Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-02-2009 Planning and Zoning CommissionPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION (Revised) Monday, March 30, 2009 - 6:00 PM Informal Meeting Iowa City City Hall Lobby Conference Room 410 E. Washington Street Thursday, April 2, 2009 - 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. Zoning Code Item Discussion of amendments to the Zoning Code to regulate Drinking Establishments and Alcohol Sales Oriented Retail Uses and to establish minimum spacing requirements between such uses. D. Rezoning Item REZ09-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by the Northside Neighborhood Association for a rezoning of approximately 23.25 acres of property located along the 300 - 500 blocks of Gilbert Street, the 300 - 700 blocks of Linn Street, the 200 - 300 blocks of Church Street, the 200 - 500 blocks of Fairchild Street, and 200 - 400 blocks of Davenport Street from Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone to Historic District Overlay/ Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (OHD/RNS-12) zone and from Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) zone to Historic District Overlay/Medium Density Single Family (OHD/RS-8) zone. E. County Rezoning Item CZ09-00002: Discussion of an application submitted by Richard Wonick for a rezoning of 39.92 acres from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) zone located east of Buchmayer Bend NE and west of Hwy 1 NE. F. Other 1. Discussion of a request to consider an amendment to the zoning code to allow accessory apartments in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone. 2. Discussion of retaining Interim Development (ID-RS) and Rural Residential (RR-1) for a portion of Country Club Estates (Outlot D). G. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: March 2 & March 5, 2009 H. Election of Officers I. Adjournment Uncomina Plannins~ & Zoning Commission Meetings Informal A ril 13 Ma 4 Ma 18 June 1 Formal A ril 16 Ma 7 Ma 21 June 4 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 27, 2009 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Karen Howard, Associate Planner RE: Regulating businesses that sell alcohol -follow-up At your meeting on March 5, the Commission requested information about the number of liquor licenses issued downtown and whether that number has increased over the last ten years. The following table lists the number of licenses issued each year in the CB-10 Zone for on-premise consumption. As you can see there has been an increase of more than 50% in the last ten years in the number of licenses issued. Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 # liquor licenses 30 33 41 43 43 44 43 52 46 46 There was also a question about whether a restaurant that remains open after midnight on an occasional basis for private parties, such as a wedding reception would then by definition be considered a "drinking establishment." Our response was that if the event was private and not open to the general public, then it would not cause the restaurant to be classified as a drinking establishment. To make this clear in the ordinance, we suggest adding the following underlined words to the definition of "drinking establishment": Drinking Estab/ishments: Any use that meets all of the defining characteristics listed in sub-subparagraphs (1), (2), and (3), below, is considered a Drinking Establishment for purposes of this Title, unless listed as an exception in paragraph 4, below. (1) The principal activity of the establishment is the preparation, dispensing and consumption of food and/or beverages; and (2) The establishment is licensed by the State for the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption, as defined by Iowa Code Chapter 123; and (3) The establishment is open to the public: for business any time between the hours of 12:00 AM and 2:00 A.M. It should be noted that this would not preclude the City from using the use classification system in 14-4A to prevent someone from attempting to circumvent these regulations by claiming that they are having a "private" party every night after midnight when in fact there is no special event with a guest list. In other words if the actual activity on the site matches the definition of a Drinking Establishment it will be classified as a Drinking Establishment regardless of what the activity is called. STAFF REPORT To: Planning & Zoning Commission Prepared by: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner Item: REZ 09-00001 Date: April 2, 2009 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Northside Neighborhood Association Contact Person: Judith Pascoe 317 Fairchild St Iowa City, IA 52245 Phone: 319-354-8768 Requested Action: Rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12), to Historic District Overlay (RS-8/OHD &RNS-12/OHD) Purpose: To designate the Northside Historic District Location: 300 - 500 blocks of Gilbert Street; 300 - 700 blocks of Linn Street; 200 - 300 blocks of Church Street; 200 - 500 blocks of Fairchild Street; 200 - 400 blocks of Davenport Street Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: File Date: Approximately 23.25 acres Residential; RS-8 and RNS-12 North: RS-8/OHD, Medium Density Single Family -Brown Street Historic District RS-8, Medium Density Single Family South: CB-2, Central Business Service CO-1, Commercial Office RNS-12, Neighborhood Stabilization Residential East: RNS-12, Neighborhood Stabilization Residential West: RNS-12, Neighborhood Stabilization Residential RM-44, High Density Multi-Family Residential Single Family Residential Stabilization -Central District Plan promotes the preservation of the Northside Neighborhood March 13, 2009 45 Day Limitation Period: April 26, 2009 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Northside Neighborhood Association has submitted an application for a Historic District Overlay rezoning. On March 12, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) held a public hearing to discuss local historic district designation of the proposed Northside Historic District. The Commission voted to recommend the Northside Historic District to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. The proposed district is titled the Northside Historic District and consists of properties between the 400 and 700 block of N Linn Street, the 400 and 500 block of N Gilbert Street, the 300 block of Church Street, the 200 and 500 block of Fairchild Street, and the 200 and 400 block of Davenport Street (See Attached Map). The proposed Northside Historic District is located within the Northside Neighborhood and contains the Gilbert-Linn Street National Register Historic District. In 2004/5 the Gilbert- Linn Historic District was nominated and listed to the National Register of Historic Places. A local district was proposed at this time, but was not approved at the Council level. The Northside Neighborhood Association has expanded the boundaries of the Gilbert-Linn National Register District in order to capture more of the Northside residential neighborhood. The proposed district places focus on Linn, Gilbert, and Fairchild Streets. Fairchild Street is a brick street that retains much of its historic character and has the same historic significance as Linn and Gilbert Streets. Additional information regarding the Criteria for Historic Districts, the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District, the Historic Preservation Guidelines, and Contributing/Noncontributing Building in the district is included in the attached Memo to the HPC. The applicant has indicated that they have used the "Good Neighbor Policy" and have had discussions with area property owners and conducted a neighborhood meeting. ANALYSIS: The role of the Planning and Zoning Commission is to review the overlay rezoning based on the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code, while the role of the HPC is to determine the historic value of the district. Section 14-8E-1 E1 of the Zoning Code states that "The Planning and Zoning Commission will review the proposed overlay rezoning based on its relation to the Comprehensive Plan, as amended, to the provisions of this Title [Zoning Code], and to any proposed public improvements and other plans for the renewal of the area involved." Comp/lance with the Comprehensive P/an: The 1997 Iowa City Comprehensive Plan notes the importance of Iowa City's older neighborhoods and references the strategies of the Historic Preservation Plan as a means to preserve these neighborhoods. The Iowa City Central District Plan also points out the importance of Iowa City's older neighborhoods and lists preserving historic resources and reinvesting in older neighborhoods as one of the general principles for maintaining and building healthy neighborhoods. The Central District Plan also lists support of the goals and objectives of the Historic Preservation Plan as a way to promote the Central District as an attractive place to live. For guidance the Commission should refer to the Housing and Quality of Life section of 3 the Central District Plan (page 11 - 22), in particular pages 14 and 20. Specifically the plan states on page 14,"A second important element of stabilizing older neighborhoods in the district is to provide incentives or programs to maintain, improve, and generally reinvest in the older housing stock and in neighborhood infrastructure, such as parks, streets, alleys, and other shared public spaces. Possible sources of funding and human resources include historic preservation programs, the City's housing rehabilitation program, neighborhood PIN (Program for Improving Neighborhoods) grants, the City's capital improvements program, and through collaborations with area schools and the University. The City should continue to partner with neighborhood associations to monitor and improve neighborhoods, to promote good neighbor relations, and foster neighborhood identity through events, festivals, public art, and shared spaces such as community gardens. In addition, the City and the University should continue to explore a variety of means to increase public awareness of the policies, programs, and funding opportunities available for neighborhood or property improvements." The side bar on page 20 of the Central District Plan summarizes the goals for Historic Preservation in the Central District. The side bar is quoted below: Historic Preservation for the Centra/ District Section V. Neighborhood Strategies (page 73-98) of the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan outlines the objectives for Iowa City Historic Areas and Neighborhoods. Many historic areas lie within the Central District. The objectives of the Historic Preservation Plan include: ^ Retention of Historic District and Conservation District status of the already designated areas ^ Reevaluating districts to determine if boundaries or integrity change ^ Encouragement of local Historic District status of the Gilbert-Linn Street and Jefferson Street National Register Historic Districts ^ Beginning the process of designating Goosetown as a local conservation district ^ Completing surveys of several neighborhoods to determine the historic quality and district eligibility. These neighborhoods include: Oak Grove -Kirkwood Avenue Corridor Lucas Farms Neighborhood Morningside -City High Neighborhood Rochester Avenue Neighborhood These objectives and goals help protect and maintain Iowa City's historic resources, which contribute to the quality of life of Central District neighborhoods. The City Council recently adopted the updated Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan as a part of the Comprehensive Plan. The Historic Preservation Plan lists as Goal 1 "Identify historic resources significant to Iowa City's past." Objective 5 of Goal 1 calls for the continued nomination of properties and districts to the National Register of Historic Places and pursuing local designation when appropriate. Goal 10 outlines neighborhood strategies for Iowa City's older neighborhoods. The Objectives for the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District are listed on page 81 -83. Objective 3 states, "In the midterm (two to three years), encourage designation of the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District as a local ordinance historic district." One of the overarching goals of the Central District Plan, the 1997 Comprehensive Plan, and the Historic Preservation Plan is the stabilization and protection of Iowa City's older neighborhoods. Along with downzoning and encouraging home-ownership, Historic Preservation is one tool that can be used to achieve this goal. Several studies conducted 4 throughout the nation have found that Historic Preservation District designation does stabilize or improve neighborhoods and creates incentives for reinvestment. Locally we have observed considerable investment in historic and conservation districts, such as Brown and Ronalds Street, East College Street and South Governor Street. In these areas, there has been a number of building rehabilitation efforts, and a number of property owners have credited the historic district designation as a major part of their decision to invest in their properties. Because they have some assurance that their neighborhood will retain the qualities that attracted them there, they were more willing to make a substantial investment in their own properties, which is in turn an investment in the neighborhood. Re/ationship to Zoning Code: In addition to considering the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning and Zoning Commission is required to consider the relationship of the proposed overlay zone and the other provisions of the zoning code that apply to the area. The underlying zoning of the majority of the proposed historic district is Neighborhood Stabilization Residential Zone (RNS-12). The purpose of the RNS-12 zone is to stabilize certain existing residential neighborhoods by preserving the predominantly single-family residential character. Provisions in this zone prevent the conversion or redevelopment of single-family uses to multi-family uses. A small portion of the northern part of the proposed district is zoned Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8). The purpose of the RS-8 zone is primarily to provide the development of small lot single-family dwellings. The regulations are intended to create, maintain, and promote livable neighborhoods. The proposed overly zone is clearly compatible with the purpose of both the RNS-12 and RS-8 zones. SUMMARY: The Comprehensive Plan, Central District Plan, and Historic Preservation Plan clearly support the designation of the Northside Historic District as one of the tools the community can use to stabilize one of Iowa City's oldest neighborhoods. Upon studying the Northside Neighborhood, and in particular the proposed Northside Historic District, Staff feels that the designation of this area as a historic district is warranted and is compatible with the underlying RNS-12 and RS-8 zones. The area retains its traditional neighborhood character and a sense of time and place, and a majority of the structures within the district contribute toward this character and are architecturally intact. Designation of this historic district will protect the neighborhood from demolition. and inappropriate new construction and alterations, which detract from its character. The neighborhood association hopes that with historic designation, this district will begin to experience the same type of investment and improvement that has been occurring within other designated historic districts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that REZ09-00001, rezoning approximately 23.25 acres a.s shown in the map approved by the Historic Preservation Commission from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) to Historic Preservation Overlay (RS-8/OHD and RNS-12/OHD) to establish the Northside Historic District be approved. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 5 2. HPC approved Northside Historic District boundaries Map 3. Northside Neighborhood Association's rezoning statement 4. Memo to HPC regarding the proposed Northside Historic District 5. Correspondence ~ ~ ~~J Approved by: /~~a~`"JP~ ~G~TG~_ol~-' Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development Z °o o 0 c~ 0 N l MHOIH 1S 304 v ~ O ~ O t O U ''" ~ O ~ i 1S NOS HOf O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °,~, ~v ~ ~~\ rV~ ~ U; ~` z W :.