a Historic District Overlay zone (OHD). Under the current zoning the property is limited to two five-acre, single-family residential lots including the existing house. Proposed Zoning and Subdivision: The proposed RS-5 zoning allows single-family dwellings on lots of 8,000 square feet. In the previous submittal the applicant proposed to subdivide the property into 8 lots. The applicant is now requesting approval for a subdivision involving only two lots-a 3.52-acer lot and a 5.92-acre lot. The RS-5 zone will allow for a low-density residential development while allowing for preservation of the sensitive areas and natural areas, the historic McCollister House and the general character of the farmstead. This rezoning and the subdivision would be compatible with the public land to the south, which may contain remnants of prairie and a Native American pcd\staff reports\rez06-000 1 O+sub06-00008 mccollister 3 Burial site and the proposed residential development to the east. It is also consistent with future land use scenario of the South District Plan. Sensitive Areas/Environmental Features: The Sensitive Areas Ordinance requires that an application of Sensitive Areas Review must be submitted and approved prior to any development activity on the land where any regulated sensitive features exist. The Iowa City Sensitive Areas Inventory indicates that the property contains environmentally sensitive areas such as upland woods and potential wetlands and some regulated slopes. In a note on the preliminary plat, the applicant has indicated that after an investigation it was determined that the no jurisdictional wetlands exist on the property. The applicant has not shown the full extent of proposed development on the property. The disturbance of the sensitive areas indicated on the plat is primarily a result of the installation of the sidewalk along Gilbert Street and the necessary infrastructure such as the private drive and sanitary sewer line extension. The plat indicates that approximately 7.75% (0.10 acres) of the steep slopes and 25% (0.09 acres) of the critical slopes will be disturbed by the proposed subdivision. The property contains approximately 3.93 acres of woodland, and groves and other isolated trees. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance at a minimum, 50% of the woodlands be retained on properties zoned RS-5. The plat shows that approximately 9.4% (0.37 acres) of area with woodland land will be disturbed. The plat also shows isolated trees that will be removed to allow construction of a shared driveway. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance requires delineating any construction areas, and indicating the boundaries of all the intended development activities including grading, excavation and storage of construction materials. The plat does not delineate construction activity. Because the extent and nature of the future development is unclear, the extent of sensitive areas that will be disturbed is unknown. Whether a Levell or Level II Sensitive Areas Review is required can only be decided based on the extent of the disturbance of the sensitive features. Because the application does not comply with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance Requirements, staff recommends that the application be deferred until the deficiencies are resolved. Historic Buildings: The Historic District Overlay zone requires that the Historic Preservation Commission approve any exterior alterations to the existing building as well as construction of new buildings on the property. The McCollister farmstead included the original McCollister farmhouse and a barn with other outbuildings. The historic house sits on a higher elevation from the street approximately at the center of the property, with the outbuildings scattered on the otherwise wooded land. The historic barn was heavily damaged by a wind-storm in 1998. The Historic Preservation Commission has completed a pre-application review of the applicant's previous proposal. The Historic Preservation Commission approved demolition of he barn due to its unsafe condition, provided that the proposed replacement structure be sympathetic and compatible with the general scale and character of the barn and the historic house. The Historic Preservation Commission has indicated that an exact replica of the barn would be inappropriate and not feasible in this location. Only a few remnants of the outbuildings remain on the property and the applicant proposes to remove them. The Historic Preservation Commission has indicated subdivision of the property to allow construction of additional dwellings is acceptable provided that the views of the historic house from Gilbert Street are preserved and that views from the house towards the river and the prairie remnants to the south are preserved. The boundary between lots 1 and 2 has been designed to accomplish this goal. Any further development on lot 2 should be behind the historic house. pcd\staff reports\rez06-0001 O+sub06-00008 mccollister 4 Traffic implications: The property is currently accessible by South Gilbert Street. This proposed rezoning and development, will not result in a major increase in traffic. Proposed development includes a new private drive that will be shared by the existing house and the proposed lot. Currently, there is no sidewalk along the west boundary of this property on Gilbert Street. The applicant is responsible for extending the sidewalk to the southern boundary of the property. Neiohborhood parkland or fees in lieu of: Based on the Neighborhood Open Space Ordinance, a subdivision of this size is required to dedicate 0.224 acres (9,754.44 square feet) of open space or pay fees in lieu of dedication. The plat has been referred to the Parks and Recreation Commission for comments. The property is part of the Wetherby Neighborhood Open Space District. Storm water manaoement: No development is proposed at this time and the runoff from the proposed two-lot subdivision would not require a storm water detention/management area. However any future development on the property will require a review by the City Engineer. The plat shows a potential future storm- water detention area. Infrastructure fees: The applicant is required to pay water main extension fees for each of the lot from the proposed subdivision at a rate of $395 per lot. The property is subject to additional fees if it is further subdivided in the future. The applicant is extending sanitary sewer line from the south for the existing house. This sewer line can be further extended for any future development on the property in the future. No fee is required for sanitary sewer. