HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-17-2008 Planning and Zoning Commission
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Monday, July 14, 2008 - 6:00 PM
Informal Meeting
Iowa City City Hall
Lobby Conference Room
410 E. Washington Street
Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 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
REZ08-00005/SUB08/00005: Discussion of an application submitted by Ike Akabogu for a
rezoning from Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) zone to High Density Single Family (RS-
12) zone and an 11-lot residential subdivision for approximately .88-acres of property at 442,
446 & 452 Benton Street and 719 & 723 Michael Street.
(45-day limitation period: August 7, 2008)
D. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: June 30 and July 3, 2008
E. Other
F. Adjournment
Informal
Formal
5T AFF REPORT
To: Planning & Zoning Commission Prepared by: Christina Kuecker
Item: REZ08-00005/SUB08-0005 Date: July 17, 2008
Re-subdivision of Lots 1, 2, 3, 6 & 7
of Giblins Subdivision
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Ike Akabogu
1555 Otter Ave
North Liberty, Iowa 52317
Contact Person:
Ike Akabogu
Phone:
(319)621-6857
Requested Action:
Rezoning from Medium Density Single Family
Residential (RS-8) to High Density Single Family
Residential (RS-12) and preliminary plat for 11
single family lots
Purpose:
Redevelopment of property for attached single-
family townhouses
Location:
442, 446, & 452 Benton Street and 719 & 723
Michael Street
Size:
38,080 sq. ft (approximately .88 acres)
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
triplex and single family / RS-8
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: residential (RM-20)
South: residential (RS-8)
East: residential (RS-8 & RM-20)
West: residential (RS-8 & RM-20)
Comprehensive Plan:
small lot, single family residential
Neighborhood Open Space District:
Brookland Roosevelt District
File Date:
April 10, 2008
45 Day Limitation Period:
Waived to August 7, 2008
SPECIAL INFORMATION:
Public Utilities:
Sewer and Water are present. A water main hook
up fee of $395 per acre applies.
Public Services:
Police, Fire, and Refuse provided by City. Transit
stop at corner of Michael and Benton Streets.
2
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant is requesting a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) to
High Density Single Family Residential (RS-12) in order to redevelop the properties at 442, 446, &
452 Benton Street and 719 & 723 Michael Street into attached single-family townhouses. The
intention is to tear down the existing single-family structures and construct a 6-unit, a 2-unit, and a
3-unit grouping of townhouses. These townhouses would be on individual lots. The applicant
has submitted a preliminary plat of the re-subdivision of lots 1, 2, 3, 6, &7 of Giblins Subdivision
to reconfigure the lot lines to subdivide the existing 5 lots into 11 lots with rear driveway access
easements.
The existing buildings on these properties were constructed as small single-family homes in the
mid-1950s. All of the subject properties are single-family rental properties, with the exception of
719 Michael Street, which has been divided into three small apartments, making it a
nonconforming use in the RS-8 zone.
There are currently seven multi-family buildings located at the north end of Michael Street
containing a total of 82 apartments. One of these buildings is located behind and to the west of
the subject single-family structures with the remainder located to the north. A parking lot for one
of the apartment building is located across the street from 723 Michael Street. Single-family
structures surround the subject area on all other sides.
Previously the applicant submitted an application to rezone 719 and 723 Michael Street to RM-20.
This application was denied because the Comprehensive Plan and the Southwest District Plan
designate this area to remain small lot single-family or duplex residential. The new proposal for
RS-12 zoning is different in that the town homes would be on separate lots that could be sold
individually. The RS-12 zoning has been designated as a zone to allow development of affordable
single-family housing.
The applicant has indicated that he has used the "Good Neighbor Policy" and has had discussions
with neighborhood representatives and held a neighborhood meeting.
ANALYSIS:
Current Zoning: The subject properties are currently zoned RS-8, which is intended to provide
opportunities for more affordable single family neighborhoods by allowing single family homes on
smaller lots with duplexes allowed on corner properties. Based on the RS-8 requirements this
property could possibly be further subdivided into 6 or 7 lots, provided there is an alley or rear
driveway access.
Proposed Zoning: The RS-12 Zone is intended to provide for development of single-family
dwellings, duplexes and attached housing units at a higher density than in other single-family
zones. The RS-12 zone has a minimum lot area of 3000 square feet and lot width of 20 or 28
feet for attached single family lots with alley or rear access. This would allow a maximum of 11
attached single-family dwellings to be developed on the property.
Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The Southwest District Plan, which was adopted in
2002, indicates that this area is intended for single family and duplex residential. In the plan,
the subject properties are located within the Miller-Orchard Neighborhood in the Roosevelt sub-
area. The plan states that this neighborhood "has many assets, but a number of challenges.
Affordability of housing, the proximity to the University, downtown Iowa City, Roosevelt School,
and the new park, all make this area a potentially attractive location for a variety of households.
However, short-term tenancy, traffic circulation patterns, an unattractive interface between the
commercial and residential area, and a lack of pedestrian links both within and between this
PC DIStaff Reportslrez08-00005 michael & benton st.doc
3
neighborhood and surrounding destinations has all contributed to some disinvestment in the
area."
Both the comprehensive plan map and the Southwest District Plan map indicate that properties
in this area should remain single family or duplex residential. If the subject properties are
rezoned and redeveloped under the RS-12 zoning, the properties would become attached
single family residential with each townhome having an individual lot.
During the Southwest District planning process, citizens expressed a concern about future loss
of the smaller, more affordable single-family homes in this neighborhood to redevelopment
pressures. The plan supports efforts to stabilize and revitalize the Miller-Orchard neighborhood
by encouraging rehabilitation of the existing housing stock in the area to maintain a balance
between rental and owner-occupied housing. Although the proposed rezoning and
redevelopment does not rehabilitate the existing housing stock in the area, it would add single-
family units to the housing stock. There is concern from some current residents in the
neighborhood that the increased density could detract from efforts to stabilize the Miller-
Orchard Neighborhood. In staff's view, the rezoning of this property to allow the redevelopment
of the existing housing units may have some merit. Newly constructed townhouses may be
more attractive to home buyers and longer term tenants than the current houses located on the
existing lots. However, careful consideration will need to be given to the design of the proposed
new housing to help assure that it advances the Comprehensive Plan's goal to revitalize the
Miller-Orchard Neighborhood. Staff recommends that if a rezoning is approved for this
property, it be conditioned upon a concept plan that illustrates how the new development will
integrate into the neighborhood. (A planned development overlay zoning would typically be
used to achieve this objective, but in this case, the property does not meet the minimum 1-acre
requirement for a planned development.)
Compatibility with neighborhood: Currently the neighborhood exists of medium density
single-family detached residential and medium density multi-family residential. The proposed
redevelopment consists of a 2-unit and 3-unit townhouse structure along Benton Street and a 6-
unit townhouse structure along Michael Street. Because multiple units will be attached to each
other, the scale of the proposed townhouses will obviously be larger than most of the existing
houses in the neighborhood. However, staff believes, that with attention to details, such as
landscaping, window placement, trim, porches and rooflines, the larger structures could be
made compatible with the adjacent detached single-family homes. We asked the applicant to
submit plans illustrating the location and exterior design of the proposed townhouses. The
attached plan shows how the buildings would sit on the proposed lots, the location of the rear
driveways and parking spaces.
Staff is concerned that the design for lots 6-11 would result in little open space around the
proposed grouping of townhouses. The plan does show compliance with the minimum setback
requirements of the zoning code, but in this case because of the steep slopes present on the
property very little of the yard space would be usable. In comparison, the proposed
townhouses on lots 1-5 would have a 40-foot front yard, which would provide a buffer from
Benton Street and green space that would help that portion of the new development fit into the
neighborhood.
Staff is also concerned that the slope of the site causes the design of drives that may be
difficult to maneuver. Staff doubts that a 6-unit structure along Michael Street will successfully
fit into the neighborhood or the site and has recommended that the applicant consider 4 units
along Michael Street, which would allow for additional open space and make it easier to design
driveways that manage the slopes.
The applicant has submitted the attached elevation drawings showing his general concept for
PC DIStaff Reportslrez08-00005 michael & benton st.doc
4
the exterior of the townhouses. In Staff's opinion, additional design work is needed to ensure
that the structures fit into the neighborhood and the site. The applicant is hesitant to spend the
money to hire a designer without some indication from Staff and the Planning and Zoning
Commission that the rezoning will be recommended for approval. Staff recommends the
Commission identify what conditions need to be met in order to make this rezoning and
redevelopment compatible with the neighborhood, as discussed below.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas: Some steep slopes are present on the properties. The
maximum slopes are approximately 25% and are not protected slopes, but any slopes greater
than 18% require a Sensitive Area Review. Staff will be reviewing the grading plans for
compliance with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. As noted above the slopes present a
challenge to creating useable front and rear yard space for the proposed lots on Michael Street
and a driveway that is maneuverable.
Traffic and pedestrian implications: The City uses an average of seven trips per day per
household when calculating the traffic implications of a development. If the subject properties
were redeveloped at the current zoning, a maximum of six or seven households would be
created, resulting in approximately 49 trips per day. The rezoning of the subject properties
would increase the number of households to 11, resulting in 77 trips per day. This increase is
minimal in the scope of traffic along Benton Street, a highly travelled arterial street. If the
proposed development is built, two exiting curb cuts on Benton Street will be eliminated and
replaced by the propose rear access drive that intersects with Michael Street. This will help
reduce side friction on the arterial street.
Michael Street currently lacks sidewalks. Sidewalks will be required on Michael Street as part
of the subdivision approval. This will improve pedestrian access from these properties, as well
as from the apartment buildings on the north end of the street. Michael Street currently has a
right-way-width of only 41 feet. As part of the subdivision process 4.5 feet of right-of-way must
be dedicated to the west side of the street to help bring it up to the current standard of 50 feet
and allow sufficient room for sidewalks.
Michael Street also has a paved width of only 20 feet, which does not meet the current
standards. Because of the narrow paved width, no on street parking will be allowed on Michael
Street, making it even more important that the parking situation on site be managed.
Neighborhood parkland or fees in lieu of: Based on the City's neighborhood open space
formula, 2417 square feet of public open space will be required or a fee paid in lieu. The Parks
and Recreation Commission will review this application and make a recommendation regarding
the dedication of open space or fees in lieu of. It is unlikely that the Parks and Recreation
Commission will be interested in the dedication of open space on the subject properties. If it is
determined that fees should be paid in lieu of dedication, the fee can be used for acquisition of
new park land or improvements to existing parks within the Brookland/Roosevelt (SW3) open
space district, including Tower Court Park, Brookland Park, and public open space at Roosevelt
School. The fee will be equal to the fair market value of the land that otherwise would have
been required for dedication. The fee must be paid in full by the developer prior to the issuance
of the first building permit for any lot within the development.
Storm water management: Storm water management must be addressed, but no detention is
required. City Engineering Staff will work with the applicant to ensure an appropriate solution to
storm water management of the proposed redevelopment prior to final approval.
SUMMARY:
Staff sees merit in the proposed rezoning and redevelopment of the subject properties, but given
PCDlStaff Reportslrez08-00005 michael & benton st.doc
5
that this is infill development in a sensitive neighborhood Staff would like to see a detailed plan
demonstrating how the redevelopment would fit into the context of the neighborhood before
recommending approval. The Commission should give an indication on whether or not the
rezoning of these properties would be recommended and what conditions, if any, would be
appropriate to help achieve the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant would then
provide the Commission with a plan and building designs that would be compatible with the
neighborhood.
Based on the current concept plan, Staff is concerned about several aspects of the proposed
rezoning and redevelopment. The applicant should address these concerns before Staff would
recommend approval of the rezoning. The applicant may have to reduce the number of units in
order to satisfy these issues successfully. Staff's concerns include:
. Vehicular access and parking. The slope and widths of the driveways shown currently are
difficult to navigate.
