HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-08-15 Info Packet1 = i
�III0 170-
i
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET
CITY OF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org August 15, 2013
IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule
AUGUST 20 WORK SESSION
IP2 Work Session Agenda
IP3 Memo from the City Clerk: PCRB Term Limits
IP4 Memo from the City Clerk: KXIC Radio Show
I125 Pending Work Session Topics
MISCELLANEOUS
I136 Memo from Community Development Intern and Community Development Coordinator:
UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership Update
I137 Email response from Transportation Planner to Council Member Payne: Dubuque Street exit
closure alters Downtown Iowa City and Ul -bound traffic
IP8 Email from Marti VanAllen to Recycling Coordinator: Rummage in the Ramp [Staff response
included]
IP9 Email to editorial staff: Letter to the Editor (school Board elections)
IP10 Email from City Clerk to City employees: City Council Candidates
IP11 Copy of Press Release: New Online Cemetery Map And Database Now Available
IP12 Civil Service Entrance Examination: Administrative Licensing Specialist
IP13 Minutes of the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee —June 5
DRAFT MINUTES
IP14 Board of Adjustment: July 10
IP15 Human Rights Commission: July 16
IP16 Planning and Zoning Commission: July 18
IP17 Planning and Zoning Commission: August 1
'►
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET
CITY OF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org August 15, 2013
IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule
AUGUST 20 WORK SESS
IP2 Work Session Agenda
IP3 Memo from the City Clerk: P B Term Limits
IP4 Memo from the City Clerk: KXI Radio Show
IP5 Pending Work Session Topics
IP6 Memo from Community Development Inte and
UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership U ate
IP7 Email response from Transportation Planner to
closure alters Downtown Iowa City and UI-
IP8 Email from Marti VanAllen to Recycling Coor ina
mmunity Development Coordinator:
cil Member Payne: Dubuque Street exit
traffic
Rummage in the Ramp
IP9 Email to editorial staff: Letter to the Edit (school B \Dabase
IP10 Email from City Clerk to City employees: City Council
IP11 Copy of Press Release: New Online emetery Map ow Available
IP12 Civil Service Entrance Examination: dministrative Lalist
IP13 Minutes of the Criminal Justice oordinating Com
RAFT MINUTES
IP14 Board of Adjustment: July 0
IP15 Human Rights Commiss' n: July 16
IP16 Planning and Zoning C mmission: July 18
IP17 Planning and Zoning ommission: August 1
Date
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule IN
Subject to change August 15, 2013
Time Meeting
5:00 PM Work Session Meeting
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
5:00 PM Work Session Meeting
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Tuesday, September 17, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting
7:00 PM Formal Meeting .
Wi�,
Tuesday, October 1, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting
1 7:00 PM Formal Meeting
15 'INN so
Tuesday, October 15, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Location
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Monday,October 28, 2013 4:30 PM Joint Meeting /Work Session
IC Public Library
,. _ .... w,.�`` -s.� me"a"
�) ` OIP,� ill) ,._ �) Ii) "�� 3G ( p ?�'
«r. �GI.., u��d �� _ ��I�'Iti� w� , ' _ _ a �� _,.
Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall
7:00 PM Special Formal Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
'a�> dill a r ^2 — . 7ary mI�SI2tY�� k'i:1 I .C9 IIO')''Xj' I I��� . .
fl )
Tuesday, November 26, 2013 Noon -6PM Strategic Planning
�ii r9,
3_
TBA
b; p j iNiI ii � l
ml!II01MIR.>. l_ lih ' I I =111 � i' w._ � n Ill'IICI t 1 II (Il1l1ai ! liiir e
Tuesday, December 3, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Tuesday, December 17, 2013 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
IP2
CITY of IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City. Iowa 52240 -1826
(319) 356 -5000
(319) 356 -5009 FAX
www.kgov.org
City Council Work Session Agenda
August 20, 2013
5:00 PM
Emma J. Harvat Hall - City Hall
410 E. Washington Street
• Questions from Council re Agenda Items
• Council Appointments [# 12]
• Discussion on local and regional affordable housing policies
• Discussion of PCRB member term limits (ad -hoc Diversity Committee
Recommendations) [IP # 3 of 8/15 Info Packet]
• Information Packet Discussion [August 8, 15]
• Council Time [IP # 4 of 8/15 Info Packet]
• Meeting Schedule
• Pending Work Session Topics [IP # 5 of 8115 Info Packet]
• Upcoming Community Events / Council Invitations
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 15, 2013
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
Re: PCRB Term Limits
0
IP3
monum
Introduction:
The Ad -Hoc Diversity Committee recommended terms for the Police Citizen's Review Board be
limited to 2 four year terms. (Attachment A)
Background:
The City Clerk's office receives applications for 19 City Boards and Commissions. Each Board
or Commission has different terms and requirements, and may also include unexpired terms.
Council has an informal policy that individuals may serve no more than two full terms but do
consider exceptions on a case -by -case basis.
When the Ad -Hoc Diversity Committee recommendation was presented at the June 18 Work
Session Council requested separate discussion at a later time. (Attachment B)
s/termlim itsmemo2013. doc
Attachment A
POLICE CITIZEN'S REVIEW BOARD
Recommendation A:
Increase Public Awareness of the Police Citizen's Review Board and the process by which to file a complaint
Sub
Recommendation
Staff Response
Staff
Recommendation
Contact/
Timeline
Current Status
prepare the
survey tool.
A7. Terms for the Police
Staff believes that the definition of
The City Council should
Citizen's Review Board
terms for the PCRB should be a
determine if changes to
should be limited to two
decision made by the City Council,
terms are necessary.
four -year terms.
not City staff.
Attachment B
Council Work Session
June 18, 2013
Page 2
STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON AD HOC DIVERSITY COMMITTEE REPORT
IMPLEMENTATION r# 14. 151
City Manager Markus, Police Chief Hargadine, and Transportation Services Dir. O'Brien
presented a power point. [Staff power point was recommendations contained in Council packet
Diversity Implementation Form Updated 6- 13 -13]. City Manager Markus indicated that Council
would be receiving periodic updates of the plan, similar to what is done with the City Strategic
Plan. Majority of Council requested discussion of PR member term limits be added to the
Council pending list.
ACTION: Proceed as directed and revisit as part of City Strategic Plan discussion for
incoming and outgoing Council Members In late November. (Markus)
INFORMATION PACKET DISCUSSION rJune 6,131
June 6
None
June 13
1. (IP 5 — Memo from Admin. Asst. to the City Manager: Strategic Planning / Community
Survey ...) Mayor Pro tem Mims encouraged staff to develop questions that would help
prioritize services given the era of tightening budgets.
2. (IP 3 — KICK Radio Show) Majority agreed to the following schedule:
June 19 - Dickens
June 26 - Hayek
July 3 - Champion
July 10 - Dobyns
July 17 - Mims
July 24 - Dickens
Meeting recessed to formal 6:30 PM; returned to work session 9:35 PM
COUNCIL TIME AND MEETING SCHEDULE [IP # 31
1. Mayor Hayek noted the July meeting schedule as follows:
July 16 — special formal/executive session for Council appointee evaluations
July 23 — special formal and work session
2. City Clerk Karr noted the next joint meeting of cities, county and school district is
scheduled for July 29 in North Liberty. More information will be forthcoming.
PENDING WORK SESSION TOPICS nP # 41
1. City Manager Markus and City Atty. Dilkes noted Council had set a public hearing for
the 500 foot spacing rule between drinking establishments (Consent Calendar item #
4e(6)) and staff anticipated there may be a need for a consultation between Council and
PHZ. Due to the Council July meeting schedule of only one meeting, staff is
recommending that a consultation be offered at the work session on July 23 prior to the
public hearing. Council agreed to offer the consult. Staff will follow up.
2. Council Member Payne requested that Council Members receive a reminder of the
special meeting on July 16. City Clerk Karr will follow up.
UPCOMING COMMUNITY EVENTS /COUNCIL INVITATIONS
None
Meeting adjourned 9:40 PM.
�! CITY OF IOWA CITY ia�
�,..� MEMORANDUM -
Date: August 13, 2013
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk PO
Re: KXIC Radio Show
KXIC offers a City show at 9:00 AM every Wednesday morning. In the past Council has
volunteered for dates, and staff filled in as necessary. Please take a look at your calendars and
come prepared to help fill in the schedule at your work session on August 20:
August 21 - Throgmorton
August 28 -
September 4 -
September 11 -
September 18 - Dobyns
Future commitments:
November 27 - Dobyns
U: radioshowasking. doc
IP5
l =
CITY Of IOWA CITY
PENDING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TOPICS
August 15, 2013
September 3, 2013
1. Discuss large assembly event permit fees
2. Staff update on the First Avenue grade separation project
3. Staff update on the Animal Shelter project
September 17, 2013
1. Staff overview of the Gateway Project status and design considerations
October 1, 2013
1. Discussion of the design parameters for the Gateway Project
Pending Topics to be Scheduled
1. Discuss concept of a community business attraction and anti- piracy compact
2. Continue the discussion on the sale or dispersion of public housing units
3. Discuss Gilbert/Highland/Kirkwood neighborhood concerns
4. Review the National League of Cities Institute for Youth, Education and Families
report entitled, "City Leadership to Promote Black Male Achievement" (originally
distributed in the 5/16/2013 Information Packet
I P i
Vw" P AM
��
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 12, 2013
TO: Tom Markus, City Manager
FROM: Claire Richmond, Community Development Intern
Steve Long, Community Development Coordinator
RE: UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership Update
The UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership program is dedicated to ensuring that neighborhoods
surrounding downtown and the University of Iowa remain safe, vital, affordable and attractive
places to live and work for both renters and homeowners. Bringing together a variety of funding
sources, the program acquires rental housing, renovates it back to single - family and offers the
homes for sale to income - qualifying buyers. Thirty homes were part of the program in the first
two phases. Phase 3 is in full swing with 14 out of 17 homes now owned by the City and in
various stages of rehabilitation.
Phase 3 began this year with the intent to renovate ten homes using City funds; however, staff
worked with a variety of additional funders which made it possible to acquire and renovate 17
homes. Additional funds will come from the Iowa City Housing Authority, Iowa Finance
Authority, I -Jobs and HUD. Homes are located in the Longfellow, Goosetown, Northside and
Miller- Orchard neighborhoods, and range in price from $85,000 - $230,000.
The UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership is ramping up its marketing efforts with an expanded
social media campaign. A new blog highlights the renovations of 725 E. Davenport, a turn of the
century home in the Northside / Goosetown neighborhood, which once belonged to Mayor Matt
Hayek's grandparents. The program's Facebook following has grown to an active fan base of
nearly 700 and twitter updates can now be found @UniverCitylC.
For the most up -to -date UniverCity news, follow the Facebook page at facebook.com /UniverCitylA.
Program information and applications are available at icgov.org /UniverCity.
Below are photos of all 17 Phase 3 homes.
661 S. Governor Street (sale pending)
430 S. Lucas Street
IP6
August 12, 2013
Page 2
314 S. Lucas Street
1116 E. Burlington Street
324 N. Lucas Street
318 S. Lucas Street
1116 E. Burlington Street
601 S. Governor Street
316 Douglass Court
August 12, 2013
Page 3
725 E. Davenport Street
936 E. Bloomington Street
1034 E. Burlington Street
312 Fairchild Street
303 W. Benton Street
Marian Karr 1P7
From: Tom Markus
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 8:36 AM
To: Marian Karr
Subject: FW: Dubuque Street exit closure alters Downtown Iowa City and UI -bound traffic
Please copy to council.
From: John Yapp
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 8:32 AM
To: Tom Markus; 'MLPayne @midamerican.com'
Subject: RE: Dubuque Street exit closure alters Downtown Iowa City and UI -bound traffic
Good morning Michelle —Tom forwarded this tome to respond —Yes, Iowa DOT and the contractor have told us all four
ramps at the interchange will be open for the first (and subsequent) home football game. Individual ramps will still be
closed periodically during the week to finish the project, but they have committed to having them open for home
football game weekends.
We are tracking the project of course in case something changes. UI and DOT will be posting wayfinding signs
(electronic and regular signs) on the interstate and on Dodge St to direct incoming students into campus, and has
assured us they have contacted all students by email on the situation at Dubuque /1 -80.
John Yapp, Transportation Planner
From: Tom Markus
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:57 PM
To: John Yapp
Subject: FW: Dubuque Street exit closure alters Downtown Iowa City and UI -bound traffic
Please respond to Michelle.
From: Payne, Michelle L [mailto:MLPayne @midamerican.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 3:43 PM
To: Tom Markus
Subject: FW: Dubuque Street exit closure alters Downtown Iowa City and UI -bound traffic
Great timing ... will it be open for the first football game?
Michelle
From: City of Iowa City [mailto:webmaster @iowa - city.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 3:02 PM
To: Payne, Michelle L
Subject: Dubuque Street exit closure alters Downtown Iowa City and UI -bound traffic
Contact: John Yapp
Contact Phone: 319 - 356 -5252
Dubuque Street exit closure alters Downtown Iowa City and UI-
bound traffic
Issued by: Communications Office
Mailing List(s): Construction & Street Closures
- General City News
Originally Posted 8/13/2013 3:01:56 PM
Construction on Interstate 80 exit 244 to Dubuque Street will alter traffic bound for downtown Iowa City and
the University of Iowa campus over the next several weeks.
The Iowa Department of Transportation has closed the westbound off -ramp from the interstate. Visitors coming
from the east should instead use exit 246 to Dodge Street. The eastbound off -ramp and both on -ramps to I -80
remain open, but lanes are reduced on the eastbound off -ramp and on north Dubuque, creating possible delays.
The changes affect traffic headed for the central UI campus, including the university's residence halls. Traffic to
UI hospital and athletic facilities should continue to use exit 242 to First Avenue in Coralville.
Students and families moving into the residence halls should note the detour and use exit 246 if arriving from
the east. Lane closures on Dubuque may cause congestion around Mayflower -- visitors should use caution.
Although Dubuque Street on -ramps remain open, I -80 -bound drivers leaving all residence halls are advised to
use alternate routes to avoid delays. For more information about traveling to specific UI housing facilities, visit
http: // now. uiowa .edu /2013/08 /dubuque- street- exit - closure- alters -ui- bound - traffic.
In addition, motorists are encouraged to use alternate routes and avoid north Dubuque Street, particularly during
the UI residence -hall move -in period that begins Sunday, Aug. 18 and continues through the following
weekend.
View this article on the ICGov Web Site: http: / /www.ic ov.org_/apps /news / ?newsID =8998
This media release was sent to: mlpavneAmidamerican.com
Do not reply directly to this e-mail! It is produced from an automated system, and is not monitored for replies. If you have a question or comment about this
information, please contact the individual(s) listed in the release.
• Unsubscribe or edit your subscription details.
• Visit our jobs page for employment opportunities.
• View more news from the City of Iowa City.
UWE
Marian Karr
From:
Jennifer Jordan
Sent:
Thursday, August 15, 2013 2:21 PM
To:
'Marti VanAllen'
Cc:
Council
Subject:
RE: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Hi Marti,
Thanks so much for your email. Rummage in the Ramp is one of my favorite projects because we get to help people find
homes for so much stuff, but also because we get to work with so many great local non - profit groups who are doing
such good things in the community.
Jen
Jen Jordan
Recycling Coordinator
City of Iowa City
319 - 887 -6160
www.icgov.org/recycle
From: Marti VanAllen [ mailto:mjvanallen321 @gmaii.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 7:17 PM
To: Jennifer Jordan
Cc: Council
Subject: Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
To: Jen Jordan
cc: the Iowa City City Council
Congratulations on another great year with your successful project, Rummage
in the Ramp.