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this application be deferred until the requirements of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance are met and deficiencies and discrepancies noted below are resolved. Upon resolution of this issue staff recommends that REZ06-00010, a rezoning of approximately 9.53 acres of land, located east of Gilbert Street from Interim Development-Residential/Historic District Overlay (ID-RS/OHD) zone to Low Density Single-Family Residential/Historic District Overlay (RS-5/0HD) be approved, and that SUB06-00008, a preliminary plat and final plat for McCollister Subdivision, a two-lot residential subdivision on approximately 9.53 acres of land located east of Gilbert Street, be approved subject to staff approval of construction drawings and legal papers prior to City Council consideration. DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES: Provide a complete application for Sensitive Areas Review, delineating any construction areas, indicating the boundaries of all the intended development activities. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Preliminary Plat 3. Final Plat Approved bY:~/ Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development pcd\staff reports\rez06-000 1 O+sub06-00008 mccollister ~ 0:: o -.--.. >- ~ _ V1 :::J o Z <( - V1 0:: o 0:: W 0.. 0.. W 0.. ~ tj ~ ~ ~ ~ tj W ....J U 0:: U o o o 5: z o 0:: W ....J U 0:: U o o o 5: z o 0:: :5 a: I C - an C D- O f.... W W 0:: f.... V1 I U 0:: IT) :5 a: I C j:I:ri:ri:r:rI: i~;::4<::~::~ ",..;I"" "" ..0" .:;:t:.:::)~.::::;:':/:{{:)/::: ":. c:: o ,... Q) ~ - '- " Ot) .... g- Q <: - c .0 C/) :> "'0 .0 ::l (f) L- ID ........ C/) 0 0 0 ~ .. N Z ,... 0 en ~ ~ a: < -- U C 0 ~ D- ~ 0 ~ ~ rJ) co o o o o I <0 o CO :::> (f) -... o .,.- o o o o I <0 o N W a: w-+_w .. ~ CW1lC~lIIrar ,.. , ,;<IJ I h <'If.' "".0;, ~:1' 1~,1 o ,J..';" ,z"{ ~;,"I"/ '" o ~~%;~ ~:2.;-';..."':. ~'".~,p.:~ ~~~:'t,::': of NJit...'. "'''".. 2OO~1i.I. Io'l'CI C~1. I.lMI, I'l __ _ :tit 1'IaI.1I...f''''lf~n'''''1lI,o'fgo;.227,oflN.~_''o1 U1. '-(_'1_"'" 0fI0t. _ ....<lII....rG'~ ~l:1O. ~O?~~.~'H. ~~::~~O~~:~.:~Iht'i..:~ C'_I"'b_'l"ol.h",~..t''',''a.dOOlo,"'' ...1, ~:~ ~1-"-""1 h,~I~l! ~,"'l,..'. r-,~.. :>n"IoI1:>1, I PIotIl>or..t"*<......r.. 1M "'-'''''01\ \A>I...t~ II. ~1Il~:.~2::,:4 ~.~. r~~{. ~~ ~: ::_~~~~..~.... ,...,.. rr~1r,~~~:i~1.!~;}tt=~,':~d:~2:-!::: 1.,l,J""'...crd;...,,..,l'o........,._r.....IoIIonI,.!"-.: STANDARD LEGEND AND NOTES ==_-:.:-_-=== =~~L~~~~ _ _ _: ~~~I~~~~~::VL~ -r.tl~HT''''''' - .CT LI<I['l, ~_~"ro ('if; III Ma> mm.....uh_m _ ~=~~~lf$ .. -'0.(111_ (~) _l[iXI~)ie~ "-1 -~.llIt"',,"Q,l""''"_'' -~(i'- -~~(I>-: ~~~~:_(n : ~~~~;:l i .. , . iI'{ ".1:-: ;f ~... .- . ~ ~:;; ~.~ _CON10U'l11Ot$(2'IWTtR'oA.L) -txI$lNGTltIXLl'It - l~lIH~ litOCI,l:.>u~ !<l., -0CI51N.'ltIQl(N:DlTlla5 .o.J.l*ENilIIllS,IK Nrnr.u() .ucA::T.$ "llOIoI(7....I.P_t'l5m.TlUll[~lioHOWN S....ttrTOlIOJfQ.TlCti.lHD!QIIlC_lZ to LC:~~lON cr.loU PIl:OPOSro fAtlUTU 'MTH Cc:N$....UCnON DOClJMD.TS, \lIHICH AAr 10 Af I\NI) swll...nrn ~.u~Q1Jr'l 11'.0 THr ^""II()V-"l.Ol'"TI<Jn.AT. 0,* ~-CT[!l'$Lon D -=Bltlll$'MlIIED f<,:"':'.:-J - UI'CAl.'&.lH. (1)- 1~mT'..l.~00I:Mtl PRRLTMTNARY PI,AT McCOLLISTER SUBDIVISION IOWA Cl'l'Y, IOWA PLAT PH~PAH~j) UY : MMS COKStJ1.TANTS INC. 1917 SOLTH GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA. 02240 OW~~II/SUUUIVIU~II: PON '" WRI COCHRAN 64 EDGEWOOD CIRCLE IOWA Cln, IOWA 02245 "'<, OWN~II/SUUj)IVJj)~H: OWN~HS' A'I"I'OHN~Y: ANPRIA N. SAVAGF. MICHA~I, W. Kf.NNF.OY STACY WEBBER 920 S. DUBUQUE STREET 2400 m!.Op.RT STR~~T IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52245 I"::P~ICIlWOOO ~ '.\ <., /; ~r~I'A\lri'i 'i <. .I/'!~ . , ~~ -', ~ ~--v..v..vy-v-f..~-~v..-v-y-vv__v-y--Vy..VV-y'"~v-:4(( ,0... s' ~ ,"'." ' ~..J--€e" . -'- I I ;' .($ J";~"''3l' ..~".,~, ~IfW'l'~MIf'tll"f1frf ~/I1J;:U: lXHIfIlY! I.NO&m Ate> ''''1UIa .1111I nll~ ,"UA ..Ir l:;JN... o;w(.,,~ ~CT~CII~I'I.A1 <- .r:'." ..;~,{f' "'t'<( ,aJ:f",:I~.'~'rP ~~ ~,~,~.~,~.. ~\~ ",:;'1/: "N(. ao'!\IfN'''''$ "'lI1E~"" " .>,'.:~s\ .,,\ ifor~~~~~~~C \\~\ "O'Oll.OO"';~ \ I\Z~. :.. \ \ ._., ""......1 nOr~""TOI ~:::t$0"'~\,.,\>\\\ \ \It.1UI1W.'~ ~i~ <0'\ ,\~\ \ ( , ""..."le'te'v.f1 '~\.\ \\ \ t . ~\" 1.\ \ .;/ CCC-.. .. \.\>'. .., '\'~~ \\ ^ .. --"<:::.:::-., \~\\ \ \\\~ \\ '''''~\ \\~\\ .. \ \~'.\.'\. \ '\Y..\\\ \"\, \ \\\~ \\ \~\ \ ~~ \{\ \~;\.. \, \;\~1 .. \ "4f\ \ \ ~\ \\, :-:';:;:~'~~: \\"~\~,\\;~~.~,'\\ :\\.',\:,~~~\~\\,~"" NOll:. NXIlTl::w.l. ~t\oG.OPICNT ON DHOl ~,rsr(l~...'1N'1.~~:.u~AL \ \ \ \; \ HCIX5$/\IlY \ :-'\ '\, ~\"~ IlfImL \ \, '\", \,',":\ \',,_ l. r~oroac DIlIvt'/rAY 'lU'IIO\It:<<NTS WLl \ ,. 8( COIIPUIl) 8UC~! l01I OOOI.P;l,/II(l)' Pf:'tII- IG Ri-'lJlrollA,STltUC1lIll(t)t.lCTZ- \\ ,,' \ ' ~. $lll(..... il'Iol,L. II[ 1NS...utI ol,L(JflC TIlE tA~T 5 ~ \\ \\ \ .\{\..," ~'.",it< rI'UI[IIl:T n~([- ADoJACOlT 10 Letn' ';;'0 l ""lOll "0 '\1 , ~ . .!~ 'Ht.llI'lll~IlI1U1-"w~I.NCY""'Will'ltHUJI;; '\:' \ '\ \' 3. ALl f'O~TI4. I!:TI..I.N)S IA'\IC JI:tN "'oOinraT[~ \\ . ",-, \ \~\\. .; >>Il tII:.~1MtW HA1"C .l}"';('lCTlOII~. ~ "", \. '. . \~.... \' CXlS. ON 11-[ S"t \<\\~', .' ~~ ~ '\ ~TUFSl.O~_l,:tACR[S Pllill5l)LtOlSlJllIlO)Ud:~aO'OoloC:7.~\\ '>\~\"iI \ ::::~~rJ.~ ~~r.:iR[s' POSlliU OIS-VU~ ARUo . OC. AC (ZiC .. ". \,,\\ ~ \ \ ~ \ \IIQ(l~JNll AIl[~ _ HJ _i PrJ;WU lIIS"'UU!ll UtA _ U1 AI,; :'.~~..,0" <\,~:, ~\ \\\'1 \ '/) \~\~~\ .~, \\ '~>\ \ ~\ \\ f.\\, \ ~\ \' \",. \\\, '1.'.. \~\ \\ '\j;~, \\").. \\~~, \ "''''~\~~~~ '. .~,\ .,,'\ \y~ ,/,,;\ \. \~ ~~, '. \i1, .,;,.~\.......\., - \...;'~~\. . ~<-, ", ~..). ,\ ,', )r ~1 '.+.'~'\'.'... \\........ ~\\ <"""" \. "~~ . ... ;.....~..'.(0\ ,..L '-.~\ I 1\.'\ ,,/ 0 0' ;.\ " \\\ <.0 t \::j \ \~;, o .r(""V.v"V.-...:....- : .'. (. .. .............""'...,.... (r""'.~'\ ~.;~~.,~',",,^ ..... "\..' .c..... C ~,"'~~.)'>~;"'" .~'\.~, ..".~-\. <.; ~ . ,.., -....~<~ ""-:-.1"0 '~"""..,\t..' . -"'~) '-'"",., "'" '-... ". I. '" f!'i '" '-'~~. (-. ),{cCOw.:J1f~rry~~~pIVlSION .~. ~.. . .~... f'\'f'IC.!L ~~^y ~&fl;;:N // pw..r/pl.AH APPNOVlI:D by lh~ City or Iowa City :..~~I~~~.st:o~s,tf[~~lIi~,r~~ nO/(lll 'IIAHII lJN(S IZl: t'llH5TJnf:;HllI P1."~S rCIII ~nA.LI. -~- (/)3: ;g Il~ ;h " ~ ~ CfIl m ~~ C III Is I i ~ ,"" ~ ~ OlO i: ifm"'~ljjjj'''dljjjl Q... ~ 11 1-' i ~ u ~ <... II j ~ ~.~~ i ~ ~ i ~ lid !~ Ii:!!;;; 'i"; ; ~ !ii~ ~ .i' n; ~ ~ i "/II,,, ,,;.,=,, r.;f"D,J ~ ~ Om U! U~ ah ~ z;o H >',".'"