HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-21-2008 Planning and Zoning Commission
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Monday, August 18, 2008 - 6:00 PM
Informal Meeting
Iowa City City Hall
Lobby Conference Room
410 E. Washington Street
Thursday, August 21,2008 -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
REZ08-00008: Discussion of an application submitted by the University of Iowa Community Credit
Union for a rezoning from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Commercial Office (CO-1) zone
for approximately 3.87 acres of property south of Dodge Street, west of Scott Boulevard.
(45-day limitation period: September 14, 2008)
D. Comprehensive Plan Item
Consider setting a public hearing for September to consider adoption of the Central District Plan as an
element of the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan.
E. Code Amendment Item
Consideration of amendments to Article 14-5B, Sign Regulations, to allow limited use of freestanding
signs in the CB-2 Zone, add a definition and standards for entranceway signs, and to clarify the
regulations regarding signs on residential buildings.
F. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: August 7, 2008
G. Other
H. Adjournment
Informal
Formal
November 3
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Prepared by: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner
Item: REZ08-0008
Date: August 21,2008
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
University of Iowa Community Credit Union
825 Mormon Trek Boulevard
Iowa City, IA 52246
Contact Person:
Dick Noble
Phone:
(319)339-1000
Requested Action:
Rezoning from RDP (Research Development Park)
to CO-1 (Commercial Office)
Purpose:
To allow for the construction of corporate office
building and branch bank facility for University of
Iowa Community Credit Union
Location:
South of Dodge Street and west of Scott Boulevard
Size:
3.87 acres
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
RDP (Research Development Park
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North:
South:
East:
West:
OPD-5
OPD-5
P1 and RS-5
RDP
File Date:
July 31,2008
45 Day Limitation Period:
September 14, 2008
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant, University of Iowa Community Credit Union, is requesting a rezoning from
Research Development Park (RDP) to Commercial Office (CO-1) for an approximately 3.87 acre
property located at the south corner of Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard. In 1988, the property
was zoned to RDP to allow the Iowa City Press Citizen to be built in the area to the south. The
University of Iowa Community Credit Union (UICCU) intends to build a corporate office building
that houses the administrative headquarters and a branch bank facility with a drive-up teller.
The applicant has indicated that they have chosen not to use the "Good Neighbor Policy" and
have not had discussions with neighborhood representatives.
2
ANAL YSIS:
The applicant has submitted a concept plan of the proposed development that illustrates the
proposed location of the bank building, the parking lot, drive-through facility, and landscaping (see
attached). On the concept plan, the bank building is located close to the intersection of Dodge
Street and Scott Boulevard, which screens views of the parking lot from Dodge Street, a major
entranceway into Iowa City. There is no direct driveway access to Dodge Street. Access to the
parking lot and drive-through is from a driveway off of Scott Boulevard located approximately 350
feet from the intersection.
Current Zoning: The Research Development Part Zone (RDP) provides areas for the
development of office, research, production or assembly firms and other complementary uses.
General office commercial uses (financial businesses and back office banking facilities) are
permitted in the RDP zone, but personal service-oriented retail uses (retail banking
establishments) are not allowed. Drive-through facilities are also not allowed in the RDP zone
Proposed Zoning: The Commercial Office Zone (CO-1) provides specific areas where office
functions, compatible businesses, apartments and certain public and semipublic uses may be
developed. The CO-1 zone can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive
commercial or industrial areas. Personal service-oriented retail and general office uses are both
permitted in the CO-1 zone. Drive-through facilities for financial institutions are allowed by special
exception, to be approved by the Board of Adjustment.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan emphasizes the need to preserve the natural
beauty of the Dodge Street entrance into Iowa City. The North District Plan and the Northeast
District Plan both briefly mention the area. Both plans note that there are two major employers
in this area, the Press Citizen and ACT.
The North District Plan identifies Dodge Street as a main entranceway corridor into Iowa City.
Maintaining and enhancing the appearance of the entranceway is recommended. Views of
wooded ravines and well-landscaped office park developments have been identified as positive
features of the area.
The Northeast District Plan has a section that discusses environmental features in the area.
The Plan encourages "development that occurs with consideration of ecological features, such
as protecting critical wildlife habitats, natural terrain, and future green space."
Staff finds that the proposed concept plan addresses the appearance of the development as it
relates to the Dodge Street entranceway. Locating the building close to the street intersection
will present a more attractive streetscape than a view of a parking lot and drive-through,
particularly if the building is designed with window openings and other fa9ade detailing to avoid
blank walls along the street. In addition, if the site is attractively landscaped with the parking lot
set back and screened from view of neighboring residential properties, the development should
blend well into its surroundings and be an attractive feature in this important entranceway into
Iowa City.
Neighborhood Compatibility and Future Development in the Area: The immediately
surrounding areas include residential neighborhoods, the Iowa City Press Citizen facility, and
some public land. The CO-1 zone is as a low intensity commercial zone that is appropriate as a
transition zone between more intense commercial or industrial areas and residential
neighborhoods. If built as shown on the concept plan, the landscaping and existing steep terrain
will buffer the proposed development from the surrounding properties. Between the parking lot
and the residential neighborhood to the south approximately 150 feet of land is shown that
includes a ravine and significant vegetation. In addition, the parking lot will have to be screened
3
with the highest level of screening, S3.
The residential area to the north across Dodge Street is a set of five townhouses. The
proposed bank will be visible from these homes. However, if the land is developed as shown
on the enclosed concept plan, the effect should be minimal. The building will be located at the
corner of the lot along Dodge Street, which should block views of the parking lot and drive-
through facility and associated commercial activity from these neighbors. Staff recommends
significant landscaping along Dodge Street in order to help blend the proposed development
into the surrounding landscape. However due to the prominent nature of the building along
Dodge Street, Staff believes that appropriate articulation and fenestration of the Dodge Street
elevation will help the building be an appealing element in an entranceway into Iowa City.
There is currently some undeveloped land adjacent to this property. The first is the area
northeast of the subject property, across Scott Boulevard. This is the future location of a new
fire station. Directly across Scott Boulevard to the east is a parcel of land zoned Low Density
Single Family Residential (RS-5), which has potential to be further developed in the future.
However, it may not develop as a single family neighborhood. The Comprehensive Plan has
designated the area as appropriate for Office Research Park zoning.
In Staff's opinion, the proposed administrative offices and back office functions proposed are
similar to what is currently allowed in the RDP zone. However, the branch bank and drive-
through will generate higher levels of traffic than would the office and employment uses more
typical of an office park. Staff finds that the proposed site plan effectively locates the driveway
access point, the parking lot and drive-through facility to accommodate the higher level of
traffic generated by the retail functions of the proposed facility.
Staff believes this location is appropriate for a bank facility and is compatible with the
surrounding neighborhoods. In the CO-1 zone, building heights are limited to a height of 25
feet instead of 45 feet allowed in the RDP zone. The location and mass of the building,
combined with the proposed landscaping could provide an appealing entranceway feature into
Iowa City along Dodge Street, provided the building presents an attractive face toward the
street rather than blank walls.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas: This property contains some steep, critical, and protected
slopes. The protected slopes will be buffered and left undisturbed. Approximately 26% of the
critical slopes and 35% of the steep slopes will be disturbed by the new construction. Since the
disturbance to critical slopes is less than 35%, the proposed development will require a Level 1
Sensitive Areas Review, which an administrative review by staff.
Traffic and Pedestrian Facilities: Highway 1/Dodge Street has recently been reconstructed
to provide a more functional entrance into Iowa City, which includes sidewalks on both sides of
Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard.
The corner of Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard is a busy Iowa City intersection. Because of
the amount of traffic at this intersection the location of the access point to this property should
be carefully considered. According to the concept plan, access to the parking lot and drive-
through will be located on Scott Boulevard approximately 350 feet from the intersection. This
should be an adequate distance to prevent conflicts between traffic turning into this
development and traffic stacking at the intersection. Staff recommends that the location of this
access point be a condition of approval.
A traffic volume count conducted in 2006 shows that there are 9,100 daily trips on Dodge Street
and 10,200 daily trips on Scott Boulevard. The capacity of a two-lane arterial with a turn lane
such as Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard is approximately 14,000 trips per day. Since there is
4
considerable capacity currently available, uses allowed in a CO-1 zone would not generate
enough additional traffic to cause congestion along these roadways.
Summary: The Northeast District Plan and the North District Plan, elements of the
Comprehensive Plan, recognize the importance of Dodge Street as a main entranceway into Iowa
City. The Plans also note the environmentally sensitive areas of the subject parcel. At the time of
the rezoning for the Iowa City Press Citizen to RDP, concern was expressed for the protection of
the entranceway and the steep slopes. The CO-1 zone is an appropriate zone between
residential and more intense land uses. The important issues in this rezoning include:
. Dodge Street as a major entranceway into Iowa City. This has been addressed in the
provided concept plan by the installation of landscaping and locating the building near the
corner, keeping the parking away from Dodge Street and the neighboring residential.
Staff has asked the applicant to provide drawings of the Dodge Street elevation in order to
ensure the building is appropriate in Iowa City's prominent entranceway. The applicant
has indicated that elevation drawings will be available prior to the meeting on August 21.
. Compatibility with the surrounding areas. According to the provided concept plan, the
proposed development will blend into the surrounding areas by providing landscaped
screening and by locating the building at the corner of the Dodge Street and Scott
Boulevard. The S3 screening will buffer any surrounding residential areas from the
parking lot and the commercial activity associated with the drive-through.
. Vehicular access. The access point to the bank should be located a sufficient distance
from the intersection of Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard to allow for safe traffic
movement. Staff recommends that the access point, as shown on the concept plan, be
included as a condition of approval.
. Steep, critical, and protected slopes. The location of the building and parking shown in the
concept plan appears to leave the most sensitive slopes undisturbed. A Level 1 Sensitive
Areas Review will be required prior to development.
