HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-20-2007 Planning and Zoning Commission
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 7:30 PM
Formal Meeting
Iowa City City Hall
Lobby Conference Room
410 E. Washington Street .
AGENDA:
A. Call to Order
B. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
C. Rezoning Items:
CZ07 -00002: Discussion of an application submitted by Streb Investment Partnership for a
rezoning from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) zone for approximately 4.99
acres of property located on the north side of Rohret Road SW, approximately .5 mile west of
its intersection with Landon Avenue SW in Union Twp.
D. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: August 16, 2007
E. Adjournment
Informal
Formal
Commission Meelin s:
October 29 November 12* December 3
November 1 November 15 December 6
*Meeting cancelled due to holiday.
I ~ 1
-~= -....!t
,....--....
~~~le
~~.....~
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date:
September 20, 2007
From:
Planning and Zoning Commission
Adam Ralston, Planning Intern
Item REZ07-00013, Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R3)
To:
Re:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The applicant, AI Streb of Streb Investments, is requesting a rezoning from Agricultural (A) to
Residential (R3) for approximately 4.99 acres of property located along the north side of Rohret
Road approximately Y:z mile southwest of the Rohret Road and Landon Avenue intersection. This
property lies outside the city limits of Iowa City, but is within the area covered by the Fringe Area
Policy Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City. It also lies within the Iowa City long-
range growth boundary.
ANAL YSIS
Existing Land Use and Zoning
This property is currently zoned and used for agricultural purposes. All adjacent properties are
also currently zoned and used for agriculture, with the exception of a residence on the south side
of Rohret Road southeast of this property.
Compliance with Comprehensive Plan
The Fringe Area Agreement, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, is intended to provide
guidance regarding the development of land located within two miles of Iowa City's corporate
limits. It was mutually agreed to by the City of Iowa City and Johnson County. The agreement's
stated purpose is to provide for orderly and efficient development patterns appropriate to a non-
urbanized area, protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and environmentally
sensitive features, direct development to areas with physical characteristics which can
accommodate development, and effectively and economically provide services for future growth
and development. To further guide the implementation of this policy the agreement contains a
land use map which identifies appropriate land uses with in the fringe area. The applicant's
property is identified as appropriate for agricultural purposes. This is also the designation given to
it by the Johnson County Land Use Plan. Therefore the requested rezoning is not incompliance
with the Fringe Area Agreement or the Johnson County Land Use Plan.
In describing general standards applied to unincorporated development in the fringe area, the
Fringe Area Agreement seeks to "Discourage development in areas which conflict with the
Johnson County Land Use Plan which considers CSR (Corn Suitability Rating), high water table,
wetlands, floodplain, non-erodible soil, and road suitability." The County's Land Use Plan
discourages development in the City's growth area unless it is contiguous to previous outward
growth of the city. The Johnson County Land Use Plan generally seeks to preserve agricultural
land and minimize conflicts between incompatible uses. Rezoning this property from agricultural
to residential would not support either of these goals.
As noted above this parcel is within Iowa City's growth are (the area identified for eventual
annexation into the city). The Fringe Area Agreement generally encourages that land with the
growth area be annexed into the city prior to development. Until the outward growth of the city
reaches this parcel it may continue to be used for agricultural purposes.
September 14, 2007
Page 2
Infrastructure
The applicant has indicated that a well and septic system would be put in place should this
rezoning be approved. These options are not ideal for a parcel within the city's growth boundary.
A stated purpose of the Fringe Area Agreement is to "...effectively and economically provide
services for future growth and development." As the city expands outward over time, existing
rural residences must be switched over to City services. The smallest number of residences
requiring such a switchover results in the services being provided economically, as desired in the
Fringe Area Agreement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that item Cl07-00013, an application for the rezoning of approximately 4.99
acres of property located along the north side of Rohret Road approximately ~ mile southwest of
the Rohret Road and Landon Avenue intersection from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R3), be
denied.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . Location Map
2. Photograph
Approved by:
~~
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
~
~
\.J
~
~
~
~
t3
u
Z
J
o
T""
a:
a:
w- _
S1.1WIl A1.1J
P-"'"
- -11
I
\
T-
"---0
en
a:
I
c
, \
IIR_Il:m.Il!ll.._.,tIllLIl!ll"._.'fs_..,B__"ml.lIl1IIm_,m,_.iliHlli'l'lli'I-m-_~ ~~ - -
\ Sl1WIl Hl.MOCl9 t1.1J \fM91 ::JO A1.1 ,
1 !::
b
o
co
II
-
,....