29 tons of material diverted from the landfill, 240 volunteers from 30
nonprofit organizations who will share $20,311 in profits to help their
organizations, wow !
Your contributions to making Iowa City a better place will not go unnoticed.
Thank you for coordinating this event and for all of your hard work.
Marti VanAllen
123 Cayman St.
Proud Iowa City Resident
Marian Karr IP8
From: Marti VanAllen <mjvanallen321 @gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 7:12 PM
To: jennifer-jordon@iowa-city.org
Cc: Council
Subject: Rummage in the Ramp
To: Jen Jordon
cc: the Iowa City City Council
Congratulations on another great year with your successful project, Rummage in the Ramp.
29 tons of material diverted from the landfill, 240 volunteers from 30 nonprofit organizations who will share
$20,311 in profits to help their organizations, wow !
Your contributions to making Iowa City a better place will not go unnoticed.
Thank you for coordinating this event and for all of your hard work.
Marti VanAllen
123 Cayman St.
Proud Iowa City Resident
Marian Karr_
From: Edwin Stone <stone. edwin@gmai 1. corn>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 9:12 AM
To: opinion @press - citizen.com; daily. iowan.letters @gmail.com; editorial @gazcomm.com
Cc: Council
Subject: Letter to the Editor
To the Editor
Please vote in the school board election on September 10. This is important because in a representational
democracy, the only way for a minority to take advantage of the majority is for the majority to take the election
for granted and stay home on election day. The majority I am talking about in this case are the residents of
Iowa City. Iowa Citians pay more than 70% of the taxes that support our public school system and yet not a
single new elementary or junior high school has been built in Iowa City in the past 20 years. Iowa City schools
are much older, much less accessible to handicapped children and much less air - conditioned than the schools in
the smaller communities of our school district. Why? Because for these 20 years, Iowa Citians have taken their
good schools for granted and have frequently given away their rights to educational equality in school board
elections that have been decided by margins of less than 100 votes. When I vote on September 10, I am going
to vote for the three candidates that I believe are most likely to create and maintain an equal and excellent
educational opportunity for every student in the district, regardless of the student's street address. I hope you
will, too.
Ed Stone
534 Woodridge Ave
Iowa City
Marian Karr IP10
From: Marian Karr
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 4:59 PM
To: AIICEmp
Subject: City Council Candidates
Individuals may file City Council candidate papers starting today, August 12. Deadline for filing is August 29. Updates of
Council candidates filing are available on the city website, under elections:
http://www.icgov.org/?id=1124
The site is updated as soon as papers are filed and then again after they are verified. Remember individuals are not
considered candidates until the papers are filed.
In the past, as a courtesy, we provided information requested by an individual candidate to all candidates. Because of
the availability of more information on the City website we are no longer tracking the requests.
As always if you feel information provided to an individual or candidate should be available to Council or other
candidates please feel free to provide a copy to me for inclusion in the next information packet.
Marian
City Clerk
City of Iowa City
319 - 356- 5041(Phone)
319 - 356 -5497 (FAX)
Population 67,862
New Online Cemetery Map And Database Now Available
Page 1 of 1
IP11
New Online Cemetery Map And Database
Now Available
Posted on Monday, August 12, 2013 at 9:43 AM
Contact Information
The City of Iowa City is introducing a new system that allows the public to
Name: Marian Karr
view Oakland Cemetery information online. Visitors to the site can search for
Email: Send Mail
burials by name, locate a burial site on a map of the cemetery, and view
records that can be printed from home. The system also provides a map
Phone: 319 - 356 -5041
featuring lots sold, used, and those available for sale.
The program, eCIMS, allows the City to share data and maps online and
provide improved access for those searching for gravesites and records. The
eCIMS software is a customer service enhancement for citizens, making
records available 24/7, and is ideal for genealogists searching through family
records.
The City Clerk and Cemetery staffs have worked on the project for more than
seven years, scanning and entering data for more than 20,000 cemetery
records. These records include lot owner and deceased information, as well
as updates and correspondence. Users are asked to be patient when loading
the new program, as it may take several minutes to open, depending upon
connection speed.
City Clerk Marian Karr reminds users that "while great care was taken in
preparing and loading the information, there may be errors in this
presentation and it continues to be a work in progress" Quarterly updates to
the program are planned.
Visit the Oakland Cemetery website at httD11www.icoov.ora/?id =1054 to
access this new feature and learn more about using the program. Contact
Marian Karr for more information at 319 - 356 -5041 or email marian-
k a rKaD i owa -ci ty. o rg .
A -Z Index Citizen Service Center
Contact Information
Residents Transit Routes
Web Policies
Business News
City Employee Resources
Government E- Subscriptions
Visitors Jobs
Calendar
Copyright ® 2006 -2012 City of
Store
Iowa City
410 E Washington St., Iowa City,
IA 52240 Phone (319)356 -5000
http: / /www.icgov.org/apps /news / ?newsID =8994 8/12/2013
iM110°e� 1
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa 'City, Iowa 52240 -1826
(3 19) 3S6 -S000
(3 19) 356 -SO09 FAX
www.lcgov.org
August 5, 2013
TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council
RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Administrative Licensing Specialist
Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby
certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Administrative
Licensing Specialist.
Wendy Mayer
IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Lyra . Dickerson, Chair
IP13
MINUTES OF THE JOINT INFORMAL MEETING OF JOHNSON COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING
COMMITTEE:
JUNE 5, 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Process and Planning to Address Critical Needs of Law Enforcement and Court Services,
Including Sheriff's and County Attorney's Offices ..................................... ..............................1
OtherReports ..................................................................................................... ..............................3
Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee .......................................... ..............................3
FacilitiesSubcommittee ........................................................................ ..............................3
Funding/Grants Subcommittee .............................................................. ..............................3
Commentsfrom the Public ................................................................................. ..............................4
SetNext Meeting Date ....................................................................................... ..............................6
Chairperson Rettig called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the
Johnson County Health and Human Services Building at 4:33 p.m. Members present
were: John Etheredge, Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Janelle Rettig. Absent: Rod
Sullivan.
Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members present were: Department of
Corrections Supervisor Jerri Allen, MECCA Director Ron Berg, University of Iowa
Student Representative Drew Lakin, Iowa City Public Library Adult Service Coordinator
Kara Logsden, County Attorney Janet Lyness, County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek, Judge
Douglas Russell, Citizen Representative Professor Emeritus John Stratton; Absent were:
Iowa City City Council Member Connie Champion, Bar Association Representative
James McCarragher, State Public Defender's Managing Attorney Peter Persaud,
Consultation of Religious Communities Representative Dorothy Whiston. Staff present:
Board of Supervisors Executive Assistant Andy Johnson and Deputy Auditor Nancy
Tomkovicz.
PROCESS AND PLANNING TO ADDRESS CRITICAL NEEDS OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND COURT SERVICES, INCLUDING SHERIFF'S AND
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICES
Rettig said it is unclear of how to proceed with this item because the Board did not
reach a consensus. The internal Space Needs Committee met twice and is creating a list
of needs for the Jail and the Courthouse to stabilize the buildings.
Rettig asked for feedback about whether the CJCC should continue to meet and how
often. Iowa City Public Library Adult Service Coordinator Kara Logsden said after 12
years of these planning meetings, unless there is work to do at this point, the CJCC
should not continue to meet. She added she is willing to meet if there is agreement on a
forward moving process.
Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Meeting Minutes: June 5, 2013/ page 2
Sixth District Judge Doug Russell said the Sixth Judicial District Court Administrator
Carroll Edmondson and Sixth Judicial District Chief Judge Patrick Grady met and
discussed judicial and Courthouse needs. They have been meeting with judges of all
levels in the district and, they will contact Board members and the County Attorney to
further discuss the issues. He fully expects Grady will request an opportunity to address
the Board in the near future to make a presentation on the Judicial Branch's proposals
and requests. Russell said he thinks the CJCC should meet on a regular basis.
Citizen Representative Professor Emeritus John Stratton said he agrees with Judge
Russell. The problems still exist and will not vanish with the failed bond referendum.
Department of Corrections Supervisor Jerri Allen said it is worthwhile to continue
meeting to keep the dialogue open. Systemic solutions are needed, but until then, there
are daily needs to meet. She recommended including justice center opponents in
conversations addressing the space and security needs.
MECCA Director Ron Berg said he agrees CJCC should continue to meet. He agreed
with Logsden that when they do meet, the meetings should target specific goals and
identify specific tasks.
County Attorney Janet Lyness supports continued meetings to maintain momentum.
She said meeting attendance would be thin during the next two months so she proposed
reconvening in September. She said the Iowa Bar Association will be meeting to discuss
some of the issues also.
Russell said CJCC meetings serve as a forum for public input and also improves
transparency.
University of Iowa Student Representative Drew Lakin said he will not be able to
continue representing student government but he would like to remain on the committee.
He said many students are interested in serving on the CJCC and he thinks the group
should continue to meet.
Rettig said the Clerk of Courts has kept storage in the garage behind the Courthouse.
This was deemed unsafe, so staff will be moving storage from that garage. Rettig said
the Board is in the process of updating its 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan with the
Strategic Plan.
This plan will probably include critical and necessary changes (Jail locking system,
generator replacement, roof replacement) to the Jail and Courthouse to maintain
operations over the next five years.
Neuzil said the list of repairs is important because the Board is in a situation with a
long timeline and the critical needs should be identified in the interim period. He said
Governor Terry Branstad and the Iowa Legislature expressed interest in reducing the
County's ability to generate revenue.
Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Meeting Minutes: June 5, 2013/ page 3
Harney said there are so many needs within the system and he cannot justify putting a
lot of money into the Jail. Prisoners can be shipped to other counties. He recapped that
the GSA is at least a month and a half away from submitting a proposal.
Rettig said Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabeck said remodeling the Jail could possibly result in
the jail inspector reducing the Jail capacity. Rettig said critical needs in the Jail are:
stabilizing the Jail building, including the evidence room, the door locking system, the
generator, windows, walls, flooring, water, sewer, and roof. Current critical needs in the
Courthouse include: boilers, ongoing moisture problem, security, Americans with
Disability Act (ADA) compliance, lack of courtrooms, lack of space for the County
Attorney, lack of space for the Clerk of Court Office, lack of storage space, sound issues,
parking issues, jury boxes, retaining wall and sidewalk issue. There is currently no
funding for these needs, other than the boiler; the Board budgeted for the boilers so heat
will be available this coming winter.
Neuzil said he thinks it will be helpful to reprioritize in September and decide how to
allocate the roughly $2.8 million which was set aside for the proposed justice center.
Rettig said the Board cannot wait until September to move forward on space needs
issues; it will develop a plan for the next five years. She repeated this does not include a
new building or more space.
OTHER REPORTS
Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee
Lyness said everyone should have access to the numbers from the Substance Abuse
Evaluations at the Jail for the last month. The Jail Alternatives and Treatments
Subcommittee will meet again in September. Jail Alternatives Coordinator Jessica
Peckover said she met with a committee addressing Disproportionate Minority Contact
(DMC). Some of those committee members plan to attend a DMC conference held at
Georgetown in Washington, D.C. When they return, they plan to hold a community wide
forum to further discuss the issue.
Facilities Subcommittee
Harney said the Facilities Subcommittee members met with the U.S. General Services
Administration (GSA). Lyness said the space in the Social Security Administration
office is not very large, and there were other concerns. Lyness said she doubts the GSA
will be interested in renting to the Attorney's Office and she does not believe the space
would be efficient enough. Harney said the U.S. Post Office has extended its contract
until October 2013.
Funding/Grants Subcommittee
Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Meeting Minutes: June 5, 2013/ page 4
Rettig said Johnson County has other important needs apart from the needs of the Jail
and Courthouse. Secondary Roads no longer has a maintenance shed due to the fire. The
Board cannot afford to build a new Courthouse or Jail for the amount of money it has nor
the amount of money allowed for bonding. The Board has no choice but to move
forward on other needs of the County. New legislation will lead to losses of available
County money. The Board anticipates a $600,000 reduction in income for FY15 and the
legislature is not backfilling local government.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Carolyn Dieterle asked if there is support for separating the Jail and Courthouse. She
thinks 60% of the electorate would support a bond referendum for the Courthouse. She
asked if the new bonding regulations apply to all bonding or bonding that is not voted on.
Rettig said just bonding that is not voted on.
Neuzil said it should be noted item two on today's agenda states "process and
planning to address critical needs of law enforcement and court services" which should
indicate the committee's willingness to consider separating the issues. Dieterle asked if
the space needs of the Courthouse are addressed, would that affect the diversion
programs. Harney said the jail alternatives programs would be part of the jail system
because the inmates are the ones participating in those programs. Dieterle said the
garden variety is it's cheaper to combine the two but that is not what Johnson County
voters have chosen. Harney said many, many, efficiencies are lost if the buildings are
separated.
Dieterle asked if there would be an impact from the new legislation on property
value. She asked if the Board had any influence on the Assessor Conference Board.
Rettig said yes but two Assessor Conference Boards exist, one for Iowa City and one for
Johnson County.
Aaron Garrett said there is a well - established organization opposed to this effort. He
said wants to hear more from that group, with the possibility of including a member from
the opposition on the CJCC. Rettig said a variety of people who served on CJCC voted
against the issue in 2000, including herself. The CJCC originally included the County
Supervisors, Elected Officials, the Courts, and people opposed to the bond referendum.
The Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee is responsible for holding Public
Hearings, and this current meeting is for the CJCC and is different from the Public
Hearings. The Board should entertain expanding the committee membership to include
those opposed to the project. Garret said a lot of new issues have come up in the last 13
years. Neuzil said these public meetings have convened monthly for roughly 10 years.
Aleksey Gurtovoy said the CJCC needs to present numbers with their ideas and
should allow comments from the public after each agenda item. He suggested CJCC
rename itself and change its focus. Gurtovoy said the DMC rate in Johnson County is
eight times what it should be and he has information for the Board. Gurtovoy said he
believes Johnson County can reduce DMC along with the incarceration rate and he will
Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Meeting Minutes: June 5, 2013/ page 5
continue to make his point. Gurtovoy said there is an official publication by the U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections which he thinks should be readily
accessible.
Martha Hample said Harney's response to Dieterle's suggestion appeared to be based
on restrictions with the old proposal. Hample asked what the direction of the Jail
Alternatives Program would be if the Jail were big enough to house the inmates. Harney
clarified the current Jail does not have enough space to accommodate the alternatives
programming. The current Jail is out of library, kitchen, and laundry space. Rettig said
the Jail was designed for 46 people, all the support structure was also designed for 46
people. The Jail had space for programs at the time but that is no longer the case and the
Jail Alternatives Program does not have the capacity to allow for more of the Jail
Alternatives Program while the inmates occupy the Jail because it is not safe. Harney
said the Jail Inspector has criticized that there is no exercise space.
Hample said a future proposal for a jail would not be as large and if the Courthouse
proposal passes and the number of inmates decreased. Harney said he thinks a better
court system will lead to trials moving faster and a steady number of inmates. Hample
suggested the public will be more trusting if the Courthouse was redone first. Rettig said
she understands Hample's stance and was herself supportive of that position three years
ago. Rettig has since studied the issue and now thinks housing both systems in the same
facility meets safety, security, efficiency, and staffing needs. She is convinced this
justice center is the most cost efficient. Placing the Courthouse Annex on the currently
available land will require careful planning so as not to destroy the opportunity to annex a
jail in the future. Rettig said she is still concerned about transporting inmates.