Staff recommends a conditional zoning agreement that addresses these issues.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REl08-00008, an application submitted by the University of Iowa
Community Credit Union for a rezoning from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to
Commercial Office (CO-1) zone for approximately 3.87 acres of property at the south corner of
Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard, be approved subject to a conditional zoning agreement that
includes:
. A requirement for substantial compliance with the concept plan as submitted;
. A requirement for the access point to be located as shown in the concept plan;
. A detailed landscape plan for the site that complies with the screening requirements and
with additional landscaping provided along the Dodge Street frontage; and
. Building elevations demonstrating appropriate articulation and fenestration of the Dodge
Street elevation suitable for this important entranceway into Iowa City.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . Location Map
2. Aerial Photograph
3. ConceptPlan /~
4. Applicant's stateme~ /
Approved by: ~_
Karen Howard, Associate Planner.
r __
J
~~
D-
o:
o
en
a:
I
c
LO
en
a:
-
~
tj
~
~
~
~
tj
LO
en
a:
-. /"'"
r/ "-/'" "-/ )
\ --,..r-/"'----",-j
r~~ I'
IT-)
/ a.. //
~ /
('
co/
(J)
/(a:
\
\
LO
en
a::
en
a:
~./ t,
a..)
n
,...
z
u
Nl~
00
o
o
o
o
I
00
o
N
~
"'C)
~
~
:>
11)
~
o
~
-+-l
-+-l
o
U
rJ:J
~
-+-l
Q)
Q)
~
rJ:J
11)
OJ:J
"'C)
o
o
. .
z
o
1-1
~
U
o
~
~
~
1-1
r:J)
~
tj
~ "0
~
~
~ >
Q)
~
;:j
~ 0
~
..j..I
..j..I
0
~ u
en
~
tj ..j..I
Q)
Q)
~
..j..I
en
Q)
OJ)
"0
0
0
. .
z
0
~
~
u
0
~
~
f-4
~
en
00
o
o
o
o
I
00
o
N
~
D-
o
cr:
LL
UJ
LD
roLL
~_UJ
g~LL
.. . UJ
W~C')
Q..<DO
o LD.--t
---.J T'"'" ,--
UJC')N
0.. II II
WOW
WWQ..
trJ1@9
O:::JUJ
zf-o
<(~w
..JOm
<( .cr:
~~:::J
!:::::dn
cr: -
u*o
..JLD
<(C')
f-
o
f-
o
W
....l
u..
..J
LL
ti:
fV'o 0
C> UJ <(
o >
i ~Q
...J~
Of-
)-0
1::<(
05:
o
,.,...
-'
=
--,
0:0
~
2 8
EB ill
~ W
-l
()
b (f)
"
~.
Cl:.::
LO
(f)
0:
1:)
..<::
CD
~
o
()
(f)
oi1
Q)
1:)
o
o
Z
::>
o 9
g ~
::> 0
II
<3'
z
~
I
f-
cr:
o
z
~t
LL
ti:S5
OLD
UJOl
I'--
LD .
<DC')
0C')
011
+C')
~x
(')..J
ZLL
~ffi
ILD
f-<D
:::IN
0"':
~~
C')
~
~
,....
<(
II
LL
UJC')
8:;=('00)
C') ~~
..w II ~ II
!zOUJllz
w~wzs
CfjUJ:i50
cr:(')D..II
SZUlUJUl
o;;z(')UJ~
wcr:ZWU
cr:~;;zu<(
(') cr:<(D..
z~<(D..UJ
;;z@JD..Ul(')
cr:wo(')z
<(oli!~;;z /
D..u::s~u/
LLO<(;::/)
Ow D.. UJ/
LL cr: /
Ul /
/
LD /
Ol /-
f'-. 1/
. /,
~ I,'
I
,/
'/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
i/I
" '
u\
, ,
'., \
" '
" '
, ,
;x:-- '\ ,- '
/' ~v " "v,.0)\;
-/1 ,: ((>V)'-
:) :'/~ '-(4-
" L-I--
-._-._- -- \~/\
-.--.-.. /;,</0 '\
.~~~~.~~~>\ '~ ~
f~ q ~- fie=.
- H Ii ,= ,I n
. tl~ ,...., '~-4'
JUL 3 I PH 12: 03
TOT ALS:
Steep
20,283 SQ. FT.
Critical
56,256 SQ. FT.
PERCENTAGE DISTURBED BY NEW CONSTRUCTION:
Steep
7,213 SQ. FT. (35%)
Critical
14,617 SQ. FT. (26%)
APPLICANTS STATEMENT
The University of Iowa Community Credit Union (UICCU) intends to
build a corporate office building at the corner of Scott Boulevard and
Dodge St. The building will be their administrative headquarters, but
will also include a branch bank facility with a drive-up teller. The
rezoning to CO-1 is required to allow by special exception the drive - up
facility.
The property is presently zoned RDP and located on the Dodge Street
entranceway to Iowa City. The City's Comprehensive Plan has been to
preserve the natural beauty of the Dodge St. entranceway. This is one
of the UICCU goals as well. All of UICCU facilities are professionally
;~
landscaped and beautifully maintained. 0 ;~
::E () c_
-,..,.- c-
The building will respond architecturally to its surroundings and the::
__' ,C-'I _~
vision of Dodge Street as a green entranceway to the city. The.1'~'IV- -0
- ::;:::
pitched roof with wide over-hangs will reflect the gentle hills ~fue r:y
topography. Natural materials of brick and stone will anchor tlfe 8
building to the site. The building's orientation will place the office areas
along Dodge Street to screen the central entrance, drive-up teller, and
parking from view. Monument signs, rather than a large over-head
freestanding sign, will quietly and unobtrusively mark the commercial
aspect of the property. The landscape will contribute to the screening
of the building and parking lot while also improving the beauty of the
existing site. There will be trees along both street facades and the
building will seem to emerge from between them. The Credit Union will
provide important services to the surrounding residents while its
landscaping and attention to its surroundings will enhance the gateway
to the city.
"TI
~
g
rn
o
Date: August 15, 2008
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
\
RE: Central District Plan
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
I
From: Karen Howard, Associate Planner i
( f\
I '
At your informal meeting on Monday, we will be handing out a draft of the Central District
Plan for your review. Many of you have participated in at least some of the workshops and
discussion forums for this planning effort. We are very pleased with the public participation
and input that have been instrumental in formulating the goals and objectives for the Central
District Plan.
The plan includes goals for housing and quality of life in residential neighborhoods, parks
and open space, streets and transportation, and commercial areas. There are many
interesting ideas presented in the plan. A few of the highlights include:
· Preserving and maintaining quality of life in our older neighborhoods;
· Formulating strategies to make what is one of the City's more walkable areas even
more bicycle and pedestrian friendly;
· Finding creative ways to enhance and add to parks and open space in the district;
· Strategies for the potential redevelopment of the South Gilbert Street commercial
corridor, including the possibility of transit-oriented development if passenger rail is
re-introduced to the City;
· Strategies to enhance the economic viability of the Northside Marketplace and
maintain its historic mainstreet charm.
At your formal meeting on Thursday, we recommend that you set a public hearing for your
September 4 meeting to consider amending the Comprehensive Plan to include this
important element. At this meeting we would like to make a presentation to the Commission
and the public summarizing the highlights of the plan. We will be sending out notification to
all those who have participated in the planning effort and also sending out a press release to
notify the public about the release of the plan for public review.
Please take some time to review the plan over the next couple of weeks and let us know if
you have any questions.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 15, 2008
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Karen Howard, Associate Planner
RE: Sign Code amendments
Over the last several months, staff has been informed of several issues and concerns
relating to the City's sign regulations. Following is a summary and analysis of those issues
and recommendations for amendments to the sign code that will address them.
Freestanding Signs in the CB-2 Zone
In the new zoning code the sign regulations were simplified so that similar zones are
grouped together with the same sign regulations. It made sense to group all the Central
Business Zones together. Freestanding signs are not allowed in the Central Business Zones
because the vision for downtown is for a pedestrian-oriented urban commercial environment
with wide sidewalks and buildings located close to the street. There is very little room for
freestanding signs in such an environment and little need for them since other types of
building signage is highly visible to motorists and pedestrians alike. In addition, since
storefronts in an urban commercial setting are often narrow, allowing freestanding signs for
each storefront would result in considerable sign clutter. Under the previous zoning code,
freestanding signs were allowed in the Central Business Service (CB-2) Zone. Since very
few freestanding signs existed in the CB-2 Zone and monument signs seemed like a
suitable alternative in those few cases where the buildings were set back from the street, the
allowance for freestanding signs in the CB-2 Zone was eliminated from the code.
Staff, however, have recently been made aware of an unintended consequence of this
change. Russ's Northside Service Station, located on the corner of Gilbert and
Bloomington, has a freestanding sign that was in disrepair. The owner wanted to replace
the sign face and repair the structure. However, the code is strict about nonconforming
signs. Any change to a nonconforming sign triggers the requirement to bring the sign into
compliance with all current standards. Since freestanding signs are no longer allowed, the
owner could not change the existing freestanding sign. In most cases a monument sign
would be a suitable alternative, however, there is not enough room on the property for a
monument sign without interfering with the traffic circulation around the gas pumps and the
vision triangle at the street intersection. In addition, unlike most properties in the area, the
building is set back from the street, so there are limited options for other types of signs that
would be readily visible to customers driving down the street. Staff agreed that the most
reasonable solution would be to allow the sign to be repaired and the sign face replaced.
In order to do that, the sign code must be amended to allow freestanding signs in the CB-2
Zone. Staff finds that it is reasonable to amend the zoning code to allow freestanding signs
in the CB-2 Zone in certain circumstances. One possible solution would be to allow
freestanding signs by minor modification in the CB-2 Zone if the owner provides evidence
that the existing configuration of the site and location of the building or buildings on the site
make it practically difficult to install a monument sign and that other types of allowed
signage would not be readily visible from the street due to the location of building(s) or other
unique site characteristics. Suggested code language is included in the following table,
August15,2008
Page 2
which would be inserted into the zoning code Table 5B-4, Sign Specifications and
Provisions in the CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10 Zones.
Sign Type Maximum Sign Area Maximum Height Provisions
Allowed only in the CB-2 Zone
Allowed only through approval of a minor modification.
Applicant must provide convincing evidence that the
existing configuration of the site and location of the
Two (2) square feet per building or buildings on the site make it practically
Freestanding Sign lineal foot of lot frontage, 20 ft. difficult to install a monument sign and that other types of
not to exceed 40 square allowed signage would not be readily visible from the
feet per sign face street due to the location of building(s) or other unique
site characteristics.