~~ \ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ti° ~ ~ \" ~ ,A ,~ ° '~ \ ° ` \ \. ~ \\ \\ A, ~~\~ ' "' f-i .~. O "» M~1 .Y V O ~ ~ ~ c N ~ `~ ~c a ~~_ , .. _ . ~~ a .._ ,..._ ~ , .°a~ r~ ~.,. ~ ~~~~~.~_ o ~ C^ ~ O a, _ ~ y ~~ E ~ ~~ ~ N ~~ ~ ~~ 1~ IvV~IVI"~~I ~ ~ o f~ ~ U 2 ~ C~ _ •~ a~~. c ~ c V 2 ~ Z Y U ~ Z L ,.~.. (Q '~ ~ ~ ~. ~ 1 1 `~ a..i . •. O V ~ ~ca ~i ~ .~+ (/~ • - ' l~ N3 (l8 h~"dl1 ~ ~ ~ V ~, Ir °" ~~ ~`~ ~~ , ~ gab. a ~ ~ . L ~Ztr ~ t ~b r y O ~ 94b _ .! i,a 6lb _ Zl.b f 1 I. lb O J_ ~ ao i cw a ': v ty , A48 I ~ ~ Q : ~ o co a a ~ tr6~; a ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~' ~ ~ _, l 1238 ~I ~ ~ ~' ~ , ~; ~ ~ ~.'~ C . ~E L ~~ ;..~ ~..~..~ ! ~z~_, ~ ~zb ~ ~ ~ ~ _~ ' ~~... ; ~ ~ ~ Sze ~ N Z B~£ ~ I 6G£ 4ZE. _ _. ~/~ 3E ~~ ~ 6Q£ ZG£ ~ ~ i 41~fi.: 6~ ~ , ._ r ,., _ ,.; t ry Nry [[~~,,~~ ~r Zl£ N[.~ ~ryy ((yy V/ y. ~:..._~DE '97: (D ~ (D I ., ~~~ NiS'~._ ~ P ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~" ~` r C7 f'7 +C7 (*1 4C6 a r'.~ bin ~', .. .. t .....I ZG~ _ ..i .. x i ~ ~._.a_...__:, ,.:.. l~ N ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ L '~ ~ ~- - ~ BZL i ~ ~ ~ ~ ; _BZZ ~ _ ~~ ~ ~.. __»,- .. h . • ~ . ~ C ~ LZZ ZZL._~«.' ~~' ~.~~['~lZ OZZ ~ LGZ bLZ ~ - _~ .,ZLZ ~_, _ > a L is 3n~n~na ~ Applicant's statement as to why the zoning change is warranted The near Northside neighborhood of Iowa City is one of the oldest and most historically significant neighborhoods in Iowa City. In order to protect the valuable historic resources contained within the neighborhood and to provide neighborhood stabilization, the Northside Neighborhood Association requests that the near Northside be designated a local historic district. The significance of the Northside was elaborated in 2005 with the designation of the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District to the National Register of Historic Places. The basis for that listing was the historical and architectural significance of the neighborhood to Iowa City. Developed between ca. 1860 - ca. 1930 the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District was strongly associated with an important period of population growth and residential development in Iowa City during the late 19th century and early 20th century. This period of growth witnessed the growing prosperity of the German-American and Bohemian-American communities and the increasing prominence of the State University of Iowa. Established and developed with a mix of housing and employment, the Northside existed as a neighborhood in the truest sense of the word. The commercial area eventually included three breweries, a hotel, grocery stores, meat markets, and other small retail establishments interspersed with the housing stock. The business owners and other prominent professionals lived within close proximity to their work and alongside the middle and working class that served the employment centers. Important German and Bohemian culture was introduced and articulated throughout the neighborhood, as evidenced by the establishment of the breweries. Architecturally, the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District is significant because it represents the architectural styles and vernacular house forms common for Iowa City from the 1860s through the 1930s. The district as a whole demonstrates the evolution of popular architectural styles and how these national architectural styles were introduced and accomplished through local building practices. Moreover, Orville H. Carpenter, an important local architect is credited with at least eight houses within the National Register district. The current National Register district amounts to over fifty percent of the proposed local district and approximately seventy percent of the properties beyond the National Register borders proposed for inclusion in the local district are contributing, key contributing, or are currently listed on the National Register. The Northside Neighborhood Association's request for a local historic district designation perfectly accords with the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan (2007) which recognizes the importance of the Gilbert-Linn Historic District. Discussing the district in detail (pp. 81-83), the plan makes the following recommendation: "In the midterm (two to three years), encourage designation of the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District as a local ordinance historic district" (p. 83). The area proposed for local district beyond the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District is within the same period of significance and possesses the same historical and architectural significance. The purpose of expanding the boundaries was to provide a more contiguous geographic unit within the same period of significance which captures a greater share of the significant historical and architectural significance of the neighborhood. The part of the Northside that already has local historic district designation (the Brown Street and Ronalds Street area to the north of the Northside) has enjoyed a renaissance in the years since becoming a local historic district, with investment and improvement in properties that had been neglected for years. We believe the local historic designation will have a similar neighborhood stabilizing impact in the proposed district area, the area of the Northside which is closest to the University and so under greatest commercial pressure. The Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District Report (2004) submitted by the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission also noted the hope that local designation for the Gilbert-Linn Street area would serve as a catalyst for investment and building rehabilitation efforts similar to what has been achieved in Brown Street and East College Street (p. 5). The Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan notes the unique market and development pressures related to the proximity to the University campus and Mercy Hospital that threaten the stability of the neighborhood and its historic resources. Rather succinctly it says, "Without design review in place for the historic district and/or a larger conservation district, the neighborhood is not likely to achieve its potential in terms of historic preservation objectives" (P. 82). Neighborhood stabilization cannot be fully achieved without the presence of families. The City's Central District Plan states, "While there are a considerable number of smaller, modest homes in Subarea A, the competition from student renters, who often live together and pool their resources, keeps these homes out of the financial reach of many singles or families looking for affordable homes to rent." The plan further states that an "important element of stabilizing older neighborhoods in the district is to provide incentives or programs to maintain, improve, and generally invest in the older housing stock" (p. 14). Local historic designation provides neighborhood stabilizing forces and protection to valuable historic resources that listing on the National Register does not. We believe that a local historic district in the near Northside supports the City's long term objectives of historic preservation and neighborhood stabilization for Central District Neighborhoods, objectives that were identified through an open and inclusive process aimed at identifying the community's vision for the future of Iowa City. We urge the City to follow through on its formal support of neighborhood organizations and the critical role they play "in monitoring neighborhood conditions, advocating for services and neighborhood amenities, and disseminating information to area residents" (Central District Plan, p. 14). Iowa City ~1S>tOt'lC PtCSet'V1t1011 C,oIl7.1Y11SS10I1 (:,iy.Ftill, 41C I~ Ak~'ashis~~ion S~trc~~t, Io~.~a t atv. try. 5224 MEMORANDUM Date: March 7, 2009 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner Re: Northside Historic District The Northside Neighborhood Association submitted an application for a Historic District Overlay rezoning. The Historic Preservation Commission is to hold a Public Hearing on the proposal and consider a motion recommending approval of the proposed District. If the Commission votes in favor of the motion, it will make a recommendation and report to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposal will also be submitted to the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for comment. The Planning and Zoning Commission will review the rezoning based on the Comprehensive Plan (which includes the Historic Preservation Plan) and the Zoning Code. The Planning and Zoning Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council, which will hold a public hearing before considering an ordinance. Proposed Northside Historic District The proposed district is titled the Northside Historic District and consists of properties between the 400 and 700 block of N Linn Street, the 400 and 500 block of N Gilbert St, the 300 block of Church St and the 200 and 500 block of Fairchild St (See Attachment A). The proposed Northside Historic District is located within the Northside Neighborhood. In 2004/5 the Gilbert-Linn Historic District was nominated and listed to the National Register of Historic Places. A local district was proposed at this time, but was not approved at the Council level. Historic District Criteria: Iowa City Zoning Code section 14-3B-1C establishes the following criteria for Historic District Overlay Zones. An OHD zone is a geographically cohesive area with a significant concentration of buildings and other resources that possess a high degree of historic integrity and convey a distinct sense of time and place. To qualify for designation as a Historic District; the subject area must contain abutting pieces of property under diverse ownership that meet criteria a. and b. and at least one of criteria c., d., e., or f. a. Are significant to American and/or Iowa City History, architecture, archaeology and culture; and b. Possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials and workmanship; and c. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or d. Are associated with the lives of persons significant to our past; or e. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, method of construction; or represent the work of a master; or possess high artistic values; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or f. Have yielded or may likelyyield information important to pre-history or history. The criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places are similar to the criteria for designation of local historic district. The NRHP criteria are: A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded or may be likelyto yield, information important in prehistory or history. Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District: Architectural historian Marlys Svendsen prepared the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form for the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District and the District was listed on the National Register in September 2004 as significant under NRHI' criteria A and G The NRHP nomination included properties from the 300 to 400 block of Gilbert Street and the 300 to 600 block of Linn Street. The NRHP Registration Form (Attachment C) documents the historic significance of the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District. The following is the summary of the NRHP Registration Form: In summary, the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District is locallysignificant under Criteria A and C. Under Criterion A, it derives significance from its association with an important era of population growth and intense residential development in Iowa City's North Side residential area at the end of the 19Th century and the beginning of the 20Th century. Iowa Citians built private residences for their growing families while small-scale developers constructed housing to meet the demand of a brisk rental market during these decades. The Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District's organic development followed this pattern of residential development. Additional significance under Criterion A derives from the fact that the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District represented a cross section of middle and upper income households with prominent business and professional leaders living next door to middle income and working class families. Individuals who resided in this neighborhood highlight several important themes in the city's history in the decades before and after the turn of the 20Th century. Primary among these were the growing prosperity of Iowa City's German-American and Bohemian-American communities and the growth in importance of the State University of Iowa. The construction of new houses, the brisk rental of existing houses, and the infill construction pattern that produced an extremely dense residential district from ca. 1895 through ca. 1925 testifyto the neighborhood's significance. Under Criterion C, the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District is significant as a representative collection of the residential architectural styles and vernacular house forms that appeared in Iowa City neighborhoods from the 1860s through the 1930s. From modest Bohemian cottages to pattern book houses and elaborate multi-story mansions, the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District reflected the architectural character and best local residential building practices of the period. The District derives added architectural significance because of the large number of well-preserved residences designed by Iowa City's most productive early 20Th century architect, O.H. Carpenter, between 1900 and 1918. The combination of visual qualities and historical associations gives the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District its distinct identity and significance.l Proposed Northside Historic District: The Northside Neighborhood Association has expanded the boundaries of the Gilbert-Linn National Register District in order to capture more of the Northside residential neighborhood. The proposed district places focus on Linn, Gilbert, and Fairchild Streets. Fairchild Street is a brick street that retains much of its historic character and has the same historic significance as Linn and Gilbert Streets. The Neighborhood Association has proposed having Davenport Street as the southern boundary of the district (Attachment A). The local districts do not have to match the National Register District. While there is merit in expanding beyond the National Register boundaries, staff believes that the National Register District should be contained within the Local District. Staff believes that extending the boundary south to the alley south of Davenport Street is more consistent with the National Register District (Attachment B). ~ Svendsen, Marlys. Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District, Johnson County, Iowa, National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, January 2004, p 30. Guidelines: The primary guidelines for alterations, additions, new construction, and demolition within the Northside Historic District have already been established, and are contained within the Iozeu City Hrstonc Pmseruztirnc Har~lxx~. The handbook is available from the Department of Planning and Community Development, at the public library, and on the City's web site at www.ICgov.org\historicpreservation . These guidelines were written to apply to both historic districts and conservation districts. In a historic district, in addition to preserving the historic character of a neighborhood, more concern is given to the individual buildings as historic resources. The guidelines also contain Neighborhood District Guidelines, which address architectural style, site and scale issues specific to each district. Staff believes that the Northside Neighborhood Guidelines for the Brown Street Historic District can be applied to the Northside Historic District as well. Contributing/Noncontributing Buildings: In order to administer the historic district guidelines, buildings within the proposed district are categorized as contributing, non-contributing, or non-historic. A property is considered to be contributing if the primary structure is an integral part of the historic context and character of the District. Anon-contributing property is a property that is not listed as contributing. Anon-historic property is any noncontributing property within a district that is less than 50 years old at the time the district is designated. Noncontributing properties maybe more than 50 years old, but are classified as noncontributing if they have been substantially altered significant architectural features have been removed, or was not constructed during the district's period of significance. Contributing and Key-Contributing properties are subject a higher level of review because they retain much of their historic significance. Non-contributing and non-historic buildings have fewer regulations and qualify for exceptions to the Historic Preservation Guidelines. Non-contributing and non-historic buildings also can be demolished provided any replacement building meets the guidelines. The NRHP Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District contains 86 properties. Of these, six are non-contributing and two are non-historic. In the proposed Northside Historic District, there are 96 properties, of which 8 are non-historic and 10 are non-contributing. 