Cl>
C\1
()
(f)
r
\
..
...
~
~
~
t.
..
~
~
~
,mll!'J"Il!'J'Il!i'l-m-.'u"-lI
I
+.....-.--...-
I -....
-.
"-
o
o
C\J
L{)
Ci)
Ci)
C\J
r-
r-
Q)
()
lo....
~
0...
----
s
if)
1:J
aJ
o
0:
+-'
Q)
lo....
..c
o
0:
. .
Z
o
~
~
U
o
....:l
~
~
~
rJ)
~
~ -
......
0
0
t3 C\J
10
C")
C")
~ C\J
,...
,...
~ Q)
0
'-
cu
~ a.
-
~
~ en
'"C
cu
t3 0
a:
....
Q)
'-
.c
0
a:
..
Z
0
1-4
5
0
~
~
f-4
1-4
CI:J
Preliminary
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AUGUST 16, 2007 - 7:30 PM
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL - CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Brooks, Beth Koppes, Ann Freerks, Charlie Eastham, Wally Plahutnik, Dean
Shannon
MEMBER EXCUSED: Terry Smith
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar, Sara olecek
OTHERS PRESENT: Glenn Siders, Charlotte DePew
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0 (Smith absent) REZ07 -00011, a rezoning of approximately 45.04-
acres of land from Interim Development Office Researc Park (ID-ORP) zone to Medium Density Single-
Family Residential (RS-8) with a Planned Development verlay zone for approximately 34.58-acres, Interim
Development Single-Family Residential (ID-RS) zone for approximately 8.75-acres, and Interim
Development Office Commercial (ID-C01) zone for app oximately 1.71-acres; and a preliminary Planned
Development of Cardinal Point South, a residential subd vision with a mix of single-family and multi-family
residential dwellings subject to:
· Staff approval of the stormwater management facility pri r to consideration by City Council
· Staff approval of the locations and designs of the mailbo clusters
. A conditional zoning agreement specifying
1. The section of Kennedy Parkway between Camp C rdinal Road and Camp Cardinal Boulevard will be
platted, and the necessary right-of-way will be dedic ted and a letter of credit of the cost of installing the
water main in this section of the street will be provide at the time of final plat approval.
2. Installation of sub-grade for this section of Kennedy arkway will be constructed by the applicant and/or
owner prior to January 1, 2009
3. This section of Kennedy Parkway will be constructe prior to January 1, 2010 or when the school site
(located north of Kennedy Parkway) is developed, r Outlot C of Cardinal Point South is developed;
whichever occurs first, and
4 If the sub-grade is not constructed prior to January 1, 2009 or if the road is not built prior to January 1,
2010, issuance of building permits will cease for Car inal Point South subdivision.
Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0 (Smith absent) EZ07-00012, a rezoning from Intensive Commer-
cial (CI-1) to Community Commercial (CC-2) for appro imately 0.95-acres of property located at 805 S.
Gilbert Street and 817 S. Gilbert Street.
Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0 (Smith abse t) VAC07-00005, the vacation of 102 feet of the
north-south alley in Block 102, subject to the retention of p blic access and utility easements.
CALL TO ORDER:
Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:34 pm.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGE DA:
No discussion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August16,2007
Page 2
Rezonina Items
REZ07 -00011, discussion of a application submitted by S uthgate Development Services LLC for a rezoning
of approximately 45.04-acres of land from Interim Deve opment Office Research Park (ID-ORP) zone to
Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) wi h a Planned Development Overlay zone for
approximately 34.58-acres, Interim Development Single- amily Residential (ID-RS) zone for approximately
8.75-acres, and Interim Development Office Commercial ( D-C01) zone for approximately 1.71-acres; and a
preliminary Planned Development of Cardinal Point Sou h, a residential subdivision with a mix of single-
family and multi-family residential dwellings. (45-day Iimita ion period: 9/3/07)
Terdalkar said at the previous meeting the outstanding is ues had been discussed, most of which had been
resolved. Remaining issues, some still pending resolution i eluded:
Trail network for the school. The on-street sidewalk in both Coralville and Iowa City will be sufficient for the
pedestrian traffic. An 8-foot sidewalk on the north sid of Kennedy Parkway between Camp Cardinal
Boulevard and Camp Cardinal Road is recommende . Recommended that 66-foot right of way be
maintained; the applicant has agreed.