. Open space. Most homes in the neighborhood are small with relatively large yards. These
structures have very little usable open space.
. Steep slopes. The slopes of the site present a challenge to development. It has not been
shown how vehicles or pedestrians will enter the buildings with the change in grade.
. Scale of buildings. The 6-unit structure is much larger than any other single-family houses in
the neighborhood. The building should be designed in such a way as to fit into the
neighborhood context in a more satisfactory manner.
· Landscaping. One way the redevelopment could fit into the neighborhood context is through
landscaping. An appropriate landscape plan should be submitted.
· With the additional ROW required for Michael Street, the lot sizes may be smaller than the
required minimum lot size of 3,000 square feet. Lot sizes will need to be adjusted.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REZ08-00005 and SUB08-00005 be deferred to allow development of a
concept plan, which demonstrates a design that is compatible with the Miller-Orchard
Neighborhood, this may require the reduction in the proposed number of townhouse units.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Preliminary Plat
3. Correspondence
Approved by: ~~
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
PCDlStaff ReportslrezOB-00005 michael & benton st.doc
~
tj
~
~
~
~
tj
,~:IE,~I~.' ..
~_81~ ~
~ LI
I
1~ j\! II
t.J~~'m
co
iCl)
a:
\
~
~
\'~
{I
-
~(j ~;
.........=- \s;
~ O'Vc)
...~ ~~\
I~ -~
~ 11)-
~ ~~~.
---:'
IT
\
""~'-O::::
o
w
o
1 J I I I
is OtJVHJc LO
0
-- 0 0
I 0
I .~.,.,.>, 0
I
~ CO
I.,........... 0
,.' ".,.~ CO
I.>" ::>
........>>> "">'>" (f)
f--,.,,,..... --
LO
.,....", U) 0
U)"."'. 0
U) 0
""',.,.. S I'~"'" 0
I
<..:) !,~"'" CO
::> 0
""", 0.""..,
0 N
"""'>> I"'>~ UJ
... a:
I......
I '-
~
\, \
\ I It
~Ll--(~
1 \ ~jiIIll{)Re0~
--1\
-OJ \
I 1 I
01
I
J OJ I
,>
If'
,.m :
i... ..",
'"
1"
I I"
I
I I I~'>'
/........
-/ ~[C
I! I ~
, 1-. ~I=J\""I
~ TI'dI-nll/lJ \ I ."., ..
Y-,~!i=\ III \ \ I ~)~
-~- I ,m I
a: I -----1
]^ V tJ]lll~
L
]^V
,...
c.
---+---.,
-----
Qj-----
~ a
Qj a
cn--c::
a (j
all)
Q:
.....c.
......
".
"........ ~
/ ~
r'-------vrmrVJ --
I lJIIj~
:Eo
CCN
en
+oJ
Q.)
Q.)
li....
+oJ
(f)
Q.)
(\S
..c
u
~
l:J
C
(\S
C
o
+oJ
C
Q.)
co
~
o
li....
Q.)
C
li....
o
U
. .
Z
o
~
~
u
o
~
~
~
~
en
HFC HART - FREDERICK CONSULTANTS P.C.
510 East state Street
P.O. Box 560
~. IOWA 52340-0560
Phone (319) 545-7215
I
I
,
,
I
I
-+..--
I I
t - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - =. -. -. -. -. -. -. -.-. -. -S"J,'4-:'-' -. -. -. -. -.-1
---__..1 6' DR! E EASEMENT
: ~ - -~ 71'-
, ! 727 @
: f'f'-98.25
~ ~I 7
....J 0'
01 ~
:s; ,I 8 r;:"O
_ ~'\,;
----&-~ .,<0<)" ,'1'1.-
.::J I r;;,J
C/) I c; -,; <<G'
~ f2 : 0~ ~,
I- Uj I r{(3 (')<0'
:J ~ I v '<;
2 '" I PROPOSED l' TO 5'
o - I KEYSTONE BLOCK "'ALL
i ~ ~ - - - - - - V.3~Y_ f!..E~G~~~:. ~~~D
-&fi-~ !
-.1 . I I
o C\J I I
O. I ,
:J:: OJ , I
OQ I I
C/), I
, ,
I I
I ,
I I
1 5 I
I I
I ,
I ,
I I
I ,
I I
I I
I I
I I
I ,
----_1. I
---------L------__T
452 450
I f'f'=89 ff=88
o @
o
ci
~
725
f'f'=98,25
~
I
I
,-
~
(]'.
-M-----
'"
__Z~~__
f'f' 95.25
721
f'f'=95.25
r---
I
I
I
I
,
I
I <::
h.L I 0
rl~ 84.58 I 0
fl 73.68 I ~ _
"" I >'<!-
16 '-aC'\J
,Q: I !!50
I I C/) Q
I ~ I C/) .
Iw:.-' I ~ '<!-
.- I:::J ai
I !;9 Q
,w I (:)
I~ I
, I
Id I
I <[ I
I~ i
'Mh I
rIM=75.*
fl=64.16j
, I
I L_____
,
I Mh
rIM=72.77
fl=62.87
15
3
"
I-
o
....J
4
,84
5
@
Mh
____----"'I"~- - __
fl 65,60 VI, BENTON STREET (66' ROVl>
Mh 9,1
rIM=73,34
fl-57.96
N
LEGEND
w
E
6. GOVERNlolENT CORNER
@ SET 5/8" mON ROD
. FOUND mON ROD (#17344)
T FOUND ROW RAIL
o FND PIPE AS NOTED
<R) RECORDED DlllEN8IONS
<M) IlEASURED DlllEN8IONS
- PROPERTY/BOUNDARY LINES
- - SETBACJI: LINES
- - - - RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES
- -. - SECTION LINES
..-.-.-.-.. EASElIENT LINES
------- LOT LINES PLATTED OR BY DEED
s
~o
Scalel 1. = 50'
I hereby cerllf1 that lhls Iond SII1'V01lDi documont .... p"'pare
~or'e ~~~d :.J.t:r~~ uf.11~e~ JyuJ~nc':;,.~'tr my
Prof~onsl land Surveyor under the laft of the state of Jon.
I. Scott Ritter. !.L.S. Dete
Iowa IJcense Number: 16546
"y license renenJ. date 1& December 31. 2008.
pag.. oovered by lhls seaI: TIDS SHEET ONLY
HFC HART - FREDERICK CONSULTANTS P.C.
510 East State Street
P.O. Box 560
TIFFIN, IOWA 52340-0560
Phone (319) 545-7215
r---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 6
I I/)
I __
I :::>-'<1-
'-a0J
I m
I :::; 0
I C/) Q
! ,C/) ':1__
I :z
I ::J cD
I f9 Q
I ()
,
I
I
I-.J I
W I
i~ i
'Mh I
rIM=75,*
fl=64.1~
I
L_____
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
1 -'-'_'_
~----------------------
---__--1
I
,
I
I
,
b :zl
-' 0 I
1/)' ~
$ I 8 90
a : ~,
----~-i -;::;<(;<::)' ,'\<")...
C/) I , 0 q'0'
~!Q : 0~0 b<'
I-- L.U I 00 ()<(;.
g:z I "
2 '" I PROPOSED l' TO 5'
~ - I KEYSTONE BLOCK ~ALL
~ '<I- L---___"0!3.Y_ HEIGHT AS NEEDED
~ . I -r-----__
-8-~--? ~.
--J ' I I
o 0J I ,
O. I I
::r:ClJ I I
() Q I I
C/) I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 5 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
-----L---------L________T
TOT AL AREA = 38273 sr,
PROPOSED GREENSPACE = 21437 sr,
PERCENT GREENSPACE = 56%
I
I
I
I
I
I
--+---
I
~
h'
rl~b 84,58
fld 73,68
i~
10::
I~
i~
,W
I~
,
r-..
I--
o
...J
4
l
Mh
-___--Clt!lill.8B..-_ _ __
fl-65,60 'vi, BENTON STREET (66' RO'vl)
Mh 9,1
rIM=73.34
fl 57,96
~
~
N
LEGEND
~
g
I
\'
~
i
g
(;;
E
6 GOVERNYENT CORNER
@ SET 6/8" mON ROD
. FOUND mON ROD (H 17344)
T FOUND R01\' 1lAlL
o FND PIPE AS NOTED
(R) RECORDED DI1lENSlONS
(M) I&EASURED DIIlENSlONS
- PROPERTY/BOUNDARY LINES
- - SETBACK LINES
- - - - RlGHT-OF-1\'AY LlNES
- - . - SECTION LINES
..--.-.-,. EASElIENT LlNES
------ LOT LlNES PLATTED OR BY DEED
w
s
~
!
~o
Sca.Lel 1" = SQ'
I. Seott Ritter, L.l.S.
Ion License Number: 16546
My license renewal date is December 31. 2008.
Pege, covered by tJlill sssl: TIIIll SHErn' ONLY
~ I hereby cert.Uy 4t t.h.is land surveying document 'WU prepm'ed
jj end the related S1l1"te)' work .... pel10rmed by me or under my
~ ~i.t,J~;;Jn~~~;,~ :~:~el1';. eoNi;. ~~l 10....
Ii
11
:7
~
Date
15
5
Mh
rIM=72,77
fl-62,87
HFC HART - FREDERICK CONSULTANTS P.C.
510 East State Street
P.O. Box 560
TDnnN. IOWA 52340-0560
Phone (319) 545-7215
:::
f-
CJ
...J
------
r---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I t!-
I '>'<;f-
,-- C\J
I &.
I ;::) 0
I C/) Q
I ,C/) '<J-'
I :z:
I ::J a:i
I !!! Q
I 0
I
I
I
/ I...J I
W I
/"/'1 I
/ 8 I
L I
'Mh I
rIM=75.0~
fl=64.1~
J L
I Mh
rIM=72.n
I fl=62.B7
15
"-
f-
CJ
...J
,
/ Irj B4.5B
fL 73.6B
-i~
l~
/I~
,":t
:/8
" i~
/i'
:z:
2
5
Mh ~
____----CI[!l
fl 65.60
- --
'vi. BENTON STREET (66' RO'vl)
Mh 9.1
rIM=73.34
fl-57.96
€
:i
3:
ill
ri
"l
:t
'"
~
?i
~
N
LEGEND
w
E
~ GOVl!llNllENT CORNER
@l SET 5/B" IRON ROD
. FOUND IRON ROD (117344)
T FOUND ROY IWL
o FND PIPE AS NOTED
(R) RECORDED DIllENSIONS
(M) IIl!ASURED DIllENSIONS
- PROPERTY/BOUNDARY LINES
- - SIlTIlACK LINBS
- - - - RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES
- - . - SECTION LINBS
..-.-.-.-.. IWlEllENT LINES
------- LOT LINES PUTTED OR BY DEED
~
~
i
g
~
~
~
"
11
s
~o
Sco.lel t" = 50'
~ I bereb)' tba d BUmlylng document .... prepered
: and the reIeled BUmly work .... performed ~ me or under my
~ 1i::,~Jo":i~~=;' :~:"~.I =. eOI : ~,:e~1 Iowa.
~
I :~oo~~.:~~: 16548 Date
o My ll.cense renewal date is December 31. 2006.
:i! Pages .overed by tbls 1OaI: THIS SHEET ONLY
SITE PLAN
LOTS I, 2, 3, 6 So 7 -
GIBLINS' SUBDIVISIDN-NE 1/4
SECTION 16-79-6
IDIJA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IDIJA
DATE: 07 06 ORN. JEB APP. JSR
FlD.BK. ROBOT PROJ.NO. 087038.01
Il>>\ NOIlYo\7U
YMOI ''ul:) YMOI
lDlII.S lMClI'I RL
_ UJIIISlMClI'I
~
.
~l
~
...
~I
',.
I (
~
.