81% are classified as contributing to the character of the historic district. In Staff's recommended boundary, an additional 2non-contributing and 23 contributing are included. This results in 121 properties total within the local Northside Historic District. Of these, 101 (83.5%) are classified as contributing to the character of the historic district. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan: The 1997 Iowa City Comprehensive Plan notes the importance of Iowa City's older neighborhoods and references the strategies of the Historic Preservation Plan as a means to preserve these neighborhoods. The Iowa City Central District Plan also points out the importance of Iowa City's older neighborhoods and lists preserving historic resources and reinvesting in older neighborhoods as one of the general principles for maintaining and building healthy neighborhoods. The Central District Plan also lists support of the goals and objectives of the Historic Preservation Plan as a way to promote the Central District as an attractive place to live. The Historic Preservation Plan lists as Goal l "Identify historic resources significant to Iowa City's past." Objective 5 of Goal 1 calls for the continued nomination of properties and districts to the National Register of Historic Places and pursuing local designation when appropriate. Goal 10 outlines neighborhood strategies for Iowa Cit}~s older neighborhoods. The Objectives for the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District are listed on page 81 -83. Objective 3 states, "In the midterm (two to three years), encourage designation of the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District as a local ordinance historic district." Summary: Upon studying the Northside Neighborhood, and in particular the proposed Northside Historic District, Staff feels that the designation of this area as a historic district is warranted. The area retains its traditional neighborhood character and a sense of time and place, and a majority of the structures within the district contribute toward this character and are architecturally intact. Designation of this historic district will protect the neighborhood from demolition and inappropriate new construction and alterations, which detract from its character. The neighborhood association hopes that with historic designation, this district will begin to experience the same type of investment and improvement that has been occurring within other designated historic districts, such as Brown Street and East College Street. In these areas, there have been a remarkable number of building rehabilitation efforts, and a number of property owners have credited the historic district designation as a major part of their decision to invest in their properties. Because they have some assurance that their neighborhood will retain the qualities that attracted them there, they were more willing to make a substantial investment in their own properties, which is in turn an investment in the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the proposed Northside Historic District meets the criteria for designation as defined under City Code and Section 14-3B- 1, Historic District Overlay Zone (OHD), and recommends consideration of the proposed Northside Historic District be approved with the boundaries as shown in the Attachment ATTACI-IMENi'S: A. Proposed Northside Historic District Map B. Staff Recommended Northside Historic District Map C. NRHP Registration Form: Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District D. Northside Neighborhood Association's rezoning statement S:\PCD\ 1_HistPres\Districts and Surverys\Northside Districts\Gilbert-Linn 2008\Memo to HI'C 03_06_09.doc Page 1 of 1 Christina Kuecker From: John Bakas [telljb@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 12:26 AM To: Christina Kuecker Subject: Northside historic district hearing of 3/12/09 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Green Ms Kuecker: I am strongly opposed to the proposed historic district designation under consideration. I view it as an unfair imposition upon private property rights. Kindly register my resolute opposition at tonight's public hearing and in all other appropriate forums. John Bakas, Owner 514 North Gilbert Iowa City 3/27/2009 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: April 2, 2009 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Sarah Walz RE: Item CZ09-00002 2939 Buchmayer Bend NE The applicant, Richard Wonick, is requesting a rezoning from Agriculture (A) to Residential (R) for approximately forty (39.80) acres of land located on the East side of Buchmayer Bend NE, a gravel road, and west of Highway One in Newport Township. While the subject property is outside the city limits of Iowa City and outside the growth area, it is within the area covered by the Fringe Area Policy Agreement. The Fringe Area Agreement indicates that R zoning, which allows 1-acre lots, will be considered if the submitted concept plans shows "a minimum of 50% of the property designated as open space or agriculture." The Planning and Zoning Commission considered an application to rezone this property at its January 15 meeting. Because the proposed concept plan submitted at that time did not meet the 50% minimum open space standard, the Commission voted to send a letter to the county recommending denial of an application to rezone the subject property. The applicant subsequently submitted a new application that removes one of the proposed lots located along the north cul-de-sac (see attachment 2). With this change the application meets the minimum 50% standard. The applicant has indicated that the area proposed as open space is level and thus desirable as open recreation space. Space to the east of the lots preserves woodland and provides some buffer between development and State Highway One. ANALYSIS Existing Land Use and Zoning The subject property is zoned for agricultural uses and most of it is used for grain production. Land abutting the subject property to the north and west is zoned agricultural, save for properties to the southwest along Jenn Lane, which are zoned Residential (R) and developed as a 10-lot subdivision. Properties east of Highway One, along Running Deer Road and Penny and Fox Lanes, mostly consist of R or R3 developments, however development is limited in the area between Highway One and Newport Road (to the west) where land is mostly agricultural fields or woodland. Infrastructure Vehicle access to all seventeen proposed lots would be provided along three cul-de-sacs extending from Buchmayer Bend NE. The applicant has indicated that the cul-de-sacs would be built to County subdivision standards, but has not addressed the condition or upgrading of Buchmayer Bend, which is currently a gravel road. Staff believes that if a rezoning is approved for this area, Buchmayer Bend should be brought up to County road performance standards, which would likely include conversion to a chip-seal surface. March 26, 2009 Page 2 The 1-acre lots would be served by individual septic systems and three community wells will provide water service to the entire development. The applicant has not addressed stormwater detention for the development. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan The Fringe Area Agreement, an element of the Iowa Ciry Comprehensive Plan, is intended to provide guidance regarding the development of land located within two miles of Iowa City's corporate limits. The stated purpose of the agreement is to provide for orderly and efficient development patterns appropriate to anon-urbanized area, protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and environmentally sensitive features, direct development to areas with physical characteristics which can accommodate development, and effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development. The agreement states that any rezoning for property outside Iowa City's Growth Area will be considered "on the basis of conformity with the Johnson County Land Use Plan and other related policies." At this time a proposed amendment to the County Land Use Map is under consideration. If approved, the amendment would remove the subject property from the county's growth area boundary and rezoning the property for non-agricultural uses would not likely be approved. While the proposed plan meets the minimum standards for a rural subdivision, the change proposed along with existing and proposed subdivisions and development in the immediate area will alter the rural character of this area. The requested rezoning would allow conversion of farmland to residential use, which runs contrary to the goals of the County Land Use Plan. Staff remains concerned with the proposed layout of the subdivision. It would appear that land could be more efficiently used and the area dedicated to paving minimized if open space along Buchmayer Bend was incorporated into residential lots-areas now proposed as open space along the north and south cul-de-sacs. The proposed "common open space" remains somewhat amorphous-it appears to be left over land at the margins of the development rather than open space intended to serve a collective purpose for the development. Concentrating the open space to areas east of the lots may have the benefit of buffering the noise from vehicle traffic travelling along Highway One. An alternative subdivision layout is provided (see attachment 3). The applicant has not proposed an ownership arrangement for long term management of the outlot. STAFF RECOMMENDATION While the proposed plan meets the minimum requirements for a rural subdivision, rezoning this property for non-agricultural uses appears inconsistent with the proposed map change now under consideration and with the County's stated goals for preserving agricultural land. In this case, because the property is located outside of the Iowa City Growth Boundary, it is most appropriate for the County to determine whether the proposed rezoning is consistent with County land use policy. If a rezoning is approved, staff would recommend that the subdivision concentrate the required open space to create separation between development and Highway One and to minimized the length of the cul-de-sacs (see attachment 3). Staff would also recommend that Buchmayer Bend be improved to meet County road performance standards and that the applicant address stormwater detention as well as ownership and management of the outlot. March 26, 2009 Page 3 ATTACHMENTS: Location Map Concept plan Alternative concept plant proposed by staff Approved by: /~ ~,~'- /. Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development rr_ i_ ____ _ 1_ ~: - ---- z -~ ~~l O °o 0 0 N V ~.~ ~~. ~~ ____-: ~a. F~ ~~ a O O 0 W z v v ca U 0 V O W H a S3~o m~~nl~~p~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ a~~ ~~~~ ~ t a ~ y ~~ ~~ w ~aa °-`c~U~e ~~E9 L__- - -- - °sy ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~' ~ I ~~~~ W ~~ ^^ .~$ w ~; o $~~ E ~ ~ "~~a~ H o <~ ~ 4 ~03~~ M ~ e W ~ $ ~ ~ U ~~~ a ~ ~,~$~ 2 ~ o ~ ` ~w~ # ~=~~ X Q ~ gg;; ~ ~ ~ T~~ ~ ~ x§~o= W o a s a 3~z ~ a ~ 0~30~ N ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ \/ ~ a ~ yN Z .L ~u4 ~ rc a s zz~ ~ v uQj tl~°~~d O / ~ ~> ~ ~ ~ ~ o00 ~ g`~~~~ a aa° W ~J ,µt~C m O ~ iv nr er ar.~ emi//ex/e swzwo~ru\-~ U Z~ UW ~ ~ ~~~ Om Za Z N2 ~0 o Z ~ e ~W ~d °o ~~ ~~~ <aa~ ~ ~ ~ a~=~ ~ ao~~m~~ 83~~W ~a_n ~ z asP `~ ~~~ a g ~x ~g$~z~~a~~~~~ ~ ti~~~_x ~~~~~ 3z ~ ,~~ a ~~~~~$~~~~m a~~s y~~ i ~~~~~~~y~~~~~~~e~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~mo~x&r~~"5me~ ~ y~ c ~.S9~m ~g~',~g,o ~ a~~ ~< ~w~3~"'~~a~~.'e .8~m a's" wm ~~~~ ~~a g~~~~~~ ~ ~ 5g~ ~E _~~~~ ~~w^~s x~gP: ~ ~ .ss g ~~w „oe a~~ e z X~ ms ~ .Eo Q 3~~ 8 ~ ~ ~'~ ° e~~. g~c4~gm~~z o~w ~~ m ~ € F 3 gg Q Q Q ._ ~~ VAl ~ ~ ~, Q~ ~~ ~i~e~ "~? .MS,,. - ~` ~ - _ ~(/~a elf Q ~ ~ ; !;iisit;: :...::::... . wr wE xi M Ec m ~~lii~ iiir":i~ :':iii: ":. ~yjS[ro~ :{' ~' ~~ "~- emarw~ war ~~°ir.: `!. - _ KO~cu :~nr~'f4M;>~j - - - - ~r'~rrc... U'ii~ 'aa Q!2:;~ ;~ !! '"I~- ~ . ~~; . :r.i ..~.. _ k M':.Li':•jii:~ 10~ I !+Y k :~~:: ~ !: : (J:: a ~`. Q t' / `a : •rw /J/ pq :!i!.s:. ~ _ . Q.. I Cpl#' q :/% ;ra.. j cSS`~ N b !:!!!::; G' ,~, I b e~~^ ' O' _ ~'N ei'rir'p~;.w ~_ NJ' - /l~^ bg • y; . i W O° i : Qj: iQi`i . ~:, ieC F~~ 1\\\\ awaraxt ~~!" iiiiP I -~~ ,m" T :i:i S'i!!i k .~ ~iu~ii"iii „':": I' ~: i k !'. . ~~. ,,:: B ~~ \, :!ii[: . F. a~., :~: !:`:U is G' :~:::::: ~,,. •r ,~a~~~ : ~~, :~: :, ;~~ ~' e ~~'~ ! . ~.: ~'~ a 3iiN `'F.'ii :I: s: ryi0 i=ii:~~ i?~ nr~~ j - 'r':pj':.~':ii ~''r:'''r:''r'p;'.. I ii'a'3r~~'~ iira `:iiiii ~~!. i ~ii~ii i ''iii: ~.. . !:.::a.• ri~»rii!:.~ ii ».!.:.: d ,~~+ iiiiiif'~ii€: ~ '! % . b / R !:''i iii iiii ~'r'iii'~ ' Q 'r~' .. N Q ~, :.:.~ ::::::zki ~,. i ~ E 9 :Fi.iE ! ..::.:.. N I '/ ~' a - ~i ~ B x m A a 'rte I E ~? pies`?is : 8 ~ i~ i ~ `!~ ~ P ,~ iie~ ~' ' ~ ~ i 'NM w ~ ~ °~(~yO a ~~~w .. , March 26, 2009 Page 6 Wonick`s Property i Site Plan '~` ~~ ~ Staff Proposed Alternative ' I ~ r ~~~~~ CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: March 27, 2009 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner Re: Request to amend the zoning code The Commission has received a request from Kurt Conner to amend the zoning code to allow accessory apartments in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential Zone (RNS-12) (see attached letter). When the zoning code was written in 2005, the Commission had considerable discussion of accessory apartments and the appropriate zones in which to allow them. A decision was made to specifically exclude accessory apartments from the RNS-12. The purpose of the RNS-12 zone is to stabilize certain existing residential neighborhoods by preserving the predominantly single-family residential character. Provisions in this zone prevent the conversion or redevelopment of single-family uses to multi-family uses. The Commission felt that because of the number of conversions to multiple dwelling units that had already occurred in the RNS-12 zones, the existing density of the RNS-12 zone, the intent of the zone to stabilize areas and the difficulty with enforcing occupancy regulations, it was in appropriate to include accessory apartments in the zone. The Commission should decide if you would like to reconsider that decision and allow accessory apartments in the RNS-12 zone. If you would, you should then consider what priority to assign the amendment to your work program (copy attached). If you do not wish to amend the code staff will take no further action. Planning and Zoning Commission: I am writing this letter to revise the current zoning code RNS-12 to allow accessory apartments in the section of Iowa City( 414 East Davenport St.)where I would like to purchase a home. With the recent push for affordable housing I would like this code revised so that I may purchase a home in Iowa City and live in the accesory apartment. I am aware of the occupancy requirements for this home and I would uphold those requirements. It would be an owner occupied lot and I would have a greater level of supervision over my tenants being located on the property versus living in another location and renting this home. If the accesory apartment is not allowed I am afraid that I won't be able to purchase this property due to the cost of living in another home. The outside of the existing accesory building would not need to be altered, therefore there would be no visual changes to the property. Thank you very much for your consideration. Sincerely, Kurt Conner 309-275-2830 Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission Work Program 1. Review CB-2 standards 2. Review of CB-10 zone requirements -setbacks (Burlington Street), parking, height limits, number of bedrooms etc. 3. Southeast Planning District 4. Investigate methods of protecting landmark trees (see APA zoning practice July 2006) 5. Update Open Space Plan/Ordinance (consider some credit for private open space?) 