..,,,'....,../,,,,.. Ul !li ~ &'l .,; z o I===j UJ. I----i >- I~h I----i ! ~ ~ o -i~ ~ ~ !;~ E--i j ~ 21~ I! ~ U) ~~ i:I;; ~ ~il~ E--i ~~!;! ~ ~ U Igi~ z r~.., g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ L-..., > .. ~ c---'?- 8:110 Ul 0 I~ti~ I----i ~ d,. ..., E-!u. I----i . h ~ ~ Bill:! I!Jtoo: !ill!;! o U U ~ /Q[Q/Q~~ ti!f.!1lf D~I fj~r-.l~~f!llrtl~li ~f;l'i 25 1'<l!E3!I ~~illJ 8l.:ii ~ ~~~3~!i~~~ I'<l p.,:::>:;;J =i! ~5- &;1l~ ~~in 'I ! II ~ i I 1 ~ " .. .. ~ i '" I l ~ .m i ~ ~ ., i ~ it. J f ~ ig~ ~; ~ ~ i l!~ II i i i t~~ ;~! ~i 5~i I~ I~ g".s Ig~ III "'.... 0 S .t' ~!~ ~~I a I 0. .~ u & Ih I!~ L! W ~lit I .! ~a III --+-{i! . -I; I w . J . it w o " o u w " ~ ~ ~ e~j ! ~~ ~ ~~ t ~ . ~ ~ ~h~~t ~~ !!! ~ 5 i~fh' ~h I~~inll ~ ~ z m!~~i SI.~~~~~Ui i l<f i ~ ,~,~,~I~',~~mlm! ~ I <( !!I i P o I: I ;/ ~ Z I 1 \!l W'W1OV ~ Ii' : I ~ () , 'I J ~ d W ,: I \! I!s -.J II : U t:.<, ~'V ~.r: :0::,(. ;11 ",:)():./(.'/I ~ i u I ~ ~ il ~ D.. ...J <C z LL o::z ~Q C/HJ') ::is> ...J_ 00 U[(J U:> ~(I) o.~~.~~.. f~..~ ~~ ~ ~~ Hl'~&oli~ ",p K!H j;H o"~.p ~o..o -~ .. IO~~~I~~ S.i..i~!..~~!~sll~IJ~~i~S~11 'aQ~O::! II:' X1!II:'"I1i,,:! ~Joi....~O>.'i~jJQIt):o:.a.!F >.g~ ~""H 3l ll~~!i~S~ =FI';;f~i . "'Ii ~ feZ,," 1i.. .11~~':8l! P&i:f;~f~~r~H~~ ~,,:8~dJ]~ i ~ .'~~ ~ p "~~~$d~I:&tg~ ~ ~~ H ~h~.t"i:S . ~t f~d .li~llll.1l.~H~fo ..,~ ~~:t~ n ,,$ ~ 1~:~ ~.~i ~ul~~~t 8~UFi ~l~~~ ~;'1~~Ufi . _5 0 ~z. .. o~ 6''' "d "llH.re =.. ~sti5j ....~ ~ s~~~~1fG rS~o~!&ifE):~;g~5$jj~~~:~~~ ~ .~ft di ~t ~Fd~ lrl ~~ .~,,~'."j~ ..~t~,!;~H i.... 0:: R:!tO::lO 1:' :Ii scj:,f~ ,_.~._.... ~ I"t.' ~l. 11 .;:::~~~~~ u~~ 8~JJ;n ~J n:;l. ~ f~IQ:~ ".... :::q'lNjd: z"'i;~;:jN,'~~,*:iQ 0811)0.... I~H~,~~ ~ o~& .=!d..~"h';."~"" .~8,J ~o.~5. ~ oil" Iil ~6"E - .N~_...~.W.'F"~'" .{~.::1l1::l~ : ::l8~;;hF~~~~~..~~n1~H~~~.' E ." 2 i &D .., &~.., ~i' ~o. ~~"'u ~t:~iIlJ~j 1~ ~uf~~5~~ i1~F..;~~ ~~~Ii~~~ 1 n~~hi~~:: ]h..i",lI ii".h~o.r .z~i1!s~z..~-5';;OJ!1l _ rr~.!ht~ 1Il5~o~ e~'~J~~Bi~l.:g~:S i :~~:..~ a::< 5 iHJi'Ot5:~:5~~~oi ~ ::J o ~~ ufil ~z< 05S: -...,Q I 1. \;\ ) \ .J.'\ il!"'. u' i~~; o..~'r~ \ tt Oil\ ~''- / '6' ~ )i~ ~ 17~1 502'43'104'-( 1)49,60' ~ \ ~ \"\\ '!t~. 1& ~;" ii~ .., llIu i~' \"' ~ 0.,"- ~t C\lij~ ~." ~ ~,~, \:: ~ori o~\ il !8 '6' ~ ~ W4,I'S1"t ~ ~ 1:,7.11 ~. "ill ~ ~ f5~~i ~~~~ ~ :I: hn co zlll~~\ I ,ti'1lll "",,,,.,,'" .~ ~ W N. ~N b~ ~~ ~ /'1 ../ I City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: July 14, 2006 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Karen Howard, Associate Planner, RE: SUB06-00011 - Final Plat of Hollywood Manor, Part 9 All discrepancies on the final plat of Hollywood Manor, Part 9 have been resolved. The location of the proposed off-site storm sewer and drainage easement has been illustrated and labeled on the final plat. Therefore, staff recommends that SUB06-00011, a final plat of Hollywood Manor, Part 9, a 4.84-acre, 12-lot residential subdivision located at the ends of Wetherby Drive and Totting Circle, be approved. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL JULY 6, 2006 PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks, Dean Shannon, Charlie Eastham MEMBERS EXCUSED: Beth Koppes, Wally Plahutnik, Terry Smith STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Drew Westberg, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Steve Ballard, Bob Burns, Pat Hartin, Jack Tank, Tracy McWane, Liz Maas, Ryan Maas RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0 (Koppes, Plahutnik, Smith absent), REZ06-00001, a rezoning of 2.83-acres of property located at 4435/4455 Melrose Avenue from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Neighborhood Public with a Low Density Multi-Family Zone overlay (P-1/RM12) provided the following conditions are met: · Vehicular access to the property must be provided by way of a private drive extending across the Chatham Oakes property utilizing the existing access point to Melrose Avenue as illustrated on the Site Plan. · Submission and approval. of a landscaping plan for a vegetative buffer/screen that includes a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs to be established along the property boundary adjacent to Highway 218. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0 (Koppes, Plahutnik, Smith absent), REZ06-00016, a rezoning of 2.32-acres of property located at 2401 Scott Boulevard from General Industrial (1-1) zone to Neighborhood Public (P-1) with an overlay of Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0 (Koppes, Plahutnik, Smith absent), an amendment to Title 14, City of Iowa City Zoning Code, Subsection 4E-8C, Nonconforming Signs, to allow for the reconstruction of a nonconforming sign by special exception in cases where the sign is generally recognized and associated with a longstanding business or institution and makes a significant artistic, cultural or nostalgic contribution to the community or neighborhood. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0 (Koppes, Plahutnik, Smith absent), that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending that a conditional use permit be approved, subject to: . County requiring the implementation of the Wetland Mitigation Plan created by Red-Tail Restoration · County required improvements are made to the entrance onto Izaak Walton League Road from Oak Crest Hill Road. CALL TO ORDER: Brooks called the meeting to order at 7:32 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING ITEMS: REZ06-00001, discussion of an application submitted by Johnson County Permanent Supportive Housing LP for a rezoning of 2.83-acres of property located at 4435/4455 Melrose Avenue from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Neighborhood Public/Low Density Multi-Family Residential (P-1/RM-12) zone. Charlie Eastham informed the Commission that he is the president of the Iowa City Greater Housing Fellowship which in the past had applied for rezoning applications with Robert Burns who is a party to this Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 2 application. The Housing Fellowship and Mr. Burns are partners in two limited partnerships which own affordable rental housing. The Housing Fellowship was not a party to this application nor did they have any interest in it or the subsequent development that would occur if the application succeeded. Eastham said he felt there would be no conflict of interest, he'd consulted the City Attorney and she had agreed. Miklo said this property had been on the Commission's agenda several months ago and had been deferred while an issue regarding an access to Melrose Avenue could be explored and/or worked out. The