Only one freestanding sign is allowed per lot.
A freestanding sign is not allowed if the property has a
monument sign, entranceway sign, or masonry wall sign.
Entranceway Signs
City staff received a request for permission to install identification and directional signage on
the archway structure on Linn Street that leads to the surface parking lot for the grocery
store on the ground floor of the Plaza Towers building in downtown.
The archway and associated masonry walls provide screening for the parking lot and a
street wall that helps separate and buffer pedestrians from the parking area. Because it is
not apparent to motorists that the parking lot is intended for customers of the grocery store,
the owner requested to install signage on the archway that identifies the business and
directs traffic to the parking lot. However, this type of sign did not fit into any of the sign
categories allowed in the CB-10 Zone.
Staff finds the request reasonable and believes there may be other contexts where a
business or institution may have a parking lot or grounds and would like to have a feature
such as an archway to identify and delineate the entrance. In addition there may be
situations where there would be a need or a desire to delineate a walkway or pedestrian
entrance with an archway with identification and directional signage. Therefore, staff
recommends adding a new sign type, "entranceway sign," to the zoning code with
restrictions on size and location. Following is a proposed definition of "entranceway sign,"
proposed standards, and zones where this type of sign might be allowed.
ENTRANCEWAY SIGN - A non-building sign incorporated into or mounted on the
face of or affixed above or below an entranceway arch that extends over a
walkway or driveway. Said sign type is intended to identify and direct traffic to
a place, grounds, or parking lot. The sign may include the name of only one
entity or place and an associated logo, crest, or insignia that identifies the
place, grounds or entity to which the parking or grounds belong. The sign
may also include the words, "parking," "entrance," and/or directional arrows,
but may not contain any advertising message.
Zones where allowed - All Commercial, Industrial and Research Zones. Allowed in
Residential Zones, but only for Parks and Open Space Uses.
August 15, 2008
Page 3
Standards
· Up to one sign per elevation of the entranceway arch.
· For signs located across the top of the entranceway arch, the area of the
sign may not exceed 25% of the total area delineated by the entranceway
arch (see illustration). For a sign located on the side of the archway, the
area of the sign may not exceed 33% of the surface area of the side of the
archway support on which the sign is located.
· Sign copy may not extend beyond the edges of the entranceway structure.
However, if an applicant finds that this standard is too restrictive, they may
request review and approval from the Design Review Committee for an
alternative design. The Design Review Committee will approve, approve
with conditions, or deny an application based on whether the proposed
alternative design is appropriate to and integrated into the overall design of
the entranceway. The Committee will consider such factors as colors,
materials, size, and proportionality.
· An entranceway sign is not allowed if the property already has a monument
sign, freestanding sign, or masonry wall sign located at the subject
entrance.
· In the CH-1, CC-2, and CI-1 Zones, signage on an entranceway arch as
defined herein will count as one sign toward the total limit for freestanding,
freestanding wide-base signs and monument signs on a lot or tract.
· Minimum clearance height is 10 feet for entranceway signs across
driveways and 8 feet for entryway signs across walkways.
· Changeable copy is not allowed.
Signs on Multi-Family Buildings
Earlier this year, the City received an emailletter from the Northside Neighborhood
Association expressing their concern about the proliferation of signs on rental properties
advertising the name, phone number, and/or website of the leasing company that owns the
building. The association believes that these signs are detracting from the residential
character of the neighborhood.
In order to prevent commercial sign clutter from detracting from the residential character of
neighborhoods, the only permanent signs allowed in residential zones are identification
signs, integral signs, directional signs, and flags. Real estate signs are also allowed on a
temporary basis when a property is for sale or lease. The types of signs to which the
Northside Neighborhood refers seem to function somewhat like a real estate sign, except
that they are permanently affixed to the building and are not necessarily advertising the
particular building to which they are affixed, but instead are advertising the leasing
company. For instance, checking the website listed on one of the signs indicates that the
particular property is already leased for the entire year and is not available.
A real estate sign is defined as a sign that advertises the sale, rental or lease of the
premises or part of the premises on which the sign is located. The code also states that a
real estate sign must be removed within 48 hours of the sale of the property. By implication
then, real estate signs should not be permanent signs, but should only be present if the
August 15, 2008
Page 4
property is for sale or lease. However, for rental properties that more frequently turn over, it
is difficult to monitor when properties are available for rent to determine whether a sign is
legal at any particular point in time.
Some have argued that these signs could be considered "identification signs." However,
identification signs are defined as, "a sign displaying the name, address, crest, insignia or
trademark, occupation or profession of an occupant of a building or the name of any building
on the premises. Since the leasing company signs are advertising a business that is off-site
rather than identifying the building itself, these signs do not fit into this sign category.
Staff have considered this issue and have observed the proliferation of these types of signs
particularly in neighborhoods close to downtown and the University. However, City staff
have found it difficult to enforce the existing code as written. While it may be reasonable to
allow larger multi-family buildings that may have more frequent vacancies to display a small
sign with the name of the leasing company and a phone number or website, when located
on single family homes, duplexes, and small apartment buildings and rooming houses, the
signs seem out of place and detract from the residential character of the neighborhood.
They present a commercial feel to the neighborhood and suggest to permanent residents
and potential home buyers that the neighborhood is transitional in nature. Staff finds that
the typical temporary "For Rent" sign should suffice when there is an actual vacancy on the
property rather than allowing the investment property owner to use these homes as an
advertising vehicle for their rental business by placing a permanent sign on every rental
property they own.
To address these concerns and make it easier to enforce limitations on commercial signage
in residential neighborhoods, Staff recommends the following changes to the sign code:
· Amend the definition of "real estate sign" and "temporary sign" so that it is clear that
real estate signs are temporary signs, built of temporary materials and only allowed
as a yard sign or a sign in a window. Place a time limit on the display of such signs.
· Amend the provision that states that only one real estate sign is allowed per lot to
state "only one real estate sign is allowed per principal building that is for sale, rent,
or lease." This will provide a more reasonable standard for properties that have
multiple buildings on one lot, such as planned developments.
· Add a new sign type, "residential leasing company sign," to the code and allow them
only on multi-family buildings with eight or more units and only in multi-family zones.
Allow this type of sign in lieu of a "small identification sign," which is currently
allowed.
· Maintain the current code provision that allows any use other than a single family or
duplex to display a larger identification sign in the form of a monument sign, facia
sign, or awning sign. For example, a 12-unit apartment building in a multi-family
zone could have a sign on the awning above the door that states, "Pine Ridge
Apartments," and also a small sign that states, "AAA Rentals -
www.AAArentals.com...
REAL ESTATE SIGN: A temporary sign which advertises the sale, rental or lease of
the premises or part of the premises on which the sign is located, including open
house directional signs.
RESIDENTIAL LEASING COMPANY SIGN: A buildino sion displavino the name,
address, phone number, website, crest. insionia, and/or trademark of the leasino
company for the multi-family buildino upon which it is located.
August15,2008
Page 5
TEMPORARY SIGN: A yard sale sign, temporary identification sign, real estate sian,
or political sign constructed of temporary materials, such as cardboard, wallboard
or plywood, with or without a structural frame, intended for a temporary period of
display, but excluding banners.
Table 58-1: Sign Specifications and Provisions In Residential Zones and the 10 and OPOH Zones
Maximum Height &
Special Provisions
The siqn must be a buildinQ
siQn.
Onlv allowed on multi-familv
buildinQs that contain 8 or
more dwellinQ units.
Uo to one of these sians is
allowed oer bulldina.
Must be located no more
than 10 feet above Qrade.
The sign must be a building
sign.
Up to one of these signs is
allowed per building.
No permit is required.
Not allowed if the buildinq
has a residentialleasinq
comoany siqn.
Permitted Signs
Zone
RM-12. RM-20. RNS-20. RM~44. PRM
3 Sq. ft.
Small
identification sign
ID-RS, RR-1, RS-5, RS-8, RS-12, RNS-12,
ID-RM, RM-12, RM-20, RNS-20, RM-44,
PRM
2 sq. ft.
Table 58-6: Sign Specifications and Prqvlsions for Non-Pe
Permitted Signs Maximum Sign Area . MaximumH
anent, Off~Premlse, and Other Special Signs
Provisions
Real Estate signs
In Residential Zones: 4 sq. ft.;
May be double-faced for a
total area of 8 sq. ft.
In Non-residential Zones: 32
sq. ft.; May be double-faced
for a total area of 64 sq. ft.
In Residential Zones:
5ft
In Non-Residential
Zones: 10 ft.
The Neighborhood Associations and the Apartment Owners' Association have been
informed that these proposed amendments will be on your meeting agenda next week. A
number of written comments have been received regarding the proposed changes to the
sign code. These are attached for your consideration.
Karen Howard
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Klaus, Carl H [carl-klaus@uiowa.edu]
Thursday, August 14, 2008 10:24 AM
Karen Howard
mbslonn@mchsi.com
Proposed revisions in the code for building signs
Dear Karen Howard,
I write in support of the Northside Neighborhood's request for revisions in
the city code pertaining to building/rental signs in residential
neighborhoods. As a resident of Goosetown, I share the belief that
residential neighborhoods should not be turned into permanent advertising
venues by landlords and rental agencies. Thus I strongly support the
revisions that have been drafted by city staff.
Yrs., Carl Klaus
carl klaus
http://www.carlklaus.com
1
Karen Howard
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Howell, Perry [perry-howell@uiowa.edu]
Thursday, August 14, 2008 12:03 PM
Karen Howard
proposed clarifications of Iowa City signage regulations
Dear Karen,
Just writing to let you know that I strongly support the clarifications you
have made to the Iowa City signage regulations. I appreciate the work that
has gone into thinking about and writing up these clarifications. I think
this will be very helpful, especially for maintaining the appearance of
residential areas that makes them pleasant places to live in the first
place for both owner-occupiers and renters.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can provide any additional input
to express my support.