~l
F
~
l!I
III
I
--..... "'1IIIIM<<)1'W
I
M3I/\ NDI1YArn
YMOl 'JJJ:l YllOl
.I3JIIIS "BYIOII tu
S3IIOHIIIQ1 .I3JIIIS "BYIOII
Ij'
~
ID
.
~
"
I -.J
I. I! I I. e ~
,.~ ;! ~~ ~ y
::;. I '-
, I- .
Z \...
. B ~
. . I~
I
/'
C -.,.I
Over the past 3 years, I have been dealing with the deteriorating conditions of the
buildings located in 719 and 723 Michael Street, and 452 and 446 Benton Street. There
are leaks from the foundation and my efforts to fix these repairs have resulted in such a
huge amount of money without any concrete resolution. Raising the rent is not an option
as we are endeavoring to make these houses affordable to low income families.
To address these issues, we are proposing that 719 and 723 Michael properties and 442,
446 and 452 Benton St properties be rezoned to RS 12. This rezoning will allow for the
preservation of the existing number of single family dwellings on those lots (total of 5)
and also allow for the possibility of increasing the number of low income housing
available and at the same time making the financing necessary for the project obtainable.
We are proposing to build a 6 unit multi-family building, townhouses with garages in the
back on 719 and 723 Michael Street lots, and a duplex and a triplex on 442,446, and 452
lots, also with garages in the back and additional parking spaces. We plan to have an
alley in the back of the buildings eliminating the issue of traffic on Michael Street. I
would put in sidewalks on Michael Street.
Each unit will have its own lot, allowing for low income families to be able to purchase
these units in the future.
I currently work with many low income families who need affordable places to live, and
in some cases have helped them to go from renting to actually owning. And with this
project, I look forward to doing the same in greater capacity.
I believe that this rezoning will produce the desired result that is consistent with the
comprehensive plan; preservation of existing single family dwellings and opportunity for
more affordable low income units.
I would work with the planning department to select a building plan that would give the
neighborhood the best look, and still maintain a uniform look.
I look forward to a favorable decision from you.
Thanks for all you do to help make Iowa City a desirable place to live.
Sincerely,
Ike Akabogu
To: The Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Mary Knudson, Miller-Orchard resident
Date: July 10, 2008
Re: Ike Akabogu's proposal to change zoning on
Benton/Michael streets.
Dear Planning and Zoning Commission,
I am writing to express my objections over Ike Akabogu's
proposal to increase the zoning of his property on Benton
and Michael Streets. What follows is a similar letter sent
to Mr. Akabogu by me in May. It reflects the consensus of
a neighborhood meeting we had with Mr. Akabogu on May 13.
I feel our neighborhood is a wonderful place to live, with
a diverse mix of families, students, and older adults (we
embrace the residents from the Oaknoll Retirement
Community) and our close proximity to Roosevelt Elementary
School, UIHC, the Law College, Kinnick Stadium, the UI
Fieldhouse, the downtown area, and our new neighborhood
park. However, it is also a fragile neighborhood, where
development decisions can easily either enhance or harm our
need for feeling safe and secure in our homes,
oftentimes made challenging by the existence of a busy
street that divides our neighbors. The consensus at our
meeting was that Ike's plan to increase zoning from RS8 to
RS12 would bring negative consequences. A couple of
consequences would be:
1. A concern about the already high density in the
neighborhood, which has more than its fair share of
apartment buildings. This proposal would increase the
density in this area. Add to this the realistic fear that
other landlords/developers would request an increase in the
zoning of their property in the neighborhood and this would
definitely be detrimental to our neighborhood. The result,
at the very least and from this zoning change alone, would
be higher traffic and a more transient population. There
is a school in the neighborhood as well as many children
and elderly people. Higher density would create an
atmosphere that would make this area less suitable for them
to live due to more traffic and noise. This impact only
greatens as more properties are increased in density.
A great deal of work by city staff and residents has gone
into planning for the different districts within Iowa
City. The Southwest District Plan specifically addresses
"preserving and stabilizing close-in, diverse
neighborhoods". In view of this, I do not see that
increasing the density to allow more dense housing
development will "preserve and stabilize" our
neighborhood.
2. The rent of these new units would easily be between
$1000 and $1400 a unit. I fear for that amount of money,
the type of person who can afford it and be willing to live
in this neighborhood for that amount of money is a student.
This will likely increase the number of vehicles per unit,
traffic and potential for loud parties. Again, this
attribute would not help "preserve and stabilize" our
neighborhood.
For these reasons along with the goals of the Southwest
District Plan, I cannot support Mr. Akabogu's proposal.
Thank you for your consideration.
Regards,
Mary Knudson
725 West Benton St.4
Iowa City, Iowa 52246
To: The Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Mary Knudson, Miller-Orchard resident
Date: July 10, 2008
Re: Additional remarks to my comments on Ike Akabogu's
proposal to change zoning on Benton/Michael streets.
Dear Planning and Zoning Commission,
I have a couple of additional reasons to why I object to
Mr. Akabogu's proposal (my first couple of objections were
sent in an earlier e-mail sent today) .
1. Mr. Akabogu's proposal does not provide enough green
space. At our neighborhood meeting on May 13, he
presented a plan of 11 units -- each that is 1400 square
feet and has 4 parking spots - on these five lots on Benton
and Michael Streets. The result will be little green space
for recreational space and landscaping. There will be no
room for kids to play in a yard.
2. Mr. Akabogu's design is not sensitive to the overall
design of the neighborhood, which is one of single
(separate) residential houses. Because he wants to build on
one of the neighborhood's major roads, this design will
affect the design of the neighborhood. The result would
be a neighborhood with a feel of having no cohension-
certainly not an attribute we want to a neighborhood that
is trying to become more stable.
Again, I do not support Mr. Akabogu's proposal and hope
that the Planning and Zoning Commission will vote against
it.
Regards,
Mary Knudson
May 22, 2008
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City IA 52240
Dear Members of the Commission:
After attending a Miller-Orchard neighborhood meeting on May 13, 2008, I am writing to
urge you to deny the rezoning request of Ike Akabogu concerning the properties at 452,
446, and 442 West Benton and 719 and 723 Michael Streets from RS-8 to RS-12.
Housing in the Miller-Orchard neighborhood area appears to primarily consist of large
rental complexes, student rentals, and the disproportionate concentration of subsidized
housing rentals on Douglass Street and Douglass Court. Sprinkled sparingly among these
are some remaining privately owned and occupied homes.
One of the explicitly stated goals of the Comprehensive Plan for the Southwest District _
Roosevelt Subarea is to "encourage rehabilitation of the existing housing stock, particularly
in the Miller-Orchard Neighborhood." Changing the zoning of the properties in question to
a higher density and allowing the building of 11 new townhouses as per Mr. Akabogu's
proposal is not in keeping with this goal.
Furthermore, the properties in question are actually adjacent to the Old Gold Apartments
and other apartment complexes at the end of Michael Street. Additionally, the Lodge,
Carriage Hill, Seville, Benton Apartments and Benton Manor, Riverside Drive and Hwy 1
surround the island of single-family homes located in the Miller-Orchard neighborhood.
Further to the north, plans are underway for a large development near Olive/Leamer/
Marietta. Even now, few families are attracted to the neighborhood due to the large
number of complexes, student rentals, and thoroughfares already in the area. Allowing a
further increase in density will do nothing to reverse this trend or provide incentive for
those of us in the privately owned and occupied homes to stay.
Another concern is the effect that a change in the zoning for these properties would have on
requests by other developers who may be looking to rezone in order to increase the density
to develop their rental properties in the area. This particularly applies to the properties on
Hudson / Miller Streets and the 9-acre parcel owned by the Ruppert family located south of
Benton. If you allow a change in zoning which is not in keeping with the Comprehensive
Plan for one developer, can you then deny request for changes in zoning put forth by other
developers?
Mr. Akabogu used, as his primary selling point during the meeting, the noble goal of
renting to families and ultimately enabling them to purchase the units, particularly those
who have made misguided financial decisions in the past. All attending the meeting were
in agreement that, given what little he was willing to reveal about the units he was
proposing, the properties would not be affordable to either rent or buy by the people he
claimed he was attempting to "help" with his development. The square footage of the
proposed 3 bedroom units in a new construction would be cost prohibitive to these renters!
buyers. A reasonable concern is that students would then be the primary renters of the
proposed units, further deteriorating the family-oriented housing that is already being lost
in the Miller-Orchard neighborhood.
In an effort to preserve the existing, single-family neighborhood housing in the Miller-
Orchard neighborhood, I would highly support a plan by Mr. Akabogu to enhance his
properties, which are currently in disrepair and in need of improvements (a fact of which he
was fully aware when he purchased them), but to do so as zoned and to then proceed with
his goal of renting or selling to families with the idea of assisting them in establishing
permanent roots in the area. I encourage the Planning and Zoning Commission to do the
same aIld deny the request for rezoning.
Thank you for your time. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
cJ~
Paula Swygard
426 Douglass St.
Iowa City IA 52246
338-1908 (H)
356-1194 (W)
Email: paula-swygard@uiowa.edu
725 West Benton St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52246
May 21,2008
Mr. Ike Akabogu
1555 Otter Lane
North Liberty, Iowa 52317
Dear Mr. Akabogu,
Thank you for meeting with our neighborhood on May 13. It was an opportunity for
us to hear your_plans for the five properties on Benton and Michael Streets and for
you to listen to the concerns of the neighborhood. As the neighborhood
representative, I wanted to inform you of the results of our discussion after you
left Roosevelt School that evening.
We feel our neighborhood is a wonderful place to live, with a diverse mix of families,
students, and older adults (we embrace the residents from the Oaknoll Retirement
Community) and our close proximity to Roosevelt Elementary School, UIHC, the Law
College, Kinnick Stadium, the UI Fieldhouse, the downtown area, and our new
neighborhood park. However, it is also a fragile neighborhood, where development
decisions can easily either enhance or harm our need for feeling safe and secure in
our homes, oftentimes made challenging by the existence of a busy street that
divides our neighbors. The consensus at our meeting was that your plan to increase
zoning from RS8 to RS12 would bring negative consequences. They are:
1. As we indicated during your presentation, we are concerned about the already high
density in our neighborhood, which has more than its fair share of apartment
buildings. Your proposal would increase the density in this area. Add to this the
realistic fear that other landlords/developers would request an increase in the zoning
of their property in the neighborhood and this would definitely be detrimental to our
neighborhood. The result, at the very least and from your zoning change alone,
would be higher traffic and a more transient population. There is a school in the
neighborhood as well as many children and elderly people. Higher density would
create an atmosphere that would make this area less suitable for them to live due to
more traffic and noise. This impact only greatens as more properties are increased
in density.
A great deal of work by city staff and residents has gone into planning for the
different districts within Iowa City. The Southwest District Plan specifically addresses
"preserving and stabilizing close-in, diverse neighborhoods". In view of this, we do
not see that increasing the density to allow more dense housing development will
"preserve and stabilize" our neighborhood.
2. The price you quoted for the units you indicated would be rented and then offered
for sale would be too expensive for the families you suggest you want to help get
started in home ownership. The rent of these new units would easily be between
$1000 and $1400 a unit. Furthermore, a person or persons seeking a starter home
would not choose to rent here. For that amount of money, they would choose a
prettier neighborhood - definitely one with more green space and less traffic. We
perceive that, in order to receive sufficient income to make payments on your loan,
you would need to succumb to renting to students who would be sharing the cost of
the units which will likely increase the number of vehicles per unit, traffic and the
potential for loud parties.
3. You did not address our concern for the lack of adequate green space for
children. You propose to put 11 units - each that is 1400 square feet and has 4
parking spots - on these five lots. The result will be little green space for
recreational space and landscaping. There will be no room for kids to play in a yard.
To have the kids play on the sidewalk, which you mentioned you would add to
Michael, is not a good option for a play space for kids. The traffic count on Benton is
simply too high to let your kids use that area as a space.