property, located at the intersection of Melrose Avenue and the interchange with Hwy 218, was zoned Public because it was owned by a public agency. The Zoning Code required that all land owned by a pUblic agency be zoned Public. If the publicly owned land will be used for a private use, an overlay zone is required to accommodate. the use and the use must comply with the requirements of the overlay zone. The original proposal had proposed a driveway entering onto Melrose Avenue at a place where a median curb cut would be required. That particular area was a place of transition where there were entrance ramps to Interstate 218 and a narrowing of the pavement from 4-lanes to 2-lanes. Given those concerns and after exploring the options, Staff had made the determination that the best location would be to use one of the existing driveways for Chatham Oaks, an existing development located on County property. The applicant's proposed redesign provided for a driveway intersecting with Melrose Avenue; the existing Chatham Oaks driveway would have a new frontage driveway built to the subject property where the two proposed buildings would be built. The removal of several mature trees would be required. The actual details of the driveway would need to be approved by the City's Building Department when the site plan for the building was reviewed. Staff had previously recommended the requirement of the submission and approval of a landscaping plan for a vegetative buffer/screen to be established along the property boundary adjacent to Highway 218; Staff continued to recommend that condition. A Phase I Archaeological Survey had been completed and a release from the State received so that condition had been removed from Staff's recommendation. Miklo said Staff recommended approval of REZ06-00001, subject to a conditional zoning agreement with the following conditions: · Vehicular access to the property must be provided by way of a private drive extending across Chatham Oakes property utilizing the existing access point to Melrose Avenue as illustrated on the site plan · Submission and approval of a landscaping plan for a vegetative buffer/screen that included a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs be established along the property boundary adjacent to Highway 218. Public discussion was opened. Steve Ballard, 222 S. Linn Street, attorney, present on behalf of the Johnson County Permanent Supportive Housing Limited Partnership with Bob Burns and Tracy Falcomatta. Ballard said he was there for the limited purpose to say that they felt that the application and proposed use of the land did not require any sort of an overlay zone. In March, when the application had initially been before the Commission, Burns had indicated that he didn't feel that they needed to be before the Commission. Ballard had been in contact with the City Attorney's Office and had conversed with Mitch Behr previously, they disagreed about the issue. He had also written a letter to Behr which he wished entered into the record. Ballard said the applicant's position was: given the use and that the land was owned by a governmental entity and would continue to be owned by a governmental entity, there didn't need to be any sort of a rezoning. Bob Burns, 319 E. Washington. He and his associate, Tracy Falcomatta, were under contract with Johnson County Permanent Supported Housing Limited Partnership to develop the project which was independent housing with supportive services targeted for the chronically and mentally ill. A large number of persons had been working on the project for approximately 14-years. The Johnson County Board of Supervisors had agreed to lease the land to the Limited Partnership for the housing project. All funding was in place for the project, but the funding was contingent upon being able to get under construction yet this year. The solution that was before the Commission was not the applicant's preferred solution, it was one that they hoped to be able to make work. Their preferred solution was the direct access onto Melrose Avenue with a median curb cut. They'd run out of time and were hoping to get a building permit to be able to move forward. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 3 Behr said the two offices had communicated and they did disagree. The City Attorney's office had indicated its opinion that a rezoning was necessary; the Commission did not need to make a determination on that issue. If the application was recommended for approval by the Commission and approved at the Council level, the issue would resolve itself. Pat Hartin, Program Coordinator at Chatham Oaks, said she was there to support the proposal. They'd been working on this project for a long time and there would be a lot of persons who would really benefit from the proposed new type of living environment. Her only concern was with the entryway; if that was the only place they could have it then she'd rather see the building be constructed and hopefully before the last trees were dug up they could find a compromise. Her concern was with safety and the location of the proposed driveway being so close to the existing residential building. Public discussion was closed. Brooks asked if lOOT had been approached regarding the applicant's proposed initial location for the driveway. Miklo said lOOT had been, the applicant's proposal did not meet their standards or the City's standards. It would have resulted in an unsafe traffic situation. An alternative option explored and recommended by staff was to use the far drive way and come around the rear of the existing building. It would have entailed some additional expense for the applicant who had rejected that proposal. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve REZ06-00001, a rezoning of 2.83-acres of property located at 4435/4455 Melrose Avenue from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Neighborhood Public with a Low Density Multi-Family Zone overlay (P-1/RM12) provided the following conditions are met: · Vehicular access to the property must be provided by way of a private drive extending across the Chatham Oakes property utilizing the existing access point to Melrose Avenue as illustrated on the Site Plan. · Submission and approval of a landscaping plan for a vegetative buffer/screen that includes a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs to be established along the property boundary adjacent to Highway 218. Eastham seconded the motion. Freerks said she felt this was a good project, it had been in the works for a long time. This would be a much safer way to get people into and out of the proposed housing site. It was a good compromise. Shannon said he'd supported the previous application which had contained the curb cut when it had been before the Commission. He would like to see the project get moving forward. Brooks said he felt this was a very worthy project and would like to see the applicant "get shovels in the ground" yet this year. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. REZ06-00016, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning of 2.32-acres of property located at 2401 Scott Boulevard from General Industrial (1-1) zone to Neighborhood Public / Intensive Commercial (P-1/CI-1) zone. Drew Westberg, Planning Intern, presented the staff report. The City had recently acquired the property at 2401 Scott Boulevard. City code required that all public property be zoned either P-1 or P-2. Property owned by the City or by the County or by the School District was zoned Neighborhood Public (P-1). This parcel of land was currently zoned 1-1, General Industrial. The City intended to lease portions of the building to non- profit organizations whose use would not be appropriate for an 1-1 zone, which would also require an overlay zone appropriate for the uses that would occupy the building. Staff felt that a CI-1 Intensive Commercial overlay zone would be the appropriate overlay zone. The Habitat ReStore and the Salvage Barn, the proposed non-profit recycling-type uses of the building fit the CI-1 zone. The surrounding uses in the BDI Industrial Research Park were also CI-1 type uses. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 'July 6, 2006 Page 4 Brooks requested additional information regarding the limitations on exterior storage and/or placement of materials outside the building as both uses were salvage-recycling oriented uses. Miklo said the basic requirement was that they be screened fully with a wall or evergreen hedge. Much of the property was currently well screened. There was a row of evergreen trees along most of Scott Blvd; arborvitae trees provided screening on the north and south side; there were no trees in the front of the building as the prior use had been office oriented. The City would be responsible for maintenance of the screening. If there would be. any outdoor storage areas, those would have to be further screened. Eastham asked if screening requirements could be imposed at a later time if it became necessary. Miklo said they would be imposed whenever the use went into effect. City Code required compliance with the S-3 Standard which specified the height and type of plant materials. Brooks asked which department or agency would be charged with managing the rental of the building since the City would be acting in a landlord capacity. Miklo said the Public Works Department would maintain it and have some uses associated with the City's recycling operation on this site. There would also be some private non-profit entities which had a role in recycling involved. The intent of the Salvage Barn was to recycle historic building materials so that they did not end up in the land-fill. The Habitat ReStore received surplus newer building materials that were donated by a homeowner or contractor. The materials would be reused/resold. The City would also have some composting drop boxes located there for recycling materials not normally picked up at curbside. Shannon asked if the City would be in competition with City Carton? Miklo said most of the recycling material was already contracted to City Carton so this material would probably be fed to them as well. Freerks asked if the current building was of sufficient size to house the intended uses. Miklo said there very likely would be additional public use building built on the site. Brooks said Knutson Construction Services had done an outstanding job of creating an attractive streetscape appearance to their building that was an asset to that major through-fare. He hoped that the City, as the landlord, would be equally attentive to the appearance and visual quality of the property along Scott. Both were outstanding programs but he did not wish to see any degradation of the area. Miklo said the previous occupant of the property had been a solid waste collection company. When they had occupied the building they had been required to plant a heavy screening around the site. Behr said when a property was purchased, there were covenants and restrictions which applied to the property that had to do with screening and storage. Those private covenants and restrictions had been put in to place quite some time ago when the subdivision had occurred and the City would be subject to adherence of those covenants/restrictions. Public discussion was opened. Jack Tank, 624 St. Thomas Court, said he'd purChased the two properties to the south of this one eleven years ago knowing that they were zoned 1-1. He'd tried to do a number of things and to work with the City on a number of options regarding use of the properties and had requested a rezoning. He'd be adamantly told that the City would not rezone an 1-1 property. A development group had owned the 7-acre 'weird' shaped lot to the south and had been denied access to Scott Boulevard by the City. The City had refused to make any curb cut where the existing curb cut was now; had informed them that they would have to sue the City to get any curb cuts; and would not allow any curb cuts for the weird shaped lot. He'd then purchased the weird shaped lot, had had the opportunity to sell the lots and felt it had been necessary to sell them because of the 1-1 zoning and the lack of cooperation from the City it had been impossible to develop the lots. Tank said now 10 years later the lots have been rezoned and developed. A review of several of the adjacent lots had indicated the same type of history for the lots. Tank said he felt it was ironic that the City purchased lots, rezoned them and was now developing the lots. That was just plain wrong. The City was taking properties off the tax roles to develop for their use. The ReStore and Salvage Barn were wonderful uses; he felt the properties should have been rezoned and allowed to develop 30 or 40 years ago. Tank said he wanted to provide some historical background as to what the status of the lots had been, the lack of cooperation from the City and the mishandling of the properties for Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 5 nearly .50 years. Lots of persons including former owners of those lots had a lot of anguish about the properties; comments would not be heard from other people because it was not worth it to get tagged by the City, especially if a person wanted to initiate developments in other areas. The City would rubberstamp its preferred uses. Public opinion was closed. Motion: Eastham made a motion to approve REZ06-00016, a rezoning of 2.32-acres of property located at 2401 Scott Boulevard from General Industrial (1-1) zone to Neighborhood Public (P-1) with an overlay of Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. Freerks seconded the motion. Freerks thanked Tank for taking time to present before the Commission but noted that the current Commission was not involved in the history he presented. She felt it was a good use for the land and would fit well with the adjacent uses. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. ZONING CODE ITEM: Discussion of an amendment to Title 14, City of Iowa City Zoning Code, Subsection 4E-8C, Nonconforming Signs, to allow for the reconstruction of a nonconforming sign by special exception in cases where the sign is generally recognized and associated with a longstanding business or institution and makes a significant artistic, cultural or nostalgic contribution to the community or neighborhood. Miklo said the Dairy Oueen [DO] formerly located on South Riverside Drive had been destroyed by the April tornado. Associated with the DO was a sign that had been on the building since 1961 and had been located on the previous DO building since approximately 1954. The sign didn't qualify as a landmark or historic sign, but was very close. Staff felt that the intent of the historic provision of the non-conforming sign regulation pertained to situations such as this one. Under the current Zoning Code this sign could not be reproduced. Staff had looked at a number of signage options but the sign could not meet them for various reasons. The sign was a roof sign, many communities including Iowa City discouraged roof signs due to safety concerns. The sign was larger than normally permitted. Staff felt given the community interest in this particular sign and the nostalgia associated with it, Staff felt it would be appropriate to amend the sign regulations pertaining to historic nonconforming signs to make allowances for signs such as this. Language regarding safety had also been included and that the Board of Adjustment would review such applications as special exceptions. Miklo said in the interest of preserving a community landmark, Staff recommended that the historic non- conforming sign provision be amended to allow signs that didn't technically meet the definition of historic signs to be recreated subject to Board of Adjustment approval. Brooks asked if the ability to reproduce such historic/significant signs was tied in any way to the reconstruction of a structure in a historic or representative fashion. Miklo said that would be subject to Board of Adjustment approval on a case-by-case basis. There might be some cases where it would not be important that the building be a historic landmark and other cases where it would be important. Eastham said the way the proposed revision to the Zoning Code was written, it did not make it clear that obtaining a certification from the Historic Preservation Commission or Certificate of Appropriateness needed to occur before the application went before the Board of Adjustment. He felt that the sequence / wording in Section C was much clearer. Miklo said Staff's intent had been that if it was not a designated landmark the application would not be required to go to the Historic Preservation Commission, only to the Board of Adjustment. Behr said the wording in the opening paragraph clarified all the criteria which needed to be met. Miklo said when an applicant applied for their sign permit at the Building Department, Staff would know to look for both Boards approval if required. Eastham asked if the City Council had the authority to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness even if the Historic Preservation Commission did not issue one. Miklo said if a Certificate of Appropriateness was denied it could be appealed to Council. The criteria were fairly tight; Council would have to find that the Commission had acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner and had not followed their guidelines. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 6 Public discussion was opened. Tracv McWane, 60 Regal Lane, said she and her husband were the third generation to run McWane Dairy Queen. After the tornado, the outpouring of concern had been immense. Almost everyone they'd visited with had said, "Don't change anything." They didn't wish to change anything. When their contractor had requested the building permit, they'd assumed that it had included the sign. The roof had been 'beefed-up' and made sign-ready. They'd tried twice to no avail to have divers locate the original sign in the Iowa River. It had made national news. They had researched it and theirs was the only sign like it in the world, other signs fit side-ways on the buildings. They were trying to do whatever they could to have the building reconstructed and opened. They'd considered having the sign mounted on poles to meet City Code, but if they had used that option they would have had to remove their cone signs because a limited number of pole sings are allowed per property. They felt that the cone signs were historic as well since they'd made it through the tornado. The McWanes did not wish to have to take them down now. They paid royalties, were not a corporation and had no other way to advertise to persons driving by their location that they were a DQ. McWane said they'd done everything they could to stay just the way they were as a locally owned small business. If they sold out to a corporation they could make more money because the property was worth more than the business. McWane said she hoped that they could work together to work out a solution. They wished to be an Iowa City business. Freerks asked with the proposed amendment to the Code, could the exact same sign with the required safety enhancements be reconstructed? Miklo said that was correct. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve amending Title 14, City of Iowa City Zoning Code, Subsection 4E- 8C, Nonconforming Signs. to allow for the reconstruction of a nonconforming sign by special exception in cases where the sign is generally recognized and associated with a longstanding business or institution and makes a significant artistic, cultural or nostalgic contribution to the community or neighborhood. Eastham seconded. Freerks and Brooks said they very much appreciated the McWane's efforts to bring this nostalgic business back to the city. This situation showed the need for flexibility and something good had come from it. It would provide a guideline should a similar situation arise in the future Shannon said he remembered eating ice cream cones at the other store on the corner; it had been the same sign. He'd been glad when the McWane family had moved the sign to the current location; it had been very unfortunate that the original building had been forced out by the highway. The A&W root beer mug had not survived the highway construction. He supported the project 100%, what ever it took. He was glad to see the McWanes rebuilding rather than selling out for the money. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. SUBDIVISION ITEM: SUB06-00011, discussion of an application submitted by ST Enterprises LC for a final plat of Hollywood Manor Part 9. a 12-lot, 4.84 acre residential subdivision located west of Russell Drive and south of Burns Avenue. Miklo said the Commission had reviewed the preliminary plat a number of weeks ago and it had been approved by City Council. The applicant was now seeking final plat approval. The final plat was in conformance with the preliminary plat except for the location of the offsite easement to provide for drainage to the property to the south. Staff had expected that information earlier in the day but it had not arrived. The Commission would have the option of deferring this application until the information was received or they could consider approving it subject to resolution of the location of the offsite easement and approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to consideration by Council. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to defer SUB06-00011. Shannon seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 7 The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Discussion of an application submitted by S&G Materials for a conditional use permit to allow the expansion of a sand and gravel mining operation south of Izaak Walton League Road. Westberg said in 2000, S&G Materials had been granted a conditional use permit for sand mining operations in the area immediately south of Izaak Walton League Road. Upon further research, it was found that more sand was available for mining so they were seeking an additional conditional use permit and requesting to expand the existing basins. The City had the right to review this application and make a recommendation to the County because the Conditional Use Permit was located within the City's fringe area. Two areas of concern were that all mining activity had to be outside of a 1,OOO-foot buffer from any property zoned residential unless approved by a super-majority of the County Board of Adjustment. Basin 1 was within that buffer. The applicant had provided a signed petition from property owners within that 1,OOO-foot buffer area signifying their support for the requested permit. The second concern was that in some areas the mining came relatively close to the river, but it met the DNR's requirement to maintain a 100-foot buffer area. The entrance onto Izaak Walton League road had become damaged and deteriorated to the point of needing improvements from heavy truck traffic. Staff recommended that S&G make those improvements. The applicant had notified the City that they understood that County plans required paving portions of Izaak Walton League Road and they intended to comply with that stipulation. Freerks asked if there were more specific requirement(s) along the river in terms of buffer or vegetation. Was it marked clearly in detail in some plans that the Commission had not received? Westburg said the extensions of the new basins would affect a greater area of the wetlands than had been previously affected; the applicant was required to provide a new wetland mitigation plan. The only requirement was that they meet the 100-foot requirement because they would not be excavating within 50-feet of the river. Eastham asked what the Commission's role with this application was. Westberg said because this operation was located within the City's Fringe Area, the City's SAO would not apply and the fringe area policy did not speak directly to mining operations. Miklo said if for some reason the Commission felt it was an inappropriate land use for that area given its proximity to the city, or concerns about traffic generation, the Commission could make a recommendation to the Council that they did not recommend approval. If the Council agreed with the Commission's recommendation not to approve, they could make a recommendation as such and it would take an extra-ordinary majority of the County Board of Adjustment to approve it [4 out of 5 votes]. The City had a near veto power in a situation like this. Based on Staff's current review of the situation and their previous review, the greatest concern was the environmental concerns. The applicant had put together a very good mitigation plan of the mining operation. The greatest effect would be the heavy truck traffic associated with the operation. Historically the applicant had done a fairly reasonable job of keeping the Izaak Walton League entrance road in good shape. Eastham asked for further information regarding the restoration mitigation plan. Westburg said the Army Corps of Engineers would monitor for 5-years. Miklo said another concern would be, because this was located in the City's fringe area, once it was mined out if the City grew to encompass this area how would it affect future land uses. Staff believed that the mitigation plan set up the potential for open space in that area that would not be easily developable but given its location to the river that might be a good thing. Public discussion was opened. Liz Maas, Wetlands Specialist Consultant for S&G Mining. Maas said she'd crafted the mitigation plan for the Army Corps of Engineers and Iowa DNR. Maas said an integral component to the plan was that there was a conservation easement on the property; for each phase 5-years of monitoring was required so there could potentially be monitoring for up to 30-years. The Corps of Engineers would have a very active role in the monitoring. Part of the permit required an annual inspection by the Corps; commonly they just received reports but did not make an actual inspection of the property. This was