Peckover said her concern has to do with alternatives and keeping inmates from
coming back to jail once released. The cost to fix the current Jail is not sufficient and the
Board will probably not fix the Jail if the public voted on a Courthouse Annex, which
will lead to shipping more inmates out of Johnson County. This will make it even more
difficult for her to work with anybody to get people out of jail or to do discharge planning
so the inmates do not come back. Peckover asked the opposition how they plan to
address that.
Hample asked about the committees and subcommittees and how those positions are
chosen. Rettig said the Board normally advertises openings for 90 days because of Iowa
gender - balance laws but that is not always the case if a committee is already close to
gender - balance. Committee openings are usually advertised for a couple weeks on the
Johnson County website and on Twitter. The CJCC is a little different because it was
hand - selected for representation from a diverse set of entities and has stayed reasonably
stable. The Board typically advertises positions and appoints based on open applicants.
Hample asked about suggestions on changing arrest policies. Rettig said federal and
national laws dictate arrest policies. Creating change at a local level requires
consideration of the people actually arresting inmates and the chain of command. She
said she believes the Iowa City Police discriminate against minorities and she said more
Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Meeting Minutes: June 5, 2013/ Page 6
than a few of her friends have been harassed by the Iowa City Police. She plans to
address this problem through electing city council members who will lead the Iowa City
City Manager to influence the Iowa City Chief of Police to change the attitude of the
Iowa City Police force. She is embarrassed by the racial disproportionate contact in Iowa
City, and the problem exists in the Cities of University Heights and North Liberty also.
To change local arrest rates one must first change the attitude of the Iowa City Council,
and other city councils.
Dieterle asked about the properties directly across the street from the current Jail.
Rettig explained Johnson County purchased those properties to keep the Courthouse and
Jail from becoming landlocked. Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek said Iowa City planned to build
a parking ramp in that area before the County purchased the properties. Dieterle
suggested using those for more Jail and Courthouse space because the Annex does not
necessarily have to be connected to the current buildings.
SET NEXT MEETING DATE
Rettig said the next CJCC meeting is scheduled for September 4th at 4:30 but that
does not mean the Board will not continue working on this until that date. She said
anyone wishing to be present for the Informal Meeting to hear Grady speak should email
the Board ahead of time because the Boardroom is not very big.
Adjourned at 6:12 p.m.
Attest: Travis Weipert, Auditor
Recorded By Nancy Tomkovicz
"Wfr�
IP14
NNENW�
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
JULY 10, 2013 — 5:15 PM
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Gene Chrischilles, Brock Grenis, Becky
Soglin
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Tim Hennes, Sarah Holecek
OTHERS PRESENT: Mark McCallum, Pam Michaud, Steve Kohli, Doug Ferr,
Randy Kurk
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM.
ROLL CALL:
A brief opening statement was read by Grenis outlining the role and purpose of the Board and
the procedures that would be followed in the meeting.
CONSIDERATION OF June 12. 2013 MEETING MINUTES
Soglin moved to approve the minutes.
Baker seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4 -0.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS
EXC13- 00010: Discussion of an application submitted by Mark McCallum for a special
exception in the Low Density Multi- family Residential (RM -12) zone at 113 S. Johnson
Street.
Walz showed on a location map how this is a transitional zone, and that this property is zoned
Low Density Multi- family Residential (RM -12), as are most of the properties surrounding the
College Green Park. She said this is a historic property. She said there is a list of criteria you
have to meet for this application, including it being owner - occupied housing and living as part of
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 2 of 14
the dwelling unit, meaning you don't have a separate kitchen. Walz said the applicant will be
required to meet all of the building code requirements including the fire protection requirements.
She explained the number of permits that will be required of the owner.
Walz said for the owner to be allowed to rent up to five rooms as well as having his own space,
he's required to have three parking spaces on the property for the bed and breakfast and one
space for the owner occupant. She said he can provide that one space off the alley. She said
he is proposing that he can provide the four other spaces in a driveway that he will extend
toward the back of the yard. She said he could provide parking for five cars, but staff thought it
important to preserve some of the green space. She said in addition, a public parking ramp is
just one block away. She said staff is recommending approval of the application subject to the
site plan that the applicant has provided.
Soglin asked what would happen to a property like this if the owner doesn't or can't live in it.
Walz said then it would then revert to single family home. Soglin asked if the permit limited the
number of people per room. Walz said a family could stay in a room but they are limited in how
long they can stay there.
Mark McCallum, the applicant, said he is also the listing agent for the property and was the
owner of the Brown Street Inn for seven years. He said they were initially trying to sell this
property as a single family home, but there wasn't even enough parking or bathrooms for that
use. He explained his plans for modifying the interior of the home. He said when he owned the
Brown Street Inn, there were never more than two people in a room, and if a couple did want
children in their room, it is for a limited stay.
Baker asked about non - resident employees. Walz said he can have one non - resident
employee. She said that is true for all in -home occupations and that regulation sets a threshold
beyond which you don't have a fully commercial use operating out of a residential zone. Walz
said the applicant would have to apply for the non - resident employee. She said in this case, that
would be someone who would manage or run the business, not an employee like a cleaner or
housekeeper.
Baker asked if any signage would have to go through the Historic Preservation Committee,
since the property is in an historic overlay zone. Walz said it would, as would any changes to
the building's fagade.
Soglin asked if the four parking spaces would be parallel parking. McCallum said those would
be stacked spaces. He said most people will probably not even have cars since it's so close to
downtown. He said it's also very close to a public parking ramp. Soglin said she would still like
to hear more specifically what his plan is if there are four vehicles and someone needs to get
out in the middle of the night or day. McCallum said he was thinking about using electronic
communication or having the guests' telephone numbers posted on a board so everyone can be
contacted if needed. Soglin said her concern is that the parking not be a disturbance to the
people to the south or to adjoining buildings. McCallum said there is generally available parking
on the street at night as well as the parking ramp.
Chrischilles asked if any modifications that the applicant makes including bringing it up to code
as far as fire protection have to occur before he is granted the permit to rent. Walz said that is
correct.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 3 of 14
Grenis opened public hearing.
Pam Michaud of 109 S. Johnson St. said she would rather see a patio and landscaping in the
back than more cement. She said there are two parking spaces on the alley that they have been
using for decades. Walz said one of those spaces doesn't technically meet the standards, so
someone could park there, but the City can't count it as meeting the standards required.
Mlchaud said she would be happy to rent her parking spaces to the applicant so there wouldn't
have to be more pavement. Holecek explained that the City would then consider that
commercial use. Michaud said her concerns are the amount of pavement to be laid down for
parking, and competing with another sign. She said there are two other bed and breakfasts in
town that have been for sale for years, and she sees more of a need for a duplex in this
neighborhood that's sustainable long -term rental than for a bed and breakfast. She said there
are already a lot of extended stay facilities in the area.
Baker asked if the signs for the applicant's and Michaud's property have the same
requirements. Michaud said they do.
Soglin asked Michaud to clarify who her clientele is. Michaud said her requirements are a one
month minimum for a guest house. Walz said the bed and breakfast has a two week maximum.
McCallum reasserted that he will be living on the property. He said all his projects over the past
twenty years have been owner occupied.
Grenis closed public hearing.
Baker moved to approve EXC13 -00010 an application submitted by Mark McCallum for a
special exception in the Low Density Multi- family Residential (RM -12) zone at 113 S.
Johnson Street subject to substantial compliance with a submitted site plan and a
building permit required in order to establish the use.
Chrischilles seconded.
Chrischilles said that he is fine with the arrangement of the four parking spaces.
Soglin said she's not that happy about the parking but doesn't know if there's any real solution.
She said she doesn't know if Staff can recommend permeable pavement during their final
review.
Baker said he found the overall proposal very compatible with the zone and the neighborhood
and the development in the area. He said the applicant has a very good bed and breakfast
record, so he's comfortable with what he's going to do in the future.
Soglin said she largely agrees with it for short-term but has some concerns about the bed and
breakfasts that have gone unsold. Walz explained how those were different from this property.
Baker said that regarding EX13 -00010 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report of
July 10, 2013 and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied. Unless amended
or opposed by another Board member he recommended that the Board adopt the findings in the
staff report as their findings for the acceptance of this proposal.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 4 of 14
Grenis and Chrischilles agreed.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4 -0.
Grenis declared the motion for the special exception approved, noting that anyone wishing to
appeal the decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after the decision is filed with
the City Clerk's Office.
EXC13- 00011: Discussion of an application submitted by Faith Academy for a special
exception to allow a General Education Facility on property located in the Community
Commercial (CC -2) zone at 1030 Cross Park Avenue.
Walz said there is an amendment to the Zoning Code that will go before Council soon. She said
in the past the City hasn't allowed general education facilities in the CC -2 zone but looking at
some areas that have CC -2 they can see where that might be an appropriate use. She showed
the Board views of the property and the drop -off and parking areas. She said staff looks to see if
schools in the CC -2 area aren't in conflict with the commercial area, and in this case the school
is on the backside of the commercial area. She said that the site plan shows that the school can
get the cars associated with teachers or with dropping off students in and out of the site with
little conflict with the loading dock.
Walz said this applicant has been operating as an after - school drop -off program and now wants
to transition to a school encompassing Kindergarten through First Grade with 30 students. Walz
said staff has limited it to 50 students, and at such time as they go over 50 students or need to
increase the interior space beyond 500 square feet, they would have to come forward for a new
special exception to see if a larger school would fit on this site.
Chrischilles asked what business uses the loading dock and what times the deliveries are. Walz
said it's Slumberland and they would probably be making deliveries during school times, but
staff didn't find that in conflict because there are trucks that make deliveries to other schools.
She said this is also a small school and the amount of pedestrian traffic would not be in conflict
with the deliveries.
Walz showed an aerial view of the property and pointed out the loading dock and the drive.
Baker had questions about an adjacent business called The Spot.
Steve Kohli of 3125 Dubuque Street said that The Spot is Faith Academy and that is the
entrance to the academy. He said it's about 8,000 square feet inside.
Baker asked if they owned the green space and if they are renting. Kohli said Southgate is the
landlord and they are working with them on renovations. Baker asked if they have a guarantee
that the green space will be theirs' to use for the length of their occupancy. Kohli said they are
working on that right now.
Baker asked staff what would make a higher number of students acceptable in the future. Walz
said with any school, daycare or church staff usually sets an upward limit at which they would
like to re- evaluate if it's working, if they need new safety precautions or additional parking. She
said what they are saying is that a small school looks like it works here, but they are not sure
about a larger school. Baker said it seems that for a larger school to work there would almost
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 5 of 14
mean that there would have to be a corresponding decrease in activity around the school if they
are basing the current limit on the activity that's there now.
Walz said staff wanted to set a threshold for re- evaluation, and if everything is going smoothly
and there are no conflicts, the staff would be inclined to recommend it becoming larger. Baker
said they are leading the applicant to believe they can expand in the future. Walz said they
aren't saying that a larger school won't work, but they want the chance to re- evaluate in the
future.
Baker asked about bike parking standards. Walz said it's based on the square footage.
Baker asked Walz to expand on the staff concerns about pedestrian access from the north due
to the high traffic volume on Highway 6 and the fact that it could be an issue for students
crossing the highway on foot or bike. Walz said that in this case, the population for this private
school will come from the same side of the street that the school is on, not from across Highway
6. Baker said his concern is that statement sort of implies that the City has a monitoring role.
Walz said that doesn't speak to what the school is intended for or the likelihood that children
would be crossing Highway 6. Baker asked if the school reached the point of having 50 or more
students and came back for re- evaluation, would one of the factors then be how many of the
students come from across Highway 6. Walz said it would.
Grenis opened public hearing.
Soglin asked how many children are currently attending each day.
Doug Ferr of 621 N. Johnson St. said the program varies from 30 -120. Soglin asked if they
would continue some of that programming. Ferr said now its function is specifically as an
outreach center so they do evening programming.
Chrischilles asked if they plan to suspend the after - school program. Ferr said there will be an
after - school component, and the school day will be from 8:00 a.m. — 3:30 p.m. and there will be
an extended after - school program from 3:30 — 5:00 for the children who are enrolled in the
school, and possibility of some who aren't enrolled in the school.
Soglin asked about the timing of deliveries. Ferr said it's hard to predict. He said they have been
in that space for eight years and there has never been an issue with traffic at the loading dock.
Baker asked if there was any plan to have the walkway between the school and the grassy area
buffered. Ferr said they have precast curbing. He said they plan to put five more feet of grass in
between the parking and the sidewalk. Baker asked if it would be a school policy that children
would not be unescorted from that door to the playground. Ferr said absolutely yes.
Grenis closed public hearing.
Soglin said she still had concerns about waiting to re- evaluate when the enrollment reaches 50.
She asked the Board if they want to lower that number or consider adding some other
qualification that if something manifested when they are at 40, an intervention could occur
before it gets up to 50. She said she presumes that most of the children will come from different
families, and she's concerned about the addition of more cars as the enrollment climbs. She
wants to find a balance as these are such young children and this deals with personal safety.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 6 of 14
Ferr explained that they have set a cap of 15 students per grade level, so what changing the
number to 40 would do is keep them from adding that additional grade level next year.
Walz said to the staff it doesn't matter how the enrollment is broken out. She said what they
were concerned with was the overall number of children on the site.
Grenis said 45 would seem like a reasonable number, because it gives them the ability to add
another class.
The other Board members agreed that this seemed like a good compromise.
Soglin suggested making it a condition that the applicant would have to report any incidents in
the parking lot when they next appeared for re- evaluation. Holecek said it would be in their best
interests to do that for a number of reasons. Walz said at the point the applicant had something
to report, they may be losing interest in the site as well.
Baker asked if the City had talked to the adjacent commercial users. Walz said they gotten no
feedback from the letters they sent out to them.
Baker moved to approve EXC13- 00011, to allow a general education facility for up to 45
students in a Community Commercial (CC -2) zone on property located at 1030 Cross
Park Avenue subject to the following conditions:
1. City Council approval of a zoning code amendment establishing a special
exception to allow General Education Facilities in the CC -2 zone.
2. Enclosure of the outdoor recreation area by fencing of a minimum height of 4 feet
to be approved by staff.
3. Establishment of pedestrian routes to school entrances and bicycle parking, the
site plan to be approved by staff.
4. An enrollment of more than 45 students or an addition of more than 500 square
feet of floor area will be considered an expansion of the use that requires a new
special exception.
Chrischilles seconded.
Chrischilles said that regarding EX13 -00011 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff
report of July 10, 2013 and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied. Unless
amended or opposed by another Board member he recommended that the Board adopt the
findings in the staff report as their findings for the acceptance of this proposal.
Baker said he is comfortable with these findings as long as the number of allowable students is
reduced to 45 based upon possible future growth and having a lower threshold for the City to
start monitoring any possible problems or other expansion plans.
Grenis said he agrees with what's been said and added that the treatments to the parking lot
seem to be adequate for the safety of the children and this use should support the
Comprehensive Plan being that it improves the neighborhood's diversity with the school and the
human development component of that.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 7 of 14
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4 -0.
Grenis declared the motion for the special exception approved, noting that anyone wishing to
appeal the decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after the decision is filed with
the City Clerk's Office.
APPEAL ITEM
APL13- 00002: Discussion of an application submitted by Sandy Beck appealing a
decision made by Iowa City's Senior Building Inspector to deny a permit for 24 x 48 foot
accessory building to be constructed at 2230 Russell Drive.