Elevations The applicant had provided new elevations earlier in the day. Staff felt the new elevation plus the
two included in the Commission's information packet w re adequate to meet criteria established by City
Code.
Mailbox clusters The applicant had changed the location 0 a few mailbox clusters, they were still working on
obtaining a copy of the United States Postal Service (USP ) accepted mailbox. Staff had discussed with the
applicant moving the mailbox clusters to the private drives instead of having them in the public right-of-way.
Potential traffic implications included unnecessarily im eding traffic flow when people pulled up and
temporarily parked at the mailbox cluster to retrieve their ail. Staff and the developer will further pursue this
with the USPS.
Stormwater Manaaement Calculations The applicant's ngineer had provided calculations to the City
Engineer earlier in the day and received preliminary app oval that the capacity would be sufficient in the
stormwater basin.
Tree landscape design On Ryan Court, lots 20 to 38, the applicant had agreed to include a clause in the
covenant indicating that the developer would provide a list of 5 different kinds of trees for the homeowner to
select from, to ensure consistency of landscaping along t e street. The street trees, one per lot, would be
planted on the private side of the property per the City ngineer; to the extent possible all infrastructure
wouldl be located between the sidewalk and the street.
Public trail access Staff and the developer's engineers ha tried to find a way to install an ADA compliant
trail/sidewalk access but due to the steep and critical slope in the area it had not been possible.
Miklo said the USPS has recently taken the position of n t wanting to deliver mail to individual mailboxes
located on the house or in front of residential houses on t e street. The USPS was pushing to have 'gang
mailboxes', a collection of 12, 16 or 20 mailboxes in one location. Staff had two main concerns, mailbox
location and design of mailbox cluster (quantity of mailbox s/cluster). Location of the mailboxes is important
to ensure that they are not near an intersection or located t 0 close to the street so as to cause problems for
snow plows. For the townhouses, Staff would prefer to se the mailbox clusters located in private alleys or
drives behind the townhouses. Staff intend to have a dis ussion with the USPS to see if they would be
amiable to this location for the mailboxes. For single-famil and zero-lot line homes there probably is not a
good alternative location for the mailboxes so Staff antici ates that the mailboxes will be located on the
public street.
Staff is not so concerned with the actual design of the mailboxes; the basic square metal mailbox is
acceptable. The number of boxes in a cluster could becom an issue. Some developers have dressed up the
mailboxes by adding a roof, shelter or other decorative eature to the mailbox cluster which is typically
Planning and Zoning Commission
August16,2007
Page 3
located in the public right-of-way. If the developer opts to nhance the mailbox cluster(s) in any way, the City
Engineer would like to review the proposed mailbox struc ure/enhancement prior to the time of final platting.
Staff would also like to assure that any thing built in the p blic streets did not detract from the overall planned
development, but in this case Southgate was not proposi g any structures around the mail boxes so that the
location of the boxes where the concern.
Eastham asked for a clarification of the minutes regarding a reference to funds being available to pay for part
of Kennedy Parkway. Miklo said the school district purcha ed the property to the north of Kennedy Parkway.
The City of Coralville and the City of Iowa City had each c ntributed $56,000 toward the purchase of the land
with the understanding that it would be used toward building the school's half-of the street and that the
school would not be responsible for building the street i that area. The money did not go to the school
district but to the party who sold the land.
Eastham said the previous Staff Report and discussion from the 8/2/07 Commission meeting included a
number of recommendations for this application which Ea tham was having difficulty finding the authority in
the Zoning Code for the Commission to require those sort of things. The mailboxes were not a bad idea; to
install them so that they would not be an obstacle for the snow-plows was ok. The design of the mailboxes
which was unrelated to plowing or maintenance, Eastham said he did not understand where in the Code the
Commission had the authority to make that kind of re uirement. The same applied to the number of
townhouse units and a required number of elevations; req iring 3 or any elevations for the zero-lot line units.