6. Review Floodplain development potential and regulations 7. North Corridor District Plan 8. Northwest District Plan Updated by P&Z 9-4-08 _~ r ~~.®~ ~~ CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: March 26, 2009 To: City Council From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner Re: REZ08-00011/SUB08-00010 Country Club Estates The majority of City Council has indicated that they would like to retain Rural Residential (RR-1) and Interim Development (ID-RS) zoning on Outlot D of Country Club Estates, rather than rezone it to Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) as originally requested by the applicant. At the time the Planning and Zoning Commission voted on this application, Outlot D was shown as parts 7 and 8 of Country Club Estates. Because the applicant was not able to come to agreement with the County and neighboring property owner about the vacation of Slothower Road, he is not able to preliminary plat the area adjacent to Slothower Road, so the plat has been changed to designate this area as Outlot D for future development. Retaining the current RR-1 and ID-RS zoning on Outlot D would preserve the City's ability to address Rohret Road right-of-way, the potential clustering of housing units and the creation of more open space and disposition of Slothower Road (see attached March 19 memorandum for more details). Because the Commission's recommendation included the rezoning of parts 7 and 8 (now Outlot D) to RS-5, the process outlined in the zoning code provides for an opportunity for a joint meeting of the Planning and Zoning and City Council to discuss the alteration to the original recommended rezoning being considered by the Council. If the Planning Commission concurs with the change or declines to meet with the Council, the Council could proceed with rezoning and the preliminary plat of Country Club Estates, Part 3-6 and retaining ID-RS and RR-1 zoning on Outlot D at their April 6th meeting. If the Commission wishes to confer with the Council, we would schedule a joint meeting prior to the Council voting on the rezoning. The Planning and Zoning Commission should decide whether you concur with the Council's direction on the zoning for Outlot D or if you wish to have a joint meeting. Attachments r ~~.®~r~ -..:ITY OF iOy~A CITY ~'`,. ' ~~ ~ E~ R ~ A ~D ~~ Date: March 19, 2009 To: City Council From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner Re: REZ08-00011/ SU608-00010 Country Club Estates Parts 3-8 At the March 10 meeting the Council asked staff to investigate moving the right-of-way of Rohret Road 17 feet to the north to help preserve trees on the south side of the street. Council also asked staff to investigate the possibility of clustering of development to create open space and some variety of housing types in the southern portion of the development. Rohret Road Right-Of-Way Ron Knoche, the City Engineer, has been discussing Rohret Road with the applicant's engineer. The City Engineer will evaluate the right-of-way needs in a separate memo. Slothower Road As discussed in the staff report and specified in the conditional zoning agreement, the southern portion of Slothower ^Road must be vacated by the County, or that portion of the subdivision must be redesigned to avoid the creation of double fronting lots between Prescott Lane and Slothower Road. The applicant has not come to agreement with the neighboring property owner and the County regarding the vacation of Slothower Road, therefore the southwestern portion of the subdivision can not be preliminary platted at this time and is now shown as Outlot D for future development. The applicant is still requesting that Outlot D be rezoned from Interim Development (ID-RS) and Rural Residential (RR-1) to Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5). He will submit a preliminary plat once the issue of Slothower Road is resolved. Clustering & Open Space Before discussing the possibility of clustering development, I would like to provide the Council with information about our previous discussions with the applicant. Approximately 2 years ago the applicant submitted Attachments A, B and C as a proposal for townhouses along Rohret Road. The plan included 124 dwelling units. The plan provided vehicular access to the units by a rear lane or driveway. With the exception of the townhouses that front onto Prescott Lane, the townhouses would not have a street in front, but would have a landscaped court yard instead. Staff advised the applicant that the development was too dense, did not contain sufficient open space and we would not recommend approval of the plan as initially submitted. We did tell the applicant that we felt that some form of attached housing would be appropriate if the plan contained more open space. This position is supported in the Comprehensive Plan policy of encouraging a diversity of housing types in new neighborhoods and the Southwest District Plan indicates that if well-designed, the portion of Country Club Estates adjacent to Rohret Road may be suitable for clusters of medium-density residential uses, such as townhouses or condominiums. Based on the applicant's current subdivision design and their previous clustering concept, staff prepared the attached sketch (Attachment D) to illustrate how clustering of dwellings could be done to create open space and a net gain in dwelling units. The plan includes 38 townhouses and 3 acres of open space (the applicant's current design for this part of the subdivision contains 27 single-family lots and no common open space). This alternative plan places the March 18, 2009 Page 2 open space directly across Rohret Road from several of the existing houses located in the county which would help preserve their views. The plan also provides room for additional right- of-way for Rohret Road, if it is determined that the road should be shifted to the north. We presented this plan as a concept to the developer to show how clustering could be designed to be compatible with the larger neighborhood and the Comprehensive Plan. There may be other designs that could achieve these objectives. Similar cluster designs have been successful in other neighborhoods, such as Windsor Ridge. The applicant indicated that he would consider including the open space if it was subtracted from Outlot B, the open space to be dedicated in the northern part of the subdivision. He did say that he did not want to cluster units because the presence of attached housing may hinder the marketing of the single family lots. If the majority of Council wished to require clustering of units and the creation of open space in the southern part of the subdivision, this could be done as part of the Planned Development Overlay rezoning. The open space could be maintained by the home owners association or dedicated to the City if the Parks and Recreation Commission chose to accept it. It should be noted that if the property is rezoned to RS-5 without a condition that a planned development be required in the future for the Outlot D, the City will not be able to require clustering or creation of open space. So if the Council wishes to see clustering and open space included in Country Club Estates, Parts 7 and 8, the conditional zoning agreement should include a requirement for a future planned development that will include clustering. An alternative that would preserve the City's rights to require clustering would be to retain the current ID-RS and RR-1 zoning on Outlot D. This would require the applicant to submit another rezoning request after the issue of Slothower Road is resolved. At that time the issue of clustering and open space could be addressed. This would also preserve the City's ability to require more right-of-way or construction easements for Rohret Road if it is determined necessary once the street is designed. The zoning and preliminary plat for the remainder of Country Club Estates (parts 3-6), could be approved now. Staff Recommendation If Council wishes to require the clustering and more open space in the southern part of Country Club Estates, staff recommends that condition zoning agreement require a planned development include clustering for a portion of Outlot D, or that Outlot D retain it current ID-RS and RR-1 zoning. Attachments: 1. Revised plat showing Outlot D for future development 2. Revised plat -phase exhibit 3. Attachment A -applicant's initial clustering concept 4. Attachment B -applicant's elevation for clustering concept 5. Attachment C -applicant's elevation for clustering concept 6. Attachment D -staff clustering concept Cc Planning and Zoning Commission { - ctr- x-=- PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN -- s' ~° ~ COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES THIRD, FOURTH °° ~ "~ ~ FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH ADDITIONS ~' _. I i ~r =~' ~ -9® ,1 4 near-t~ =ro-= ~~~ `:,_ ~ IOWA CITY, IOWA aTANDANp tIGEND AND NO7E5 i 'C's ,'1 uanaemD9n Dmr'umoa _~ ...duo n 4 B ~ e..a: ~'F ~'~L~'L•:'~"' • ®"~ n ..~,uw~w"'maew n n ,T .Ii, i ... _ _~, 'i I W~n:.t e7A6~~~s+S~Y.~R~_ g :::,.:.. T- ~ '. 111 ~-~- ~'e ^5.5:~ ~., ~^"~y~W~i.~~~ ..~..~..,..w wse I G I - ~ a` '~• ~ e t.l il, ~ ~~L?q%''~Y1f7:C~'W .e~.w on..mun =:~t _ l.C.CL~ m"SnSC.....w. ©w w Iii pmme, ~ r n / !-yF// /~ ~~... ..'Yln".'9.o.e .° :'"'S~ye~'~~'"~'~ -- ~. ~- ~ ~q~. ~~~~: r '~ r n Er'~C~ ~ j .~~ ~` • .w mww ra ~wsse . u...a ,.La. j.~ -,5a ~® see '°s f0 8~: 7 0 x ~ b!~_ x.. 1 r f i .tea A°" .. ~ '~ ~, r~.I I1 ~p ~ D Y'z ~ ~~I' : TT 'r 1~-er(-e° ~ ~.~ T I I I ~ Y. ~.. t~r, SSS ' ~ ~° ~ >:s rt : . O I ^~.~ Y~ *~i myAi T . tes p.. is ~ zs- .-- ~~' .LSY _Tb .a°"'.. • -mow..-6 ZS C7 O'~O~ O~ ,~/r _ ~ ~1 „~, . _ r ' ~ ' e v ~. >~ ~ O ~ ~s ~ r tta ~. a_ - . ~" ~~ ss .ri p _~..- aA ..~.... II _ I ~ Y..t• ~ - l ~ - - 1 ~ - ~.. L ~,y'I Cr vim' ~ .. '1~~ ~'~ ., \ ~A:*a / COVHfRY CLUB OTDA'.tl~ M-WGHiX ADDRIDli9 ~ ~~..~ 4~ ," I A 1'~ i °"` .~. ~~',• .-..-. ~ ~ o'd.'~4.~ -~ LOCA~T109~N~AP I i ! ~ « ~~~~ ~"~ IliiEi FFgg Qrr T ~~8a hr6ttt i ~9. d a Revised plat showing Outlot D for future development OUROf T ~N r MI w a / . /i M ~ 11 ~N 1 fl OIIIIOf 4 ~~~ WIlOf4 NORTH THIRD ADDITION CONSISTS OF LOTS i-38 do OU TLOT "A' FOURTH ADDITION CONSISTS OF LOTS 39-56 FIFTH ADDITION CONSISTS OF LOTS 57-83, ANO WTLOT "B" SIXTH ADDITION CONSISTS OF LOTS 84-107 & OUTLOT "C" SEVENTH ADDITION CONSISTS OF WTLOT "D" l\ • w "\ ~ e \ ~ r7o ~ ~ 8R ~ ~ O`p0 y~o ~ ~ 8 s m DzD ~~ a ~ ~ ~~ 'g = p N ° D C ~ ~ - -. ~ _ y v,g 3 n p° z c ~ c z~ ~~n n m ~ ~ ~ ~n ~ ~_' ~ ~ ~ Tm m ~ ;°~ o ~ u ~ ~ yy ~ O ~O ~ -y-1 Z = ~ RD y c _ ? ~ (p ~lnD ~ Z ~ ~ ' ~ to m ~ CO l ii p~ C 7 -~ ~ ^ .i. A V 1 T ' wl ,. • r i « N ~ a w T M o ~ ' n w (/~/ r ~ / wl • I w 1 wl w o a ~ r \ ~ ^ M / ~ ~~ M wl O M w `` o ~' ' \ '~ a ^ ~ ~~ M ~ / ~T~ w y~/' o 3 D~ ~ ~y ~~~~~ ;_ ~ro~ c m O ~ ~ ,~" .d ~7, m E D m L+i ~ ~~1 ~? .m. ~ ~ • r Fn n Revised plat -phase exhibit ~ ~ . r~~ / -~-~---11~. ~ ~ ~_ / ~ / ,,\ }^~ ~ / \ , inf. ~ ~ \ ~ d V C \ ~ ,,~ ~ '% ' ~ N ,~~ \ ~ ~~ ~ ,\ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~• ~ fl.. ~ \~ , ~+ ~ ~ ~~ +~+ ~ \ \~\ l\.. '`j \ ~ \ ~ ~~ .\ 1 ~, ~qa o m ~ ~ ~ ~ ` + ~ Q. ~ ~ -~ ,. _ - •;~ I ' ~ Q~ I I m'~ '~ , ~ \ II L I I ~ , \\ I ~ J -... - ... -- ... ~ I i- - j i I ~ ,'\\ ~ .. _ •-- _ ~ i I I I ` '.. ~ ,~~ O ~ `, , •. "-~~_ -- ----- - I ~ I - ,CZ'CL6 M.OY,SLOON ~~ \. Q. V C O V C ~L ~1.+ N V L 0 ++ N C V Q Q m C d t V a z O ~_ d U z 0 d z O QL D to O O Q V C O V C ~L {.r N V L 0 0 ++ d N C V Q tQ U c m E s Q r r"~°",®~r'~ CITY OF IOWA CITY ~~~~ RAN~uM M EMo Date: March 19, 2009 To: City Council From: Ron Knoche, City Engineer Re: Rohret Road and Country Club Estates Parts 3-8 The first thing to note is the reconstruction of the portion of Rohret Road from east of Rohret Court to west of Slothower Road has not been completed. The preliminary plat stage of Iowa City's development process does not require construction drawings to be complete. The construction drawings are completed prior to the Final Plat approval. The current proposal requires the Developer to construct, at their cost, the piece of Rohret Road from the end of the curb and gutter section to west of Rohret Court. The remainder of the reconstruction will be an Iowa City project. Apre-design meeting will be held with the neighborhood prior to the design being completed. This allows the neighbors to be involved in the design process. Keep in mind, all of the requests of the neighbors cannot be incorporated into the final design. The items listed below are the major design and construction questions that have been brought up during the public hearing and observations from a field review. The centerline of the road could be shifted to the north, but the right of way width of 50 feet on the north side of the existing centerline will be sufficient. • The road centerline must connect with into the existing centerline to the east and west of the project limits. • Temporary construction easements along the south right of way line will be required. The ditches along the road will need to be filled in with this project. This may require a wider temporary easement along the south west end due to the topography of the land. • It appears that a majority of the trees are outside of the existing right of way, but will be in the temporary construction easement. • Some bushes and volunteer trees within the fence line and at some driveways must be removed to complete the project. • City projects are designed and constructed with the preservation of trees as an objective. You can find examples of this in the Rohret Road corridor to the east of this project, Mormon Trek Boulevard along Finkbine Golf Course and more recently on Lower West Branch Road. The City Forester is consulted during the design to find out the health of the trees and define the root zone area. This varies by tree species. • The practice during construction is to place safety fence around the trees outside of the root zone. This keeps heavy equipment from compacting this area. • The portion of Rohret Road from Rohret Court to the west will not have sidewalks installed on the south side with the reconstruction project unless these properties are annexed prior to construction. • It can not be guaranteed that the existing trees will not be affected by construction. • It is not anticipated the overhead power line will be moved. Staff will attend the meeting on Tuesday, March 24~h to address any further questions. MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 2, 2009 - 6:00 PM -INFORMAL CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Michelle Payne, Wally Plahutnik, Tim Weitzel, Elizabeth Koppes, Josh Busard MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: None CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks. Miklo announced that they were having trouble getting the computer started. He asked the Commission review the minutes while he attempted to get the computer started. Plahutnik said that he would like to raise an issue for discussion on a future agenda. He said that there has been a lot of community discussion about the Iowa City School Board's facilities plan and how it will affect the city. He said that he recalled recent planning and zoning issues in the Miller Orchard area and the City's commitment to preserve and improve that area of the city as a viable neighborhood with a good mix of housing for both renters and owners, college students and families. He said that the School Board's plans to close Roosevelt School may be counter to the city's efforts. He asked if it is appropriate for the Planning and Zoning Commission to weigh in on the issue. Freerks said that she recently ran across a copy of the Planning Commissioners Journal that contained several articles about the importance of dialogue between Planning Commissions, City Councils and School Boards. She said the Weber School capacity issues that the neighborhood raised in the recent Country Club Estates rezoning case, was a good example of how what the City does affects schools and how School District decisions affect neighborhoods. She asked if staff could provide copies of this issue of the Planning Commissioner's Journal to the rest of the Commission. Miklo said that he would try to have copies for the next meeting. Koppes said that she did not want to weigh in on the opening of a new school at the Crossings. Freerks said that she was not hearing anyone propose that a school not be built there, but that there is a concern that schools in the core part of the city may be endangered. Freerks asked if there was a majority of Commissioners who would like to put discussion of School District plans as they relate to the Comprehensive Plan an upcoming agenda. The consensus of the Commission was to place discussion on a future agenda. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2009 -Informal Page 2 REZONING ITEM: REZ09-00002: Discussion of an application submitted by City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Interim Development (ID-1) zone to General Industrial (I-1) zone for approximately 100 acres of property located on 420th Street SE, west of Taft Avenue. Staff gave a brief overview of the application, noting that the property in question had recently come before the Commission for annexation. In response to a Commissioner question, Miklo said that he believed that both 420tH Street and Taft Avenue would eventually provide access to Interstate 80 (though not directly). Eastham asked if the full portion of 420tH Street would be improved. Miklo said he was not sure at this time. Miklo said that one concern is that the County will not allow industrial uses on these sites until 420tH Street is improved. The City does not want to improve the road and then have the owners develop in the County without annexing into the city. Miklo said that depending on negotiations with the property owner, the improvements may be done to a point and then stopped until the adjacent land is annexed. Koppes asked what was present in the area currently. Miklo said there was an empty warehouse, but no residences. Freerks noted that with the City-initiated application there is no limitation period though a timely response is appreciated. Eastham asked if special access was needed if there was a wind turbine facility there. Miklo said that the heaviness and length of that equipment is being taken into account with the design of 420tH Street. Koppes asked if traffic signals off Highway 6 were being considered as part of the improvements to 420tH Street. Miklo said he believed it was being considered but was not yet determined. COUNTY REZONING ITEMS: CZ09-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by Michael Furman for a rezoning of 40 acres from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R3) zone located at 3051 Buchmayer Bend NE. The applicant has requested an indefinite deferral. ZONING CODE ITEMS: Discussion of amendments to the Zoning Code to regulate Drinking Establishments and Alcohol Sales Oriented Retail Uses and to establish minimum spacing requirements between such uses. Plahutnik abstained from these discussions. Freerks asked if much feedback had been received from either the University or affected property owners. Miklo said that he had been contacted by the attorney of a property owner. Eastham asked if any special notification had gone out. Miklo said there had not been, but that there had been considerable newspaper coverage. Howard said that City Council had had several very public discussions on this issue. Freerks asked if the Chamber of Commerce had gone out and contacted people about this. She said that it would be nice if everyone connected were aware and could address its impact. She noted, however, that the City is not required to notify specific people about zoning code amendments. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2009 -Informal Page 3 Greenwood Hektoen said that several attorneys she had spoken with know that this regulation is in the works. She said that she personally had only received one phone call on the issue. Miklo said that from Staff's perspective, the City has been discussing this matter for years. The City Council brought this up five years ago and then decided to try other more voluntary approaches to get overconsumption of alcohol and underage drinking under control. Miklo said that these measures have apparently not worked to the satisfaction of the Council so they directed Staff to investigate this option. Miklo said there is a concentration of bars and liquor stores downtown that contributes to the overconsumption of alcohol. Miklo said that from a land use perspective such concentration can lead to a downtown that has only one dominant use. This would not be in sync with the goals of the community. Miklo said there are some very valid public policy reasons to do this. Freerks said that the regulations would not really take anything away from anyone at this time so long as a bar behaves lawfully. Busard said that if 500 feet of separation is required, no new bars will be allowed to open up in downtown Iowa City. Koppes said it sounds like they would be creating a very valuable market for a few people. Howard shared representations of the downtown zone which mapped the concentration of bars and liquor stores in the downtown zones. Howard said that definitions had to be created to establish what qualifies as a drinking establishment and what qualifies as an alcohol-related sales use. A lot of businesses have alcohol sales as an accessory part of their business, such as theaters, bowling alleys, fraternal organizations, hotels and motels, etc, but these would not be considered drinking establishments. A Drinking Establishment is defined as 1) the principal activity is the preparation and dispensing of food and or beverages, 2) has to have a liquor license for on-site sales, and 3) open for business anytime between 12 a.m. and 2 a.m. Howard said that principal uses and accessory uses are all defined in the code as a means for the City to figure out what zoning regulations apply to a given business. Payne asked about the provision in which a percentage of sales determined whether alcohol was a principal or accessory use. Howard explained that percentage of sales was used only as a means of distinguishing liquor stores from other retail stores, such as grocery stores where only a small percentage of sales are alcohol-related. However, staff felt that using percentage of sales to distinguish between restaurants and bars was more problematic. Eastham asked if the three factors she outlined were the only defining factors of a bar. Howard said that they were and that Staff had struggled with the definition quite a bit. Howard said that if the primary concern was the activity that happens after midnight downtown, then subjecting every beer wine and liquor permit in the city to an annual income review seemed to go overboard. Howard said that the 12-2 AM portion of the definition distinguishes restaurants with liquor licenses from establishments that are truly bars, which focuses the regulation on the primary problem. Payne asked if it was true that a bar that closed at midnight could be exempt from being called a drinking establishment. Howard said it could, but that the question was would there really be a bar that closed at midnight downtown. Eastham said that the flip-side was a restaurant that happened to serve alcohol that wanted to stay open past midnight could not. Howard noted that there are a lot of restaurants downtown that turn into bars at night. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2009 -Informal Page 4 Payne noted that the new diner on the corners of Market and Gilbert Street would not have been able to open under this ordinance because they both serve alcohol and stay open past midnight. Howard said that if they stay open after midnight that would be correct (staff later verified that this restaurant is not open after midnight, so would not be affected by these regulations). Eastham asked why use the 2 am time. Greenwood Hektoen pointed out that alcohol cannot be sold between the hours of 2 AM and 6 AM. Howard gave several examples of establishments that would not have the separation requirement, including: restaurants with liquor licenses that close before midnight, bars and restaurants associated with hotels (Class B liquor license), bowling alleys, private clubs, etc. Howard said that it seemed like the biggest concern with liquor stores was the recent proliferation of liquor store type businesses in the downtown area. Howard said that Staff is recommending that these regulations are applied only to liquor stores or convenience stores in the downtown area whose alcohol sales exceed 25% of overall sales. Greenwood Hektoen noted that uses that are grandfathered can only be the same non-conforming use (i.e., could not turn a bar into a liquor store or vice versa). Koppes expressed concern about applying the regulations only to downtown liquor stores and the possibility of getting a lot of liquor stores setup just outside downtown. Miklo explained that he did not think this was a concern when the map of the zones was taken into account. Howard noted that all of the stores downtown are grandfathered in, so there should not be a sudden proliferation because none of those stores will be closed as a result of this ordinance. Miklo said that the issue of applying the liquor store standards citywide would mean looking at all the sales record for all convenience stores and grocery stores in the whole city every year. He said there has been no proliferation of liquor stores surrounding downtown. Payne and Koppes said that it was possible this regulation could cause that proliferation if liquor stores downtown closed. Freerks said that this is something that could be revisited if necessary. She said the idea is to create a better environment. Howard said the future market cannot be known. She said that one of the things to keep in mind is why there is a proliferation of liquor stores downtown. Howard said the reason is that there is more of a concentration of a population and also establishments in the downtown area that want to buy alcohol. Howard asked if those same factors existed anywhere else in Iowa City to the degree that such a regulation was necessary. She said one must also think about whether this particular regulation would have benefits that outweigh the costs if it were to be applied citywide. Staff believes that the administrative costs and cost to grocery stores and other retail establishments that just happen to sell some alcohol would likely exceed the benefits of establishing a separation requirement. Eastham said discussion of the possibility is worthwhile. Greenwood Hektoen advised the Commission to keep in mind what their goal is and what Council's goal is in enacting these regulations. She said it is important that whatever is adopted, or not adopted, addresses those concerns. Howard said that passing the ordinance will not affect existing bars and liquor stores. They will continue as legally non-conforming uses for as long as they are in business. If the liquor license lapses, is revoked, or discontinued for a period of one year then the use would lose its non-conforming rights. Payne asked if this was the same for all non-conforming uses and Howard said that the one year time period applied to all nonconforming uses. Eastham asked if a license can be suspended for more than a year. Howard said that she did not think so. She said if it is revoked then it could be for longer than a year. She noted that there is a long process before revocation is enacted, and chances are that the license holder would sell the establishment prior to revocation. Greenwood Hektoen acknowledged that the City can affect the status of a license through recommendations to the State issuing board. Freerks asked what the costs would be to the City in terms of staff hours, etc. Planning and Zoning Commission March 2, 2009 -Informal Page 5 Koppes asked if this regulation did not stand to increase the value of certain properties and by extension decrease that of others, as those with drinking establishments already in them would be the only allowable spaces for bars. Koppes said there would be 53 really happy people, and some very upset people who had wanted to start a bar downtown. Weitzel asked if that was a compelling enough reason to not pass the regulations. Busard said that the same thing had been done when the occupancy limits were changed for the downtown area. Payne said that her biggest question with this is how does this actually stop the drinking problem. Howard acknowledged that this regulation would not solve the problem, but that this was one part of the larger effort to resolve the problem of overconsumption of alcohol and the mix of business in the downtown area. Payne said that even if a place closes down and another cannot replace it, the people who had frequented that establishment will just go elsewhere. Greenwood Hektoen said that she believed that the Council was also concerned with the changing nature of downtown, and wanting to have diversity in what occupies its storefronts. Miklo said that the idea was to prevent the expansion of more bars in the downtown area. He said that the Council still wants to do other things to help curb overconsumption and underage drinking downtown. Eastham asked how the separation was measured. Howard said that it is measured from the property line. Eastham asked how many bars would be in the area downtown if the regulations had been in affect before any bars had been established downtown. Howard said a typical block in the downtown area is 350 feet, so approximately a little fewer than one per block. Eastham asked what the rationale for the 500 foot figure. Howard said this was the typical distance based on their research of other communities that had enacted such ordinances. Miklo added that ordinances from other communities ranged from 200 to 1000 feet separation requirements. OTHER: None. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. C O .N .~ O (~ 'O 01 O C ~ ~C ~ N vo o~ C O ~ ~ N C ~ ~~ d C ~ lC Q a v O Z_ I- W W J Q 0 LL M X X X X X X X N X X X X X X X O X X ~ X X ~ ~ .~ ~ w ~ ~-- 0 ~ r 0 M r 0 N r 0 O ~- 0 O r 0 M r 0 ~ z ~ y m ~ ~ W ~ d ~i ~ ~°c = a 3 R 3 v a~ U X W ,~, c ~ •- ~ ~ c ~~ a`~'i ~ Q d Q u ~ n u w YXOO MINUTES PRELIMIANRY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 5, 2009 - 7:30 PM -FORMAL CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham, Elizabeth Koppes, Tim Weitzel, Michelle Payne MEMBERS ABSENT: Wally Plahutnik STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: John Beasley, Brad Houser, Dan Black, David Kieft, Don Stalkfleet RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Commission recommended approval of REZ09-00002, an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Interim Development ~ID-1) zone to General Industrial (I-1) zone for approximately 100 acres of property located on 420 n Street SE, west of Taft Avenue. The vote was 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). 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. ZONING CODE ITEMS: Discussion of amendments to the Zoning Code to regulate Drinking Establishments and Alcohol Sales Oriented Retail Uses and to establish minimum spacing requirements between such uses. Howard stated that in early January the City Council expressed their concern about the concentration of bars and liquor stores in the downtown area. City Council asked the staff to draft regulations for the Planning and Zoning Commission's consideration requiring a minimum separation between bars and liquor stores. The regulations require a 500 foot separation between bars and a 1000 foot separation between liquor stores. These regulations would apply to new bars and liquor stores being established in the downtown area. Howard said that Staff has created some draft regulations for amending the zoning code to comply with City Council's request. Howard shared a map of the downtown business area which outlined the areas that would be affected by the new regulations. Other illustrations demonstrated the concentration of drinking establishments and alcohol retail stores downtown by showing the areas which would separate bars and liquor stores under the new regulations, and highlighting the overlapping areas that exist currently. Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 2 Howard said that in order to regulate bars and liquor stores, Staff needed to establish a definition of what a Drinking Establishment is as opposed to a restaurant, theater, etc. that sells alcohol. Staff proposes a use classification process that would apply to any use for which an application has been filed for a liquor license or wine or beer permit. Through this process, it would be determined if a new business would fall into one of two categories: 1) Drinking Establishment, or 2) Alcohol Sales-Oriented Retail Use (liquor store). Howard said that Staff also created a system to define uses in which alcohol sales are merely an accessory use to the principal use of the property, e.g., a grocery store such as Hy-Vee, which sells alcohol but not as its primary purpose. In order to be classified as a Drinking Establishment, a business would have the following characteristics: 1) the principal activity of the establishment is the preparation, dispensing and consumption of food and/or beverages; and 2) the establishment is licensed by the State for the sale of alcohol for on-site consumption; and 3) the establishment is open for business any time between 12 AM and 2 AM. Howard noted that restaurants that have a liquor license but are not open to the general public after midnight are not considered Drinking Establishments and are therefore not subject to the separation requirement. Other establishments such as theaters, bowling alleys, etc., which sell alcohol are not classified as Drinking Establishments because the principal business is not eating or drinking; as a result, they are not subject to the separation requirement. Restaurants and bars that are associated with a hotel or motel are not subject to the requirement as they hold Class B liquor licenses which are issued only to hotels/motels. Alcohol sales for all of the above uses would be considered an accessory use and therefore not subject to the separation requirement. Howard said that Staff has defined Alcohol Sales-Oriented Retail uses as any establishment for which a Class E liquor license or wine or beer permit has been issued that allows the sale of alcohol or alcoholic beverages in closed containers for off-premise consumption. In order to determine whether or not those alcohol sales are a principal part of the business, Staff had to come up with a system for classifying businesses. If an establishment can show that its income from alcohol sales is less than 25% of gross yearly income then that establishment qualifies for an accessory alcohol sales certificate and is exempt from the separation requirement. Businesses must renew this certificate every year at the time their liquor licenses are renewed. The proposed regulations state that a Drinking Establishment must be separated by a minimum of 500 feet from any other Drinking Establishment. This regulation would apply in all commercial zones that currently allow bars. For Alcohol Sales-Oriented retail uses, liquor stores/convenience stores, staff recommends that the regulations apply only in the Central Business zones. These establishments must be separated by a minimum of 1,000 feet. Staff does not recommend requiring the 1,000 foot separation city-wide because Staff feels the City Council's main concern was the concentration of liquor stores in the downtown area. The problem with applying the regulation city-wide would be that every grocery store, convenience store and gas station in town would then have to go through a fairly onerous process to submit their income statements to the City each year; which would be a problem both administratively and for business owners. Howard pointed out that Staff is recommending that Drinking Establishments not be allowed in the Mixed- Use or the Commercial Office zones. These zones typically contain or are next to residential areas. To Staff's knowledge neither of these zones currently have bars in them. At their informal meeting, Commissioners had requested a map showing all of the commercial zones that would be affected by these regulations. Howard shared such a map. Howard noted that existing businesses would be grandfathered in. If the businesses do not comply with the 500 or 1,000 foot space requirement they would be considered legally non-conforming and would have the right to continue in their present use. If the liquor license lapses, is revoked or is discontinued for a period of one year, or if there are changes to the use such that it no longer meets the requirements Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 3 of a Drinking Establishment or an Alcohol Sales-Oriented Retail use, then the building would be required to come into a conforming use. For example, if a nonconforming bar was changed into a clothing store, it would not be able to be converted back into a bar. Once non-conforming uses are changed into conforming uses, they cannot revert back to the non-conforming use. Non-conforming uses cannot expand; though the interiors can be renovated, the square footage and the exterior footprint cannot be increased. Howard noted that these things are true of any non-conforming use, not just in the case of these specific regulations. However, the regulations are written to exclude sidewalk cafes from the definition of expansion, so that they would be allowed as long as they met the requirements for sidewalk cafes. Miklo noted that in the case of sidewalk cafes there are no guarantees that a Drinking Establishment could establish one as the City Council considers many factors; however, the exception written into the regulations is intended not to prevent them. Freerks asked for clarification on when a use would have to change from non-conforming to conforming. Howard stated that in the case of suspensions of liquor licenses then the legally non-conforming use could be continued so long as the use was re-established within the year. She clarified that if a bar closed and a clothing store opened, then the use would be considered converted after the new use was established for a period of seven days. Once converted to a conforming use it could not be changed back into a nonconforming use. Eastham asked if a liquor license suspension of more than 365 days would constitute a change in use. Greenwood Hektoen said that state code allows the local authorities to suspend a liquor license for a period not to exceed one year. She noted that the code does give the City the authority to revoke or suspend, however, the City Council has a policy of not making those types of determinations and instead makes a recommendation to the Alcohol and Beverage Division and lets them make the decision. The goal behind this policy is to remove the politics from any local suspensions. Eastham asked if the State could suspend a liquor license for more than a year. Greenwood Hektoen said that the State could not suspend for more than a year; however, the State could revoke the license. Eastham noted that the definition of a Drinking Establishment included the provision that the business is open between the hours of 12 and 2 a.m. Eastham asked if it was possible then to establish a bar within 500 feet of another so long as it closes before midnight. Howard said that this would be possible; however, she said that practically speaking bars generally stay open until 2 a.m., and that she cannot think of an instance of a bar that closes before midnight. Eastham said that he could not think of an instance either but that it could come up. Howard said that the goal was to find a system of classification that would make a clear distinction between a bar and a restaurant and would provide a level of certainty for both the City and the business owner. Howard said that the proposed definition makes it very clear whether a business is a Drinking Establishment or not. She said that if someone were to undertake a new business, they would not want to take the risk of establishing what they believed would be a restaurant only to find out after 6 months that their percentage of alcohol sales had classified them as a Drinking Establishment and thus become an illegal use. Howard said using a percentage of sales for the bars vs. restaurants would make the whole process a lot muddier and less certain. Howard noted that since most of the problems that occur which are causing concern in the community happen after midnight, it Is best to use a definition that will focus the regulation on establishments that are truly bars whose primary business is selling alcohol after midnight. Eastham said that as he understands it the Drinking Establishment definition does not depend on percentage of sales. Howard said that is correct. She said that Staff felt that using a percentage of sales to determine what businesses were Drinking Establishments would not have given enough notice to people in the process of starting new businesses downtown and would have created administrative headaches for both the City and the business owners. Howard said the current definition targets the problem itself and does not require every single restaurant to submit their books and verify their income every single year. Planning and Zoning Commission March S, 2009 -Formal Page 4 Koppes asked if special occasions like wedding receptions and renting out restaurants would be affected by the 12-2 a.m. requirement. Miklo noted that the policy says "open to the public," which a wedding reception presumably would not be. Howard said that city code has a whole section on classification systems used to determine what is an accessory use and what is a principal use. In the case of the occasional private party or reception that would cause a restaurant to be open after midnight, the City could consider that an accessory use. Payne asked Staff to address the issue of grandfathering in current businesses. Payne asked if under the current language it was possible for a business to retain its status as legally non-conforming if it had its liquor license reinstated on the 365th day of suspension. Greenwood Hektoen said she believed so but would have to check. Howard said that typically suspensions are for short periods of time, and a series of suspensions is generally handed down prior to revocation. Howard noted that the intent in the non- conforming chapter of the code is that non-conforming uses will go away over time, and this regulation is not an exception to that. Greenwood Hektoen said that the way she reads it, if the license is suspended for a year, the use would have to be brought into conformance. Eastham asked if it was correct that if a suspension was in place for a year then the use would have to become conforming. Howard said this was correct. Freerks asked what the history is of a bar losing its license for a period of more than one year. Howard said it was extremely rare. Miklo noted that Doug Boothroy, who has worked at the City for 30 years, recalled only one instance where a bar had its license revoked for a year. Freerks asked about the administrative and staff time that would be needed to enforce the code. Howard said she thought that for Drinking Establishments the requirements would not be strenuous. For the Alcohol Related Retail Sales certificate the staff time would be greater, as would the time required by the business owner. She noted that the accessory alcohol sales certificate is optional for the business owner, upon whom the onus of applying lies. Koppes asked for clarification on the CC-2 and Intensive Commercial zones downtown and whether they would be affected. Miklo noted that there were still a few pockets of CC-2 zoning south of the downtown where a liquor store could be opened under these regulations. Howard noted that the Drinking Establishment requirements would be applied citywide. She said that the intent of the regulations is not to disallow liquor stores and bars but to reduce the concentration. Eastham asked Staff to talk a bit about how they determined the separation should be 500 or 1,000 feet. Miklo said Staff did a considerable amount of research on what other communities across the country do. Mikto said the distances of 500 and 1,000 feet were pretty typical distances. Miklo said that as liquor stores are a pretty specialized business, there is not a need for a lot of them. Bars and restaurants tend to be a little more common than liquor stores, thus their required separation distance is lower. Miklo said different communities required separation distances that ranged from 250-1,000 feet. Miklo said that given the pattern of uses already established in our downtown, the distance of 500 feet seemed a good fit. Eastham asked if Staff felt that if the 500 foot separation of bars were in effect presently it would allow for a reasonable number of drinking establishments in the downtown area. Miklo said Staff did not get into that kind of analysis. Miklo said that Staff looked at what was presently there and then re-examined it in light of the goal of not increasing that concentration. There were no further questions for Staff and the public hearing was opened. John Beasley, 321 E. Market Street, said that he was present on behalf of some property owners in downtown Iowa City. He said that as he sat at the back of the room listening he was trying to get a sense of what the Commission intended to do with this proposal. He asked if the Commission was considering this proposal, just discussing it, or was prepared to make a recommendation to City Council. He said that the answer to that question would play a role in some of his remarks. Freerks replied that the Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 5 Commission could vote on the matter and make a recommendation or they could vote to continue discussion at a later date. Freerks said it depends on discussions that take place. Beasley urged the Commission to take time to sort through the matter, as there are multiple perspectives to take into consideration. Beasley said that he was present on behalf of landlords as well as bar owners in the downtown area. He said that before enacting this kind of regulation, the Commission needs to look at it from all perspectives. Beasley noted that the downtown property owner is not necessarily the bar owner, and may have an entirely different perspective. Beasley noted that the discussions seem to lump the property owners and the bar owners together as though they are both "The Drinking Establishment," when in fact their interests and perspectives may be quite different. Beasley said that this proposal could have far-reaching effects on the party that owns the real estate and rents it to the bar establishment. Beasley said that ultimately the landlord is responsible for the real estate taxes. Beasley asked if any of the Commissioners had had a chance to sit down and look at the amount of real estate taxes being paid on some of the properties that have bars in them, and how significantly some of those taxes have increased in the last four to five years. Beasley said that the taxes on one of his client's downtown properties have gone up 13% in the last year. He said that before the Commission makes a recommendation they need to dissect the matter more fully. Beasley expressed surprise that there were not more bar owners or property owners present at the meeting because of the large impact this matter will have on them. Beasley said that this is a big deal. He said that it is an even bigger deal if a landlord has an empty property that is not currently a bar. He said that not only does that landlord have to find a new tenant, but the pool of potential tenants is severely affected. Beasley said that he also would ask the Commission to delay making a recommendation until they had fully considered how this piece of legislation would work with other legislation under consideration that governs the City Council's relationship with the Alcohol and Beverage Division (ABD) and how the licensing process works. Beasley said the City Council makes a recommendation to the ABD for liquor license renewals. He said that there is a new piece of legislation under consideration which states that if the licensee has had more than one PAULA (Possession of Alcohol under the Legal Age) citation in a minimum of 18 visits by the police department within the last year, then the City Council will recommend that the ABD not renew the license. Greenwood Hektoen clarified that it was actually an average of one PAULA per visit by the police department. Beasley said that the point was that the Commission really needed to understand the interplay and relationship of the City with the ABD and the terms suspension of license, revocation of license and non-renewal of license and how they fit together. Beasley said that it was his understanding that if an employee of a bar sells alcohol to an underage person the ABD has what Beasley terms a "ladder system." The first offense is an administrative fine to the licensee. For the second offense within a one or two year period (Beasley was not sure which) a suspension of the license is levied. The third offense within a three year period would result in a longer suspension, and the fourth time could receive a revocation. Beasley said that a revocation means that not only is the licensee out of business, but that premises cannot be licensed to serve alcohol for a period of one year. That bar owner's license revocation could thereby permanently disallow the property owner from renting the property to a bar in the future under the proposed regulations. Beasley stated that the proposed statute has a lot of implications, is very complicated, and has great impact on a number of parties. Beasley said that he is not condoning the bad things that have occurred to prompt this proposal for downtown Iowa City, but he said there is a lot more to this proposal than meets the eye. He said that he himself is just beginning to get his arms around all of the possible implications. Beasley said he would be happy to answer any questions the Commissioners might have for him. Freerks asked Beasley when he received the proposal. Beasley received the proposal on March 1St. He said one of the reasons he had come to the meeting was to hear Staff's perspective on the issue and the questions the Commission has. He reiterated that the property owner and tenant perspectives on the matter were not necessarily one and the same. Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 6 Payne asked if Beasley believed that a building that has a Drinking Establishment as its current use today could be worth more money under this proposal since it already has that use; if it was more valuable as a result of its legally non-conforming use. Beasley said that anytime a landlord has more options and opportunities to rent to a greater diversity of uses then the value of the property is greater. Beasley said that he did believe this would make some properties more valuable because anytime potential uses for the property are taken off the table, value is lost. Beasley said that the harsh reality of it is that he is concerned that taking action on the number of bars/restaurants in downtown Iowa City is a good way to wind up with a lot of "for rent" signs and vacant buildings. Beasley said that he had advised the then- mayor of Iowa City of this at the time Coral Ridge Mall moved into the area. He said that a bar that is well run and well-maintained is a good tenant, and that is the facts of the matter. He said that the exorbitant real estate taxes that come with downtown property can be paid if you have a good bar as a tenant. Beasley said he is not condoning excessive alcohol use in downtown Iowa City, but he cautioned against winding up with a bunch of "for rent" signs in the downtown as that leaves a different negative impression on people (referring to the negative impression the Council fears will be left on people by the sight of too many bars downtown). Beasley noted how beautiful the College Street Billiards Company was, and how intricately it was decorated with woodwork. He said that he asks himself who will put that kind of money into downtown Iowa City if you cannot have arestaurant/bar in the building. He said that legislating against bars and restaurants can have much more far reaching affects than those intended. Eastham said that it seems to him that this proposal could in fact reduce the number of bars in the downtown area. Eastham asked Beasley if he had an opinion as to whether or not the downtown area should allow for additional bars than what is currently there. Beasley replied that if an individual is willing to take the risk, invest the time and money and sign a contract with a landlord, then they should be allowed to do so. Beasley said that this would be a business decision on the part of the bar owner. Beasley said that at some point, a perspective bar owner will reach the business decision that there are too many bars downtown to make a profit with a new one. Beasley said that supply and demand will work itself out. He said that at the point where there are too many bars, the market will take care of the concentration. Weitzel asked Beasley what he proposed. He said that if City Council's directive was incorrect in pursuing regulatory controls to prevent a concentration of bars and liquor stores he wondered what Beasley's clients would propose as a means of preventing concentration. Weitzel said that the city had already had about five years of waiting to see if the bars would regulate themselves, with no sign of that actually happening. Beasley replied that his clients work hard to properly train their help and to monitor who goes in and out of their establishments. Beasley said that one of his clients has even taken the initiative to go to a 21-only policy for his establishment. Weitzel said that if that was the case these bar owners would not suffer any adverse consequences from this legislation. Beasley shared an anecdote with the Commission about how sometimes the best training and supervision does not necessarily spare a bar owner from receiving a ticket for serving minors. Beasley said that an establishment had been ticketed for selling alcohol to someone under the legal age and was going to lose its license for a period of time. Because of the suspension, a lot of money was at stake. The employee who had served the minor swore that the individual had presented a legal I.D., but no identification of any kind was found on the person when searched by police. On the surface, it appeared clear that the establishment had violated the law. Just before trial, it was learned through eyewitness testimony that the individual who had purchased the alcohol had possessed a fake I.D. and had discarded it prior to being stopped by the police. In fact, the establishment had followed the law exactly, and still would have been penalized as though it had broken the law were it not for the witness who came forward. Beasley said that the problem is that sometimes bar owners despite their best efforts are penalized for the actions and mistakes of the kids working for them. Beasley acknowledged that there were in fact bad bar owners out there, but he contended that most tried hard to do the right thing. He said these regulations are a big deal because the property owner remains on the hook for $50,000 per year in real estate taxes even if the tenant's 19 year old employee made an error or someone pulled a shenanigan. Beasley said he could tell by the questions the Commission was asking that they would give the matter their full consideration because they were asking good questions. Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 7 Busard asked how Beasley would feel if the language was changed so that the use remained legally non- conforming for a year and one day so that the non-conforming use did not go away because of a one- yearsuspension. Miklo said that though it was possible to change the language in that way, Staff would not recommend it. Howard said that every other non-conforming use in the community is held to the same standard and the bars would receive an extra day if that were done. Greenwood-Hektoen said that it would be problematic to treat bars differently than other nonconforming uses. Beasley said he felt it was very important to look at the impact of the proposal on not just the existing bars downtown, but also on the property owners who do not have existing bars. Beasley offered the example of a property owner who rented to a T-shirt shop. If the T-shirt shop goes out of business and the property owner needs to find a new tenant, that property owner cannot rent to a bar or liquor store under the proposal as it is currently written. Freerks said she thought the Commission understood that dynamic. Beasley said that when he first heard about this he called the ABD in an effort to understand the differences between license revocation and denial or renewals, and how the ramifications of this proposal on those different scenarios. Howard said that if the license was revoked the property would lose its legally non-conforming use designation as a revocation means that the premises may not be licensed for a period of one year. Greenwood Hektoen stated that Iowa Code 123.39 states that when a liquor license, wine, or beer permit is suspended after a hearing as a result of violations of the code, the premises shall not be relicensed to another person until the suspension has been terminated or the time of the suspension has occurred or 90 days has gone by, whichever occurs first. Eastham asked if the provisions for revocation are different from those for suspension in terms of how they affect the premises. Eastham asked if it was correct that a license holder who has had their license revoked cannot obtain another license. Greenwood Hektoen said that in order to get a license a person must be of "good moral character," and that she imagined that the definition of what that means may contain some prohibition for those who have been revoked in the past. Howard said the relevant implication for revocation is that it affects the property. Howard said that even without the proposed revocation no one lets the matter get to revocation because it has serious repercussions for the property owner as well as the business owner. Miklo said that for someone's license to be revoked the offenses have to be egregious. Miklo said that given the Council's directions, if someone is operating a business in such a way that their license is revoked perhaps there should not be a bar in that location. Eastham said that he thinks Council's direction is to reduce the number of bars. He asked if that necessarily meant that the Council intended to prevent landlords and property owners from having a reasonable opportunity to rent their space to a business that is going to be a bar. Miklo and Howard said that from their discussions with the Council it seemed clear that Council actually wants to see a reduction in the number of bars downtown. Freerks cautioned that the Commission was still in public hearing, and that she wanted to make sure there was adequate time for public comment before embarking on discussion. Brad Houser, 3693 Johnston Way, North Liberty, said that he has been involved in real estate in the area for a number of years. Houser said that he found it amazing that his downtown property will be devalued by this proposal but that there was no requirement on the City's part to notify him as a property owner of the actions they were discussing. Houser said that if he were developing a piece of property he would be required to notify nearby property owners whereas the City can simply put a "graveyard" ad buried in the Press Citizen as their notification process. Houser said that he believes that the City's notification process should be more comprehensive. Houser said he would not have known about the meeting if someone had not called him at 2 o'clock that afternoon. He said he did not think this was a fair situation. Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 8 Houser said that he had grown up in Iowa City, and that he could not see that he himself had not been in downtown bars prior to coming of legal age. He said that the fact that many other people could say the same thing did not make it right, but it did show that it happens. Houser said that it is generally not the landlord that has control over the issue of underage drinkers in bars downtown. Bar owners do the best they can, but sometimes there are fake I.D.s involved which complicates the matter. Houser pointed out that for the minor involved, the fine is much stiffer for possessing a fake I.D. then it is for PAULA, so there is no incentive for the individual to admit the use of a fake I.D. Houser said that these regulations penalize the bar owner, the landlord and the door-man for something that they cannot necessarily control. Best of intentions, best training, and best situations can still lead to mistakes. Houser said that if you look around any office and terminated everyone who made a mistake, the room would get pretty empty pretty quickly. Houser said that as a landlord he cannot control what his tenant does. In enacting these regulations, Houser said, the City would be asking him to do that and that should not be a consideration he has to have. Houser said he that if he signs a lease with a tenant, he is bound by it. He said it would be nice if he could put something in his lease saying that because he as property owner is responsible for the actions of the tenant, the tenant will also be responsible for his actions, but he does not think that would be possible to do. Houser said that until a lease comes up for renewal, a landlord's hands are tied as to their selection of tenant. Houser said that these regulations devalue downtown properties. Houser said that properties are bricks and mortar and as such have a certain inherent value; beyond that, their value is based on the leases they hold. The value of a property is higher if the business in it is able to generate high revenues, regardless of the business type. Houser said that in all likelihood a clothing store would not be able to pay the same rent as a bar or liquor store (if the non-conforming use were void), as a result, his property taxes would have to go down (although they would not at first). Houser said these regulations require him to police his tenants, and he cannot be the police. Eastham said that he felt he was hearing two different stories. He said that on the one hand this ordinance provides that a Drinking Establishment can remain a Drinking Establishment even if it is separated by less than 500 feet from another Drinking Establishment unless it changes use, or its liquor license lapses, is revoked, or is otherwise discontinued. Eastham said that his understanding is that it almost never happens that a license is revoked or suspended for a period of one year. Eastham said that he understood Houser to be saying that he was concerned that a license could be lapsed, revoked or discontinued for a period of more than one year. Houser said that Eastham was correct in a sense. The regulations are themselves putting that possibility in play; although everyone can sit there and say that it will not happen, the landlord is at the mercy of the bar owner making sure it does not happen, with no control themselves. Houser said it is also an issue for him that he would not be able to expand under the non-conforming use codes. Eastham said the expansion issue is intended to prevent any further Drinking Establishments in the downtown area. Eastham said that while this is what it was intended to do, he was not sure that it actually achieved this. Eastham said the question he has now is what is going to happen to existing businesses as time moves forward. Houser said he agreed with Beasley that the market would take care of itself to a certain extent. Weitzel asked how this particular ordinance would be different from any other regulatory ordinances on alcohol. Houser said he did not claim to be an expert on alcohol, and he did not even know how to answer that. He said he was looking at the ordinance from a landlord's standpoint. Weitzel asked if it was not the case that the trend over the last ten years has been toward bars. Houser said he was not Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 9 sure that was entirely true. He noted that Old Capitol Mall could easily have reverted to bars, but did not. He said that he would like to see the statistics supporting that assumption. Freerks asked if the number of bar and liquor licenses have actually increased over the last several years. Miklo said he thought staff could get those numbers from the City Clerk. Howard said that one of the things the City Council referred to when discussing this matter was the market study that was done downtown. Their focus became firmly fixed on the concentration of this one particular use in the downtown area, and the problems it could be causing in the market. The consultant recommended limiting the number of bars and restaurants downtown to open up space to other types of businesses. The hope is that to will help to stimulate the economy ad influence the number and types of residents who choose to live downtown. Houser said that if there are tenants that want to rent downtown that are not bars but can pay the same amount of rent, then that is fine. Houser said that presently there is a lot of change going on in Iowa