Walz showed the Board an aerial view of the subject property, a picture of the house, and an
elevation for the proposed building. She said the first version with overhead doors was denied in
2012. She explained that the back of the attached garage in the current proposal would be
opened up to create a driveway to go to the back of the property where the larger structure
would be built. Walz said that in reviewing this appeal, staff feels that it hinges on a subjective
interpretation of the definition of accessory uses. She said the definition in the City Code reads
"accessory uses, buildings, or other structures customarily incidental to and commonly
associated with a permitted use, provisional use or special exception ". Walz said in this case the
permitted use is a residential, or the principle, use on the property, and the accessory use is
also subordinate to that principle use and contributes to the comfort, convenience or necessity
of the occupants. She said in this case the use, which is a storage use, is customarily incidental
to properties. She said the question here is whether the size and scope of what's being
proposed on the property would be incidental to.
Chrischilles asked about a permitted use. Walz replied that garages and workshops are
accessory uses in the residential zone, but the question is whether at the scale proposed it
becomes such that it is not subordinate.
Grenis asked about the limit of accessory uses. Walz said the limit on the coverage of all
accessory detached structures taken together can't take up more than 15% of a property. She
said in this case, it would not.
Baker asked what would happen if this were a smaller version of the same, exact building. Walz
said the building official is saying that if it were a smaller version they would interpret it as both
subordinate and customarily and incidental to. Baker asked if the only issue here is size.
Hennes said that the size is the issue. He said they do not find that it is customarily and
incidental to due to its size.
Chrischilles asked what the size limit is.
Hennes said they proposed to the applicant allowing a 24'x24' garage in the back yard. He said
they got no response and there was no negotiation. Chrischilles asked if there was anything in
the Code about a certain percentage of property or a certain size of building. Hennes said that
more than 15% can't be covered by an accessory structure. He said where their interpretation of
customarily and incidental comes -is that it's too large for the footprint of the house. He said the
livable footprint of the house would be smaller than the proposed accessory building. He said if
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 8 of 14
you then add the attached accessory use of a garage and the new accessory structure, it was
getting to be too large.
Baker asked how an applicant knows what the limit is when they have something that doesn't
cover 15% yet the official says that's still too big. Hennes says that's through the review
process.
Chrischilles said to him that sounds arbitrary. He said if it qualifies under the City's rules and yet
it's being denied, that seems to be an arbitrary decision. Hennes said if you look at it at that
level, he's right.
Baker asked if there have been other comparable buildings that have been approved. Hennes
said there had. Baker said there had been one that had been issued in error. Hennes said after
further research, he determined that it was issued with consistency of other permits issued for
accessory structures during that time period.
Hennes said from 1984 to 2005 it was specific in the Code that one of the criteria for accessory
use was that it was subordinate in area. He said in 2005 when the Code was amended that
phrase was taken out so it allowed some discretion, because they were getting some small
houses that wanted to put a garage on. He said in some cases, the garage on a small house will
be larger than the house. He said in the subject neighborhood this is not customarily incidental
to the size of the other garages in the area. He said he had been given some addresses to look
at and out of the nine, five were prior to 1984, three were between 1984 and 2005, and one was
after 2005. He said all of them were smaller in size based on the square footage that they were
analyzing them with so that's why he's saying they aren't being arbitrary in their decision. He
said they were consistent in comparing the size of the garage with the house size. He said there
are some large detached garages on Muscatine Avenue but the house square footage is larger
than the garage.
Baker asked if the same building on a larger piece of property or a bigger house on the small
property would be acceptable. Hennes showed a picture of 132 Dartmouth. He said he thought
if that was reviewed today, they would be in front of this Board with the same question. He said
in 2002 when it was reviewed for a building permit it met the criteria because the accessory
building was smaller in size than the principle structure.
Baker asked what size the Building Department had asked for in this case. Hennes said they
asked for a 24'x24' structure because that's the typical size of a double car garage. Baker asked
if they would be willing to split the difference on size and Hennes said they would be willing to
do that. Baker said he is concerned that too much is being left to personal negotiation. Hennes
said the ordinance was intentionally written that way. Baker asked why that hasn't been
addressed before. Hennes said it's come up in reverse of its intention, which was to enable
smaller houses to build garages. Baker said regardless of what they do in this case, the
situation will come up again and both Hennes and the applicant will be both in an unfair
subjective position. Hennes said that he thinks staff agrees after discussion of this this case that
the ordinance could be improved.
Walz said it is complicated and it is subjective and at a certain size, which would vary by
property and its relation to the principle use, there becomes a question if the property is serving
the house or the accessory use. She said there have been many instances of people storing so
many cars or other things on the site that it becomes a question of what the property is serving.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 9 of 14
She said it's difficult to write a zoning code that has a clear mark for when you have crossed the
line. She said she thinks what the Building Department has tried to do is to say that everybody
should be allowed to have a two car garage, and when it goes beyond that is when you have to
look at size of property and relationship to the house.
Baker said the bigger the accessory use, the more the potential for it turning into a home
business.
Hennes said the accessory building is one of the issues but over time they have found through
nuisance enforcements that there's a potential for that use to migrate out into the concrete
driveway, and the whole area then becomes an accessory use.
Chrischilles said that would be even more likely to occur with a smaller building. He said the
only concrete thing he's heard so far is 15% of the property and everything else is up to the
discretion of the building inspector. Hennes said that's correct. Chrischilles said that until the
15% limit is changed, it seems logical that will be the point that the Board needs to operate
from, and anything else is telling someone they don't have the right to use their property as they
see fit and just because we think it's too big, it's not allowed.
Hennes said he would like to support staff's decision that they are not being arbitrary or
capricious because they did look at the law and the underlying facts of the case, and he referred
to Sarah Holecek's memo where it states that a decision is also "arbitrary" or "capricious" when
it involves an "abuse of discretion Hennes said they based their decision on the 1984 to 2013
history and enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance through size of principle structure when
compared to the accessory structure. He added that in the charging language it says that the
structures are customarily incidental to. He said it's not incidental in size. He said that it is
incidental in use.
Chrischilles said that is Hennes' opinion. Chrischilles asked if there had been any negative
responses from the neighbors. Walz said she received three phone calls from neighbors who
had questions. She said she doesn't report anything unless someone goes on record saying
what their concern is.
Chrischilles said if this building were to be allowed at the 24'x48' size, is there anything to
prohibit the applicant from operating any sort of retail business. Walz said they are allowed
whatever is allowed by zoning code. She said she thinks home occupations are allowable.
Hennes said there are examples of when a business gets too big to be a home business and
has to find another site for it. Chrischilles asked if that is based on complaints. Hennes replied
that it was.
Baker asked if the City had any control over design. Hennes said they do not. He said they do
have control over the height, which is 15' high.
Chrischilles asked if a 24'x48' swimming pool would be too big. Hennes said he would have to
look at the Code. Walz said you do have to have a fence around it.
Grenis asked Hennes to describe the process the building department used to come to this
decision. Hennes said it was well discussed and thought -out throughout the Building and
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 10 of 14
Housing Office but ultimately the decision comes back to the director of the department, Doug
Boothroy.
Baker asked what the notification process is. Walz explained that the City sends letters to every
property owner within 300 feet of the subject property and posts a sign in their yard.
Grenis asked Holecek to explain the framework for how the Board will decide this case. Holecek
said the first question to answer is whether they feel that the building official has exercised the
powers and followed the regulations in the Zoning Code with regard to accessory uses and
structures and then whether the action was patently arbitrary or capricious. She said just
because a Board member may not agree with the decision, they can't supplant their disagree or
agree but have to find one of those things to be true in order to overturn it and be able to
articulate why they think it was an inappropriate decision.
Grenis invited the applicant to speak.
Randy Kurk of 2230 Russell Drive handed out some exhibits to the Board. He said when the
building official told him and Sandy Beck that they would be allowed a 24'x24' building and that
a 24'x48' structure could not be built, the applicants took that as non - negotiable. He said that all
through the process, the applicants consulted with the Code Enforcement Assistant on the
specifics of their structure and were assured that they were going by the Code — size, location
and other specifics.
Kurk showed pictures of single family properties in their neighborhood and at other locations
where there are structures larger than the one they are proposing. He said he found many
accessory buildings comparable to his proposed structure within single family neighborhoods
and most of them also had an attached garage. He read sizes, locations and dates built from his
short list of such properties. Kurk said the building he proposed is deemed to be not commonly
associated with or customarily incidental to a single family dwelling. He said with the samples he
just cited, it can't be said that it's uncommon. He said one of the explanations for denial from the
building official was noise and disruption to the flow of the neighborhood. He said the building
won't even be visible from the street, and they have always respected the noise ordinance
control within their neighborhood. He said their structure was modeled after the one at 132
Dartmouth except theirs doesn't have a driveway going around their house. He said there are
many examples in town of a single family house with an attached garage and an accessory
building, and they are examples of the arbitrary ways in which the decisions are made by the
building official and the department. He said there is no consistency when it comes to Code
enforcement, explanation or permit allowance.
Chrischilles asked what the applicant planned to use this building for. Kurk said a woodworking
shop and a two car garage. Chrischilles asked if this will be an additional garage. The applicant
said it would be. Chrischilles asked if the woodworking is a hobby. The applicant said it will be
when he retires.
Baker asked what happened in 2005 with the Code. Hennes said the City adopted a revised
version of the Code which changed the accessory structure language and removed the words
"subordinate in area ". Baker asked if Hennes would characterize the change in 2005 as a
relaxing of the rules. Hennes said he would. Baker asked if Hennes was on City Staff in 2002.
Hennes said he was. Baker asked if he was involved in the 1811 Muscatine Avenue project.
Hennes said he agreed with Baker that the accessory structure is a monstrosity but that it was
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 11 of 14
approved based on the square footage of the house. Baker said the applicant stated that his
interpretation of his discussion with the building department about the alternative proposal was
a maximum that was not up for negotiation. Hennes said that wasn't personally his
conversation. Baker asked what guidelines were used to decide that 24'x24' would be the
acceptable size. Hennes said it was based on a standard double car garage.
Soglin asked about the example built in 2012 that was 24 "x32' on a smaller lot. Hennes said it
was a carry- over of the subordinate in area language in the ordinance. Hennes said he doesn't
think that the initial applicant with the 24'x32' tripped anyone's thought process that this is
getting too big, where the subject application has tripped that tipping point. Soglin said so it's
possible that if this applicant had originally asked for 24'x32'... Hennes said in that case the
Board might not be here deciding on this.
Baker asked Hennes if they have denied any other accessory uses based on size. Hennes said
not. Baker asked if there had been other applications. Hennes said he didn't know, but he thinks
this one hits that size where it begs the question if it's too large for the neighborhood.
Soglin asked if the Board upheld the denial of the application could the applicants go out
tomorrow and submit a new application for a smaller structure. Holecek said they could submit a
new building permit application. She said they could find that there was a different reason or
different rationale that would support what the applicant wanted to do.
Chrischilles said they can't do that because the only standard they have is 15 %. Walz said the
Board can uphold the appeal, deny the appeal and grant the applicant the building he proposed
on a different set of criteria or say that there is another size that is supported by the Zoning
Code.
Baker said he doesn't feel that the Board should be getting into negotiating sizes. He said the
Code needs to be worked on, and that is not the Board's job. Chrischilles said the only thing
that's in the Code that's concrete is 15% of the lot size. Baker said he came to this meeting fully
expecting to support the staff, but in this case he supports the appeal.
Grenis moved to take a five minute recess.
Baker seconded.
Grenis called the meeting back to order.
Holecek explained the criteria for upholding this appeal to the applicant.
Kurk asked why it was his building that flipped some kind of switch, instead of a 1200 sq. foot
building from his list that was granted a permit.
Grenis closed public hearing.
Walz clarified to the Board that they always vote yes on an application and explained what a yes
or a no vote means in this case.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 12 of 14
Baker moved to support APL13 -00002 requesting an overturning of the denial of a
building permit for an accessory structure in the RS -5 zone at 2230 Russell Drive.
Chrischilles seconded.
Baker said that the nature of the Code sets building officials up for arbitrary decisions, which is
unfair to them. He said there has to be a better way the Code can be written to achieve a
reasonable goal of controlling accessory use size. He said he personally thinks this particular
project is too big but that's an arbitrary decision because he can't point to anything that justifies
his decision in law. He urged the Board to support this appeal and the staff to quickly reconsider
how the Code can work for the benefit of the public and the staff because he doesn't want them
put in this position again of coming before the Board to justify what seems to be an arbitrary
decision.
Chrischilles said he agrees 100% with what Baker said. He said 15% is the only standard that
has been cited as a concrete standard, and this application satisfies that standard. He said
there are no neighbor complaints other than one, who said she doesn't want it used for a
business, and the owner says he's not planning on doing that, so you have to take him at his
word. He said according to the decision Arora vs. Iowa Board of Medical Examiners abuse of
discretion occurs when the action rests on grounds or reasons clearly untenable, unreasonable
or lacking rationality in light of the actor's authority. He said that fits this situation. He said this
decision screams arbitrariness from the fact that many other similar buildings have been
granted and have been built in residential areas. He said the year that these buildings were built
doesn't seem to be important because in 2005 the standard was actually lessened and no
standard was created other than the 15% at that time, and that's really all the Board has to work
from.
Soglin said she agrees with much of what Chrischilles said. She said lot size seems to have
something to do with a trend toward a different size of accessory structures, but there is nothing
codified regarding that. She said perhaps future revision should include something about how
footprint size is going to matter as much, not just the 15 %, but footprint relative to the square
footage of the house. She said lot size seems to matter. Soglin said some size between 24'x24'
and 24'x48' seems to be more reasonable but there's nothing for the Board to base that on.
Grenis said he agrees with what's been said. He said in looking at the two criteria the Board
decides on, the building official did exercise his powers and followed the regulations established
in the Zoning Code, but there's that grey area that allowed this to be denied. He said, though,
that in light of the second criteria, whether the building official's actions were patently arbitrary or
capricious, in light of that he has to agree with the Board's decision to support the appeal. He
said he thinks it's wise to let the building permit as presented go forward because it's not in the
Board's capacity to try and set a size.
Walz and Holecek agreed that the Board has said constitutes findings for this case.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4 -0.
Walz said that vote upholds the appeal of the applicants.
Board of Adjustment
July 10, 2013
Page 13 of 14
OTHER:
Baker said he would recommend changes to this ordinance such as access to the accessory
use, design, size, neighborhood, screening, and sooner rather than later.
Chrischilles said rather than have it based on something that's a moveable target, perhaps
come up with the maximum size an accessory building can be no matter how big the lot or the
house.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION:
The Board discussed dates for the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT:
Chrischilles moved to adjourn.
Baker seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 4 -0 vote.
z
W
U)
D
°a
U.
0
a
m
D
U
W
w
W
L)
Q
Z
W
N
Q
M
r
0
N
N
r
0
N
a>
M
7
X
W
� c �
N y N
a`aQ
II II 11
xow
w
Y
(D
E
N
is
O
z
X
x
x
j
X
n
X
X
X
;
X
co
x
X
X
x
j
X
X
X
x
x
X
M
X
X
x
X
00
X
X
o
X
x
x
x
x
x
=
!