Miklo said this was a planned development, with a pi nned development the City often granted some
concessions to a developer such as allowing constructi n of multi-family units in a single-family zone or
building duplexes in a zone that didn't allow them. It res Ited in higher densities than would be possible if
developed as a non-planned development. The expectat on was that there was a plan that laid out what
would be done; drawings showing building elevations, a expectation as laid out in the intent that a plan
would show a quality development and also requirement hat the developer follow multi-family and zero-lot
line design standards. Those design standards talked abo t variety, consistency in architecture, trim around
windows - it was all spelled out in the Code. Miklo said h would be glad to sit down with Eastham and go
over the specific points and sections of the Code.
Freerks said that with Planned Development zoning the in ent was for the Commission review the details of
the plan in exchange for zoning bonus that are granted to t e developer.
Eastham said he'd read through all the Code provisions a d he was not convinced that some of the specific
requirements for this application were neatly and clearly co tained within some of the provisions.
Miklo said in terms of the planned development, it referr d back to the multi-family design standards; that
was where a lot of the specifics that Staff had raised were ontained.
East said he did not see a requirement for more than one et of elevations. Miklo said that specifically would
not be found, what the Code did say was that a planned development would be suitable for a residential
zone, the multi-family would contain a variety of architectu e yet consistency in design. A judgment call had
to be made as to whether the plans submitted for the pia ned development met the intent of the code and
the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff provided th ir professional recommendation and it was up to
the Commission to decide when making there recommend tion to City Council.
Public discussion was opened.
Glenn Siders, SouthGate Development, said he pretty mu h concurred with everything that Miklo had said.
With respect to the mailboxes, Miklo had accurately summ rized the situation, the developer was more than
willing to not block vision or obstruct maintenance of the st eet. He wanted everyone to understand that they
were very limited as to what design of mailbox they could get, they were even uglier than the transformers
which sat in the front yard of many homes. They were tying to work with the USPS and had only one
mailbox option at present. With respect to design, they wer limited as to what they could do.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2007
Page 4
They'd had their engineer look at specifically trying to ge a walkway system into the park area somewhere
along Ryan or the gap between the single family and th first four units and/or in other locations. With the
steep and critical slopes that were on the property, to et ADA compliance would require clearing out a
massive area and use of a lot of fill, it just would not work Physically it might be done but Siders felt it would
ruin everything that the developers and Staff were trying 0 do. Regarding funding for street: the money had
been paid to SouthGate Development and the property wners of Cardinal Ridge South. They'd received
payment, the school system owned their site, SouthGate ad transferred the deed for their site to them. The
payment was in part to bring all infrastructure to that site. The cities had participated because they wanted a
school on that site, as part payment for street, sewer, ev rything that was associated with that street right of
way. The school system would be obligated, for example if the wanted a turn lane installed with the street,
they would be responsible for the cost of that turn lane 0 what ever might occur because of the use of that
site. It had all been agreed to in the 28E agreement. So thGate was obligated to install the boulevard and
they were happy to put it in.
Eastham said he understood that Siders was in agree ent with the Staffs recommendations. Eastham
asked Siders to make any kind of comment about what e ect the recommendations would have on the cost
of the homes.
Siders said they would increase the cost of the homes. From what they had started out with their original
design and what they had now, they were not displeased with the design, and there was a market place for
it, it was like the Peninsula, there was a market for that se but it was proven that they paid more for that
use; they were paying more per square foot for that ty e of dwelling than the vinyl siding or customary
dwellings that were seen. It was not a good thing or a bad hing, but there was a cost associated with it.
Freerks said that a developer did end up with many mo e units than a conventional development on this
property - that was part of a planned development. A tra e off for higher density was some scrutiny of the
design to make sure that it was compatible.
Public discussion was closed.
Motion: Brooks made a motion to approve REZ07 -00011, a rezoning of approximately 4S.04-acres of land
from Interim Development Office Research Park (ID ORP) zone to Medium Density Single-Family
Residential (RS-8) with a Planned Development Overl y zone for approximately 34.S8-acres, Interim
Development Single-Family Residential (ID-RS) zon for approximately 8.7S-acres, and Interim
Development Office Commercial (ID-C01) zone for appr ximately 1.71-acres; and a preliminary Planned
Development of Cardinal Point South, a residential subdi ision with a mix of single-family and multi-family
residential dwellings subject to:
· Staff approval of the stormwater management facility pri r to consideration by City Council
· Staff approval of the locations and designs of the mailbo clusters
· A conditional zoning agreement specifying
1. The section of Kennedy Parkway between Camp Ca dinal Road and Camp Cardinal Boulevard will be
platted, and the necessary right-of-way will be dedica ed and a letter of credit of the cost of installing the
water main in this section of the' street will be provide at the time of final plat approval.