different in that it would be a unique opportunity to study what could happen when mitigation occurred over a long period of time, especially for Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 8 such a large parcel that was being put to this type of use. The Corps had a high level of interest in the development of how the area would change over time, they intended to use what happened at this site for assessment of locations all over the county. The majority of the property was located in the flood way. As the City grew to the south, there would not be a lot of property amenable to development of any type. The conservation easement left this area as a green space and nicely developed Wetlands Park for that part of the county. Trees would be planted along the river. As time went by, if there was anything that the Corps of Engineers felt did not meet the plan, they could and would request alterations to the plan so the goal of the mitigation would be met. The permit holder had to meet those goals or they would lose their permit and could not operate. Brooks asked how the plan met safety for each basin, especially if in the long term it became public land or open for use. Would shelves be built into the shoreline? Maas said the mitigation would occur in basins 1, 2, and 3. The greatest depth would probably be in the center of the basins, not higher than 17-feet. The mitigation would be constructed along the fringes of the basins, they'd attempted to create the most surface area development possible to gain as many acres of wetland mitigation as possible. Basin 4 would remain as an open water basin, which would be desirable and provide a diversity of environments - it would provide a pond. Any abandoned mine pit had to meet State requirements and have the banks sloped appropriately so they would not be a danger. Eastham asked if the mitigation plan involved refilling basins 1, 2 and 3 and where would that material come from. Maas said the Corps of Engineers preferred mitigation on site, the overburden material that would be removed to access the sand and materials the applicant wished to extract would be put aside and used to refill the basins. It ultimately would result in reproducing on the site a more natural feature along the river than what would have occurred naturally 150-years ago using the materials that had been naturally deposited there since the last glacial period. In order to get things to grow, black dirt would be required to be placed on the overburden material so seeds would grow. Rvan Maas, 620 Ronalds Street, founder and initiator of the non-profit, River Bend Foundation, which had been constituted to hold the conservation easement for this project. The conservation easement had been a requirement of the Corps of Engineers. Once the mitigation practices had been implemented they needed to remain in that state and not be impacted by development, filling, etc. to make sure that the wetlands stayed in place to preserve them in perpetuity. S&G Materials could not hold its own easement, a third party was needed. Conservation partners had been solicited through a process, various entities had been contacted and a new organization focused on restoring these areas was ultimately born. The hope was to replicate this type of project elsewhere across the state to restore the natural occurring bottom land areas. The conservation easement had already been recorded in the County Recorder's office. As the project developed, it was expected that academic researchers would be interested in studying the restoration practices; as previously stated the Corps of Engineers was also interested in the practices and their outcomes. Citizen based types of activities such as bird watching, horseback riding, canoeing, photography, kayaking could occur in areas where active mining operations were not occurring. River Bend Foundation had been designated as the controlling entity for non-mining activities. They hoped to develop a presence in the community as a go-to for those types of restoration processes. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to recommend that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending that a conditional use permit be approved for S&G Materials, subject to: . County requiring the implementation of the Wetland Mitigation Plan created by Red-Tail Restoration . County required improvements are made to the entrance onto Izaak Walton League Road from Oak Crest Hill Road. Eastham seconded the motion. Freerks & Brooks said they were glad to see the collaborative effort and that there was a vision for the future. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 9 OTHER ITEMS: There were none. CONSIDERATION OF 6/1/06 and 6/15/06 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Eastham made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Freerks seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Eastham made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 pm. Freerks seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill s:/pcdlminutes/p&z12006l07 -06-06.doc e o 'en '" 'E E o (.)"E! mo e (,) ,- CD S~ NCD~ oa(,)o eN tnC'll e"C ,- e e CD e~ .!!<( a.. ~ C3 C'lI ~ ..2 ~ I UJ UJ UJ I >< >< >< - - >< 0 .... I 0 0 ." I UJ UJ UJ .... I 0 >< - >< >< >< 0 - I 0 (Cl I .... I I >< >< >< >< >< >< >< CD I I co I .... I >< >< >< >< >< >< >< - I ." 0 I UJ N 0 >< >< >< - >< ~ I 0 I ~ I UJ >< >< >< >< >< >< >< >< >< >< - I M I (Cl UJ I UJ .... 0 >< >< >< - >< - I 0 N I N I UJ >< >< >< >< >< N I - I 0 en I UJ .... >< >< >< - >< >< - I 0 .... ~ I UJ >< >< >< >< >< .... I 0 I 1/1 co 0 co .... 0 co co E ~ ..- ~ ..- ..- 0 0 ..- ~ ~ 'p in - - - - Q) X LO LO LO LO LO LO LO I-UJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E ~ e >< '" ~ '" '2 0 :I ~ C'lI 8 .... e C'lI .c :I .c 'u 0 .... CD .c e .... Q) e '" ! C'lI C'lI 'E e C'lI 0 .c E <( m w u.. ~ a: (/) (/) III ci a:i U <- w 3= ci .,.: z <.9 z i= UJ UJ ::E ....J <( ::E ~ o u. ." I UJ .... I >< >< >< >< >< >< - in I 0 I .... I UJ .... 0 >< >< >< >< 0 >< ~ I .... I ~ >< >< >< >< 0 >< N I M I UJ .... >< >< >< >< 0 >< N I 1/1 co 0 co .... 0 co co E ~ ..- ~ ..- ..- 0 ~ ..- ~ ~ 'p in - - - Q) X LO LO LO LO LO LO LO I-UJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >< E ~ e ~ '" '" e 0 :I C'lI ~ ~ .... e C'lI .c .. :I .c 'u 0 .... CD .c e .... Q) e '" ! C'lI C'lI 'E e C'lI 0 .c E <( m w u.. ~ a: (/) (/) III ci a:i U <- w 3= ci .,.: z <.9 z I- UJ UJ ::E ....J <( ::E ~ o u. Z "0 Q) 1/1 ;:j (.) X UJ --:;::. c: c: c: Q) Q) Q) 1/1 1/1 1/1 ~.c.c 0..<(<( " II II II >. UJ Q) - ~><oo