N
N
x
x
x
x
x
r
x
x
x
x
x
0
o
x
x
o
x
o
r
X
X
X
X
j
X
X
X
x
ti
CL
x
n
w
v
LO
00
00
w
o
0
0
0
0
0
N
N
N
N
N
N
—
LU
H
W
z
W
W
z
F-
J
J
�
V
W
J
Q
0
J
W
J
N
m
m
=
C
V
z
z
W
x
z
a
a
W
x
0
z
m
0
V
U)
U)
a>
M
7
X
W
� c �
N y N
a`aQ
II II 11
xow
w
Y
(D
E
N
is
O
z
INS
mnw�
Minutes
PRELIMINARY
Human Rights Commission
July 16, 2013 — 6 P.M.
Helling Conference Room
Members Present: Harry Olmstead, Orville Townsend Sr., Diane Finnerty, Kim Hanrahan,
Jewell Amos.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers, Mike Moran, Chad Dyson.
Recommendations to Council: No.
Call to Order:
Chair Townsend called the meeting to order at 18:02.
Consideration of the Minutes of the (Revised) Mav 21.2013 & June 18.2013:
Townsend noted that he was misquoted in the minutes of May 21, 2013. Townsend stated: the minutes
incorrectly reported that he said he was dissatisfied with the City Council decision to go along with an
officer in a school and that was incorrect, what he said was " the City Manager attended most of the Ad
Hoc Committee meetings and I was surprised that he allowed that to move forward, considering the fact
that our committee was definitely not in favor of it." Olmstead moved to approve minutes, seconded by
Hanrahan. 3 in favor, 2 abstained (Finnerty & Amos). Motion passed 3 -0.
Public Comment of Items Not on the Aeenda: None.
New Business:
ID System for Facility Access Recreational Centers
The Recreation Centers started a new software system in December 2012, as a part of this system the
Centers are able to track usage. The new id system, which had a soft opening at Mercer in June, does not
require a picture to be taken to be issued. There is also no cost for an id to be issued. Over six hundred
id's have been issued. There is a $2 replacement fee if an id is lost. Organizations, like The Arc or
Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program would just be issued one id for use with group outings. Id's are
not required for rentals, special events or if just walking through the facility. There is no documentation
of any kind required for a person to be issued an id. Moran and Dyson will contact Finnerty to set up
future focus groups to further explore the new id system. In addition, Moran will share quarterly reports
with Bowers to share with the Commission for future follow up if necessary.
Coalition for Racial Justice's Racial Equality Report
The Coalition will be releasing a report on Tuesday, July 23. The report contains information concerning
a lot of disparity data. Olmstead moved and Hanranhan seconded to allow Finnerty to speak on behalf of
the Commission, given the stated parameters, not in support of the report but in support of the focus on
the racial equity outcomes as a way to build diverse and inclusive communities. Motion passed 5 -0.
Annual Report (Draft) FY 13
Report should include more on the Youth Awards and that there were no Youth Ally nominations
submitted in 2013.
Scope & Priorities of the Human Rights Commission
Commissioners discussed following up with initiatives, clarification on their roles and will continue to
look at other models.
Human Rights Breakfast
The event will have a multimedia presentation and not a keynote this year. More information is
forthcoming at the next meeting. Suggestion to change the Community Award to the Bill Reagan
Community Award will be discussed at the next meeting. Olmstead moved and Amos seconded to forgo a
keynote speaker for the 2013 Breakfast and instead have a multimedia presentation. Motion passed 5 -0.
Fall Conference on Racial Justice & Disproportionate Minority Incarceration
Bowers will follow up with Disproportionate Minority Contact Chair LaTasha Massey to see if there can
be a collaboration on an upcoming program the DMC Committee will be hosting in October.
Proclamations
The Commission plans to do a proclamation for Hispanic Heritage Month.
Updates & Reports:
Juneteenth
Townsend thoroughly enjoyed the event and recommends the inside location (Mercer Park) again for the
future.
SEATS
Olmstead reported that City staff will be coming up with recommendations concerning SEATS.
Education Subcommittee
Finnerty anticipates hearing from the ICCSD within the next month or so.
Immigrant Subcommittee
No Report.
Ad Hoc Diversity Committee
No Report. This item will be removed from future agendas.
Building Communities
A meeting will be set up in the near future.
University of Iowa Center for Human Rights
Bowers will write a letter to President Mason thanking her and the University community for keeping the
Center open. Provost Butler will be cc in the correspondence.
Commission
Finnerty updated on Cultural Diversity Day, this will be an agenda item for the next meeting.
Staff
No report.
Adjournment:
Motion to adjourn at 19:28.
2
Next Regular Meeting — August 20, 2013 at 18:00.
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2012/2013
(Meeting Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP.
8/21/
12
9/18
/12
10/16/
12
11/20/
12
12/18/
12
1/15/
13
1/28
/13
2/19/
13
3/19/
13
4/16
/13
5/21
113
6/18/
13
7/16/
13
Diane
Finnerty
1/14/14
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
Orville
Townsend, Sr.
1/1/14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
Dan Tallon
1/1/14
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
WE
Kim
Hanrahan
111115
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
Shams
Ghoneim
111115
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
Jessie Harper
111115
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
R
R
R
R
Jewell Amos
111115
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
X
Katie
Anthony
1/1/16
-
-
-
-
-
X
X
X
X
X
R
R
R
Joe D. Coulter
1/1/16
-
-
-
-
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Harry
Olmstead
1/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Connie Goeb
1/1/13
X
X
X
X
X
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Howard
Cowen
1/1/13
X
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
David B.
Brown
1/1/14
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Henri Harper
1/1/14
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
-- = No longer a member
R = Resignation
IP16
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY
JULY 18,— 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Anne Freerks, Phoebe Martin,
Paula Swygard, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Karen Howard, Darian Nagle -Gamm, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff Miller Mark Schuchard, Ed Wasserman, Liz Christiansen,
K. T. Labadie, Walter Seaman, Judy Buddenbaum, James
Mossman, Liz Maas, Casey Cook
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
1. The Commission voted 7- 0 to recommend approval of REZ13- 00004, an
application submitted by Jeff Miller Construction to rezone 1.05 acres of property
from Low Density Multi- family (RM -12) to Low Density Multi- family residential with
a Planned Development Overlay (OPD /RM -12) subject to compliance with the
submitted Sensitive Areas Plan and a Conditional Zoning Agreement to ensure
that the recommendations set forth in the geo- technical survey are followed in the
design and construction of the development, and that the building is designed
according to the submitted elevation drawings with any additional conditions
imposed by the Design Review Committee to ensure that the building complies
with the Central Planning District multi - family site development standards; and
that the planting areas to the north of the parking lot be planted with trees,
shrubs, and ground covers as recommended in the approved list of Johnson
County Heritage Trust; and retaining walls over three feet in height located north
of the building be screened from public view from the right -of -way; and additional
trees upright in form shall be planted south of the building to provide screening,
where possible.
2. The Commission voted 7- 0 to recommend approval of REZ13- 00018, a request to
amend the Sensitive Areas Ordinance for approximately 7.13 acres of land located
at Mormon Trek Boulevard and Dane Road SE subject to the applicant funding an
escrow account to assure completion of the proposed wetland mitigation
improvements. With the commencement of the mitigation plan and the
establishment of an escrow, other development with the subdivision would
be allowed to proceed.
3. The Commission voted 7- 0 to recommend approval of amendments to the Zoning
Code to implement the recommendations under Bullet #2 in the staff
memorandum expanding the allowed uses in the CIA zone and allowing these
newly proposed areas under the same conditions as apply in the CC -2 zone:
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 2 of 13
Uses allowed in the CIA zone should be expanded to allow the following CC -2
uses with the same standards and provisions called out in the CC -2 zone:
• Restaurants and bars
• Medical and dental offices
• Personal services (banks, salons, dry cleaners, laundries and similar)
• Hotels and motels
• Religious and private group assembly
• All sales- oriented retail (currently limited to certain uses)
4. The Commission voted 7- 0 to recommend approval of amendments to Title 14:
Zoning Code as outlined in the staff memorandum of July 11, 2013, to delete
specific street requirements for Daycare Uses, General Educational Facilities, and
Religious /Private Group Assembly Uses.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
Rezonina Items:
REZ13- 00004: Discussion of an application submitted by Jeff Miller Construction for a
rezoning of 1.05 -acres of land located on First Avenue, north of Rochester Avenue from
Low Density Multi - Family (RM -12) zone to Planned Development Overlay /Low Density
Multi - Family (OPD /RM -12) zone.
Nagle -Gamm presented a location map and pictures of the subject property that the
Commission has seen before. She said last fall the subject property was rezoned from Low
Density Single Family (RS -5) Zone to Low Density Multi - Family (RM -12). She said as the
developer moved forward with the project it determined that more than 35% of the critical slopes
on the property were going to be disturbed during construction of the proposed building. She
said in accordance with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance a Level II Sensitive Areas Review was
required, which is considered to be a type of planned development and therefore must be
reviewed accordingly to the approval procedures for a planned development overlay rezoning
and applicable standards within the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. She said the applicant must
address how any negative effects of disturbing the critical slopes would be mitigated.to ensure
that the design and construction is safe and minimizes flooding and erosion. She said this item
has been before the Commission several times, and was deferred due to issues with storm
water management, slope stability and sub - surface water.
Nagle -Gamm said in response to questions from the Commission, that the applicant has
submitted two additional items for review. She said the first item is a certified letter and a cross -
section drawing from a structural engineer which contains an analysis of the proposed
development. She said the engineer concludes that there will be no adverse impacts to the
existing retaining wall or building to the south of the subject property if constructed as proposed.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 3 of 13
Nagle -Gamm said the second submittal is a geo- technical engineering report that contains a soil
survey and site specific recommendations for preparation on the site, earthwork, design,
construction of foundations, floor slabs and pavements based on the proposed site plan. She
said this report also addressed the stability of slopes on the property, and based on the analysis
of the development along with the site - specific soil conditions that were uncovered in the study,
the engineers did not anticipate stability issues with the slopes at the end of construction or in
the long -term if the recommendations in the report were followed.
Nagle -Gamm said Engineering and Planning and Development staff have both reviewed these
documents and find that they adequately address the site - specific conditions noted. She said
the latest iteration of the site plan, met public works staff expectations for on -site storm water
management. She stated that staff now recommends approval of this rezoning subject to the
Sensitive Areas site plan and a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA).
Eastham asked staff how the geo- technical recommendations in the report will be met during
construction. Howard said the Inspection Staff will have oversight, and with any development
that has extensive retaining walls Housing and Inspection Services will require sign -off by a
structural engineer.
Freerks opened public hearing.
Jeff Miller, the applicant, said that with these reports, he has gotten a lot of good suggestions
from the engineers that will be helpful before, during and after construction. He said he has 35
years of experience behind him and has built several developments that have been as or more
challenging than this proposed one.
Eastham asked Miller if he would have gotten an analysis and engineer report even if the
Commission hadn't requested him to do so and did he discover anything from the reports that
he hadn't known before. Miller said the study was interesting but it cost a lot of money and came
out with results that he had expected.
Thomas asked how high the retaining wall was in the northwest corner of the subject property.
Miller said it was four or five feet.
Theobald said there had been some discussion about trying to save some of the trees,
particularly the small oaks located in the far corner of the property. She asked what Miller plans
to do with them. Miller said they will try to keep as many trees as possible because they are
required to replace nice trees they remove.
Mark Schuchard, the applicant's engineer from V.J. Engineering in Iowa City, introduced himself
and stated that he concurs with the findings in these most recent analyses.
Freerks asked Howard if with a Level II Sensitive Areas, much of this analysis would have to be
done. Howard replied that it's common on sloping sites for staff to require a soil study, and they
have done so on a number of properties so it's not that unusual, particularly when they are
building large retaining walls and disturbing a lot of the site.
Ed Wasserman of 555 North First Avenue showed slides of the subject property and some
graphics that show how virtually all the trees on it will have to be removed. He reiterated the
neighbors' concerns about potential drainage problems, the size of the retaining wall, the
amount of dirt that will have to be removed and what effect this will all have on Hickory Hill Park,
his building to the south and others in the neighborhood, the lowering of property values and the
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 4 of 13
fact that this is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He said that no reason has been
presented that this should be rezoned.
Liz Christiansen of 549 North First Avenue said that Iowa ranks among the very lowest tier of
states in terms of publically owned recreation land and is considered the most altered state in
terms of land use. She wants the Commission to act to protect the trees on the site of the
proposed development and consider the ecological services these trees provide. She said trees
and green space provide benefits and add value to developments.
K.T. Labadie of 708 Woodside said she is chair of the Board for Friends of Hickory Hill Park.
She and six other Board members decided she should come before the Commission and make
a statement about their concerns about this item. She stated their concerns about invasive
species and wants to make sure that this development has to follow a specific plant list. She
said their other concern is the amount of storm water from this site and its effect on Ralston
Creek and the park. She said they don't believe it can all be handled on site. She said they think
a smaller development would be more compatible for the park.
Walter Seaman of 551 North First Avenue quoted from the Central District Plan where it states
"generous front yard landscaping combined with a beautiful canopy of trees create a pleasant
environment for walking and biking despite the gaps in the sidewalk network... and
improvements and access to parks is another issue of importance to residents to this area of the
Central District." He said the removal of trees on the subject property would certainly not
improve access to the park.
Judy Buddenbaum of 557 North First Avenue said she doesn't have a lot of faith in the City
Inspectors being there all the time when things are done on the subject property. She cited
examples in her own building where things were signed off on but not done properly.
James Mossman of 535 North First Avenue said he and his wife are strongly against the
proposed development. He said it will be a negative for the neighborhood. He said the concerns
cited by other speakers tell the story very well.
Freerks closed public hearing.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of REZ13- 00004, an application submitted by
Jeff Miller Construction to rezone 1.05 acres of property from Low Density Multi- family
(RM -12) to Low Density Multi- family residential with a Planned Development Overlay
(OPD /RM -12) subject to compliance with the submitted Sensitive Areas Plan and a
Conditional Zoning Agreement to ensure that the recommendations set forth in the geo-
technical survey are followed in the design and construction of the development, and
that the building is designed according to the submitted elevation drawings with any
additional conditions imposed by the Design Review Committee to ensure that the
building complies with the Central Planning District multi - family site development
standards.
Swygard seconded.
Eastham asked about a comment made by Labadie about damage to a bridge. Labadie said
she was referring to a bridge in the park.
Eastham asked Howard to respond to Labadie's request that the developer use non - invasive
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 5 of 13
species from the Heritage Trust list. Nagle Gamm clarified that there were some species on the
initial site plan that were not recommended because they might be invasive and the applicant
did change those for species identified as being appropriate for Johnson County through the
Heritage Trust list.
Freerks said she's torn in some ways but feels that the applicant has done a lot to address the
issues that have been put forward, except for the trees. She said trees are important to her, but
she's not sure that all of the trees she would like saved will be saved here. She said she thinks
many people would like this land to be purchased and made part of the park. She said,
however, that someone owns this property and they have the right to do something with it, and
they have met all of the requirements that have been asked regarding storm water
management, and studying the soil and ensuring the building is constructed to prevent erosion.
She said based on that, she will be voting in favor of this application.
Martin said with regard to the question asked by one of the neighbors regarding the need for
this housing, she notes that other buildings have been built in the area, and people have bought
them, so it is really the market that determines the need for new housing. She said she is really
conflicted about this, but she said the Commission already voted to rezone it to RM -12.
Theobald said she thinks the builder has done everything the Commission has required. She
said she has also listened to the concerns of The Friends of Hickory Hill Park, and while there's
a minimum requirement of what the Commission has asked, it would be wonderful if the builder
would explore doing some real water management and planting some things that will take the
landscaping to the next level and helping that transition to the park even more. She said it would
be a wonderful thing to explore with some of the groups in the community that are helping
promote retaining storm water on site and the plantings and things you can do to help that. She
said it would be a wonderful marketing tool if she was looking for a property to purchase. She
said she would be supporting the application.