Regards,
Perry Howell
1
Page 1 of 1
Karen Howard
From: j & r williams [williams.books78@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 200812:00 PM
To: Karen Howard
Subject: commercial signs in residential neighborhoods
Hi - regarding this issue, my suggestion is that,
[lJat the very least, such permanently affixed commercial real estate related signs be limited to the same
total square-inchage and/or other limitations, as for true "cottage industry" at-home businesses -- --------
---OR,
[2] that true cottage-industry type businesses be permitted the same privileges as the current large real
estate/rental signage !
Sincerely,
Rok
Northside Book Market, Iowa City
319-466-9330
OPEN Mon-Fri 11-8, Sat 11-6, Sun 11-5
NEW
bookstore email address is:
wiUiams,b9Qks~a@gmail~Qm
8/14/2008
Karen Howard
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Vinsonhaler, Nettie C [chris-vinsonhaler@uiowa.edu]
Thursday, August 14, 2008 10:07 AM
Karen Howard
proposed signage amendments
Attachments:
sign.code.amendments.7.08.memo.doc; ATT00001.txt
~
~
~
sign.code.amendme ATfOOOO1.txt (70
nts.7.08.memo... B)
Dear Karen Howard,
As a new home-owner in the Northside area, I want to express my strong
endorsement to the proposed sign ordinance modifications. Certainly the
issue of neighborhood appearance strongly affects property values--which in
turn strongly affects tax revenues, as well as the vibrancy and health of a
community.
In addition, however, the sign modificatons also protect those involved
with rental property. Reduction of signage increases the appeal of
neighborhood life for those who choose to rent in neighborhoods, thereby
improving rental values for those who own rental property. I know this
because I also share a couple of rooms in my own house with graduate
student renters. Because I offer a high quality environment for those who
share my home, I can charge higher rent and also keep my home in top
condition. Moreover, I am able to do this without any signage whatsoever. I
have found other ways to advertise (especially the new craigslist.org),
which are much more effective than physical signage.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours,
Chris Vinsonhaler
715 E. Market Street
1
Page 1 of 1
Karen Howard
From: KENT ACKERSON [kenCackerson@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 20089:35 AM
To: Karen Howard
Cc: Northside
Subject: Signs on multi-family dwellings
Dear Karen,
We have lived in the Northside Neighborhood since 1974.
We support changes that will restrict, and hopefully eliminate, the proliferation of signs on rental properties.
Respectfully,
Kent and Kay Ackerson
617 Brown Street
Reveal your inner athlete and share it with friends on Windows Live. Share now!
8/14/2008
Page 1 of 1
Karen Howard
From: jponto@avalon.net
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 8:41 AM
To: Karen Howard
Subject: sign code amendments
Dear Karen, Planning and Zoning Commission, et aI.,
I wish to express my support of the proposed amendments to the sign code. As a resident of the northside
neighborhood, I am familiar with and affected by many of the signs discussed. For example, I believe that the
free-standing sign for Russ Amoco should be allowed. My primary concern, however, relates to permanent rental
signs affixed to apartment buildings. These signs are visually quite distracting to the neighborhood. I think that
the proposed amendments to the sign code will be important improvements, and I urge their adoption.
Sincerely,
James Ponto
618 Brown St
Iowa City
8/15/2008
Page 1 of 1
Karen Howard
To: Mark Penno
Subject: RE: Clarification of sign codes
From: Mark Penno [mailto:alexpenno@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 10:13 PM
To: Karen Howard
Subject: Clarification of sign codes
Karen,
I will not be present at the Planning and Zoning meeting next Thursday, but would like to express my
support of the clarification and "cleaning up" of the signs on properties- sign clutter.
Thank you!
Bonnie Penno
8/15/2008
Page 1 of2
Karen Howard
From: N Ta [nta1995@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 20082:44 PM
To: Karen Howard
Subject: FW: Northside Action Alert
Attachments: sign.code.amendments.7 .0B.memo.doc
Dear Ms. Howard:
I live in the Northside Neighborhood on Fairchild St and am writing to not support the NNA complaint about signs
affixed to the building. I think this is violating property owners' rights. If it's within owners' property, I don't
think the city should infringe to that right. In addition, what if it takes more than a year to rent or sale a
property, would a regulation from the city leads to property owners to unable to put up a for rent / sale sign after
the expired date.
There aren't too many rental buildings here to make this even an issue. I am offended to listen to what the
associations or the city tell me how to live on my property. In short, I don't think that we need tiny bity law
that takes away people's rights.
thank you for your time,
Hannah Hinckley
Karen Howard
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
c spons [csspons@yahoo.com]
Friday, August 15, 2008 11 :06 AM
Karen Howard
Support for Sign Clarification
Dear Karen,
I am writing to support the proposed sign code amendments, particularly the
one regarding signs on multi-family buildings. Over the past few years, I
have watched with concern as permanently-affixed signs advertising rental
companies have cropped up with growing frequency on single-family houses
used as rental property. It is now hard to find a block in any older
neighborhood that is unmarred by their presence.
These signs, which typically advertise the rental company's website (e.g.,
IIwww.CityRentals.org,1I undermine the residential feel of neighborhoods and
contribute to visual clutter. As commercial advertisements, they are out of
place in residential zones.
I believe that the proposed clarification will help maintain the spirit and
intent of the existing code, by removing this commercial clutter from
residential neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Claire Sponsler
413 N. Gilbert St.
1
Page 1 of 1
Karen Howard
From: jesse.singerman@mchsi.com
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 10:47 AM
To: Karen Howard
Subject: sign clutter clarification
Dear Karen-
I support the clarification of the sign code which will be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning
Commission and by the City Council in the section entitled "Signs on Multifamily Buildings"
This should help to address the problem of commercial sign clutter in residential neighborhoods.
Thank you,
Jesse Singerman
219 Ronalds St.
Iowa City, IA
8/15/2008
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AUGUST 7, 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, Christina Kuecker, Sarah Greenwood-Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT:
Ike Akabogu, Uju Akabogu, Lambert White, Mary Knudson-Dion,
Anne Bendixen, Josh Newman, Ruth Baker, Ann Kohl, Anna
Buss, Sadie May, Paula Swygard
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
Recommend denial by a vote of 3-2 of item REZ08-00005/SUB08-00005, an application submitted by lke
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 0.88-acres of property at 442, 446,
and 452 Benton Street and 719 and 723 Michael Street.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
REZONING ITEMS:
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. The 45-day limitation period is August 7,2008.
Kuecker noted that this item had been deferred from the last meeting. The applicant has submitted a new
site plan which would change the development to a 10-lot subdivision by changing the original six units on
Michael Street to five units. This change provides a new 30-foot wide green space that was not originally
there. In addition, three parallel parking spaces have been added to the site plan. Kuecker handed out
elevation drawings of what the buildings would look like. Kuecker stated that Staff's concerns with the
new plan are similar to their previously stated concerns. Staff is concerned with the amount of open
space and with the scale and design of the buildings. Although Staff was given a set of preliminary plans
to look over earlier in the week, the plans before the Commission on this evening had not been
extensively reviewed.
Kuecker attached information to the staff-packet that the Commission had requested at the last meeting.
One Commissioner had asked for data on the amount of building permits and what sort of redevelopment
had been happening in the neighborhood in question; a table was included in the packet which outlined
this information. Commissioners also requested information on the amount of dollars in General
Rehabilitation and Improvement Program (GRIP) funding that had been given out in the neighborhood.
Kuecker included a summary of the funding, and stated that the total amount spent in the last 20 years
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7, 2008
Page 2
was approximately $200,000 for this neighborhood. Kuecker stated that a copy of the minutes from the
Planning and Zoning meeting in which this property had requested an up-zone to RM-20 was also
included in the packet.
Freerks asked if there were any questions for Staff. Eastham asked if Staff knew what the allowable
number of units would have been for these five properties under the RS-8 zoning that was in place prior
to recent revisions to the zoning code. Miklo said that was something which Staff would have to study.
Kuecker noted that under the current RS-8 zoning there could be six lots, possibly seven if the corner met
the size requirements for a duplex. Eastham asked if it would be reasonable to suggest that more units
would have been allowed under the previous version of the RS-8 zoning code. Miklo would not risk a
guess without sitting down to further research the question.
Freerks opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak first.
Ike Akabogu, 1555 Otter Lane, North Liberty, thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak with
them regarding this application for rezoning. Akabogu stated that when the application was submitted,
the plans were for a 6-plex. He said that a 6-plex had been planned because his bank required at least
that many units to finance him. Akabogu stated that in order to make the project work for the Planning
and Zoning Commission, he had gone back and reduced the number of units on Michael Street to five,
created more green space, and added an eight-foot porch in the front of each unit to provide additional
outdoor space. Akabogu said that he had also twice met with the neighborhood since the last Planning
and Zoning meeting and has shown the new plans to them. Akabogu stated that this was not an issue of
him against the neighborhood; rather the neighborhood and he are endeavoring to work together. He
said that in the last conversation he had with the neighborhood they actually liked the revised drawings;
however, their concerns remained regarding the rezoning. Akabogu stated that he wished to remind the
neighborhood and the Commission that the properties in question are surrounded by RM-20 zoning and
apartment buildings. These lots, Akabogu contended, are totally different from the other side of Benton
Street in that there are apartment buildings and multiple-family units all around his units, whereas the
other side of Benton consists of small single-family units. Akabogu said the neighbors need not fear a
"slippery slope" argument in which property owners in the area would rush to get rezoning for their
properties and would be approved based on his precedent. Akabogu said that the other properties in the
area would not be so justifiable for a rezoning based on the fact that they are not surrounded by multi-
family units. The condition of the units in question, Akabogu said, is terrible; everyone agrees. He asked
the Commission if it was better to leave these units in terrible condition, or better to try to improve the
area by implementing his building plan. He said the community would gain solid buildings, a wider street
on Michael Street, and new sidewalks. This rezoning, he said, applies only to his small corner, not to the
whole neighborhood; he is not looking to change the whole neighborhood. He said that he wished it was
possible for him to simply build fewer units to ease everyone's concerns, but financially he has done all
he can do to show good faith. Akabogu said that trying to fix the current units is simply not worth it
financially because the units were not built to last for as long as they have. Akabogu encouraged the
Commission to consider the positives of this project and to look at the whole picture.