2. Installation of sub-grade for this section of Kennedy P rkway will be constructed by the applicant and/or
owner prior to January 1, 2009
3. This section of Kennedy Parkway will be constructed prior to January 1, 2010 or when the school site
(located north of Kennedy Parkway) is developed, or Outlot C of Cardinal Point South is developed;
whichever occurs first, and
4. If the sub-grade is not constructed prior to January 1, 2009 or if the road is not built prior to January 1,
2010, issuance of building permits will cease for Cardi al Point South subdivision.
Koppes seconded the motion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2007
Page 5
Miklo clarified that there had been two elevation drawin s included in the information packet plus the third
drawing which had been distributed prior to the start of th meeting.
Plahutnik also seconded the motion.
Eastham said he would vote in favor of the motion but h wanted to state for the record that it was clear to
him that the development of this application through the r zoning process had added some additional cost to
the eventual homeowners of the properties even though igher densities had been obtained. It was not clear
to him that the zoning code was quite clearly called for s me of the additional requirements. Mailboxes were
trivial additional cost. things that were most difficult for hi to understand were requirements for two or three
alternative elevations for the zero-lot line and in some cas s townhouse units; requiring full width trim around
the townhouse units. Eastham said he felt that some of t ose things could have been done and achieved a
well designed subdivision and at the same time achieved ome kind of cost reduction.
Plahutnik said the developer's main motivation was profit and the City/Commission tried to work within that.
As they asked for things that would raise the cost(s) th y tried to give something back by allowing more
development and a little higher occupancy. They tried to eep things in line so the developer could go ahead
with their project and make money. Plahutnik said he w s aware that Eastham's hot button was low cost
housing; his place on the Commission - he was not conc rned either with the profit or in particular low cost
housing. Plahutnik's main concern was that 25 or 30 year from now when someone drove through this area
they would say that it was a really good addition to low City. For the developer, hopefully buildout would
occur way before then, they would be gone and they'd m de their money. Some people had a pride such as
SouthGate had, others didn't. Other things like the multi Ie elevations, Soviet block housing was the most
egregious example of single face mass development. Ho efully no one would do that in Iowa City however
there were areas of town that one could drive through an say, "What were they thinking? This looked like a
mini Soviet block development." There were tradeoffs a d each person on the Commission might have a
different focus. Eastham's focus was low cost housing, PI hutnik said he had other things on his mind which
include the long-term livability of the community.
Freerks said it was not black and white, the Code allowed them to do such things in a planned development
and she didn't see any issue with it. Freerks said she agre d with Plahutnik; looking at the Longfellow Manor
there were a lot of units there and work had been done t create a lot of variety and make the units seem
more individual. It had been a benefit to the neighborh od. This application was somewhat similar. She
supported having neighborhoods that were sustainable and had a lot of variety, she felt this development
would be a good development and she looked forward to s eing it.
The vote passed on a vote of 6-0 (Smith absent).
REZ07-00012, discussion of an application submitted by George Sehl for a rezoning from Intensive
Commercial (CI-1) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone for approximately 0.95-acres of property at
805 and 817 South Gilbert Street. (45-day limitation periOd 9-8-2007)
Miklo said this parcel was part of a larger CI-1 zone to the est and was bordered on the east by CC-2 zone.
The north property contained a medical office, the buildin on the south property was currently vacant and
for lease. Buildings further north contained offices, apart ents and a bike shop. Kennedy Plaza was to the
east, commercial on the ground floor with residential on th second floor. To the south and west was Ralston
Creek, there would be no development to the south as it as publicly owned land and contained the creek
bed. To the west was also the creek and further west was warehouse and quasi-industrial uses.
Staff felt the rezoning made a lot of sense as the creek pr vided a natural transition point from the proposed
CC2 and the existing CC2 in the area and the more inte sive commercial and quasi-industrial area to the
west of the creek. The comprehensive plan showed the ar a as being generally commercial and the area to
the south as intensive plan. The text of the Plan talked a out the change in character of the neighborhood;
Staff felt that that opened the door for the rezoning to C-2 without doing a major Comprehensive Plan
amendment and it was right on the line of the area of a C -2 zone as shown in the Comprehensive Plan. It
was a small enough area that Staff didn't feel an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan was warranted.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August16,2007
Page 6
Gilbert was an arterial street with some congestion. Give the existing buildings on the site, the CC-2 uses
would not likely generate more traffic than a CI-1 use. T ere were good sidewalk networks in the area so it
was suitable for pedestrian traffic. Between the two pro erties there were 34 parking spaces, sufficient for
the proposed office use. Staff recommended approval of t e proposed rezoning from CI-1 to CC2.