For the reasons listed, the Miller-Orchard Neighborhood cannot accept the proposal
you presented to us. However, we would welcome a continuing dialogue with you to
explore innovative, neighborhood friendly ways of improving our neighborhood. If you
would like to work with us in that spirit, we would welcome your participation in this
ongoing discussion.
Thank you.
Regards,
Mary Knudson
Cc: Bob Miklo, Marcia Klingaman, Mark Cannon, Ruth Baker
J(Jf~.JJ~
~ ez ~-a)-tL-
C7 / st9r!Jf63Uo
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JUNE 30, 2008 - 6:00 PM - INFORMAL
CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
PRELIMINARY
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Elizabeth Koppes,
Wally Plahutnik, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS EXCUSED:
None
STAFF PRESENT:
Bob Miklo, Sarah Greenwood-Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT:
Various representatives of Wal-Mart
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 6:01 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks.
REZONING ITEMS:
REZ08-00006: Discussion of an application submitted by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., for a rezoning to amend
the conditional zoning agreement to modify the concept site plan for approximately 25.16 acres of
property in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 855, 911 & 1001 Highway 1 West. The 45-day
limitation period is July 3, 2008.
Miklo announced that a new site plan for the project had been submitted since the last meeting of the
Planning and Zoning Commission. The plan contains several changes, including most of the items on the
sheet outlining code deficiencies which was distributed at the last meeting.
A drive in the previous plan that had been intended for mixed-use car and truck traffic has been
redesigned so that it is no longer intended for truck use. A turn-around point has been established for
truck use, leaving the lane free for general traffic use. These changes resolve major concerns for mixing
car and truck traffic and mixing drives and aisles. Eastham asked if the radius was sufficient for truck turn
around. Miklo said th~t he had not yet verified that but that it could be addressed at the next meeting.
Busard added that all of the truck traffic would be coming off of Ruppert Road.
Miklo said that another concern had been a pedestrian route from Ruppert Road. Previously, the route
had been right on the curb. In the new plan it has been moved to approximately six feet off of the curb.
At one point along the existing detention basin the path goes back out to the curb for a brief distance to
accommodate the basin. Engineers have said that they will look at the possibility of redesigning that
basin; however, Staff does not feel very strongly about that as they find the new route much more
acceptable than the previous. Eastham asked if a concrete barrier or wall would be possible along that
section as an alternative to redesigning the basin. Miklo said that given that the area is 26 feet wide, he
did not feel that that would be a good solution.
In terms of the design of the building itself, Miklo said, there was an issue regarding the code requirement
that says that every 100 feet you must have at least a 3-foot variation in the wall that must be at least 20-
feet wide. The previous plan did not show this, and the current plan does not yet either, however, Miklo
said, a plan had been submitted by the architect that day that does show the 3-foot variations on the wall.
The new drawings meet the minimum of the code requirement. Additionally, some decorative awnings
and a canopy have been added. Miklo said that he could not yet verify that the new plans meet the 60%
decorative requirement as Staff does not yet have the to-scale drawings, but that he suspects the
requirement will be met by this plan. The architect had some computer problems that did not allow her to
provide the to-scale drawings at this point. Miklo said that it does appear that the Ruppert Road side of
the building and the front of the building now meet the code requirements.
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 30, 2008 - Informal
Page 2
One area in which the Commission had given pretty specific direction at the last meeting concerned
landscaping between the drive, the curb and the building itself. Miklo said that there is a desire on the
part of Wal-Mart to keep some penetration so that pedestrians can easily get to the front of the store.
One possibility that had been discussed was removing one parking spot from the end of each row of cars
and moving the parking area back to allow for more green space at the front. Wal-Mart has expressed a
desire to maintain as much parking space as possible. The suggestion was to remove roughly 20 spaces
in one area and replace them in an area off to the corner, thereby resulting in the additional 9 feet freed
up for landscaping and the pedestrian walkway. Miklo said that Wal-Mart does have some concerns
about tree grates being a trip hazard, although, he added, there are other solutions, such as: raised
planters, curbing tree wells, etc. The applicant has proposed the addition of some landscaped beds up
against the building. Miklo said that this was a judgment call for the Commission and that they needed to
ask themselves if they are satisfied with the solution. If not, Miklo said, direction would need to be
provided between now and Thursday. Freerks asked about the additional parking spaces that appear in
the plan since the insertion of the flower beds at the front of the store. Miklo said that the previous plan
had a total of 836 spaces; the current plan has 859, a total addition of 23 spaces. Greenwood-Hektoen
pointed out that small islands were added at the end of the handicap-accessible parking areas.
Miklo said the current Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA) specifies a maximum of two free-standing
signs for the development. A free-standing sign is essentially a pole sign where the pole can be 25-feet
tall, rather typical of strip developments. Miklo said that the applicant has requested a third sign for this
development which h'3d not been a part of previous discussions. Miklo pointed out that if it was not for
the CZA, the sign code would have allowed for three signs for this property. The applicant is not asking
for anything that would not have been allowed by the zoning code if the CZA were not in place.
Miklo said that the question of impervious surface had been addressed by the applicant. A graphic
overlay showing the current configuration of the store and the proposed development demonstrates a
reduction in both rooftop and overall paved area, showing that there is more green space in the proposed
plan than in the current development. Eastham asked if Miklo knew the square feet and percentages in
the reduction of impervious surface. Miklo said that the total paved area in the proposed plan was 12.28
acres; the existing is 14 acres. The proposed plan has 4.35 acres of building space, 4.56 in the existing
development. Miklo said that there is over an acre of additional green space on the site.
Miklo said that at this point the 45-day limitation was waived to July 3, 2008. Miklo said that Staff does
suggest the Commission vote on July 3rd. If there are any issues that the Commission would like to be
addressed differently, Miklo suggested they be as clear and direct as possible tonight so as to give the
applicant direction.
Weitzel asked if Westport Carwash was included in the revised CZA, and Miklo indicated that it was not.
Eastham asked about bus service, and Miklo indicated the area in which the bus was intended to stop.
Miklo said that the plan appears to meet the minimum code requirements. The only remaining area which
the Commission needs to determine is if it is satisfied by the landscaping plan.
Eastham and Miklo aiscussed the landscaping on the perimeter of the site and the fact that some of it
may need to change due to property boundaries and utility services.
Eastham asked a question about the code for large scale parking lots and whether the Wal-Mart plan
could be said to be in compliance with the language of the code. Miklo said that in the areas where the
parking lot exceeds 200 feet, the portion of the code applies that talks about the use of landscaping
islands to break up the parking area. Eastham noted that that section of the code refers to the breaks
being demarked by drives rather than aisles. Miklo checked the code and did not see a problem, and
believes the intent of the code and its illustrations are consistent with Staff's reading. Eastham
recommended clarification going forward on what the code requirements intend.
Eastham asked what the dimensions of the medians were; stating that making the parking area
aesthetically pleasing was in large part affected by the size of those medians. Miklo said that to his eye
they appeared to be ten feet. Eastham asked if it was possible to specify at the concept plan stage what
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 30, 2008 - Informal
Page 3
the median widths are, in order to ensure the widths remain that way at the time of the site plan. Miklo
said that because this was a CZA, something specific like that could be written into it.
Eastham asked about the use of ground cover. The current parking lot has trees surrounded by rock.
Eastham expressed his interest in the CZA being very clear that the cover for medians, islands and end-
caps be green and vegetative. Koppes asked if he would find bark mulch acceptable, and Eastham
replied that he would not. Eastham asked Staff to comment on the options the City has to make sure the
owners maintain green cover. Koppes said that she did not see a problem with mulch. Freerks said that
she believed the concern was to get as much green as possible as viewed from the road.
Freerks stated her disappointment that the clear direction that the Commission had given the applicant at
the last formal meeting had not been implemented. She said that making changes to the building to allow
for a wide swath of green was important to her. Weitzel said that one of the things advised in the Staff
memo was for Commissioners to decide whether the new planters adequately addressed their
landscaping concerns. Freerks said that, for her, they did not at all meet what the Commission had
specified. Weitzel said that he had seen other Wal-Marts with more landscaping in front of them and that
he thinks this is a small attempt to do that. Further, Weitzel said, the Commission had suggested
removing some parking spaces to provide additional green space, and instead, more parking spaces
have been added. Busard expressed his support for living vegetation in the islands. Freerks said that
this spoke to her concerns for the front of the building.
A representative of the applicant asked to help to clarify some of the concerns expressed by the
Commissioners, and was informed that an informal meeting is not a place where the Commission can
accept public comment, as it could be viewed as ex parte communication.
Eastham said that he did not feel the front of the store was adequate at this stage, and that there is not an
adequate limit to the appearance of the parking expanse from the street.
Koppes expressed concern that some of the expectations may be stemming from the fact that Wal-Mart
was the applicant. T:'e other Commissioners disagreed that this played a role. Weitzel stated that with
the CZA, the Commission is trying to make a model "Big Box" development. Koppes contended that the
requirements being discussed are above and beyond what the code says. Plahutnik said that so far the
applicant had met on:; the minimum levels of compliance. Koppes disagreed. Freerks advised that
differing opinions were fine, and that ultimately the majority would prevail. Greenwood-Hektoen stated
that it is important to remember that it is not about "who" but "what". Eastham said that his concern was
about the appearance of the parking lot and that he did not care who owned the store. Freerks said that
she does know for a fact that there are Wal-Marts done to the landscaping standards they are requesting.
Eastham said that if the applicant has problems with including a landscaping area in the front of the store
or on one side or the other of the drive, then he would like to have the applicant show two alternatives at
the formal meeting.
Miklo said that from Staff's perspective, dragging this out anymore is not a good idea. Miklo allowed that
there could be legitimate reasons why the applicant would not want a solid strip of landscaping at the
front of the building between the parking lot and the store. Miklo said that from his perspective there is
probably a happy medium between putting the tree-lined entryway, and having nothing. Miklo said it
could be a combination of planters or tree wells.
The same applicant's representative at this point attempted to clarify the point concerning the front of the
store, this time addressing Miklo rather than the Commission. Miklo explained that it would be
inappropriate for the Commission to engage in dialogue with the applicant at an informal meeting
because the general public was not present and also able to participate.
Eastham asked Miklo if he then believed that there were workable alternatives to the kind of plan he and
Freerks were looking for. Miklo said that in his view, the only way to put in more landscape area and still
provide adequate room for pedestrians is to remove the front row of parking to pick up an additional nine
feet. Weitzel said this would also help to keep traffic slow.
Plahutnik commented that this would not be a project that he would proudly show his wife as one the
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 30,2008 - Informal
Page 4
Commission had worked on and thereby contributed to the enhancement of Iowa City. Plahutnik said that
this was the Commission's one chance at planning, not just zoning, and that the Commission was failing.
Eastham asked if the parking lot was designed to have aisles down the smallest dimension. Miklo said
that he believed the drive down the middle is not present due to the amount of parking it would take up.
Eastham said he was asking about the orientation of the aisles and wondering if having the medians
perpendicular to the highway would improve the screening and the look from the highway.
Plahutnik said that it sounds as though the Commission will be voting on whether to approve the plan or
not. Miklo said it is possible the applicant will take suggestions from tonight's meeting and make
changes, or they could present what they have and ultimately it will be the Council that decides.
Eastham asked if the dimensions for the median were available. Miklo replied that the dimensions could
be put in the CZA.
Miklo said that what he is hearing is that the majority of Commissioners want the specifics of the
landscaping areas put into the CZA so that we do not get less than what is shown; Commissioners also
want specifics in terms of the treatment of the landscaping areas so that they are living plants, not simply
mulch or rock; several Commissioners wish to see more landscaping in the front and the applicant can
choose to go with the solution that has been offered or not; the final point to be decided is whether to
allow for an additional free-standing sign, something that would have been allowed if the CZA had not
been in place.