City's economic situation, with many people sitting on the fence. Houser said that the uncertain times and a change of such magnitude are something that should be considered in light of one another. Houser reiterated that his frustration with the process is that he just found out about the proposal and the meeting four or five hours ago. Houser urged the Commission to at least wait on the issue to allow more input from the public. Dan Black, 1241 Flagstaff, spoke on behalf of Midwest One Bank, which manages commercial real estate through their trust department. Black said he represents landlords and property owners in the downtown area. Black echoed the sentiment that he did not have much notice on this issue either, although he prides himself on trying to keep up with what goes on in town. He said that he did not know anything about it until he received a call at work two days ago. Black said that Howard had kindly brought him up to speed on the proposal. Black said that he would not address things that had already been addressed, but that he wanted to touch on a couple of things that strike him. Black said that it seems like an unfair proposal because it creates an instant monopoly on licenses, because no more will be issued in the downtown area. Anyone with a license presently could have an unfair advantage and financial windfall immediately bestowed upon them. Black said that the inability to expand a business is another very troubling issue to him. He said that the notion flies in the face of free market enterprise. Black concurred with others who had suggested that the free market will take care of this problem. Black said that the last two commercial leases he wrote for the downtown area were for a deli and a clothing store. Black expressed concern that this particular solution would not really solve the problems it intended to address, namely late-night alcohol related issues. He said that he sees it doing very little to address those problems. Black suggested that better ways to address those problems would be to enact a 21- only law and step up enforcement. He said these would be much more effective in addressing the alcohol related problems. Eastham said he had not considered the idea that this particular ordinance might actually create a monopoly of liquor license holders in the downtown areas. Eastham asked if Black was saying that even if he were ultra-responsible as a bar owner he would not be able to open a bar in the downtown area because he would have to buy a license from an existing establishment. Black said this was correct. He noted that he could not go open a bar on the 100 block of Iowa Avenue under these regulations because there are existing establishments within 500 feet, and this creates a monopoly for the existing license holders. Eastham said that he understood Black to be saying that the only way to establish a new bar would be to approach an existing establishment to purchase their license, but that the price of the license would now be exorbitantly high. Black said it just seems to be an uneven playing field and that he cannot think of any other types of businesses that would be approached this way. Black said that other businesses are not limited in other zones, and that he understood the reality of some of the alcohol- related problems, but that this proposal did not seem the best one. Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 10 Koppes asked if the regulations were passed it would mean that all bars downtown would become non- conforming. Miklo said that it would. Payne noted that a bar could become conforming if the bars within 500 feet of it went out of business. David Kieft, 2500 Rushmore, represented the University of Iowa, saying that he had a somewhat different perspective than other speakers. The University has been working with the City for months on this and other issues, he said, and the issue has been well-publicized since December. He said that there is no right to hold a liquor license, and that it is a privilege which comes with great responsibility. He said that unless a bar offends multiple times, the issue of PAULAs and suspensions will not come into play. Without violations, there is no possibility of revocation. He contended that the same establishments are found to be violation month after month after month. These regulations send a very strong message to repeat offenders that they need to get their act together. While he understands the concerns of the landlords present, he said that he felt Council was looking at the matter from a perspective of trying to control excess drinking in the city. He noted that it is not just University of Iowa students that drink in downtown bars, but the youth of the city in general. He said that some Iowa Citians do not even come to downtown Iowa City any longer because of the culture of alcohol that is down there. It is the culture of alcohol that Council wishes to address, and this is one small measure to do so. Over time, he said, this measure will help address the concentration of bars in the downtown area. Busard asked if it was not a part of the Comprehensive Plan to create a downtown with a mixture of uses that is more hospitable to non-student populations. Miklo said that it was a general goal of the Comprehensive Plan and for the Strategic Plan for downtown; although the wording in the documents is different, it is the general direction outlined in the plans. Miklo said the idea is to have downtown be an around-the-clock business district with some businesses open during the day and not just evening businesses. Don Stalkfleet, 3105 Dubuque Street, said that he wished to respond to something that had been said. Stalkfleet said he had lived in Iowa City for 55 years, and owns businesses downtown. He said that he did not hear anything about this ordinance until Friday morning. He said that he reads the Press Citizen every day, watches the City Council meetings and does all he can to be informed but still heard nothing about this ordinance. Stalkfleet felt that as a property owner it would have been appropriate for the City to send him and other downtown property owners something notifying them of the ordinance so that they had a chance to respond to it. Stalkfleet said he felt very confident that the Commission would do its job well, but that he really felt he should have been notified. He suggested delaying making a decision on the matter until property owners had had adequate time to respond. Stalkfleet asked if anything had ever been sent out. Miklo said that nothing had been sent to individual property owners. He said there had been several newspaper articles and some television news coverage of the issue. Freerks asked if it was typical for the City to send out individual notice to property owners for zoning code amendments. Howard said that this amendment to the zoning regulations applies to every commercial property owner in the city, and as a result no special notices were sent to individual property owners. Miklo noted that the issue was covered by the local media and that concerned citizens can subscribe to receive notifications of agendas for different Boards and Commissions. The public hearing was closed. Koppes motioned to defer the matter until the March 19th Commission meeting. Eastham seconded. Freerks noted that the March 19th meeting is during spring break so it might be wise to schedule an extra meeting the following week or wait until the April 2"d meeting. Koppes amended her motion, suggesting deferment until the April 2"d meeting. Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 11 Eastham seconded. Freerks invited discussion from the Commission. Koppes asked what happens to service clubs like the Moose Lodge with these regulations. Howard replied that clubs are not open to the general public. If there is a membership then the regulations would not apply. Koppes said that she feels she has a lot of unanswered questions on this matter. She said she is not sure that the regulations treat everyone equally across the city, especially in regard to liquor stores. Busard said that zoning is not about making money for property owners but about successfully managing growth in cities. Busard said that he felt the Commission was getting "wrapped around the apple" about individual property owners when it is really about the city as a whole. Payne said that one of her questions was what amount of property tax is currently generated by those establishments, and whether the amount would stay the same if in the future the uses all became conforming. Payne wondered if the property taxes and values would be lowered because clothing stores, for example, could not generate the same income as a bar. Greenwood Hektoen cautioned the Commission to avoid those types of issues as the Planning and Zoning Commission's considerations should be more focused on what the best use of the land would be and how it fits in with the Comprehensive Plan. She said she felt it would be more appropriate for City Council to examine such considerations. Miklo advised that there would be a lot of speculation and assumptions in any answer that was provided to Payne's question. Weitzel asked Greenwood Hektoen to address whether or not all due process and notification has been followed. Greenwood Hektoen said that all proper notice had been given. Busard said that in terms of notice the Commission has done everything to the letter of the law. He said he saw no reason for a deferral. Miklo noted that there were probably more articles about this issue than any other recent zoning issue considered by the Commission in the Press Citizen, Gazette, and Des Moines Register. Weitzel said that he was mindful of the consultant's study which indicated that a lot of people shun downtown because of the party atmosphere. Weitzel said he did not see the need for more time either. Eastham said he was in favor of deferment. He said more often than not the Commission takes more than one meeting to decide zoning code changes and he sees no reason not to do so in this case. He said that the Commission has heard often from citizens who are dissatisfied with the City's notification processes, which doesn't seem to be particularly effective. Eastham said nothing is lost in considering the matter further, and much is gained in hearing the perspectives of others. Freerks agreed that more time should be taken. Freerks said that this does not mean that there is not a problem here that needs to be addressed. Freerks said there is clearly a huge problem in the community with underage drinking and the City Council has asked the Commission to work on that in their capacity. Freerks said that it is the problem of underage drinking that the Council is really trying to address. Freerks said that ideas are talked about from time to time to solve this problem, and that this is one idea being talked about now. Freerks said that underage drinking and the way it affects the downtown is what the Commission is considering in relation to the Comprehensive Plan and the ways in which they want the community to grow. She said that she is interested in hearing some of the numbers that had been requested during the course of the meeting in order to clarify things in her mind. Freerks said she was glad to have had the perspective of all the public that had spoken, and that she thinks more discussion is needed. The issue is complex and has many considerations, however, she noted, no one else is offering better ideas and she would ask the public present to think about that and bring forth their own solutions. Greenwood Hektoen noted that the affect of a revocation on the licensee is that they cannot get another license for two years; the affect on the premises is that it cannot be licensed for one year. Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 12 Eastham asked if this meant effectively that the owner of that building could not have a licensed drinking establishment for one year. Greenwood Hektoen said this was correct: that address could not be relicensed for one year. Payne said that this would mean the use of the building would have to be changed if there was a revocation. Greenwood Hektoen said this was correct. Koppes clarified that a legally non-conforming use can remodel so long as the footprint of the building is not changed. Weitzel said that he had been persuaded by the discussion of others and could now see that a deferral was in order. A vote was taken and the motion to defer the matter until the April 2"d meeting was passed 5-1 (Busard voting against deferral; Plahutnik absent). REZONING ITEM: REZ09-00002: Discussion of an application submitted by City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Interim Development (ID-1) zone to General Industrial (I-1) zone for approximately 100 acres of property located on 420th Street SE, west of Taft Avenue. This property was recently before the Commission for annexation. The intention with the Interim Development (ID-1) zone is that the property is intended for industrial use at such time as the City has extended services to the property. At this time, the City has had interest expressed by an industrial use for the property -especially the property that surrounds 420tH Street south of the railroad-so the City wishes to move forward with extending services to the property and rezoning it for industrial development. The City has plans to extend water and sewer services to the property this fiscal year, as well as to improve the road. The city has hired a consultant to come up with a subdivision plan for this property giving maximum access to the rail-line and the arterial street system. Freerks asked if there were questions for Staff. Eastham asked if the City would in fact improve all of 420tH Street from its intersection with Highway 6 to the eastern boundaries of the current city limit. Howard said this was correct. Eastham asked if this improvement would occur before any land in the area is sold to an industrial user. Howard said she was not sure it would be done before it was sold but that it would be done prior to opening for business. The public hearing was opened. As no one wished to speak the public hearing was closed. Busard motioned to approve the rezoning. Weitzel seconded. Eastham asked if the City would go ahead and rent for agricultural purposes the parcel south of 420tH Street. Howard said she did not know. Miklo said that there has some discussion about it, but that it is a portion they are hoping to develop. Weitzel said he felt this rezoning met the goals for the Comprehensive Plan and intended to vote in favor of it. Planning and Zoning Commission March 5, 2009 -Formal Page 13 Freerks said she too felt the rezoning was in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and that she believed it would be a nice addition to the city. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). COUNTY REZONING ITEMS: CZ09-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by Michael Furman for a rezoning of 40 acres from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R3) zone located at 3051 Buchmayer Bend NE. The applicant has requested an indefinite deferral. Weitzel motioned to defer. Koppes seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0 (Busard abstained; Plahutnik absent). CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: February 2 ~ February 5, 2009: Eastham motioned to accept the minutes. Busard seconded. The minutes were approved on a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Freerks said that this would be postponed until the next meeting to make sure everyone is present. OTHER: Miklo noted that Commissioners had received a survey from the Human Rights Commission. Miklo said that if Commissioners had a chance to fill it out this evening, and envelope would be passed to collect them. Miklo provided a copy to all Commissioners of the Planning Commissioner's Journal which talks about the planning of school locations. ADJOURNMENT: Payne motioned to adjourn. Eastham seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 vote at 9:20 p.m. (Plahutnik absent). C O_ N N O V 'O ~ O C V '~ G1 O ~ N d c ~ C N ~ ~ _C ~ ~~ d C ~ ~Q a ~_. U 3 0 Mxxxxxox N X X X X ~ X X X X X ~ X X X r ~~~~MNOOM f- W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y ~ R Y d C r ~ N r d ~ Z m~j~iYa ~~ M X X X X X X X N x x x x x x x ~ o x x o x x o ~ ~ ~ H ~ j ~- ~ o ~- ~ 0 M ~ 0 N tt') 0 O ~ 0 O ~ 0 M ~ 0 ~ z ~ N m ~ !0 r~+ w ~j Y ~ ~i Q d Y uJ d ~ °' ~ Y C 7 a ~ ~ ry ~ H U X W .... C ~ C ~ N N ~ ~~Q ..aQ n ~ u u w YXOO