Public comment was opened.
Charlotte DePew, 1901 Farrel Drive. DePew was there a part of Informed Choice of Iowa Corporation, who
held the primary purchase offer to purchase the South Gi bert Street property which was currently for lease.
Their offer was contingent upon the rezoning because the were a non-profit medical clinic.
Public comment was closed.
Motion: Koppes made a motion to approve REZ07-00012, a rezoning from Intensive Commercial (CI-1)
zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone for approxi ately 0.9S-acres of property at 805 and 817 South
Gilbert Street. Brooks seconded the motion.
Freerks said it seemed like a common sense thing to do; there was no need to change the Comprehensive
Plan in any way to accommodate this. Koppes agreed.
The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 (Smith absent)
Vacation Item
VAC07-0000S, discussion of an application submitted by ieronymus Square Associates to vacate 102 feet
of the north-south alley located in Block 102 subject to the etention of public access and utility easements.
Miklo said this area had been rezoned to CB-10 last year; previous to that the City had vacated a portion of
the alley right-of-way and an alternative alley right of way as established to maintain circulation through the
block. In conjunction with the development of Hieronymu Square, the Commission had vacated a section
with the requirement that an alternative alley or public a cess easement be established in its place. The
applicant was now seeking the vacation, it was determined that rather than having an alley it would be better
to have a public access. The City would retain the most so thern portion of the alley. As Hieronymus Square
proceeded and .the designs developed the underground p rking area would include almost all of the use of
the land under the property and the applicant would be s eking permission to use the land under the alley.
To make it clear so there would be no liability issues or Ie se issues involved, Staff recommended vacation
of the alley and retaining an access easement so the publi could continue to use the property. The applicant
had agreed to do all snow maintenance of the alley. A n building on the former Rebel Plaza property is
currently under construction. It would have an undergrou d parking access from the southern part of the
alley. With the new design of Hieronymus Square. their un erground parking which would be devoted to the
residential and upper floors, would be accessed through th parking structure, it would be the easiest way to
get there and eliminated a lot of ramping and conflicts with sewer and other easements. Staff recommended
approval of V AC07 -00005 subject to retention of public acc ss and utility easements.
Plahutnik said if this were a transfer of property betw en two private parties, there would be some
consideration involved. It seemed like the consideration th t the City was getting was on the applicant's way
to plowing their own lot. they were going to plow the aile as they went anyway. It didn't seem like much
consideration in exchange for getting a chunk of city downt wn property. It seemed like they had been in the
business of giving away downtown property for the last cou Ie of years.
Holecek said the City did have an obligation to try and get fair market value. The swap in the consideration
was rather than trying to do an agreement where the Ci y would still retain all liability issues and try to
manage the property above and below, they got the ben fit of still having all public access surface rights
without having the responsibility of maintenance of any of he concrete or the snow removal. Given that the
City had taken the stance that this project was also worthy f TIFFing, Legal Staff felt it was a fair swap given
that the applicant was going to absorb most of the prope y anyway. Miklo said if this was not going to be
encumbered by easements. the City would charge the applicant. The public still had the right to occupy and
Planning and Zoning Commission
August16,2007
Page 7
access it. Holecek said the City had one of the most imp rtant sticks in the bundle of rights, non exclusivity,
meaning that the applicant could not exclude the public s there was still public access.
Koppes said the Planning and Zoning Commission was ever involved in monetary considerations for right-
of-way vacations anyway.
Freerks said this one seemed to have a little different flav r than the vacations they usually did.
Holecek said it was up to the City Council to determine if t ey felt it was a fair disposition or not.
Public discussion was opened. No public discussion. Publ c discussion was closed.
Motion: Eastham made a motion to approve V AC07 -000 5, the vacation of 102 feet of the north-south alley
located in Block 102 subject to the retention of public acc ss and utility easements. Brooks seconded.
The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 (Smith absent).