Eastham asked if the City could enforce the maintenance of the green space. Miklo said that if you are
once required to do something by the code or a CZA than you continue to be required in the future.
In regards to the third sign, Plahutnik said that if you are going to let someone build a building, it makes
sense to then let people know there is a business there. Freerks noted that there are no residential areas
nearby.
Weitzel said his big issue was to see the front of the store improved. Because of the CZA in place,
Weitzel said, the Commission can help to direct this project in the direction of being a model store for the
city.
Eastham asked if there were any other parking lots of this size governed by the code. Miklo said that the
only other one was Menard's.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m.
Ol I I I
..... I XXXXX I , X
(0 , , ,
, I ,
It) W : w , ,
xxx -- , , x
(0 0 I 0 , ,
I , ,
I: It) , , :
.2 x , XXXX , x
..... , , ,
I/) in , , ,
.!!!
E
E , W I I
..... X , xxx 0 , I X
0 in , I ,
()"O e" , , ,
... Z
alO
I: CJ i= ,... : w ,
.- Gl ,
go:: w ..... x , xxxxxo ,
w ~ I ,
I
NGlClO :::t
otlCJg
I:N ...l ,
<C ,
al<O M X , xxxxxx ,
I:"C :::t ~ , ,
.- I: I ,
I: Gl 0::
I::t: 0
~<C u. 0 , W I
0. N X , xxxxx 0 I
I ,
>- M , ,
:!::
()
<0 ,... W , W ,
, xxxxx 0 I
~ :!: 0 , :
0 ..... ,
~ I W ,
X , XXXX x ,
, 0 ,
..... , I
(/)
EQ)O..........C'?NOCXl.....C'?
'-~~~~~~o,....""
W .0.. i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i
I-LijOOOOOOOOO
.:.:: I:
E .-
1/)"0<01/)1/)1:0 -
.:.::.....l:~g'SI:..l:~
0<0... 1:...
o I/) I/) Gl ..l: <0 .- .-
OJ ...:::s<oeo~..l:EGl
E mmWu.~o.rnrn3:
C1l m-iu<cw3:c"':"':
z
~:XXXXX:
co ' ,
I
:X
I
e"
Z
i=
w
w
:::t
...l
<C
:::t
0::
o
u.
Z
!:::!~l
COOl
I 1
XXXX: : X
, I
NW'
.....--,
it; 0 I
, ,
XXXX: : X
I ,
"'It I
.....X'
~ I
XXXXXX:
I
N W : W W :
NO: xxxoox I
,... X 1 XXX!:!:!!:!:!!:!:! :
N: 000 :
(/)
EQ)O..........C'?NOCXl.....C'?
"-,...."'"""".,-~.,-,....o"",....
'- ';:; ......... ......... -.... -.... ........ -- -- -.. .........
Q)~l!')l!')l!')l!')l!')l!')l!')l!')l!')
I-Lijooooooooo
E .:.:: I:
1/)"0<01/)1/)1:0 -
.:.::.....l:~~'SI:..l:Gl
g:XUiC1lc...l:lij:!::~
Q)E...:::s<oeO~..l:Eg
mmWu.~o.rnrn>
~a:i-iu<cw3:c"':"':
"'0
Q)
(/)
::l
(J
X
W
'+:>
__I:
c: c: Q)
Q) Q) (/)
(/)(/)~
~~<(
CL<(II
>. II II W
Q) --
~xOO
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 3, 2008 - 7:30 PM - FORMAL
CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
PRELIMINARY
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Elizabeth Koppes, Wally Plahutnik, Tim
Weitzel,
MEMBERS EXCUSED:
Josh Busard
STAFF PRESENT:
Bob Miklo, Sarah Greenwood-Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT:
Mary Gravitt, Jacki Cook-Haxby, Scott Sanders, Jeremy Carter, Ryan
Horn, Wally Taylor, Tom Carsner, Gary Sanders
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
Recommend approval by a vote of 4-1 item REZ08-00006, an application submitted by Wal-Mart Stores,
Inc., for a rezoning to amend the conditional zoning agreement to modify the concept site plan for
approximately 25.16 acres of property in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 855, 911 & 1001
Highway 1 West, conditional upon:
1. The most recent concept plan and elevations submitted and presented to the Commission on
7/3/2008 are being included with the Conditional Zoning Agreement.
2. The three perpendicular parking lot medians are noted on the plan as being of nine-to-ten
feet.
3. The location of a bus shelter shall be included on the plan.
4. A third free-standing sign may be located on Ruppert Road, with the other two locations
remaining as shown on the Concept Plan.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:37 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
REZONING ITEMS:
REZ08-00006: Discussion of an application submitted by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., for a rezoning to amend
the conditional zonin~ agreement to modify the concept site plan for approximately 25.16 acres of
property in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 855, 911 & 1001 Highway 1 West. The 45-day
limitation period is July 3, 2008.
Miklo stated that this afternoon a revised plan had been received for this property. The plan was revised
as was discussed at the last formal meeting and at the informal meeting on Monday (6/30/2008). One
parking space was removed from each row allowing everything to shift nine feet to the north. This allowed
nine additional feet to be added to the pedestrian walkway in the front of the building, and the addition of
new and larger landscaping areas beyond what was presented in the previous plan. This was initially
suggested by Staff, and was indicated by a majority of the Commission that this was something they too
wished to see.
Some of the other minor landscaping deficiencies have also been corrected. There is now S-2 screening,
low shrubbery screening two-to-four feet in height, around the perimeter of the parking lot. That issue has
been resolved. There is a possible issue along the property line with the auto dealership in that there is a
ten-foot easement. Some of the trees and shrubs planned for that area may need to be moved as the City
Engineer does not want to see large plantings in an easement. Miklo said that code would still need to be
met if this was done. He said there might be a slight change between what is called for in this concept
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3, 2008 - Formal
Page 2
plan and what is implemented at the site plan, at least in the location of trees, if not in the number of trees
near the easement.
Another question that came up in the Monday informal meeting was whether the standard in the zoning
code requiring that no section in a parking lot could be more than 200 feet applied to certain portions of
this parking lot. Miklo said that portions of the parking lot are broken down into smaller areas by either
medians or pedestrian ways. Across the parking lot, from east to west, it clearly meets the requirement.
The question was whether that break had to be a drive or if it could be a median. Miklo said that Staff's
interpretation of the code, based on illustrations of the code, was that it could be either a median or a
drive. Staff's interpretation, therefore, was that that aspect of the site plan meets code requirements.
Then there was the question of whether the 200 feet was being exceeded in length, the north to south
dimension of the parking lot. Miklo said that the ordinance does provide for some flexibility on this issue,
and then read directly from the code, "Some parking areas may not easily accommodate the techniques
described above, such as long narrow parking lots, so other options may be approved by the Director of
Planning, such as the use of landscape islands to interrupt parking aisles." That, Miklo said, is what Staff
feels is being done in this plan by the tree islands, which are lined up so that there is no area greater than
200 feet without a break in the space. Miklo pointed out that the language in the code says "such as long
narrow parking lots," not "only long narrow parking lots," and it is this flexibility in the language from which
Staff draws its opinion.
Miklo reminded the Commission that the plan before them was a concept plan and that the goal is to
achieve this plan when the site plan is approved administratively at a later date. The Conditional Zoning
Agreement (CZA) will contain this plan. The plan will generally be adhered to, with minor adjustments in
dimensions being permitted. Miklo said that there are some aspects of the plan that seem to be not fully
compliant with code. Staff feels that those items are fairly minor. Miklo advised that approving this plan
would not excuse those items still out of compliance with code from being brought into compliance. One
such issue is that code states that when you have a pedestrian way through the parking lot you have to
have shrubs on either side of it to buffer the pedestrian way. Based on Staff's quick review of the plan, it
does not appear that the current plan complies with the code. Miklo said that if the Commission passed
this plan on to City CGuncil, those shrubs would still have to be added at a later date.
Miklo said that there was a question at the informal meeting about putting the actual dimensions of the
medians on the plan. ;v1ost of the medians are ten feet, some of them are greater. Wal-Mart's engineer
was reluctant to put the dimensions on the plan in case a minor adjustment for an easement or something
similar was required at a later date. Miklo said that perhaps the best answer would be to provide a range
on the plan: if the plan shows a ten foot median, it could be written on the plan as a nine to ten foot
median. Miklo said he believed this to be a fairly minor point and that the Commission would have to
determine if it was concerned enough about variations in the dimensions that they would actually want
this information added to the plan before it goes to Council.
Miklo said the Commission has new elevation drawings which show the additional landscaping areas in
front of the store. While the drawing shows evergreen trees, the applicant has agreed to replace those
with shade trees. In other areas, around the perimeter of the site, evergreens are more appropriate.
Two diagrams that had been shared with Miklo on Monday by the applicant were presented. These
diagrams showed the amount of impervious surface in the current site and that in the proposed plan.
Overall, Miklo said, there is an increase of 2 acres of unpaved or green space in the new plan versus the
old plan.
At this point, Miklo said, with a few minor exceptions with regard to landscaping requirements, the plan
does meet the minimum requirements of the code for a site plan such as this. The aspects in question will
be brought into compliance before Staff would be able to issue a building permit for site plan approval.
The final aspect of the plan the Commission is being asked to amend concerns a free-standing sign.
There are currently two sign locations on Highway 1. The CZA limits the overall development to two free-
standing signs. The applicant is requesting an additional sign on Ruppert Road. In absence of an
amendment to the CZA, a monument sign would be allowable in that location, but a pole sign would not.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3, 2008 - Formal
Page 3
At this point, Miklo stated, the Commission is being asked to approve a substitute site plan for the one
that was approved in 1989, and a revised elevation plan as well.
Miklo stated that he would be happy to try to answer any questions the Commission might have.
Eastham asked for clarification of the most current number of parking spaces, stating that the plan still
indicated that number to be 859. Miklo replied that he believed the number 859 was incorrect, but that he
would defer to the applicant's engineer for the current number. He believed that number did not address
the removal of the 20-some parking spaces that made room for the additional landscaping. Freerks and
Eastham expressed concerns that the parking had actually increased based on the information presented
to them in the Monday informal meeting, and that further clarification would be helpful in determining if
their directions for more green space had been met. Miklo again stated that by his count the parking had
decreased from Morjay's meeting, but that the applicant's engineer was best suited to answer this
question.
Eastham requested th::1t the topic turn back to the ordinance requiring the break-up of large parking lots
into smaller areas, and the way in which that requirement is being met in this case. Eastham said that in
his view that third paragraph which provides some exceptions in long narrow parking lots is difficult to
relate to this parking area, which stretches over seven acres. Eastham said that he did not see how this
could be considered an "unusual" parking lot. That aside, Eastham said, the islands that go east and west
and divide the overall area into two large areas are shown as being of dimensions much larger than the
other islands in the plan. In his view, Eastham said, the width of those islands would make a lot of
difference in whether or not the code objective of having large areas divided visually into smaller areas
had been met. Those islands seem to be in the neighborhood of 15 or more feet in width, Eastham said,
which does much more than an island of eight feet.
Eastham asked for clarification on a gray area shown on the diagram which seemed to indicate the
median stops before it intersects the aisle. Miklo replied that this could be for drainage, or to let
pedestrians through, or simply a shadow on the drawing, and that it was best to have the engineer
address this question. Eastham said that he asked because the code is very clear that all aisles have to
be end-capped. Miklo said he believed that reference was regarding the end of the aisle.
The public hearing was opened. The applicant was invited to address the Commission.
Dennis Mitchell spoke on behalf of the applicant. He said that he believed the most recent plan did
address the concerns raised by both Staff and the Commission. Mitchell said if there were any minor
issues remaining that had been overlooked, it is Wal-Mart's intention to comply with the ordinance.