Koppes asked how long Akabogu had owned 723 Michael Street. Akabogu replied that he had owned it
since 2006. Koppes asked if he had done a basement remodel on the property. Akabogu said he tried to
refinish the basement but that as he worked one thing after another was found to be in need of repair or
replacement. Koppes asked if he then did not actually refinish the basement. Akabogu said that he did,
but that it did not really cure the problem. Akabogu said that the problem is that you cannot really
remodel something that was not intended to last that long in the first place. He said that he keeps pouring
in money, but is not able to raise the rents to cover the expenses. Akabogu stated that it must also be
kept in mind that most of the units in the neighborhood are not owner-occupied, and that replacing his
current units with newer units will not change that fact. He said nicer units may bring in people of more
decent character to the neighborhood.
There were no further questions from the Commission for Akabogu.
Uju Akabogu, 1555 Otter Lane, North Liberty, stated that she is Ike Akabogu's wife. She said that she
was very impressed with the crowd that came out to support and show concern for their neighborhood,
and she thanked them for doing so. Akabogu said that she also is concerned for the neighborhood and
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7, 2008
Page 3
expressed a deep love and appreciation for Iowa City.
Akabogu expressed concern with the idea that changing this one little corner of Benton Street would
change the entire city and be a visual blight on the neighborhood. Akabogu wished to reassure anyone
who had these kinds of concerns that the corner in question was very much separate from the rest of the
neighborhood and that the designs of the buildings are actually quite cute and provides a nice transition
between the small homes of the neighborhood and the large apartment buildings surrounding the
property.
Akabogu said she hopes that people understand that she and Akabogu want what is best for the city and
for Iowa because she is an Iowan and her family is Iowan; they are not just disinterested foreigners who
do not care about the area. She said they want only to improve the area, and to conduct their business
like everyone else is able to do.
Lambert White, 329 Douglass Court, said he had concerns for how this new construction project would
relate in aesthetically with the current neighborhood. White asked who the target clientele for the units
was intended to be: families, students, low-income individuals? White noted that any talks that took place
with the neighborhood must have been very isolated in their nature, as he was never consulted. White
asked what Ike Akabogu had meant when he said that Michael Street would become a "normal" street
after the completion of the project.
Mary Knudson-Dion, 725 W. Benton Street, said she wished to clarify the issue of the neighborhood
having been met with Akabogu. Knudson-Dion said that she and Mark Cannon had been called by
Akabogu a couple of times to meet with him concerning the project. Knudson-Dion said that while the
conversations were collegial, Knudson-Dion and Cannon were not in any way presenting themselves as
representatives of the neighborhood. Knudson-Dion said that the meetings were simply to keep her and
Cannon apprised of changes to the plans.
Knudson-Dion said that she had expressed to Akabogu that she liked the fact that he had increased the
green space with these new plans, and that she felt the building design was attractive. However, she
also informed him that she would not support the project because she is concerned of the "slippery-slope"
effect the change in zoning might have on the neighborhood. Knudson-Dion noted that 61 % of the
properties in the neighborhood are rented. She noted that land there is cheap and that values would go
up considerably for owners of that land if the zoning became RS-12. Knudson-Dion said that Callaway
Acres, the 8 acres of vacant land behind her house, could easily be rezoned to RS-12 if that zoning is
granted to Akabogu.
Knudson-Dion said her concern extends to other neighborhoods, not just hers, because she is afraid that
if this passes, it will also be easier for other developers to go from RS-8 to RS-12.
Knudson-Dion said that a lot of hard work was done with the Southwest District Plan to integrate the two
sides of Benton Street and emphasize that they are in fact one neighborhood. One of the reasons
residents wanted Benton Hill Park was so that they could have one, unified, diverse neighborhood that
joined together in spite of the arterial dividing the two sides of the street.
Knudson-Dion said that her understanding of the staff report was that Staff had requested the building be
reduced to four units, not five. She asked for clarification on that.
Weitzel asked Knudson-Dion if her neighborhood had a Neighborhood Association. Knudson-Dion said
that it did, that she was its representative, and that it was with the Neighborhood Association that Ike
Akabogu had initially met with in May.
Anne Bendixen, 902 Hudson, stated that she owns her own home, six homes away from the property in
question. She stated that she is a low-income, single parent of two children who attend Roosevelt
Elementary. She noted that the property is on the route she and her children take to school each day.
Bendixen said that when she moved into her house 11 years ago it was in a neighborhood that was
diverse in terms of economic-standing, race and age; a quality which her family liked about the
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7, 2008
Page 4
neighborhood. Bendixen stated that she has been troubled by the deterioration of the neighborhood.
She described the neighborhood as one on the brink of collapse.
Bendixen said that increasing the population density of this neighborhood could only make the situation
worse. Increasing the density will mean: less green space and fewer mature trees in an area where shady
pedestrian areas are already limited; more transitory student renters with no investment in the
neighborhood; more student parties and the nuisances that come with them in terms of trash and noise;
more parking problems in an area with very limited parking; more risk for children walking on streets with
no sidewalks, more risky student drivers, more incidents of near-misses for children walking to and from
school; more requests for zoning changes from other rental properties, which will only exacerbate existing
problems; and a continued decline of families in the neighborhood. Bendixen stated that the end result
would be a faltering elementary school surrounded by college-student apartments, leaving the vast
majority of Roosevelt students to be bused in from other neighborhoods. Bendixen stated that this
rezoning could result in another ghetto for Iowa City.
Josh Newman, 1715 G ST, former owner resident of 442 W. Benton Street said that he has an interest in
these meetings as a longtime Iowa City resident. He said he wished to respond to a letter opposing the
project by saying that while the writer was concerned with keeping the neighborhood affordable for first-
time homebuyers and families, what the homes in question really are is cheap, not affordable.
Ruth Baker, 515 W. Benton Street, said that she lives directly across the street from the proposed
townhouses. Baker said she had attended the May 15th Neighborhood Association meeting with
Akabogu, and said she has given the matter a lot of thought. She said that while the homes are in terrible
shape, the solution is not to change the zoning. She said an increase in density would be the last straw
and would absolutely demolish the neighborhood. Baker said that while Akabogu is asking only to rezone
a few properties, she believes it is true that other requests will come in immediately and that they will be
difficult to deny if they meet the same criteria. The neighborhood already has its share of high density
multi-family units, Baker said. Baker noted that Akabogu purchased the properties knowing they were
zoned RS-8. Baker said that the City is always expressing the need for affordable housing in Iowa City,
and yet, here is a neighborhood full of affordable housing that may be destroyed. Baker said that it is a
shame that the properties have not been kept up better, and that she believes there should be some City
assistance available for first-time buyers in the neighborhood. She said the neighborhood would
welcome subsidized housing and that as a diverse neighborhood close to downtown, it was made for that
kind of thing.
Ann Kohl, 709 Giblin Drive, said that she had lived in her home for nearly 35 years. She said that she
hopes the Commission will not change the zoning to RS-12 because she feels the neighborhood already
has too many apartments, and does not need the increased population, or the extra traffic. Kohl said that
while she gets along alright with the students who live next door to her, they do have way more parties
than she would like. She said that she believes Akabogu means well, but that she does not believe he
really knows what he is doing with this project. She said she believes that the buildings are way too much
for the area, and that the plan would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Kohl said she worries what a
change in zoning might do to property values as well as property taxes. Kohl said the focus should be on
what can be done within the confines of the present zoning. She stated that Akabogu knew what he was
getting when he bought the properties and he should now deal with what he has.
Anna Buss, 525 W. Benton Street, stated that if Akabogu bought these properties in 2006, then he knew
what he was getting. One of the things that he has clearly said, Buss stated, is that these buildings are in
bad shape and are falling apart. Buss said that this was not possible in Iowa City because the Housing
Inspection Services (HIS) department would not issue a rental permit to any property that was unfit to live
in. If the house is somehow unfit to live in, Buss said, then shame on the City for letting that happen and
shame on Akabogu for not fixing them up.
Buss said that every one of her properties in the area is older than Akabogu's, and each was in as bad or
worse shape when she bought them. She said she has sunk thousands of dollars into her properties, and
as a result, she now has higher property taxes. Buss said that if Akabogu does not wish to keep his
properties up then he should sell them to someone who will.
Buss said she invited everyone to go by and look at the rental properties up the hill in the RM-20 zone.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7,2008
Page 5
Two of them, she said, are in such horrible condition that they ought to be torn down. Buss contended
that because Akabogu knew what he was buying when he purchased the properties, he had to have had
a plan for the neighborhood that included rezoning.
Buss said that a number of years ago she owned almost every house on Miller Avenue. When the
Southwest District Plan was developed and the zoning was changed, Buss said, she lost a lot of money.
The rezoning prevented her from being able to put duplexes all down Miller, as she had hoped. As a
result of that rezoning, she began selling her properties on Miller. She said that she had spoken to
everyone that she had sold to and they are all waiting to see what the Commission does with this issue.
Buss said that the owners of the nine acres south of Benton Hill Park are also waiting to see what comes
of this rezoning. She said that there are realtors that are salivating at the idea of a rezoning in the area.
Buss stated that five of the eight houses on Miller Avenue are rental properties; on Benton Street
between Hudson and Miller, two of the three houses are rentals; on the west side of Hudson, six of 15
houses are rentals; on the east side of Hudson 11 of 18 houses are rentals. Buss said that by her count,
the percentage of rentals in the neighborhood is more like 75% than 61%.
Buss said that affordable housing does not exist in Iowa City. She said affordable housing is a myth and
that this is because of the land costs and the expense of City requirements. Buss said that she has been
unable to find a builder for her proposed development that is willing to build for less than $210 per square
foot.
Buss said that she will be satisfied whether the Commission votes to rezone or not. With a rezoning, she
stands to make money and see her property values double. She does not, however, wish to see what will
happen to the neighborhood if the rezoning goes through.
As no one else came forward to speak, Freerks allowed lke Akabogu a chance for rebuttal.