Thomas said he thinks part of the problem is how the building located to the south of the subject
property is sited. He said it was also a planned development overlay. In that case, to avoid the
sensitive area to the south of the building on that property, the building was placed too far north
leaving no opportunity to create any kind of landscape character to the north of the building. He
said he thinks the siting of that building with the retaining walls to the north have created
problems for any development to the north. He said that adding a condition of tree plantings to
the south of the proposed building would be one way of mitigating the relationship of the
buildings to each other. He said another aspect that could be better mitigated is to require that
the retaining walls that can be seen from the public right of way be screened from view. He said
he would propose that north of the driveway and parking bay that the landscape be developed
in a way that would be consistent with the character of Hickory Hill Park so it would be an
extension of the park landscape. He said given that the retaining wall runs through this area, it
may not be appropriate for lawn, as proposed on the planting plan.
Freerks said if trees were possible between the two buildings, she definitely would be in favor or
that, but she would not be favor of asking to screen the entire retaining wall. Greenwood
Hektoen said that any conditions the Commission imposes have to address public needs that
are being generated by the rezoning. She said some of those suggestions are good for the
developer to take into consideration but she doesn't know if the Commission can require them
as conditions for the rezoning.
Thomas argued that the public need is because of the sensitive areas that are being impacted
and the mitigation required is retaining walls. He said in other zoning codes in other towns there
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 6 of 13
is a concern with the public image of a property if the walls are over four or five feet in height.
Greenwood Hektoen asked if his condition is to screen just the portion visible from the public.
Thomas said yes, if the wall was not visible from the public right -of -way, it would not require
screening.
Howard noted that there is a property further to the north that had a similar situation where there
were large retaining walls proposed that would be visible from First Avenue. She said the
Commission recommended a CZA that required landscape screening of retaining walls to soften
the views from First Avenue. She said since this property was similarly situated a similar
condition might be imposed.
Eastham said he would support that addition. Freerks said that previous condition did not
recommend concealing it, but rather softening it.
Howard said they were required to show what the retaining wall would look like and then do
plantings to soften the view of the wall. Freerks said she would be okay with that but would not
be comfortable going into great detail but rather assigning to design review.
Freerks said the transition planting to the north that Thomas recommended seems appropriate
and that staff should also review a landscaping plan to ensure compliance. She said she
wouldn't feel comfortable outlining it here.
Thomas replied the key concept there is that it integrate with the landscape north of Hickory Hill
Park and that it not be planted in lawn.
Eastham said he thinks that's a good idea.
Thomas moved to amend approval of REZ13 -00004 by adding
1. that the planting areas to the north of the parking lot be planted with trees, shrubs
and ground covers as recommended in the approved list of Johnson County
Heritage Trust
2. retaining walls over three feet in height north of the building be screened from
view when seen by the public right -of -way
3. additional trees upright in form shall be planted south of the building to provide
screening where possible.
Greenwood Hektoen asked if these are aspects the Commission would like the Design Review
Committee to take into consideration when doing their review. The Commission agreed that
they are
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion to amend carried 7 -0.
Swygard said it's been a very difficult decision to come to and she appreciates all the
neighborhood involvement that has helped her think through all the aspects of her decision. She
said she appreciates the applicant's diligence on following through on everything the
Commission has asked of him. She said she's not sure that they always have to have proof that
there is a need in the community for a property to be developed, unless it's a non - residential
type of building. She said she will be supporting this application.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 7 of 13
Eastham said the Comprehensive Plan does support this development in general. He said the
Plan talks a lot about providing multi - family residential buildings along arterial and collector
streets, which is a key point of the current Plan. He said the proposed building is keeping in
multi - family character with what's on the west side of North First Avenue in this area. He said he
appreciates that the staff and the developer invested in a thorough engineering analysis and
their reports indicate that there are insignificant hazards to the building or the retaining wall to
the south. He added that the engineers had an analysis of how to construct this kind of building
on this property so that it won't cause run -off problems during the construction phase or have
water inside during the life of the building if the soil engineer's recommendations are followed.
He said preserving the on -site trees is a vexing problem for this or other applications. He said
he's sympathetic to the residents of the building to the south, but asking the developer to
replace trees is a good thing. He said this development follows the current requirements for
handling storm water, and although he knows there will be additional run -off from this site into
Ralston Creek, he doesn't have a regulatory way of changing that at this time. He said he will
support the application with the added requirements.
Dyer reiterated what Thomas said in that most of the problems can be attributed to the fact that
the building to the south is built almost on the property line. She said if the applicants follow the
requirements that the Commission has established, which she thinks are substantial, they can
use their property as they choose.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0.
Freerks reminded those in attendance that this item will go on to City Council so there will be
another opportunity to discuss it.
REZ13- 00018: Discussion of an application submitted by Dealer Properties IC LLC for a
rezoning to amend the Sensitive Areas Development Plan to allow an alternative method
of establishing the required wetland mitigation rather than removing and replacing the
topsoil for property located at 2845 Mormon Trek Boulevard.
Howard said the Commission recently passed an amendment to reduce the overall size of the
wetland buffer area to 4.14 acres. She said this item is a change in the method they would like
to use to install the wetland mitigation. She said instead of removing twelve to eighteen inches
of topsoil, the applicant has developed a plan they feel will be less invasive and more successful
as described in a letter from Transition Ecology, LLC.
Eastham asked Howard what the timeline for this project will be and who will be responsible for
oversight. Howard said it will be whoever the applicant hires to install it, and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers has a timeline, and the plants have to be installed by the end of this year.
Greenwood Hektoen said the recommendation is that they commence the plan before any
construction permit would be allowed for Lot 2. Eastham asked what would happen if they don't
complete it. Greenwood Hektoen said the applicant would put up an escrow that if they don't
complete it the City would have the money to go in and do the work.
Dyer said the plan involved starting in the growing season of 2013. She said we are already
halfway through that season.
Freerks said much of the planting will take place much later, as according to the new plan, they
want to kill everything first.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 8 of 13
Freerks asked about the staffs recommendation. Howard clarified that the project needs to
commence and escrow needs to be established before a permit is issued for use of Lot 2.
Eastham asked about the Council's timeline for this application. Howard said because of the
need to start the mitigation during this growing season, Council has already set a public hearing
for this rezoning request for August 6th pending the Commission's recommendation.
Greenwood Hektoen said the key element of the plan for the Commission is not the specific
start date but that the applicant has to start before they get a building permit. Howard said that
the consequence of not approving this rezoning is that the existing Conditional Zoning
Agreement (CZA) that was adopted previously would still be in force, which would require the
applicant to remove and replace twelve to eighteen inches of topsoil and then install the wetland
plants. She said the Commission should decide which plan is better for the wetland and its
survivability. She advised that the applicant's consultant could answer any technical questions
the Commission has about the alternative method proposed.
Freerks opened public hearing.
Liz Maas of Transition Ecology said she was contacted by the applicant to see if she could
devise an alternative to dredging out the soil and cutting into the area with heavy equipment.
She said this is a storm water mitigation site so removing so much topsoil would cause a lot of
erosion, and heavy equipment would compact the soil and create less benefit in that the water
will want to go off if the soil is compacted. She said her alternative involves using chemicals to
treat the invasive species that are there. She said this mitigation site is completed in the sense
that the only problem with this site is that the vegetation is not appropriate. She said it's
functioning well but the vegetation is not what was specified by the original mitigation plan that
was passed ten years ago.
Dyer asked if the correct plants weren't planted. Maas said that's part of it, and they weren't
planted at the correct ratios, but a lot of what is there could have come in naturally. She said
about half of it is invasive canary grass but half is actually decent wetland plants.
Martin said it's logical to not remove topsoil but the words RoundUp and wetlands don't seem
compatible to her. Maas said there is a safe chemical called Rodeo that is used for this kind of
work in a wetland area. Martin asked if that affects birds or other species or the native
vegetation. Maas said RoundUp is a poison and would only be used judiciously in the places it
needs to be use. She said as an ecologist she's very sensitive to trying to protect as much as
she can the existing vegetation so it can out - compete the invasive species. Maas addressed
Eastham's previous concern about responsibility. She said because this is a wetland mitigation
site the Corps of Engineers and the Iowa Department of Natural Resources are required by the
Clean Water Act to monitor the site for five years after it's been completed as well as during the
project.
Martin asked who will be doing the monitoring. Maas said it will be her or someone in her
position that is hired by the applicant.
Freerks wanted to clarify per the report from Maas that Rodeo must be used. Maas said it
would. She said they had hoped to start the mitigation this spring, but they will begin as soon as
they possibly can.
Theobald said she has been hearing a lot about RoundUp resistant weeds and wanted to know
if a test plot would be done before they spray the whole area. Maas explained that not only will
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 9 of 13
they be spaying but also tilling in order to plant other things there to compete with the canary
grass. She said the canary grass will never be eradicated completely from this site. She said the
goal of this project is to reduce the impact and size of the canary grass so that there is a
healthier mix of wetland plants that can be sustained over time.
Freerks said with by not removing the soil, Maas will be able to use a targeted approach. Maas
confirmed that that was correct.
Freerks closed public hearing.
Thomas moved to recommend approval of REZ13- 00018, a request to amend the
Sensitive Areas Ordinance for approximately 7.13 acres of land located at Mormon Trek
Boulevard and Dane Road SE subject to the applicant funding an escrow account to
assure completion of the proposed wetland mitigation improvements. With the
commencement of the mitigation plan and the establishment of an escrow, other
development with the subdivision would be allowed to proceed.
Eastham seconded.
Freerks said she thinks this is a better plan, and she's glad to see that it will be started soon;
she thinks that it could be a beautiful spot some day.
Eastham said he is intrigued with this method instead of scraping and removing topsoil. He said
his only concerns have been that the work is actually done and followed through so that
eventually there are mostly non - invasive species at that site.
Thomas said it sounds like a much better approach and the devil will be in the monitoring.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0.
Zonina Code Amendments:
Discussion of amendments to Title 14: Zoning Code, to broaden the uses allowed
in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) Zone based on recommendations from an ad hoc
commercial zoning committee appointed by the City Manager.
Howard said that last fall a committee of private citizens was appointed by the City Manager to
work with City staff to examine the zoning regulations in several of the city's commercial zoning
districts due to some concerns that had been expressed by the business community. Howard
thanked the members of the committee: Casey Cook from Cook Appraisal Services; Jeff Edberg
from Lepic Kroeger Realtors; Anne Freerks as a representative of the Planning and Zoning
Commission; Glenn Siders from Southgate Development Services; Peggy Slaughter, Midwest
America Commercial Realty; and Joe Younker, Bradley and Riley Law Office.
Howard said the task for this committee was to discuss the issues and identify any potential
solutions regarding Iowa City's commercial zoning designations. She said there has always
been some confusion about the Community Commercial (CC -2) and Intensive Commercial (CI-
1) zones, so the committee decided to focus on these two zones. She explained that there is
quite a bit of overlap in the uses allowed in these two zones. She said that areas in the
community change over time, but unless there's a specific request to change the zoning, the
zoning may become out of sync with the changes that have occurred over time.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 10 of 13
Howard said the committee agreed that one of the main issues is that property that has prime
retail frontage on a high traffic arterial street should probably be zoned CC -2 rather than CI -1
and that a number of properties, particularly along Highway 1 West should be rezoned to CC -2.
Howard said another finding was that property not having suitable visibility, access and traffic
count is probably more suited to CI -1. In addition, she said the majority of the committee agreed
that opening up possibilities for additional uses in the CI -1 zone wouldn't have a significant
effect on CI -1 zoned properties and that the private market should decide what's appropriate
rather than restricting uses in the zoning code. She said the committee acknowledged, however,
that allowing a broader range of uses in the CI -1 would make it incumbent upon the buyer of a
property and their real estate agent to consider the possibility that a business might locate next
door that has some of the features that would be allowed in the CI -1 zone — the outdoor work
and storage areas, noise, and dust.
Howard said the Commission is being asked to consider amending the Zoning Code to
implement the recommendations under Bullet Point #2 in the staff memorandum.
Eastham asked if there was some consideration given by the committee to get an idea of what
the property owners want in those areas that are zoned CI -1 now before they actually change
the Code. Howard said there was no outreach to all property owners in the CI -1 Zone, but said
part of the problem is that unless a property owner wants to do something different with their
property, they have no reason to request a rezoning, so the City tends to get rezoning
applications on a piecemeal basis.
Dyer asked if the area between Riverside Drive and the 218 interchange almost all developed
already. Howard said many of the properties are developed but some are underdeveloped and
there are some vacant properties, so that's an area that could see significant redevelopment
over time.
Martin recalled a property on Mormon Trek that they rezoned last year so that medical offices
could be allowed. She said the market spoke, and that's where they wanted to be.
Swygard said as someone who has Highway 1 in her backyard, she has seen a lot of positives
being developed along the highway. She asked what the negatives would be, if any, to doing
this. Freerks said they felt safe with the list they made. Swygard said one area of concern for
her is bars. Freerks she thought they could still adopt it. She said it's just going to be one or the
other depending on what City Council decides.
Freerks opened public hearing.
Casey Cook of 1 Oak Park Court said he is coming before the Commission today as a
landowner on Highway 1 with CI -1 land. He said his primary reason for being here is to express
his thanks to Karen Howard, Jeff Davidson, Anne Freerks, and the City Manager. He said they
had a very good committee with lots of good discussion. He said this adds value to his land and
to the land of many other people along Highway 1, gives them more flexibility to attract
businesses to Iowa City and to build the tax base. He said as a former Commission member, he
realizes that the Commission does important work, and he thanked them for it.
Freerks closed public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 11 of 13
Thomas moved to recommend amending the Zoning Code to implement the
recommendations under Bullet #2 in the staff memorandum expanding the allowed uses
in the CIA zone and allowing these newly proposed areas under the same conditions as
apply in the CC -2 zone:
Uses allowed in the CIA zone should be expanded to allow the following CC -2
uses with the same standards and provisions called out in the CC -2 zone:
• Restaurants and bars
• Medical and dental offices
• Personal services (banks, salons, dry cleaners, laundries and similar)
• Hotels and motels
• Religious and private group assembly
• All sales- oriented retail
Eastham seconded.
Theobald asked where payday lenders fall under this category. Howard said the Council
recently adopted very restrictive rules about where payday lenders could locate, but she did not
recall exactly how they were categorized in the zoning code.
Eastham said it was commendable of the City Manager to start this process. He said he would
like to eventually increase the number of CC -2 parcels along Highway 1, which he thinks would
increase the appeal of the entryway into the city.
Thomas said in general he's in favor of mixing uses, although there is some potential tension
that comes with that. He does think it's a good approach though.
Swygard said she thinks it's a good idea to allow for a variety of uses, and she'd like to see
some of the empty properties progress into something nice.
Freerks said she thinks the committee vetted everything carefully and it will be an excellent
outcome.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7- 0.
Discussion of amendments to Title 14: Zoning Code to delete the specific street width
requirement for Daycare Uses, General Educational Facilities, and Religious /Private
Group Assembly Uses.
Howard noted that the current street width standard is a standard that has been in the code for
a long time, and it appears in staff's view to being an obsolete standard. There are very few
residential streets that are wider than 28 feet, so it could be a problem for people trying to reuse
or re- purpose institutional properties, such as churches. She said that traffic is typically a major
issue for neighborhoods so it is carefully considered by the Board of Adjustment if there's any
concern and they have the power to impose conditions when necessary. She said staff feels
that there's no real danger in removing the street width standard because traffic concerns are
thoroughly covered with the other approval criteria that the Board considers for every special
exception. She said it could be constraining the reuse of properties, particularly vacant church
sites.