Mitchell said that he did feel comfortable saying that Wal-Mart has really made some good-faith efforts to
go above and beyond the requirements of the code, particularly in terms of landscaping, to address the
concerns expressed by the Commission and by Staff. The other thing to keep in mind, Mitchell said, was
that Wal-Mart is doing the right thing by trying to redevelop this site rather than build a store somewhere
else. This, he said, does provide a benefit to the community, does not add to urban sprawl, adds green
space, and provides economic benefit to the city as a whole and the neighbors in the vicinity. Mitchell
stated that while this is a concept plan, he had every expectation that City Staff would make sure that
Wal-Mart does comply with what is before the Commission. Wal-Mart has no intention of coming back
and making any substantial variation from that plan, Mitchell assured Commission members. While he
understands the concerns expressed that the prior developer had not substantially conformed to the CZA,
he wanted to make sure that the Commission understood that Wal-Mart was not that developer, and that
Wal-Mart will move forward as quickly as possible on this plan if it is approved, and will proceed with all of
the discussion and agreements fresh in its mind. Mitchell said that he is very confident that the
Commission will see substantial conformance with this plan. Mitchell then introduced a number of other
people who would be speaking on Wal-Mart's behalf at the meeting.
Eastham said to Mitchell that Mitchell had just asked him to consider a number of items in weighing his
decision, among them: change to the tax base, economic benefit, and redevelopment of the site.
Eastham said that as he understood the code he is supposed to look at the Comprehensive Plan and the
ordinance that governs large parking lots and large "Big Box" stores. Eastham said he did not see
economic development, tax base or any of those factors in the code. He asked Mitchell if he was
suggesting that there were some factors he ought to be considering that are not in the code. Mitchell
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3, 2008 - Formal
Page 4
replied that this proje~t is going to meet code and that he simple brings those things up because with this
site there was a preexisting CZA that is being amended, and as a result Wal-Mart is begin asked to go
above and beyond what the ordinance requires. Mitchell said he thinks this is going to be a great project
and that certainly the sity is going to be better off with having this site redeveloped rather than having
Wal-Mart look somewhere else to do that.
Greenwood-Hektoen advised that some of the things mentioned are in fact part of the Comprehensive
Plan, such as encouraging economic development and economic stability. Eastham said that he would be
happy to get into that sort of a discussion if she felt it was appropriate, but that he just didn't think that
was what he was being asked to do here. Freerks said she believed it was very common for people to
mention those types of things in their presentations and that she did not believe anything was meant by it.
Jeremy Carter, civil engineer for the project, went over the revisions to the plans. The existing site is
25.16 acres, with the existing building taking up roughly 199,000 square feet when the Wal-Mart, Cub
Foods and Staples buildings are all considered. The existing parking lot is approximately 1200 spaces.
The plan is to keep the existing building open while the proposed building is built, and to then tear down
the old building. One of the concerns expressed by Housing Inspection Services (HIS) has been in regard
to the parking requirements. All parking requirements must continue to be met even during all aspects of
construction. Carter said that they anticipate at this time that that will happen; all minimums for parking
will be met at all times.
Carter briefly reviewed the various areas of the plan, including the three entrance vestibules, the truck-
delivery areas, and the compressor unit area for the refrigerated equipment. Carter also updated the
Commission on landscaping areas that have been added near the vestibule areas.
Carter pointed out the major change in the new site plan as being the end-capped islands, which have
been moved to allow for more planting between the building and the parking, as requested by the
Commission and Staff. The current parking count, Carter said, is 838 spaces.
One of the other areas of concern included the Ruppert Road side of the building. Planters have replaced
previously shown striping, a 30-foot drive aisle has been added, and there is now six-feet from the back of
the sidewalk to the curb for most of that area (one exception is an area slightly pinched by the detention
basin).
Carter said that they believed an area on the Ruppert Road side if the building would be the perfect spot
for the bus stop, and that they were working with Transit to establish that route.
Semi-trucks do occasionally need to stock the Garden Center, Carter said, and concern had been
expressed regarding the mix of car and truck traffic in that area. The new plan calls for the trucks to
simply turn around and go back out they way they came in, avoiding any mingling with car traffic at all. In
adding that turnaround area, Wal-Mart had the opportunity to recapture some parking spaces along the
side of the building. Freerks asked how many parking spaces had been added to that area. Carter said
that he did not have the exact number of spaces before him, but that the new spots were taken into
account in the 838 total parking spots he mentioned earlier.
Carter noted that there is a space for a horse hutch provided that was requested by the Mennonites. The
hutch is roughly three parking spaces wide and is shaded with water and bucket hooks available.
Eastham wondered if the bus stop on the far eastern side of the building might not meet the needs of
disabled passengers, as it seems quite far from the entrance vestibules. Carter replied that the distance
from the bus stop to tr.3 door is roughly the same as the distance from the back of a handicap stall to the
door. Carter added that the advantage to having the bus stop where it is, is that people who are disabled
riders will not have to cross any driveways.
Carter stated that the proposed retail area is reduced by 9,212 square feet from the current site and that
the parking lot area has been reduced by over 350 spaces. Currently there are 5.7 acres of green space,
26% of the entire site. The proposed plan has 8.58 acres of green space, or 34% of the entire site. 2.1
acres of green space is an increase of 30% over what is there today. If only the green space between the
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3, 2008 - Formal
Page 5
parking lot and the building is counted (not the pond area), the internal green space is increased by 150%
over the current space.
Traffic circulations on the new site plan are the same as in the previous plan, other than the truck
turnaround in the Garden Center which was previously noted.
A visual aid was shared that overlaid the proposed green space with the current green space. Carter
noted that per the ordinance, the minimum area for an island that has a tree is 256 square feet. The
average island in the site plan is around 500 square feet, though some are as large as 700 square feet.
Carter offered to answer questions before asking Scott Sanders to come speak before the Commission.
There were no questions at that time.
Scott Sanders, landscape architect for the project, thanked the Commission for the opportunity to address
them directly. Sanders said he is thankful for the increased opportunities to do landscaping on this site.
One of the significant changes Carter discussed between the existing site and the new site is the changes
in green space. Sanders said that the changes in the interior green space are what is most critical to this
project. Sanders said that while the perimeter of the site remains largely unchanged, the two acres of
green space that have been added are wholly within the parking field, an increase of 150% of plant-able
green space.
The perimeter's dimensions do not change much, but the surface and the appearance of it will change.
Around the margins of the pond, from water's edge to top of slope, native vegetation will be re-
established, using an appropriate transitional blend of prairie grass and wildflower seed mix. The required
S2 standard buffer will be maintained. There are 325 new trees being added, creating a more dramatic
backdrop and feel to the site.
As had been pointed out, Sanders said, this is still a preliminary plan, although there is no intention to
change things beyond suggested improvements. One such improvement, Sanders said, was that the go-
ahead had been given by Wal-Mart today to increase the ratio of evergreen to deciduous trees around the
perimeter of the site.
The interior space of the site is where the meat of the plan differs from what exists today. There are a
number of internal islands. The ordinance requires that any given parking stall be no more than 60-feet
from a shade tree. This plan has no parking space more than 45-feet away from a shade tree. The space
between most islands is now 90 feet. The standards are met and exceeded in regard to shade trees.
Sanders said that Eastham was exactly correct in assessing why the middle islands were by design 19-
feet in width by 40-feet in length; to provide a more pronounced visual and physical barrier of a wide
green swath through the parking lot. Just as the perpendicular median islands break up the parking lot
into smaller pieces, this large path of green space hopefully does the same on the other axis.
From previous plans, there is a fairly substantial increase in plantings in the plaza area at the front side of
the building. The linear footage of beds has gone up to ten feet wide, sufficient to have trees. The
renderings, Sanders said, by his omission do not accurately show the shade trees that will be present in
the area. The sum total of beds, including the ones that now wrap around the building, is now around
5,000 square feet of planting space.
Sanders said that a concern had been expressed as to what the finished surface of islands would be.
Sanders said that every island will be planted 100% with vegetative cover. The finished individual designs
for each island is not done yet, but Sanders did share a representative sample of end-caps and interior
islands. While the ordinance does restrict as far as height, there will be a variety including: deciduous and
evergreen ground cover, willow, sumac, a variety of junipers, some ornamental grasses and wildflowers.
The intention is now that the long ribbons in between the islands would be planted with turf grass, not
filled with shrubs. However, there is a requirement to have shrubs along the sidewalk, and as a result
these long, bold continuous green strips will be reconsidered to meet code.
Overall, Sanders said, the engineers have really done a good job of compartmentalizing the clusters of
cars with a lot of trees and green cover.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3, 2008 - Forma;
Page 6
Sanders offered to an&vVer any questions the Commission might have.
Eastham said he wished to emphasize the point that the parking lot now has a number of trees in the lot
that are surr?und~d by ~ circular area that is covered in rocks. Eastham said that it is his understanding
that the applicant IS saYing that the ground cover in this design is going to be maintained into the 30-40
year future as green ground cover.
Sanders said that this was correct. He noted that at installation when planting shrubs and perennials, they
are not mature and there will be bark mulch there to maintain moisture. However, everything is designed
so that at maturity it will be green, vegetative cover, not exposed rock or mulch.
Jacki Cook-Haxby, architect for the project, presented changes on the elevation drawings from the last
presentation. The planters have been significantly up-graded; the codes have been met as far as the ins
and outs of building and decoration. Cook-Haxby pointed out the "iconic planter" at the front of the store
and the new Wal-Mart sign and logo. The islands in the parking lot have been added to the architectural
renderings to show the green space they will provide; they had not appeared on previous elevations
because that is a standard architectural treatment. They have added a planter that is approximately 120
feet long, planters that are anchored to the store, and in-ground planters. The planter with the "iconic tree"
has now been increased in size to about three times what it had been. The evergreen trees that appear in
the elevations will in fact be shade trees as is shown in the landscaping plan. The overhangs have also
been increased to meet the 3-foot requirement.
The side elevation has been changed to meet the requirement of no lineal length greater than 100-feet,
with at least a 3-foot e)ttension or recession of the building. Canopies, faux window areas, and decorative
pieces along the side have also been added. At the last presentation, the side fac;ade of the building was
26% decorated; it is now 62% decorated.
Freerks asked if bicycle parking was on the east elevation. Cook-Haxby said that a couple of different
areas have been explored and possibilities include two areas that are under a canopy for protection. Wal-
Mart uses two different types of bicycle racks: one is a standard ribbon rack and the other is a round rack.
Cook-Haxby said there is ample room in both locations to provide all of the required bicycle parking.
Because concerns had been expressed from the Commissioners regarding what the site would actually
look like from the highway, three different point-of-view drawings have been developed to demonstrate
the appearance of the store and parking lot.
The first new elevation drawing represented the view one would have if they were about to turn into the
parking lot from the highway. The second elevation represents the point-of-view from approximately the
middle of the parking lot. The third point of view shows what it looks like coming into the parking lot from
Ruppert Road. The significant amount of vegetation on the Ruppert Road side almost screens the
building, Cook-Haxby said. The Highway 1 viewpoint makes a very attractive entrance into the city.
Eastham asked to review the second elevation and asked for confirmation that this view was just to the
south of the wider landscape islands. Eastham asked if in Cook-Haxby's opinion those views are accurate
and as they will appear. Cook-Haxby said that they are; they were taken from the actual landscape plan
and overlaid onto the $pecific views.
There were no further questions for Cook-Haxby, who turned the microphone over to Ryan Horn.