Akabogu stated that the issue was one in which everyone needed to take their emotions out of it and
examine the real deal. Akabogu said that something needs to happen with the houses, and that this plan
is one which will draw families to the community. Akabogu said that his heart's plan is to house families,
not students. He said that he is working together with a Johnson County assistance program to make
these homes affordable for families. Akabogu said that the median income for a single-person household
in Iowa City is $50,800; Iowa City is not a cheap place to live. Right now, Akabogu said, no family with
children will rent these homes. This project, Akabogu said, will provide units with room for families and a
widened, improved Michael Street. Akabogu said that low-income housing is not going to fall from the
sky, and that he is trying to do something for this population.
Akabogu stated that he is giving the Commission a say in what happens to this neighborhood; that he is
presenting plans that he will have to follow, and not just asking for a blank check. He said that he has
helped one of his former renters, a single mother; actually buy the house she had rented from him. This,
he said, is his real mission and what is in his heart. Each unit is on its own lot so that the family can
actually buy it, Akabogu said, and he is connecting with resources and organizations in the community to
make that possible.
Freerks interjected that the Commission cannot rezone based on potential buyers. Freerks said that who
may purchase or live in the property and whether or not it is owner-occupied never comes into play with a
rezoning.
Akabogu said that he understood this, but that he was addressing concerns of the community. Akabogu
said that he was replying to the concern that 61 % of the neighborhood was already a rental, and that he
was trying to show he would be taking away from that problem, not adding to it.
If the rezoning is approved, Akabogu said, then five rental units will be replaced by ten very nice units that
could be purchased by their occupants. If nothing is done, Akabogu said, the community will further
deteriorate. He wants to be a part of the community, he said; he wants to work together with the
community to make it a better place.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7, 2008
Page 6
Akabogu reminded the Commission that the last time he came for a rezoning he wished to connect the
two lots on Michael Street with the rest of the RM-20 zone in the area. If that had been done, he said,
they would not have had a problem rebuilding single families on the Benton Street side.
Freerks asked why Akabogu was now asking for a rezoning on Benton Street if he once thought that the
appropriate thing to do was to cut off the rezoning at Michael Street. Akabogu said that at the time he
requested the first rezoning, he did not own all of the units on Benton Street that he does now. Freerks
then asked if the original rezoning application was based then on what he owned, not on what he thought
was best for the area as a whole. He said that this was true.
Akabogu said that it only makes financial sense to build buildings the size he is proposing. No bank will
sponsor a plan that does not make money from them. Akabogu contended that there will be no increase
in density as a result of this plan. Freerks responded that an increase in density and a rezoning is
required to implement the plan. This plan does not mean that the children will not have a place to play,
Akabogu said, or that the neighborhood will be ruined and the community destroyed. This plan will
actually create a better place for children and the community. He is the one who will be paying to make
these improvements.
Freerks noted that Staff had recommended a reduction in the number of units on Michael Street from six
to four, and that Akabogu had only reduced the number to five. She asked why he had settled on five.
Akabogu said that even at six units the plans showed an $114,000 deficit. With five units, Akabogu is
endeavoring to show the Commission that he is willing to make the project work. He said that he is open
to suggestions from the Commission and the community to make this work.
Weitzel asked Akabogu to speak to the neighbor's point that he should at least try to work within the
framework of the existing code, if not within the framework of the existing buildings. Akabogu said that he
has searched for ways to get this done without changing the zoning. Most available funding requires an
owner-occupant to qualify, and were fairly small amounts.
Freerks stated that some of these properties were owner-occupied before Akabogu bought them. He
said that only Josh Newman's unit was owner-occupied and that Newman had tried to fix the place up but
that it was not feasible. Akabogu said that he was told by one contractor who looked into remodeling the
place that it looked as though the home was from Mexico or something. Akabogu said that with all of the
repairs needed, one might as well tear the place down and build new. The reason they are proposing the
building they are, Akabogu said, is that it makes good financial sense. If the City would give him
$300,000 for the project, he would cut the number of units down to whatever the City wanted.
Uju Akabogu said that she felt there was intimidation going on. She said that she felt that some people in
the audience were making threats such that if this is rezoned then they and others will do the same. Uju
said she was concerned that this was intimidating to the Commission and to the other members of the
neighborhood. She said that the implication is that if Akabogu tears down five houses, the whole world
for the neighbors will be rocked, and that simply is not true. Freerks said that this proposal may very well
feel very threatening to some people. Uju said she finds it unfair for someone to say that they are, on the
one hand, against someone being able to rezone, and then on the other hand, going to do the exact
same thing if the rezoning goes through. She said she finds some of the tones threatening, inappropriate,
and intimidating.
Miklo said that he wished to address the question of wholesale rezoning of the neighborhood. From a
professional planner's perspective, he said, each rezoning should be considered on a case by case basis,
and based on the Comprehensive Plan, the character of the neighborhood, and the adjacent zoning.
Freerks said that she felt she must add that the Commission does consider how rezoning an area affects
the rest of the community, and, in fact, the Commission should not do anything without taking this into
account. Miklo agreed that this was true. He noted, however, that one of the things to consider in this
case is the adjacent zone. There is, he acknowledged, RM-20 zoning adjacent and because of this,
transitional zoning such as RS-12 is not necessarily inappropriate. In terms of the larger neighborhood,
most of the area south of Benton Street is zoned RS-8, although there is some multi-family and
commercial zoning. Freerks asked about Miller Avenue, stating that there is RM-20 and commercial
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7,2008
Page 7
behind Miller. Miklo said that if somebody submitted a proposal to rezone the area north of Benton Street
then that would be a consideration. Miklo said that there seems to be an implication that if this is rezoned
the entire neighborhood must be rezoned, and that is false.
Sadie P. May, 612 W. Benton Street, stated that she has lived in her home for 50 years. The
neighborhood has been described as a residential area, she said, and she would like to keep it that way.
May said that there were still a few people in the neighborhood that owned their homes and that they
would like for that to continue. She said that they do their best to keep their places up. May said she
would not like to see any more townhouses than are already there. Living next to the school, she said,
she sees how dangerous it is for the children to walk to school and try to cross the street, especially
during the winter. May said that she is surprised that in all the years she has lived there no child has
actually been killed trying to cross the street. She said that she looked forward to a better Iowa City, and
that she is asking the Commission not to approve this plan.
Weitzel asked Miklo if Benton Street was an arterial street. Miklo replied that it is.
Lambert White said that he drives Benton Street every day in his automobile and twice a day as a school
bus driver. White said that Benton Street has issues of speeding traffic, poor road conditions and children
trying to cross a dangerous road. Adding to the density of the neighborhood just puts more pressure on
that road, White said. During the flood, White said, Benton Street turned out to be the only access road
between one side of town and the other, which further demonstrated its vulnerability. White said the size
of Benton Street should be increased, and that added consideration should be given to the density of the
population in that area.
Koppes remarked that while Benton Street is an arterial, it does not meet the current standards for an
arterial. Miklo said this was correct. Benton Street has insufficient width for an arterial and has more
driveways coming off of it than would be allowed for a new arterial. Then again, Miklo said, when moving
traffic in an area that is already built, you are not going to have a modern street. Getting a modern street
into an already built neighborhood such as those off of Benton would probably destroy the neighborhood.
The City Council did consider a proposal a couple of years ago to add improvements such as turning
lanes on Benton Street and encountered quite a bit of neighborhood opposition. As a result, Miklo said,
that proposal was basically tabled and there are no current plans to widen the street.
Anna Buss stated that there had been court cases in the past in which property-owners sued the City to
get a rezoning because of issues just like the one before the Commission currently. Those cases, Buss
said, will not be the first or the last to go to court. Buss said that she is trying to be intimidating because
she owns two-and-a-half times as much property as the Akabogu's do and she would love to build on it,
as would some of the other property owners down the street and the owners of the vacant lot on Miller.
Plahutnik asked if these discussions about other properties could be brought up at the beginning when
the Commission invites discussion of other issues, as that would seem more appropriate.
Buss said when Miklo said that RS-12 might be a good fit for Michael Street due to being surrounded by
RM-20 she realized what a good fit her property on Miller Avenue would be with the commercial zoning
on the other ends of Miller and Hudson.
Buss said that if the Commission would look at the map drawn up by a neighborhood resident that shows
all of the rental property in the area, the picture would become clearer to them.
Ike Akabogu said that the way the houses are right now, the driveways are right on Benton Street. This,
Akabogu said is much more dangerous to little kids than the configuration he is proposing. What he
proposes has no dril,(eway on Benton and has the cars coming in to the back of the building. Further, the
houses are 40 feet from the street. Freerks asked how far the current houses were from the street.
Kuecker said she was not sure, but that it was less than 40, perhaps 20-25 feet.
Paula Swygard, 426 Douglass Street, said that she has been a homeowner in the area for about 11
years. Swygard shared the map that had been discussed by Buss with the Commissioners. She said
that when the rentals surrounding them are all laid out on a map like that it feels pretty overwhelming.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7, 2008
Page 8
Miklo also supplied the Commissioners with a map containing the same information that had been drawn
up by Staff.
Swygard said she would like to address the idea of emotion playing into this situation. She said that her
feeling is that the emotions have been on both ends. She noted that Akabogu talks about what is in his
heart and the way he wants to help families. When it comes right down to it though, Swygard said, this is
a business he is talking about. He is in this for financial reasons, and that should be considered, she
said.
Freerks invited new commentary from the public. As no one came forward, the public hearing was
closed.
Freerks said that she believed there were two options for going forward. The 45-limitation period is up, so
the Commission could vote either to approve or deny this application. If the Commission voted to
approve, then they would need to discuss limitations or conditions they would require of the developer. If
conditions and limitations are required, then the Commission may want to ask the applicant if he would
like a deferral so that the Commission had time to review exactly what conditions they would like placed
on the property. Freerks said that before the matter was discussed further she would like to ask for a
motion.
Eastham moved to defer this item to the item until the next meeting if the applicant approves a deferral.
Freerks said the request has to come from the applicant. Miklo said the applicant could be asked now.
The applicant indicated his agreement to a deferral.
Weitzel seconded the motion.
Freerks opened the floor for discussion.
Eastham said that he felt this proposal had a number of fairly complicated issues associated with it, and
he would like to have some additional time, including an informal session, to ask some questions of Staff.