Freerks opened public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 12 of 13
Freerks closed public hearing.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of amendments to Title 14: Zoning Code as
outlined in the staff memorandum of July 11, 2013, to delete specific street requirements
for Daycare Uses, General Educational Facilities, and Religious /Private Group Assembly
Uses.
Theobald seconded.
Freerks said they always strive to make the Code better, and she thinks there are already
criteria in place to address traffic issues, safety concerns and pedestrian issues with the Board
of Adjustment.
Eastham said eliminating requirements from the Code that aren't fulfilling a useful need is
always a good thing for the Commission to do, and he appreciates the staffs openness to
considering this change.
Martin said this is great considering that there are now three large churches for sale that have
sat vacant for some time.
Thomas said this issue of street and lane width is something he's been concerned about for a
while. He said he wishes they could narrow some streets because you combine wide streets
with the alternate parking requirements in some neighbors you end up with very wide traffic
lanes which promotes speeding. He said he thinks it's great to make this change.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7- 0.
Consideration of Meeting Minutes: June 20, 2013
Eastham moved to approve the minutes of June 20, 2013.
Swygard seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0.
OTHER
The Commission discussed how to conduct their joint meeting with City Council at 5:00 p.m. on
July 23 to discuss amendments to Title 14: Zoning Code to modify the regulations regarding the
spacing of drinking establishments so that the 500 -foot spacing rule would only apply to the
University Impact Area and the Riverfront Crossings District.
ADJOURNMENT:
Thomas moved to adjourn.
Martin seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 7- 0 vote.
z
O
V5
N
0
V
Z_
Z
N
06
Z_
Z
z
a
a
OC
v
W
w
W
z
O
Z
W
F~-
a
M
O
N
N
r
O
N
CD
z
W
W
O
LL.
Go
xxxxxxx;
h
xx-0xxxx
NOxxxxxx
xxxxxxx
�XXxxxxo=
N
X
X
x
X
�o
;xxxxxxx;
X
x
;oxxxxxx
XXxxxxx
T-xxxxx;xx
cn
axxxxxxx
�xxxxx;xx
coXxxxxo
MXXXXX
;
xX
�oxoxxx0
M
O
x
x
x
x
;
x
x
c4xxxxx;ox
V-Xxxxxxo
NxxxxX;xx
MXXXX�x0
;Xxxxx;xx
cooxxXxoo
�xxxxx;xx
�xxxxxxx
�xxxo-
MXxxxxxx
x
1
x
N
�
Xxxxx
�W
(O(OMl�lnlnM
"
XX
T"
w m
U')
LO
LO
LO
LO
Ln
F.XOOOOOOO
W
LLI
F- X00000000
}
Q
W
W
Z
Ova
=app
a
W_
J
W
m:)
J
J
z
OV
w�F=
Q=a
Q
p
p
-
w
-W
U)
Ill
0~C��~
=W
Qi
0
IP17
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY
AUGUST 1, — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Anne Freerks, Phoebe Martin,
Jodie Theobald, John Thomas
MEMBERS ABSENT: Paula Swygard
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Kent Ralston, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Jesse Allen, Duane Musser, Anthony Fry, Lisa Ziniel, Jerry
Denning, Brandon Ross, Glenn Siders, Clifton Young, Lori
Dockery, Tim Furman, John Cruise, Kevin Den Adel, E. Tony
Kellems
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
1. The Commission voted 4 -2 ( Freerks and Dyer opposed) to recommend approval of
REZ11- 00010 /SUB13- 00005, a rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) to
Planned Development Overlay -Low Density Single Family (OPD -5) zone and a
preliminary plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan of The Palisades, a 32 -lot,
13.07 acre residential subdivision located at 1729 North Dubuque Road and to
remove the list of trees and have the list of trees approved by the City Forester.
2. The Commission voted 6 -0 to recommend approval of SUB12- 00014, a preliminary
plat of approximately 4.29 acres of Walden Wood Part 10, a 20 -lot, residential
subdivision located at Walden Road.
3. The Commission voted 6 -0 to recommend approval of SUB13 -00011 a preliminary
plat of Eastbrook Flats for a 1 -lot, 4.83 acre residential subdivision located at the
northeast corner of the intersection of Muscatine Avenue and Scott Boulevard.
4. The Commission voted 6 -0 to recommend approval of SUB13- 00013, a preliminary
plat of Brookwood Pointe third to Fifth Addition, a 61 -lot, 17.15 acre residential
subdivision located north of Vesti Lane and west of Sycamore Street.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
Rezoning Items / Development Items:
REZ11- 00010 /SUB13 -00005 Discussion of an application submitted by Allen Homes for a
rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone to Planned Development Overlay —
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 2 of 16
Low Density Single Family (OPD -5) zone for 13.07 -acres of land located at 1729 North
Dubuque Road and a preliminary plat of The Palisades, a 32 -lot residential subdivision.
Miklo explained where the property is located and showed an aerial view of the subject property.
He showed the plat, which calls for dividing the property into single family residential lots as well
as an outlot to be dedicated to the City as a neighborhood park. He said that rezoning is
required because there are some sensitive areas on this property — critical slopes and a
woodland. He said a similar plan came before the Commission two years ago involving property
to the west, with the idea that some of the storm water management from the development
would be included on the adjacent property as it worked its way to an existing storm water basin
to the north. He said negotiations with the owners didn't work out. He said this plan puts the
water in the outlot, which necessitates removal of the woodland. He said the applicant proposes
to plant replacement trees on some of the disturbed area, the outlot and on individual lots.
Miklo said it's been the City's goal and in the Comprehensive Plan to connect Oakes Drive back
to Dubuque Road to make traffic better for the neighborhood and provide access for emergency
vehicles. He said the applicant has reached an agreement with the neighboring property owner
to allow this portion of Oakes Drive to be dedicated to the City to allow its connection, making it
comply with the Comprehensive Plan.
Miklo said the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department have agreed on a certain
portion of the development being dedicated for a neighborhood park. He said staff has received
revised plats that address all the deficiencies that were noted by staff. Miklo showed the
Commission photos of the neighborhood and the subject property. He said at this point staff is
recommending approval of the Sensitive Areas Overlay Rezoning as well as the preliminary
plat.
Dyer asked what kinds of trees will be cut. Miklo said there is a variety, including walnut trees.
Freerks said if the number was one - hundred percent for the removal for sensitive areas she was
shocked by that number and that they usually don't go to that extent and would like to see
something better happen. She said there are many lovely trees. Miklo said the area defined as
woodland is where the storm water management will need to go if it's going to occur on this
property. He said there had been an attempt two years ago with the adjacent property owner to
put the storm water on that property, which could have resulted in the preservation of some of
those trees. Freerks said it seems that the Sensitive Areas Ordinance was put in for a reason,
and this aggressively eliminates all sensitive areas.
Theobald asked if the adjacent property was wooded and would also require removal of some
trees. Miklo said that was correct.
Eastham asked if there are other parts of the defined woodland that are not parts of the storm
water detention facility and is the applicant proposing removing all the trees there. Miklo said
there are groves of trees outside the woodland area and the applicant is planning on preserving
some of those, but they don't get counted toward the woodlands.
Freerks said she sees no protection anywhere on the plans and to her that's a red flag because
it means anything can happen.
Theobald asked how the best way to handle storm water is determined. Miklo said it generally
has to be on the low point of the property with the vegetation cleared.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 3 of 16
Freerks opened public discussion.
Jesse Allen of Allen Home, the applicant, said they put a lot of time into dealing with the
sensitive issues of this plan and had a couple of good neighbor meetings. He said there's a
strong need in Iowa City for single family housing. He said by connecting an old neighborhood
with Oakes Street is where they are impacting many of the trees as well as with the storm water
plan. He said they will try to save as many trees as possible.
Allen reiterated for Eastham that the two reasons so many trees have to be taken down are due
to the connection of Oakes Drive to North Dubuque Road and installation of storm water basins
on the subject parcel. He said the way the City calculates the woodland impact, even though the
applicant is saving trees, is that they are impacting them one - hundred percent based on the
boundaries. Eastham asked if the applicant will plant 300 trees after the subdivision is
completed. Allen said that is correct, and they would be younger and healthier than what is
currently there.
Theobald asked where Allen got the list of trees that will be planted. Allen said MMS
Consultants put it together for him. She said there are a lot of trees on the list that will be
potential problems in the future so she would recommend that someone like Mark Vitosh, who is
familiar with emerging tree disease be consulted.
Greenwood Hektoen told Theobald to refrain from making recommendations on landscape
architects for the developer to use.
Miklo said the key point is that the Commission has an interest in what the replacement trees
are. Theobald said this list is not necessarily healthy. Allen said they would take a look and
make some changes. It was made clear that Mark Vitosh works for the State and would not be a
paid consultant.
Freerks said for her this is a special place, and she's not sure this plan is the best way to lay out
a development to take advantage of the site and to give people the feeling of being in the
country. She said removing all these trees is something that just annihilates the whole
landscape.
Duane Musser of MMS Consultants said one of the main things driving this project is the
requirement by the City to connect Oakes Drive. He said when they were planning the
development, they had a cul -de -sac, and the City said they were not going to approve any
subdivision without a connection. He said one of the ravines on the subject property will have to
be deforested and filled in to make Oakes Street connect, and the other ravine will have to be
used for the storm water management. He said on these infill developments you have to meet
certain requirements, and he doesn't know how to do that another way.
Thomas asked what the maintenance is on the replacement trees. Musser said it would be up to
the homeowner to maintain their trees. Thomas asked about those in Outlot A. Musser said they
would be the responsibility of the homeowners association.
Eastham asked if the City will have responsibility for some of the replacement trees. Musser
said they would in Outlot B.
Martin asked Musser why they have to fill in the ravine to connect Oakes Drive and why there
couldn't be a bridge. Musser said a bridge is not cost - effective.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 4 of 16
Eastham asked if the Commission could approve a plan that does not extend Oakes Drive and
has two smaller storm water retention areas with less impact on the existing trees. Miklo said
staff wouldn't recommend doing that because it wouldn't comply with the Comprehensive Plan
or the Police and Fire Departments' desire to get better emergency access to this area. Miklo
showed an aerial photograph of the larger neighborhood. He said that it's true that two acres of
woodland would be destroyed, but there is still an extensive woodland that remains in the
neighborhood. Freerks said but someday that too will be developed. Miklo said there is actually
little chance of that due to its protected slopes and no street access.
Dyer asked if the drainage would have to take the course that's outlined if there were fewer
house lots in the plan. Miklo said regardless of how many lots there are, the storm basins will
still have to located in the low points. Miklo said in term of doing two smaller basins and not
connecting Oakes Drive, it would still require an extensive amount of the woodland to be
removed.
Anthony Fry of 19 Caroline Court said he and his wife bought the adjacent property, labeled
IDRS on the location map, from Mr. Giblin in the interest of having no houses behind them. He
said Miklo has convinced him that they need to connect Oakes Drive for safety issues. He has
offered two inch saplings from his own property for use as replacements on the development.
Lisa Ziniel of 1620 North Dubuque Road said she thinks her driveway will intersect with the
proposed connection. She said she's concerned that the atmosphere of the neighborhood will
be lost because of doing what's most cost effective. She said she's also concerned about the
traffic flow created by thirty -two new lots. She said it's a tranquil neighborhood to live in and the
disruption from the proposed subdivision concerns her. She asks the Commission to consider
the area around the subdivision and perhaps take that into account when approving the
subdivision as it would conform to the neighborhood instead of heavier development with closer
access to downtown.
Miklo said one of the things staff looked at was neighborhood compatibility. He said along
Dubuque Road there now exist larger lots, and he pointed out on the plat how the proposed
development has spaced along Dubuque Road to be compatible with that aspect, but has more
typical sized lots more like those along Oakes Drive as you get farther back in the development.
Eastham asked how far the sidewalk will extend on the west side of Dubuque Road. Miklo said
in the future it may be possible to put a sidewalk in on that side of the road but there are no
plans for it immediately. Eastham asked if there is a sidewalk on the east side. Miklo said one
was put in recently.
Jerry Denning of 1146 Oakes Drive asked for clarification of where the trees would be removed.
Miklo showed him where that would be on a photo. Denning said the cost of putting Oakes Drive
through is the destruction of dense, mature trees. He said he appreciates the obvious interest of
all of the Commission in the tree issue. He said he would like them to take a look at just how
much destruction is inescapable if they are going to do this. He said it would be a great world if
they didn't have to tear it up to that extent. He said he would greatly appreciate them seeing
whatever else might be done in order to avoid this destruction.
Thomas asked if there was any discussion of narrowing Oakes Drive as it passes through the
area of the ravine. Miklo said it's designed as a twenty -eight foot street, and you could narrow it
to the narrowest width allowed, which is twenty -two feet. He said that would not have much
effect on what they could avoid in terms of grading because it's so steep.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 5 of 16
Brandon Ross of 1022 Rochester Avenue said he's familiar with the area and he would like
anything to be done that can be done to protect that area. He said it's a beautiful area and
deliberation on the Commission's behalf is appreciated by everyone.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Thomas moved to recommend approval of REZ11- 00010 /SUB13- 00005, a rezoning from
Low Density Single Family (RS -5) to Planned Development Overlay -Low Density Single
Family (OPD -5) zone and a preliminary plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan of The
Palisades, a 32 -lot, 13.07 acre residential subdivision located at 1729 North Dubuque
Road.
Martin seconded.
Eastham said he's interested in the possibility of narrowing Oakes Drive so that it would have
some effect on the number of trees. He said he's not inclined not to vote for this tonight because
of this issue, but he said in the past the Commission has asked developers to look into doing
things that they weren't sure could be done. He said he's also interested how the design of the
front four lots of this proposed development could affect the appearance of the rest of the
subdivision from North Dubuque Road. He said with those things said, he is reluctantly of the
mind that the removal of trees in this heavily wooded area is in large part the result of City
imposed subdivision standards, which make a lot of sense, especially the requirement that this
site have a functioning storm water system on site.
Thomas said anything they can do even as a gesture to reduce the impact of the connection
and trying to reduce the impact on the existing conditions is something he supports. He said he
agrees with Eastham that it's worth exploring. He said the storm water management and the
connection are triggering the impact, and there doesn't seem to be any way out of that. He said
he supports the project in terms of its basic goals, but he would like to see if they can in any way
reduce the impact. He said he also likes the idea transplanting trees from the adjacent property
to the west.
Martin said she understands the need for the connection but she hesitates to entertain the idea
of narrowing a section of Oakes Street due to safety issues. Thomas responded that this would
still allow for the minimum of twenty -two feet. Martin said the plan seems well thought -out.
Freerks said she said the area really is pretty, but she's not sure how pretty it's going to be once
you put this kind of grid down on it. She understands why everything is being done but she's not
sure that this cookie -cutter is the best use of the resources here. She said if the Oakes Drive
extension was shifted down, it would eliminate lots but also keep a lot of that forested area to
the north. She said there are some beautiful trees along there and that's going to go away. She
said she just doesn't see how this does anything to embrace or even gently nudge the Sensitive
Areas Ordinance in any way and she can't support it.
Theobald said she feels better about the project after hearing from the neighbor and the
possibility of moving some of the trees from that property. She was concerned about replanting
with disease prone trees until she heard that Mark Vitosh had been out to the neighbor's
property looking at the trees.