Horn said that this endeavor has been very challenging and rewarding. He said that he believed over
1,000 hours had been put in by this team working on this plan. Horn said that a number of constraints
were faced on this project, but, he noted, creativity is the child of restraint. One constraint was that when
a Wal-Mart store makes a profit, a piece of those profits are paid out each quarter to the people who work
at that store. Horn said that Wal-Mart could not put those employees in a position where they cannot pay
for the building and cannot make a profit, so there was a financial constraint. Adding to the financial
constraint, Horn said, was the fact that compared to many of the other stores we've seen pictures of, this
Wal-Mart will have to spend 7-figures demolishing buildings. There are also safety and access restraints,
Horn said, in considering the parking lot and the ongoing construction and demolition that will go on while
the store is open. The biggest constraint, Horn said, was the constraint of time. Because of the CZA, Wal-
Mart was in a position of having to go beyond the requirements of the ordinance. This is fine, Horn said,
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3,2008 - Formal
Page 7
but because there was nothing in writing before planning began outlining the steps they'd need to take
beyond the ordinance, a lot of planning has been done and re-done. Horn said that 100+ hours have
b~en spent with staff, 1000+ hours spent working on the project with the team; however, only about 45
minutes have been spent in front of the Commission. Horn said Miklo and his team have done a terrific
job, and that he believed Wal-Mart had now complied with every request. Horn said he brings all of this
up to make one point which is that despite all of the wonderful changes and improvements that have been
made, this is still a flawed, imperfect plan. Horn said that there probably could not be agreement of
everyone in the room of what a perfect plan is. Horn said that in wrapping up, he would just like to thank
everyone who has worked so hard on this project, and that he believes this plan will be great for Iowa City
and for its customert, and for its employees. He asked that the Commission not make the perfect the
enemy of the good, and asked that they approve this plan. Once again, he thanked Miklo and his team
and the Wal-Mart team for all of their time and effort.
Freerks invited other members of the public to speak.
Mary Gravitt stated that she was a disabled senior citizen who rides the bus, and that the one question
she came away from the presentation asking was how is the bus coming in and if the bus riders are going
to have a covered shelter like the horses and the bicycles have. Gravitt was concerned about the actual
route the bus would take into the site, stating that the bus does not come in from Ruppert, but from the
highway. She asked if the bus would then swing around to the Ruppert side where Wal-Mart had
indicated the bus stop might be.
Freerks invited Miklo to address this question. Miklo said that in terms of the bus route he did not believe
the exact route had been resolved with the Transit Department. Miklo said that Transit and the applicant
would work out the route and that it was not something usually dealt with in zoning matters. Eastham
asked if it was Miklo's opinion that the bus would enter the parking lot and go to the Ruppert Road side of
the store. Miklo said that it would and that the current route comes in from Highway 1 to the store.
Eastham asked about the idea of a shelter for people waiting. Freerks said that such a shelter was
mentioned in some of the paperwork. Miklo said that, again, he did not believe it had yet been determined
by the Transit Department. He said that it was a legitimate concern and that he believed it was something
that could be worked out, but that Transit would have to approve the design and location of the shelter.
Miklo said that the shelter would certainly need to be compatible with the design of the building. Miklo
deferred to Greenwood-Hektoen on whether this should be included in the CZA. Freerks said that shelter
was the key, and Miklo added that they were talking about a shelter with a roof, not a heated space.
Weitzel said that he would be happy if the City provided the shelter as long as the applicant is willing
install it. Weitzel said that elsewhere in town people have not wanted a shelter on their property and then
it has not been able to be built as a result. Miklo said he was not sure of the details of how that would be
addressed. Greenwood-Hektoen said that that would be something they could work out with Transit if the
Commission wanted it included in the CZA. She said the Commission could mention it generally just to
make their request known and then the details could be worked out with Transit. Weitzel said that he
would like to at least pass that recommendation along to City Council.
Wally Taylor, attorney representing Iowa City Stop Wal-Mart, clarified that as he understood it, the
proposal before the Commission was one to amend the CZA so that it does away entirely with the original
concept for this property of a pedestrian-friendly grouping of businesses and allows a super "Big Box"
store with a large parking lot instead of the original concept. Taylor said that it is not about just the color of
the building or the evenness of the fayade or the number of trees or anything like that, but that the
Commission is being asked to change the entire concept of this area. Taylor said that if that was what the
Commission wished to do that is fine, but that where we really need to go with the economy in this day
and age is to small, local, pedestrian-friendly businesses, that provide businesses and jobs for many
different kinds of people, not just one mega-store that gobbles up everything. Taylor said that he believed
Eastham was correct at the outset in saying that the primary consideration at hand is proper land use, not
jobs, increased tax base, or economic development in general. Taylor said there was some inference that
the Comprehensive Plan talks about economic development. Most Comprehensive Plans do, he said, in
the sense that zoning and land use decisions should help promote the general welfare and the general
economy. Taylor said that his point was that every zoning application he has seen in Iowa has an
applicant that comed in and says they will provide jobs and increased tax base and economic
development and that is why their plan should be approved. Taylor said that the reasons given are not
because it is a good use of the land or because it promotes all of the other many factors that should be
Planning and Zoning Sommission
July 3, 2008 - Formal
Page 8
considered; the applicant wants you to focus on those promises of economic development which often do
not come to fruition. Most importantly, Taylor said, those are not the considerations that should be taken
into account. Instead, Planning and Zoning Commissions should focus on whether or not this is the best
use of the land, or if there is a better way to do it, a way that would actually be better for the economy,
providing more jobs and businesses. Taylor said that for too long in Iowa, developers and corporations
have been allowed to get rezoning and changes in land use on whims, simply because they wanted it.
Taylor said that Iowa has not yet really looked at what zoning and land use should be. Zoning is to
provide a rational, stable system of land use, so that it makes sense, so that uses of land are compatible
with each other. They are intended to provide the person who buys a business or a home with a certain
level of assurance in what the land around them is going to be for the foreseeable future. Taylor said that
that is not to say that land use never changes, but that changes should be on a stable, rational,
comprehensive basis, not an ad hoc basis. Taylor said that he believes this kind of ad hoc land use is
what we are seeing here. This concept plan, he said, has been around since 1989, and though it has
never been followed the way it should be, that is no reason to throw it out now. That is what the plan was,
what it should be, and what is best for Iowa City. Taylor asked the Commission to look at zoning and
land-use as it should be and to look to the future and our economy, taking into account sustainable
economies, sustainable land-use and small, local development. Taylor said that he believed that if the
Commission did that they would not approve this wholesale change in the concept for this property as
was set out in the original CZA.
Tom Carsner said that he thought there were at least two larger questions that are very important for the
Commission to think about. Remember, Carsner said, Wal-Mart is asking the Commission to change the
current plan of this piece of land. Carsner asked why one store would be better than the original plan of
multiple, six to eight, stores. Carsner said that he believed this was very important for the Commission to
think about. Carsner said that he can remember downtown Iowa City being a draw for people because of
its unique, off-beat stores. The move toward dominance, actual monopolization, of an area is one reason
why those unique, off-beat stores are not downtown anymore. Carsner said that approval of this plan
would only continue that trend, and would be bad for the community. When you have one store, Carsner
said, you compromise on prices, variety, choices of whether you'd like to buy union made products,
whether you'd like to consider countries of origin where a product was made, whether you'd like to
consider the conditions of the worker who made it, etc. Carsner said that when you only have one
company to go to for your needs, you really no longer have choice. If there are multiple stores,
comparison shopping can be done and more choices are offered. This is one of the larger questions
Carsner asked the Commission to consider: why is one store better than six to eight stores.
Carsner said that his second question had to do with why does the City even have zoning, or make
agreements and amendments if no one is watching to see that developers comply with these
agreements. Carsner acknowledged that Wal-Mart had taken over this agreement from the developer, but
he asked why even have agreements at all if they go eighteen years without being enforced. Carsner
asked how many years it would actually take to comply if eighteen years had not been enough time.
Carsner said that he was pretty sure that the City would find out if he was not complying with the plan that
he gave them if he was adding on to his house or his garage. Carsner said he could possibly put them off
for a week, but the inspector would find him soon enough, and there would be consequences for his
noncompliance. Perr,aps, Carsner said, the lesson is that if you are going to violate an agreement you
should do it big, do it huge, and do it on a large scale. Apparently, the City cannot find Wal-Mart, Carsner
said. Carsner said that he thinks that it is important that if the City is going to make agreements with
companies that they are held to some kind of compliance, and that there be consequences for
noncompliance. Carsner thanked the Commission for considering these two larger questions that he put
before them.
Gary Sanders thanked Wal-Mart for their very detailed plan. Sanders stated that the previous CZA was
not adhered to, and asked if everyone was in agreement with that. Sanders specifically asked Miklo if he
agreed with that statement. Greenwood-Hektoen interjected that she was not sure that was really relevant
to the discussion. Sanders said that her point was interesting because that was what he was going to
bring up next. Sanders stated that he did not know if the City Attorney present believes that failure to
comply with the original CZA was a reason to vote "no" on the application request. Sanders said that it
seemed to be what she was saying. Sanders said he would like to remind everyone that that is simply an
opinion, the opinion of the City Attorney present, and, he assumes, the legal staff. Sanders said that that
opinion is not law. His lawyer, Sanders said, has a different opinion. Sanders said that what he learned in
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3, 2008 - Formal
Page 9
the last round was that the City Attorney can have an opinion, his attorney can have an opinion, and then
it is up to judges to decide. Sanders said that he was not certain that his side was right on this, but he
said that believes they are. Sanders said that he believes that if the previous CZA was not adhered to
then the Planning and Zoning Commission has the right to vote "no" on this proposal. Sanders said that
he thinks that this situation will get very, very interesting. He said that he is not looking for a big fight
because he is still tired and still owes Taylor money from the last time. He reiterated that he believes that
it is within the jurisdiction of the Planning and Zoning Commission to vote "no" because the previous
agreement was not adhered to.
Gravitt returned to the podium and stated that she is from Philadelphia, and she knows what an empty
building can do to a city. Gravitt said that if Wal-Mart decided to pull out, with Cub Foods empty and the
rumor that Staples is pulling out, the empty buildings will prevent Iowa City from looking like a prosperous
city. Gravitt said that the Coral Ridge Mall killed Iowa City, and that what saved Iowa City was the
University moving into the Old Capitol Center. Gravitt said that she did not know what the previous
agreement was, but that in the past she was against Wal-Mart. She said that she can see the way the
economy is going and that she believes we are close to a recession and a depression. Gravitt said that
Wal-Mart has money and can pay taxes and that that is what we need. Gravitt said that she likes her
comfortable life in Iowa City and wishes to continue it, but that you cannot have empty buildings and
remain a healthy city. Gravitt asked what multiple stores would possibly go out in that space. She said
Iowa City has multiple stores, and small businesses going out of business because there is no money in
this economy to support a small business. Gravitt said she had to tell the truth the way she sees it.
Freerks invited further comment on the matter. As there was none, the public hearing was closed.
Weitzel reported an ex parte conversation with Gary Sanders in which he ran into him at the New Pioneer
Co-op recently and basically informed Sanders that he was unable to discuss the issue.
Freerks outlined three options for moving forward. Freerks said that the Commission could 1) vote to
approve the plan as it had been presented, 2) vote to approve it subject to any items that the Commission
might want to add to it or wish to have clarified, or 3) or the Commission can deny the application. Freerks
invited a motion.
Koppes motioned to approve REZ08-00006, an application submitted by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., for a
rezoning to amend the conditional zoning agreement to modify the concept site plan for approximately
25.16 acres of property in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 855, 911 & 1001 Highway 1 West,
subject to the addition of a bus shelter on the property.
Eastham seconded the motion.
Miklo added a clarification that he believed at some point the Commission should either include in the
motion or amend the motion to address how the Commission wishes to handle the request for a third
free-standing sign.
Koppes amended her motion to include the addition of a third free-standing sign on the Ruppert Road
side of the site.
Eastham seconded the amendment to the motion.
Freerks invited discussion among Commission members.
Eastham stated that he is interested in a third condition requiring a minimum median width for the three
long perpendicular parking lot medians specified as nine-to-ten feet on the concept plan when it is
developed into the site plan. Eastham said he realized that the applicant is proceeding in good faith;
however, for him it is helpful to be specific about the required median widths because it is such a large
parking area.
Freerks invited a second.