CONSIDERATION OF THE AUGUST 2 2007 MEETING INUTES:
The motion was approved on a vote of 6-0. (Smith absent)
Motion: Brooks made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Plahutnik seconded.
OTHER ITEMS:
Memorandum from Karen Howard dated 8/10/2007, re arding REZ07-00010 - St. Patrick's Church and
related NE District Plan amendment. Miklo said Staff had drafted the CZA for the St Patrick Church site and
the Miller's property. The Miller's had shared it with the r attorney, who had indicated a desire for some
flexibility if the Church was not built. He'd asked for t e additional clause in the CZA. Staff felt it was
consistent with the intent of what was being done and the efore presented it to the Commission. If there was
any concern, Staff would take it to the City Council next w ek.
Brooks said it read fine to him.
Koppes said it was fine with her.
Eastham said he was fine with it.
Freerks said she would abstain from comment or participa ion.
Permanent change of informal meeting time to 5:30 pm. lahutnik said during the holiday season the earlier
meeting time would be difficult for him. Consensus by the Commission to move the informal meeting time to
5:30 pm on Mondays until December. December and January informal meeting start time to be reviewed
closer to the holiday season.
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion by to adjourn by Koppes. Seconded by Plahutnik.
Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill.
Motion approved by a vote of 6-0 (Smith absent). The mee ing was adjourned at 8:24 pm.
s/pcd/m ins/p&z12 DO 7/8-1 6-07. doc
C
o
'ii)
I/)
'E
E
o
o'E
c)o
C (,)
,- Q)
Co:::
o
NQ)""
~gg
C)CON
c"C
,- C
C Q)
C-
.!!!<
c..
~
(3
CO
~
..2
C)
z
i=
w
w
:E
...I
<C
:E
0:::
o
LL.
CD LU
.... >< >< >< >< >< >< (5
-
CO
~ >< LU >< >< >< >< ><
CO (5
Q) >< >< LU
.... >< >< (5 >< ><
-
.....
N LU LU
.... (5 >< >< >< (5 >< ><
-
.....
.... LU LU LU
~ - >< (5 >< >< >< -
CD 0 0
..... LU
0 >< >< >< >< (5 >< ><
-
CD
.....
.... >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
It)
C")
~ >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
Q)
.... >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
;a:
It) LU
52 - >< >< >< >< >< ><
..,. 0
It) LU
.... >< >< >< >< >< >< (5
-
C")
....
52 >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
C")
It) LU LU
.... >< >< >< (5 (5 0 ><
-
N
....
0 >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
N
CO ><
:!: >< >< >< >< >< ><
....
I/)
E ~ 0 T""" 00 N 0 00 T"""
T""" T""" 0 T""" T""" 0 T"""
Q).~ - - - - - - -
l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C)
I-UJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~
E 'j;; c:
1/1 CIl 1/1 1/1 ... 0
~ Ql ::::l c:
~ .c Q. .c c: .c
0 ... Ql :::
1/1 Q. CIl CIl
Q) e CIl e 0 n: .c E
E a:I W u.. ~ cncn
t1l iii <i. ui ;: 0"':
z u
.... <X UJ UJ
M X X 0 X -
- 0
""
U) X <X X UJ UJ X
.... 0 -
- 0
""
e X <X UJ UJ X UJ
"" 0 0 0
co <a
.... X X X X X
-
U)
0 <X
1:2 X X X X X
"II:t'
U) 3x
.... X X X X X
~
U) <X UJ
N X 0 X X X
-
N
en "X UJ
N X X X - X
- 0
....
rJ) 0 00 N 0 00
E ~ T"""
T""" 0 T""" T""" 0 T"""
Q).~ - ~~ - - - -
l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C)
I-UJ 0 0 0 0 0
.ll:: C
I/) I/) I/) '2 0
.ll:: .ll:: g - C
0 ... :J C .c
Q) .c -
2 co 'E
Q) e 0 co .c
E m LL. ~ c:: (/) (/)
l\1 ai 50:( W ~ ci ...:
z
C)
z
i=
w
w
:E
...I
<C
:E
0:::
o
LL.
~
'0
Q)
rJ)
:J
Co)
><
UJ
+-'+-,~
c: s:: s::
Q) Q) Q)
rJ) rJ) rJ)
~.o.o
0.<(<(
.. II II II
>. UJ
Q) -
~XOO