Eastham said that he personally thinks this is a rather challenging neighborhood, and that it makes it
difficult to discern the best way to proceed with this application and to foresee how the proposed
development will affect the overall area. He did not feel ready to vote one way or the other, and thus,
motioned to defer. Eastham said he would also like to defer to give Staff time to make some additional
recommendations. Freerks asked what those recommendations would be. Eastham said he did not think
that Staff had yet had time to evaluate the most recent set of plans. Miklo asked Eastham if he wanted
Staff comment on that, and Eastham said he would.
Miklo said that from the beginning Staff had seen some merit in this potential rezoning, but that Staff also
felt that this was a sensitive neighborhood and that there were conflicting issues that need to be weighed
against one another. From Staffs perspective, the current housing stock on these five lots is not in good
shape. There is a desire on the part of the neighborhood, which is encouraged by the Comprehensive
Plan, for a mix of single-family, owner-occupied and rental units in this area. When Staff reviewed this
application, Staff's consensus was that given the size, design and quality of the units, the likelihood that
they would become owner-occupied again is small. It is possible that the units could be fixed up as
rentals, but the size, configuration, and lack of basements in the homes are a challenge to their
desirability as owner-occupied units. Freerks said that this is not something that is usually talked about in
the Commission's approach to a rezoning: the quality of the property. Miklo said that he believed it was
relevant in this case because of the sensitivity of the neighborhood and the attempt to balance density
with the long-term stability of the neighborhood. Some would argue, Miklo said, that increasing density is
going to destabilize the neighborhood; but Staff is not sure that is the case here. The reason he is
addressing the size and quality of construction of these houses is that Staff must ask itself if it is possible
to achieve the goal of stabilizing this neighborhood with the existing housing stock only. Miklo reminded
the Commission that Staff did not recommend approval of this application, although they did see some
merit in it. Staff had recommended deferral to allow for time to address the concerns regarding the
design of the units, the lack of open spaces and the parking issues. While there has been some
movement on the applicant's part to address those things, the issues have not been completely resolved.
Miklo noted that Staff had recommended four units on Michael Street, and while five units does help to
Planning and Zoning Commission
August7,2008
Page 9
address the steep slope issue, it probably is not as good of a fit in the neighborhood as four would be.
Staff just received the revised plans today, and while Staff feels the level of detail could have some merit,
there are still some things Staff would suggest changes to. Miklo said that he is not ready to
recommend the plan as it is. Miklo said that he believed the question before Staff, the Commission, and
the neighborhood is: is it better to leave the current housing units there in the way that they are now?
Miklo said that it was possible that if the units were left as is someone would buy them or the applicant
would fix them up.
Freerks commented that she felt it was a sad state of affairs if Iowa City had come to the point where they
had to up-zone in order to get someone to do something with their property. Freerks said she felt it was
rewarding negligence. Miklo said that that point of view was certainly something for consideration. Miklo
said the reason Staff was looking at the question so hard was because there is a real commitment to
preserving this neighborhood on the part of both the City and the neighborhood.
Koppes noted that the mass of these buildings is so much different from the rest of the neighborhood, and
that this really concerned her. Freerks agreed with this concern. Koppes said the buildings are quite
large compared to the small single-family homes in the area.
Freerks said she had looked through the minutes from the 2007 rezoning; she had looked through the
Comprehensive Plan; she looked through the code; she looked at the Southwest District Plan. Her
conclusion is that she is not convinced that an up-zone is what is required to improve this neighborhood.
She said she does have concern with the precedent rezoning could set. She noted that she is in no way
intimidated by anyone's statements in those regards, but that in looking at the history of how things have
been done in the past she can see where someone can easily make a similar request on the same
grounds in various places in the neighborhood. While she understands that each rezoning is considered
on its own merits, Freerks feels that this could result in a "slippery slope" effect. Freerks said that
ultimately, she has a lot of concerns based on the Comprehensive Plan.
Weitzel said that he did not want to stop discussion while the Commission was getting on a roll, but he felt
that the question of deferral should be called. Freerks said that first the Commission would need to be
formally directed by Akabogu on whether or not he would like to defer until the August 21st meeting.
Akabogu stated that he would be willing to waive the 45-day limitation period if that would help the
Commission.
Freerks stated that the Commission now knew it would be possible to defer, but that now the Commission
must vote on whether or not they wished to actually defer the matter.
The motion to defer the application until the August 21st meeting failed on a 3-2 vote. Plahutnik, Freerks
and Koppes voted against the deferral. Weitzel and Eastham voted for the deferral. Busard was not
present.
Freerks asked for a new motion.
Weitzel moved to approve REZ08-00005/SUB/00005: 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.
Plahutnik seconded.
Freerks opened the floor for discussion.
Freerks noted that the agenda item called for an 11-lot subdivision, and the current plan was for a 10-lot
subdivision.
Weitzel stated that he wished to amend his motion to include the current configuration of the plans and
elevation drawings subject to potential Staff approval.
Eastham asked how many units were being discussed. Weitzel said ten units, and added that he wanted
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7, 2008
Page 10
Staff to have the chance to modify the designs to allow them to fit better with the neighborhood.
Miklo stated that the way to approach this if the Commission wished to put conditions on the plans that
they have seen is to do a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA) that would have language to the effect
that the RS-12 rezoning is approved subject to the adherence to a Staff-approved concept plan and
elevation drawings.
Plahutnik asked for clarification on whether this CZA would be an agreement with the owner, or if it was
something that would attach to the property. Miklo replied that it would be attached to the property; it
would be like a covenant where if it was purchased by someone else, that owner would also be required
to adhere to the plan unless they had the City lift it. Miklo clarified that the conditions are a permanent
requirement for the rezoning and do not have an expiration date.
Weitzel said he would like to amend his motion to reflect that. Greenwood-Hektoen asked Weitzel to be
more specific.
Weitzel said he would like to amend his motion to include a CZA that basically specifies Staff approval of
the configuration of the lot-lines, the setbacks, the elevations and all of the other similar details involved in
the current 10-unit plan before the Commission.
Freerks stated that there was a motion and a second on the floor, and invited discussion.
Plahutnik stated that what was ultimately being discussed was the rezoning of this property. Plahutnik
said that the thing that was foremost in his mind was the down-zoning of the S. Governor area that was
done a year or two ago. Plahutnik said this was an Iowa City zoning success story. The plan currently
before the Commission, Plahutnik said, was the antithesis of that. The first step that the residents of S.
Governor successfully fought against was a rezoning five years prior. Plahutnik said that stabilization
was reached in a very dicey neighborhood that was much like this area: huge apartment buildings
abutting single family-dwellings, abutting duplexes, triplexes, etc. Plahutnik said he wants to at least give
the Miller-Orchard neighborhood a shot. This project, he said, could be the tipping point that sends the
neighborhood in the other direction. Plahutnik acknowledged that the current buildings were sub-
standard, but he said that he did not buy them so that is not his sole focus. Plahutnik said that it
appeared that the Planning and Zoning Commission was written in as a part of the business plan when
these properties were purchased, and he said it was unfortunate that no one had consulted him at the
time. Someone, somewhere, has a plan for these properties that he can agree to, Plahutnik said, and he
is perfectly willing to be patient and wait for it.
Eastham said he had spent quite a bit of time walking this neighborhood, and that he has also looked
carefully at the Comprehensive Plan. Eastham said he has tried to consider how effective the current
zoning has been, and has asked himself what the condition of the neighborhood is under the current
zoning and where it seems to be headed. Eastham said he asked himself if this specific proposal offers
something that is not available under the current zoning in terms of the long-term residential viability and
development of the neighborhood. The Comprehensive Plan, Eastham said, indicates that this
neighborhood should remain zoned primarily for single-family occupancy: this includes owner-occupied
and rentals attached and detached units. Eastham said this neighborhood had been zoned RS-8 since
1983. And while the zoning has not changed, the use of duplexes in zoning and in the city's development
has changed considerably in that time. Eastham said that he suspected the balance between rental
occupancy and owner occupancy has changed toward rental-occupancy over the course of the years.
Eastham suspected that the housing conditions had correlatively deteriorated as that balance shifted.
The City's housing surveys tend to support this belief, he said.
Eastham said that what he was thinking about was the fact that under RS-8 zoning the neighborhood has
moved in an undesirable direction. Eastham said that he understood that a number of individuals had
worked very hard and spent a great deal of time and money on their properties, and he stated that this
was with great results. Most of the reinvestment in this neighborhood, however, has been in the form of
duplexes. Eastham said he was having a hard time convincing himself that maintaining RS-8 zoning
everywhere in this neighborhood is going to get the City and the neighborhood where they want to be in
terms of neighborhood stabilization and improvement.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7, 2008
Page 11
Freerks asked if Eastham was suggesting a Comprehensive Plan change. Eastham replied that he was
not. Eastham said that the RS-8 zoning on Governor Street to which Plahutnik had referred may not
have the long-term stabilizing effect that the Commission had hoped for. Over time, Eastham said, he is
not sure that RS-8 zoning quite cuts it. Eastham said that he does believe the Comprehensive Plan does
allow RS-12 zoning in this neighborhood, although it is not clear-cut. Eastham said that carefully selected
RS-12 zoning in infill development is probably going to be called for in the future as the City tries to
stabilize and reverse the trend of non-maintenance in older neighborhoods. Eastham said he did not
think that RS-8 zoning would permit the necessary flexibility to do so. He said that such neighborhoods
would require a slightly higher development density in order to make development financially justifiable.
In this particular case, Eastham said, he would prefer to look at nine total units as part of a CZA, and
would also like to include a provision that limits the number of bedrooms to three in any given unit, and
possibly requires a mix of two and three bedroom units. Eastham said that the allowable unrelated
occupancy on the five units in question is currently 20 people. With nine units in the proposed plan, the
unrelated occupancy would be 27 people. Eastham said that nine units would not unduly increase the
overall density of the neighborhood, and would make the property more manageable while keeping it
financially feasible.
Eastham said that he intended to vote in favor of the motion. He added that when the Chair was ready he
would like to offer an amendment to the motion to reduce the number of units to. nine, and to limit the
number of bedrooms in anyone unit to three bedrooms with a maximum total of 33 bedrooms for the
entire development.