Plahutnik seconded.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3, 2008 - Formal
Page 10
Koppes asked how this third condition would be handled and if the Commission voted on it separately.
Greenwood-Hektoen asked if Eastham had made a motion to amend. Eastham said that that had been
his intention. Greenwood-Hektoen asked if Freerks wished to call the question. Miklo said that he wished
to clarify ~hich medians to which Eastham was referring. Eastham said that he was referring to the three
long medians shown on the concept plan that divide the aisles.
Freerks stated that there was a motion and a second on the floor to add to that amendment Eastham's
motion. A vote was taken.
The motion to add the amendment to the motion passed 4-1 (Koppes opposed).
Freerks said that she has some questions when it comes to approving or disapproving a concept, which
of the many variations of the reworked plan the Commission was actually voting on. Miklo said that for
clarity's sake the black and white version of the plan was the most recent and up-to-date.
Eastham stated that as he understands it the motion is to approve the concept plan with the addition that
a bus shelter will be ~rovided on the site (though not necessarily funded by the applicant, Koppes added),
and a third sign will be approved on the Ruppert Road side. Eastham said that his discussion points
include the notion that this proposed use does meet the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, in
general, for this districl. The Comprehensive Plan includes a land-use scenario using land in this area in
this matter. This parcel is already zoned CC-2, which permits retail uses without regard to their size.
Eastham asked Staff or the City Attorney to comment specifically about the current concept plan that may
or may not be in existence on this parcel and whether or not or exactly how the Commission would be
changing that.
Miklo said that what the Commission would be doing is substituting the original plan for Wal-Mart and an
L-shaped shopping center (later amended by the City Council to allow for Staples in lieu of smaller
shops), for the proposed plan. Essentially, that plan would go away, and this plan (including its elevation
drawings) would replace it.
Eastham continued, saying that zoning is amended in many areas all of the time, and that in his view
there is adequate land zoned for commercial use of all types throughout the community. Eastham said
that he did not know of a specific need for additional zoning that is directed specifically toward small retail
establishments or businesses. Eastham said that if there were, he would be happy to address that, but
that he just does not see how applying a new concept plan for this particular parcel precludes retail
opportunities for small businesses generally in the community.
Eastham said that he would like to comment on some statements made by the applicant's representatives
regarding their version of how the development of this concept plan has evolved. Eastham said that his
understanding is more that the Commission has asked the applicant to make a number of changes and
they have habitually agreed to those changes. Eastham said he did not hold the viewpoint that the
applicant has been willing in every instance to accommodate Staff and Commission requests on this
particular matter.
Eastham said that he continues to have some doubts on the interpretation of the zoning codes pertaining
to dividing large parking areas into smaller lots and whether that requirement is met in this instance.
Eastham said he does agree with Staffs comments that the aisles that are shown on this concept plan
(the ones that are very wide and a third or so distance away from the highway) will have a useful visual
effect in breaking up the large parking lot into a smaller, more aesthetically pleasing parking area.
Nonetheless, he would like to revisit that language in the zoning code at some time in the future and
perhaps clarify its meaning more fully.
Plahutnik said it would give him a great deal of pleasure to approve a plan before the Commission
tonight. He stated that so far, through a kind of bureaucratic equivalent of pulling teeth, the applicant has
submitted a plan for one of the more pleasant large-scale parking lots that would be in Iowa City.
However, to Plahutnik, the whole idea of this being an entrance to Iowa City and needing special attention
by the Comprehensive Plan, limits his whole-hearted endorsement of this plan to Council for approval.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3, 2008 - Formal
Page 11
Plahutnik said he spent some time in the Wal-Mart parking lot today, and also spent some time in the
parking lot of Menard's (another large store with a large parking lot). Plahutnik said that in every rezoning
he looks at he asks a couple of questions: 1) what is the applicant to gain in this, and 2) what is the
community to gain in this? In this case, Plahutnik said, he assumes that Wal-Mart has determined that
this would be a more profitable venture for them. Iowa City gains nothing by replacing some large box
structures with big parking lots with another large box structure with a big parking lot. Further, the
community loses this one opportunity to work with some sort of pedestrian-friendly, infill development
here. Plahutnik said that even if it is a large store, there are many configurations that could be used that
do not set it at the back of a many-acre parking lot. Plahutnik said that he wished he could look at the
critics of Wal-Mart and tell them that Wal-Mart was making a great investment in our community and will
serve as an anchor for our entire south side. Plahutnik said that about the only direction left to develop in
Iowa City is to the south, and somewhat to the east. Plahutnik said that if the city is not careful, it will
block itself in to the south just as we have to the north with Westcott Heights. Plahutnik said that while it
has been the bureaucratic equivalent of pulling teeth, right now there is a store, there is an agreement,
and he is content with that.
Weitzel said that in looking at the plan he does not say to himself that he loves the store and wants it here
in Iowa City, but that he has to go back to the fundamentals of what planning and zoning is about, which
is regulation of landowner rights. Weitzel said there is a decision for what is good for the community, but
there is also a lot of murkiness and 18 years of precedent in the noncompliance with the current CZA.
Weitzel said that while this might not be the kind of thing he would develop in that space, he is not the
one venturing out the capital. Weitzel said that he cannot see a strong and compelling reason not to favor
it at this time.
Freerks stated that she believed that the Commission does have the ability to look at the plan through the
CZA and adapt it to the current market needs. Freerks said that she agreed with Eastham that there is no
great need for more zoning for small retail areas. Freerks said that she also agrees with Gravitt about the
negativity of empty buildings on a city's prosperity. Freerks said that while the process had been difficult,
the current plan is mLch better than what Wal-Mart first presented. Because aesthetics were a part of the
first CZA, they are also something the Commission can consider at this time. Freerks acknowledged that
the minimums have been met and in some instances have been exceeded. Freerks said that she would
have liked to have see;l even a little more improvement but that she is comfortable with the plan that has
been reached. She said she agrees with the need for a bus shelter, and that she is glad to see
accommodations are being made for the horses and buggies as well as the bicycles. Freerks said that
Staff and the Commission have worked hard to make this plan somewhat pedestrian friendly, since that
was a part of the initial CZA. She stated that she believed she would be in favor of the proposal.
Miklo reiterated the components of the motion: The most recent concept plan and elevations submitted
and presented tonight are being recommended to City Council with the condition that the referred to
medians be noted on the plan as being of nine-to-ten feet; that there will be language added to the written
agreement providing the location ofa bus shelter, for which the building design and financial responsibility
is yet to be determined; the agreement will also provide for the third free-standing sign to be located on
Ruppert Road, with the other two signs remaining as shown.
Freerks emphasized the need to stay close to the plan that has had so much time and effort put into to it,
and to avoid the mistakes of the past. Freerks asked Miklo to clarify the path that would be taken should
the final concept plan vary much from the requirements that have been outlined. Miklo said that if one
assumes the City Council approves the amended CZA, then a site-plan and building permit would be
applied for. Staff would then review the plan in much more detail. If there was any significant variation in
the site plan from the way the CZA is drafted, then the plan would need to come back before the Planning
and Zoning Commission and City Council. Freerks said that having gotten to the point they have with the
parking area and the landscaping, she would not like to see the plan come back, but wants to see this
plan adhered to.
Eastham thanked the public for the comments on the bus shelter, as it was not something he had thought
of, and he was glad to be able to include it in the CZA. Eastham stated that a key factor for him in
considering whether to recommend this to Councilor not was the addition of that nine-feet of additional
sidewalk and landscaping in the front of the store.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 3, 2008 - Formal
Page 12
Freerks called for a vote.
The motion carried 4-1 (Plahutnik opposed).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JUNE 19, 2008:
Eastham moved to approve the meeting minutes. Plahutnik seconded.
The motion carried 5-0.
OTHER:
Miklo said that it does look like there will be an agenda item for the 7/17/2008 meeting. Miklo said that it is
the type of issue where the Staff will advise the Commission not to vote at that meeting. The issue is a
rezoning matter with complex in-fill in a neighborhood. There are questions that Staff and the applicant
would like to get some direction on prior to proceeding to a final plan. Miklo said that there may be some
benefit to holding an informal meeting, but that it is not absolutely necessary. A brief discussion
determined that there would be enough for a quorum at a 7/13/2008 informal meeting. Freerks said that
she believed that it wuuld be a good idea if it was a complicated issue.
Freerks asked for an update on Olive Court. Miklo said that that had been approved by Council on a 6-1
vote. Miklo said there Nere sufficient protest petitions to require six out of seven Councilors to approve
the measure. Miklo said that Matt Hayek, the opposing vote, stated that his reason for opposing the
project was that he believed the buildings were out of scale for the neighborhood. The rest of the Council
voted for it based on it being an in-fill development of a reasonable density, with a good deal of
consideration having gone into the design. The Council will have another vote to pass and adopt the
measure in July.
Galway Hills was also approved by City Council, with the addition that a speed table (which raises the
pedestrian walkway) will be incorporated into the trail that crosses Shannon Drive. There is also an
indication that once the development is built there will be other traffic calming options available if needed.
Freerks asked for the status of the development code. Miklo said that the public hearing for the
development code was held last week and that the Council did defer it. There were three or four items on
which the Council wanted further discussion. That meeting will be held 7/15/2008, Miklo said.
ADJOURNMENT:
Weitzel motioned for adjournment. Eastham seconded.
The motion to adjourn carried 5-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:18 PM.
C
o
'(ij
f/l
'E
E
o
(JOO
...
010
C U
,- Q)
Sa::
NQ)CO
....ug
""CN
01 III
cOO
.- C
C Q)
C::
~<(
0.
>-
:!:
(J
III
3:
.2
Ol I I
.... I XXXXX:
~ I I
I
:X
I
Il)UJI WI
(OOlXXX01
I
:X
I
It) I 1
.... X I XXXX I
in I I
I
:X
I
C)
Z
j::
W
w
:::!E
...J
<(
:::!E
a::
o
LL.
,... I UJ I
it; X : XXXO 1
I
:X
I
~X !,XXXXXO~:
;;a: I I
M '
~ :< ;
I
XXXXXX:
,
o I UJ I
~>.. :XXXXXO 1
....... UJ I LU I
;; 0 1 XXXXXO 1
!:::!XI X XUJXI
.... :X X 0 1
(/)
EQ)O.,-.,-('f)NOCO.,-('f)
'-~~-r-'or-~""-O~"'-
03 . Cl.X- i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i
I-UJOOOOOOOOO
E .lIl: C
f/lOOIllf/lf/lCO -
.lIl: ....c:~ 8'$ C.c: Q)
gm1iiQ)2.c:lii:!:~
Q) "':JIllEo~.c:E~
EaJaJWLL.~Q.CI)CI);>
~a:i-;e,jciu.i~ci~~
C)
z
j::
W
W
:::!E
...J
<(
:::!E
a::
o
LL.
Z
NUJ
coo
:xxxx:
I I
I
:x
I
N UJ I I
~o;xxxx;
I
:x
,
oqo I
:!:x,
oqo I
I
xxxxxx:
I
NUJ I UJUJ 1
NO I XXXOOX 1
t-- 1 UJUJUJ 1
N X 1 XXXOOO 1
(/)
EQ)O.,-.,-('f)NOCO.,-('f)
'-T"""-C-T"""T"""~T"""OT"""T"""
03 . Cl.x- i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i i?i
I-UJooooooooo
E ~ C
f/lOOIllf/lf/lCO -
.lIl: ... .c: ~ ~Q) '$ C .c: fl
o Ill... Q) C.....;.;
o f/l f/l Q) .c: III ,- .-
Q)E"':JIll... o~.c: E~
aJaJWLL.~Q.CI)CI);>
~a:i-;e,jciu.i~ci~~
"0
Q)
(/)
::::l
U
X
UJ
~
__c
C C Q)
Q) Q) (/)
(/)(/).rJ
~.rJ<(
Q.. <( II
>'11 II UJ
Q) --
~XOO