Freerks asked for a vote on the amendment.
The amendment failed on a vote of 3-2. Plahutnik, Koppes, and Freerks voted against the amendment.
Eastham and Weitzel voted for the amendment. Busard was not present.
Koppes said that she too had read the 2007 minutes requesting a rezoning for this property and she said
she was struck by something Plahutnik had said. At that time, Plahutnik had said that he did not think a
past intrusion into the RS-8 zoning merited a continued intrusion. Another Commissioner of that time had
expressed concern for the "slippery slope effect" on zoning if that request had been granted. Koppes
stated that the concerns had not really changed since the 2007 application. Koppes said she felt if the
Commission wanted to do this, then they would need to go back and open up the Comprehensive Plan
and really look at this neighborhood. She said that just saying RS-12 fits into the current Comprehensive
Plan is not good enough. She thinks the Commission needs to go back and determine what their vision is
for the neighborhood. Koppes said that she is not at all for putting a massive structure with ten
townhomes in this neighborhood. She said that she would not be supporting this motion.
Weitzel said he was discovering that all rezoning issues are contentious. He said that he really does feel
for the neighborhood and stated that he had gone through similar things in his own neighborhood.
Weitzel said that what it comes down to for him, is that the Comprehensive Plan does say single-family
housing is appropriate for this area and RS-12 is, by definition, single-family housing. Weitzel said that
he does not see how this is tied to the Governor Street down-zoning because that area had much larger
housing overall, bigger lot sizes, and a preservation overlay present in the area. Those things, Weitzel
said, make a big difference. This is a different kind of neighborhood in a different area of town and the
same kind of revival would not necessarily take place as a result of a down-zoning. The proposed
development may offer a different kind of revival in the neighborhood. Weitzel said he also sees value in
the idea of a transitional RS-12 zoning between the RM-20 and the RS-8 zoning.
There is no way to control for who will rent a given unit when considering a rezoning, Weitzel
acknowledged; however, the design and the detail make these units more attractive to the less
rambunctious sort of renter. Weitzel said he wished to point out that there are very aggressive nuisance
laws in this town, which are quite effective, although they do require diligence on the part of the
neighbors.
Weitzel said that as he looks at the Comprehensive Plan he sees this fits into it and he thinks this
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7, 2008
Page 12
development does have the potential to be very good for the neighborhood. He stated that he would be
voting in favor of the motion.
Freerks said that she agrees that additional investment in this neighborhood would be beneficial, just as it
is beneficial to any neighborhood that wishes to have well-maintained properties. She said that she felt it
was sad to have to dangle a rezoning carrot in order to get people to maintain their properties. She said
she also does not see properties with this kind of bulk and mass and scale and lack of green space fitting
into what she sees in the Southwest District Plan. That plan, Freerks noted, calls for buildings "designed
to be sensitive to the environment, topography and surrounding development," and the proposed plan
simply does not do that. Freerks said that more units does not necessarily equal affordable units, and
because there is no guarantee despite the owner's assurances that the units will actually be affordable,
she cannot take that into her consideration of the application. No one knows who is going to live there,
Freerks said. She said she would like to see reinvestment in these properties within the framework of the
current zoning, and she believes that that can be done. She said that the time since the neighborhood
was rezoned in 1983 until now is just a blip on the screen, and that the Commission owes it to the
neighborhood to give them some more time to maintain and improve their neighborhood. Freerks said
she sees people in the crowd who have invested in the neighborhood, and live there, and wish to stay
there, and what she is hearing from them is that the last thing they want is these townhouses plopped
down in their neighborhood. The bottom line for her, Freerks said, is that this project is not in line with the
Comprehensive Plan. Freerks said she happens to live on Governor Street and that she saw first-hand
the positive results of the down-zoning there.
Freerks said there are implications for all of the adjacent single-family homes in the area. The
environment around them would change with this project, the green space, the trees, and the feel of the
neighborhood.
Although she is not afraid to talk about additional requests, she thinks it would be silly not to expect a
flood of requests from other areas that are adjacent to RM-20. She said she thought Eastham touched
on this when he indicated that the whole area may need to be rezoned. This is something Freerks
disagrees with. Freerks said she intends to vote against this.
Eastham said he wished to make clear that he does not wish to rezone the entire Miller-Orchard
neighborhood to RS-12; he does not think that is at all necessary or appropriate. His thinking is that a
certain targeted rezoning could accomplish a great deal.
Freerks called for a vote.
The motion failed 3-2, with Plahutnik, Koppes and Freerks voting against the measure and Eastham and
Weitzel voting for the motion. Busard was absent.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JULY 14 and July 17, 2008:
Weitzel moved to approve the minutes. Eastham seconded.
The motion carried on a 5-0 vote (Busard absent).
OTHER:
Miklo said he wanted to bring the Commissioners' attentions to their work program. Miklo noted that the
subdivision regulations, the number one item, had just been finished. At the next meeting, Miklo said, the
public hearing will be set on the Central District Plan for September 4th. This will be sent out to
Commissioners prior to the meeting and will be one of the Commission's most dense plans, so it may
take some time to review.
Staff will be gearing up for the Southeast Planning District after that, followed by a review of the sign
ordinance, an investigation into methods for protecting landmark trees, and updating the open-space plan
ordinance (which goes with the subdivision regulations). Finally, Miklo said, a couple of years ago the
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 7, 2008
Page 13
CB-10 zone was added based on Hieronymus Square and some other developments, the Commission
may want to start working on that relatively soon. Freerks asked if that had been given a temporary fix in
the past. Miklo said that it had not, and that it was a concern because right now the housing market may
be slow and downtown may be less vulnerable than it was a couple of years ago. The issues are parking,
height limits, and similar sorts of things, Miklo said.
Greenwood-Hektoen shared that she had attended a meeting in Des Moines for the Long-Term Recovery
Planning: Rebuild Iowa Task Force. She said the State had people there talking about disaster
mitigation, and it was interesting and reassuring to go there and find that Iowa City is already doing most
of the things that were recommended. She said that if the Commissioners had anything they wished for
her to communicate to the task force, they could let her know.
Weitzel noted that he is on the Cultural Resource Task Force. Eastham noted that he was not selected
for the Housing Task Force.
Eastham asked Greenwood-Hektoen if she had heard anything about changes to the state code that
would allow communities to more carefully regulate development within floodplains or flood-zones.
Greenwood-Hektoen said that she had not, and that the focus had been on more basic code changes,
such as requiring comprehensive plans, and giving cities greater bonding authority.
Miklo noted that he had passed along an article to Commissioners regarding trees and how important
they are to the infrastructure of a city.
Freerks asked what had come to pass with the subdivision code. Miklo said that it had received first
consideration by the City Council and was set to receive second consideration the following week.
Freerks asked if any changes had been made to it. Miklo responded that it had been pretty much
approved as recommended.
ADJOURNMENT:
Freerks asked if there was a motion to adjourn.
Weitzel moved to adjourn. Koppes seconded. The motion carried 5-0 (Busard absent).
The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p. m.
e
o
'iij
III
'E
E
o
O't:J
...
C)o
e c.>
.- CD
go:
NCD~
....c.>c
-eN
C)lIS
e't:J
,- e
e CD
e=
.!!!<
Q.
~
U
lIS
~
..2
l"- I W I I
I X X XX I I X
- I - I I
co I 0 I I
l"- I I I
.... I X X X XX I I X
- I I I
l"- I I I
I W I I
M I (5 X X XX I I X
- : I
l"- I I
I
en I : I
.... I X X X XX I X
CD I I I
I I I
It) W I W I I
- - I X X X - I I X
CD 0 I 0 I I
I I I
It) I I I
.... X I X X X X I I X
- I I :
It) I I
.... I W I I
- X I XX X (5 I I X
I I I
It) I I I
l"- I W I
I I
.... X I X X X X X -
~ I 0 I
I I
M I I
X I X X X X X X I
~ I I
I I
0 I W I
N X I X X X X X (5 I
- I I
M I I
I"- W I W I
.... - I X X X X X (5 I
- 0 I I
.... I I
N I W I
X I X X X X X I
- I (5 I
.... I I
1Il ('f) N 0 00 ('f)
E ~ 0 ..- ..- ..-
..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- 0 ..- ..-
Q)'~ - - - - - - - - -
l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C)
I-UJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
E .ll: e
III III III e 0 "i
.ll: 'E lIS .ll: i - e
J: ... = e J: .tI
0 lIS - CD J: -
e III III 2! lIS lIS 'E 'ijj
Q) = lIS 0 c:: J: ~
E 1XI 1XI W u. ~ en en
III ai 0 < LLi ~ ci ...= ...:
z ..,
C)
Z
j::
W
w
::E
...J
<
::E
0:
o
u.
"'It I UJ UJ I I
.... I >< >< >< 0 0 I I ><
- I I I
,.... I I I
C I , I
M I >< >< >< >< >< , I ><
- I I I
(Q I I I
N UJ I , I
I >< >< >< >< I I ><
- 0 I I I
(Q I I I
N UJ I I I
.... - I >< >< >< >< I I ><
- 0 I I I
It) I I I
"'It I I
.... >< I >< >< >< >< >< >< I
- I I
"'It I I
.... W I W W I
N - I X X X (5 (5 X I
- 0 I I
N I I
I:::: I W W W I
X I X X X (5 (5 - I
N I 0 I
I I
1Il 0 ('f) N 0 00 ('f)
E ~ ..- ..- ..-
..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- 0 ..- ..-
Q)'~ - - - - - - - - -
l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C) l.C)
I-UJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
E ~ e
III III III e 0 -
.ll: 'E lIS .ll: i - e CD
J: ... = e J: .tI
0 lIS - CD J: ;t:
e III III 2! lIS lIS E 'ijj
Q) = lIS 0 J:
E 1XI 1XI W u. ~ c:: en en ~
co ai < LLi ~ ci ...: ...:
z .., 0
C)
Z
j::
W
w
::E
...J
<
::E
0:
o
u.
~
"C
Q)
1Il
::l
U
><
UJ
:;:,
............c
C C Q)
Q) Q) 1Il
1Il1ll.o
~.o<(
a..<(1I
>. II II UJ
Q) -
~><OO