Theobald moved to amend the motion to remove the list of trees and have the list of trees
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 6 of 16
approved by the City Forester.
Eastham seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion to amend carried 6 -0.
Dyer said she is reminded of an article by Supreme Court Justice William Douglas called "Do
Trees Have Standing ?" which refers to the ability to sue. She said this plan is a grid on a hilly,
beautiful area, and it doesn't seem to take into account the landscape at all. She said she would
be inclined to ask if they need any houses in this area. She said on the east end of Oakes Drive
there are many trees around existing buildings and if Oakes Drive was moved south perhaps
those trees could be saved. She said being able to say they are going to remove one - hundred
percent of the trees doesn't seem to be a solution to preservation of one of the few remaining
natural areas of town.
Freerks said she just can't support the project because she feels that something better could be
done that would be an asset to the community.
Eastham said that one approach that Planning Commissions take elsewhere is to walk through
an area before they look at a formal plan for an area and talks with the developer and people
nearby and try to come up with some concept of how a parcel could be developed to include
both its natural features and meet the requirements of existing codes.
Miklo said the earlier subdivision was laid out thirty or forty years ago, and that has set the
direction for Oakes Drive. He said the City has tried to balance the needed community good of
extending Oakes Drive with a natural area. He said the concept of how to best deal with this
was addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. He said the City looked very closely at this in the
year the North District Plan was approved, and this is the best they could come up with given
what they are working with.
Eastham said he's encouraged that the Sensitive Areas Ordinance requires tree replacement.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4 -2 with Freerks and Dyer opposed.
REZ13- 00019/SUB13- 00012: Discussion of an application submitted by Willowwind
Properties, LLC for a rezoning from Low Density Multi - Family (RM -12) zone to Planned
Development Overlay /Low Density Multi - Family (OPD -RM12) zone for 1.31 -acres of land
located at Willow Wind Place and Westwinds Drive and a preliminary plat of The
Westwinds Second Addition, a 2 -lot residential subdivision.
Miklo said the reason for the planned development is to bring an existing duplex lot into
conformance with the Zoning Code. He explained that when Lot 3 was developed this site was a
club house, a tennis court and a storm water basin. He said it was subdivided off Lot 3 without
City review or approval and two lots were created, one for the duplex and the other for the
tennis court and storm water management facilities. He said this doesn't conform with the Code,
thus the application for a planned development.
Miklo said the plan is to create two lots, one with the duplex and the other with the storm water
basin and a very specific plan for a seven unit apartment building. He said a home owners
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 7 of 16
association would be formed that would obligate the future maintenance of the basin. He said
there are still deficiencies in a new plan that the City Engineers have not been able to look at
yet, so staff is recommending deferral until the next meeting and approval of the rezoning and
the plat if all the issues mentioned are worked through. He showed photos of the existing site
and surrounding area.
Freerks asked if the storm water facility functions right now for any of area. Miklo said it's a
depression and it does hold water. He said the new design will have to have the capacity to
serve both the old and the new development.
Eastham asked if this developer will have to provide storm water management for other property
owners nearby. Miklo said it was originally designed thirty years ago to serve the existing area
and it will have to serve the new development as well.
Eastham asked if it was financially feasible for the required homeowners association to be
responsible for the storm water system. Miklo said it should be.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Duane Musser of MMS Consultants and representative for the applicant said they will be looking
at the storm water standards from the 1970s, what's there today, and what set of regulations
they will be required to design under today. He said they haven't done that yet pending
outcomes from the Commission meeting and the Council.
Theobald said one of the trees the applicant has selected for planting is extremely disease
prone.
Glenn Siders of Southgate Development Services said they own properties in this area. He said
he's not opposed to this project, but he wants the applicant to be aware of the poor condition of
the sidewalk along Melrose Avenue. Miklo said the new plans do show a sidewalk connection to
Melrose Avenue, and once this is developed with dwelling units, there will be a responsible
party for maintenance.
Freerks asked if there is any way if this doesn't go through that the City can't address all of the
issues on the property. Miklo said it's been difficult in the past to get the owner's co- operation.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Eastham moved to defer this item to the August 15th meeting.
Martin seconded.
Thomas said one of the deficiencies that concerned him was the separation on the north side of
the duplex where an S -2 standard required for the screening between the duplex and the
proposed parking lot to the north. He said he doesn't think the S -2 is appropriate here and
would like to ask for an S -5 standard. Miklo said he thought S -3, a dense evergreen hedge,
might work better.
Theobald said she's glad this project will create the opportunity to correct the condition of the
poorly maintained sidewalk on Melrose Avenue.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 8 of 16
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0.
Rezoning Item:
REZ13- 00020: Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development
Company, Inc., for a rezoning from Community Commercial (CC -2) zone to Low Density
Multifamily (RM -12) zone for 2.19 -acres of land located east of Dodge Street, north of
Conklin Lane and west of Dodge Street Court.
Miklo showed photographs of the property and the neighborhood. He said this property was
rezoned a number of years ago to Community Commercial (CC -2) with a Conditional Zoning
Agreement to assure that the commercial or mixed use on the property would be compatible to
the neighborhood as well as being as attractive gateway to the city.
Miklo said the applicant has marketed the property unsuccessfully with a plan for commercial or
office with apartments above and a financial institution and now wants to rezone the area. Miklo
said the Comprehensive Plan talks specifically about this intersection and the need to design
something compatible to the neighborhood as well as stating if it's not possible to develop mixed
use in this area, the residential should be compatible with the existing development on Dodge
Street Court. He said the applicant doesn't have a plan yet, but staff feels that Low Density
Multifamily (RM -12) zoning could be appropriate with conditions addressing the concern about
neighborhood compatibility.
Miklo said the other concern is that Dodge Street Court is not up to City standards and that
additional traffic shouldn't be added to it unless it's upgraded. He said staff is recommending as
a condition of development that if there is any access to Dodge Street Court that it be improved
to City standards to the point of wherever there's a driveway.
Miklo said the other concern is the odd shape of the property, so laying out a development will
take thought. He said staff is recommending conditions to get at the design and that the plan
comes back to the Commission for approval.
Miklo said there are also concerns about draining away from Dodge Street Court, where
drainage isn't adequate. He said staff is recommending approval with a number of conditions
that are listed in the staff report.
Eastham asked if staff thinks Conklin Lane is adequate to handle residential development here
and what exists on Dodge Street Court. Miklo said the City's Transportation Planners were not
as concerned about Conklin Lane as they were about Dodge Street Court. He said probably the
best place for access is off Dodge Street. Eastham asked if Dodge Street in that area is two
lanes. Miklo responded that he thinks there is a center turning lane.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Glenn Siders of Southgate Development Services said as the applicant he would like to reserve
his comments for later.
Clifton Young of 1124 Dodge Street Court said he was informed that they are planning to build
up to thirty -two family units, and he thinks that's pretty high density for this area. He's very
concerned about the parking. He said what they don't want is very high density.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 9 of 16
Eastham asked what the number of units will be if this is zoned RM -12. Miklo said based on
land area, up to thirty -two units could be developed depending on design review.
Thomas asked if Miklo had the numbers for RS -12. Miklo said he thinks it would allow close to
the same number.
Lori Dockery of 1110 Conklin Lane said this has always been a quiet place. She said she's
concerned about a large number of people coming into the neighborhood and disrupting their
quiet style of life.. She said that Dodge Street has become very busy lately. She said duplexes
or townhomes would fit in with the neighborhood or smaller single family homes.
Tim Furman of 1763 Dodge Street Court said he disagrees on the rezoning application and
would like to see some validation of the applicant's claim that they can't market the property. He
said they are asking $950,000 for the property and the assessed value is around $350,000. He
said this request is not compatible with the Comprehensive Plan as it reads "if it is not possible
to achieve a mixed use development adjacent to Dodge Street Court the preferred use is
residential similar to the existing residential development in the area." He said he interprets that
to mean single family as there is no multi - family in the area.
Miklo referred to a previous question from the Commission and said if this was zoned RS -12
with a planned development you could get up to twenty -eight units theoretically.
John Cruise of 905 Bluffwood Drive said his son lives at 1265 Dodge Street Court and that he is
opposed to multi - family in the area for the same reasons Furman is opposed. He said he hopes
the Commission will look at this in light of the Comprehensive Plan. He said multi - family is not
similar to anything in this area.
Glenn Siders said they have aggressively marketed this property. He said the odd shape of the
lot makes elements of commercial development difficult, so it's most appropriate to look at this
development as all residential. He said they have no problems with adhering to any of the staff
recommendations and he doubts that they will use Dodge Street Court or Conklin Lane as
access. He said any access will come off Dodge Street.
Freerks asked what Siders feels about RS -12. Siders said they thought about RS -12, but they
like RM -12 because it offers more opportunities than RS -12.
Martin asked why they want this rezoned before the Commission sees plans. Siders said they
need some assurance that the City is happy with that zoning.
Dyer asked why he says in his written statement that the setting isn't conducive or practical for
single family living yet there's single family living on that street now. Siders said on Dodge
Street Court there is, but with the shape of the subject lot the City wouldn't allow them to access
single family homes off Dodge Street. He said providing access via Dodge Street Court would
decrease substantially the number of single family lots.
Freerks asked about a cluster of townhouses. Siders said that's a decision the Commission can
make after they go through the design review committee, and townhouses are multi - family.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 10 of 16
Thomas moved to recommend approval of REZ13- 00020, a request to rezone
approximately 2.13 acres of land located east of Conklin Lane, southeast of Dodge Street
and west of Dodge Street Court from Community Commercial (CC -2) to Low Density
Multifamily (OPD -RM12) subject to the following conditions in the staff recommendation:
• A development plan, including a landscaping plan, building designs, and site plan
be approved by the Design Review Committee and be forwarded to the Planning
and Zoning Commission for review and approval to ensure compatibility with
adjacent residential properties;
• If development on this property has vehicular access to Dodge Street Court, the
developer shall install improvements needed to bring the street up to City
standards to the point of access (driveway location); and
• The applicant shall dedicate sufficient land along the entire property frontage to
widen the Dodge Street Court right -of -way to 50 feet.
• The applicant installs sidewalks along the Conklin Lane and Dodge Street Court
frontages, and provides pedestrian connections from the development to the
sidewalk on Dodge Street;
• Development on the subject properties shall be designed to drain on -site storm
water away from Dodge Street Court.
Martin seconded.
Eastham said he's interested in the appearance of this development from Dodge Street as the
Commission has tried to keep in mind when considering developmental designs that Dodge
Street is a gateway to the city
Eastham moved to amend the first condition to add "and appearance from Dodge Street"
after "adjacent residential properties; ".
Dyer seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion to amend carried 6 -0.
Freerks asked Miklo if he thought a multi - family building is compatible and similar to, as the
Comprehensive Plan states, the existing housing in the area. Miklo said it depends on where it's
located on the property. He said his opinion is that it would be possible to put a smaller multi-
family building on Dodge Street but to be similar to what's across the street, duplexes or
townhouses would be appropriate.
Freerks said she can understand why people have concerns about this project, as she doesn't
think the subject property is appropriate for a thirty -two unit building or in tune with the
Comprehensive Plan. Miklo said he agrees that would not be in the spirit of the Comprehensive
Plan. He said a smaller apartment or some townhouses and duplexes could be compatible.
Freerks said that's why she thinks of RS -12 being better. She said if they approve RM -12 but
they don't know what will really occur because that can be a lot of different things. Miklo said the
Commission will see this again and will have an opportunity to judge it on its compatibility.
Eastham said he thinks the Comprehensive Plan does limit the type of buildings that are
appropriate for this parcel.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 11 of 16
Thomas said he reads the language of the Comprehensive Plan being pretty clear that if it's to
be similar to the existing residential surrounding the property that would suggest single family
residential. He said the densities would be similar to RM -12 and RS -12 would be a more
appropriate starting point.
Freerks said she it's pushing it to have that parcel full of townhouses. She said she doesn't think
there are going to be single family homes on this lot. She said she thinks something a little more
dense is appropriate, but she's not sure that multi - family is what they are looking for.
Greenwood Hektoen advised the Commission to either withdraw the motion to approve and
make a motion to defer, or they can take it on faith that this conversation will guide the next
stage and approve it knowing that they have this conversation on the record.
Thomas moved to withdraw the motion on the floor.
Eastham concurred with the withdrawal.
Eastham moved to defer this item until the August 15th meeting.
Theobald seconded.
Freerks said they want to make sure that whatever comes forward and the Commission finalizes
is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and multi - family structures might not be the best
choice, but perhaps there is a way to work it in with Dodge Street Court.
Thomas said he would encourage a good neighbor meeting.
Eastham said because there may not be access to Dodge Street Court from this development
perhaps it will necessitate some creativity to join the existing neighborhood with the new one.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer carried 6 -0.
Development Items:
SUB12- 00014: Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development
Company for a preliminary plat of Walden Wood Part 10, a 20 -lot, 4.29 -acre residential
subdivision located on Walden Road.
Ralston said this is the last remaining parcel of undeveloped land in the Walden Wood
subdivision. He said staff finds that the preliminary plat conforms to the RS -12 zoning that the
applicant currently has and meets the conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement, (CZA) by
having a configuration that clusters the units along Mormon Trek Boulevard and Walden Road;
providing no access onto Mormon Trek Boulevard; and has a provision of six visitor parking
spaces along the north side of the private drive. He said the Southwest District Plan indicates
that this area is appropriate for single family and duplex residential and specifically states that it
will "require careful design due to its topography conditions and the unusual shape and size of
the lot."
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 12 of 16
Ralston said the subject area has some steep slopes and the grading plan shows that no more
than thirty -five percent of the critical slopes will be disturbed. He said the City Engineer has
designed a storm water management system with an on -site water detention basin that
connects by pipe to an open swale that runs toward Rohret Road and then is caught by the
City's storm water system. He said the City Engineer believes the design meets the
requirements of the CZA, one of which is that the system not exacerbate storm water issues on
adjacent properties.
Ralston said the developer has offered to dedicate a portion of the lot to meet the open space
requirements, but staff has agreed that because of so much unusable space with all the slopes,
they recommend collecting fees instead.
Ralston said there are no remaining deficiencies and staff is recommending approval of this
plat.
Eastham asked what recourse nearby property owners have if they believe that the design is
not meeting its goal and if in five years what they see running through their yards indicates that
the design and construction did not accomplish that goal. Greenwood Hektoen said they would
make a complaint which would be investigated, and if it was founded, a municipal infraction or
something of that nature could be issued, which is what happens in any other neighborhood of
the city. Eastham asked if the City then has mechanisms to require that the storm water system
be improved or altered. Greenwood Hektoen said it wouldn't be so much to change the design
but the City would investigate to see if it's functioning in the way it's designed. Eastham asked
what would happen if the City concluded that it wasn't functioning properly. Greenwood Hektoen
said then action could be taken to require compliance with the design.
Theobald asked how efficient and environmentally friendly a storm water system is that uses an
open swale. Ralston said that the City Engineer would prefer to put it in a pipeline, but because
of the slope and the grading they can't put a pipe in the area where the open swale will be.
Theobald said there are several basins on the west side that end up just sitting there with no
trees and grass, just collecting water and trash. Ralston said this would not be a very deep
basin and it would be dry most of the time. Theobald said she doesn't think this empty expanse
of lawn will be very attractive. She said her question is whether it's been explored updating
what's being done on top of those basins, like plantings.
Greenwood Hektoen said in response to Eastham's earlier question, it will have a subdividers'
agreement that will impose that requirement and the City won't release the obligations of that
agreement until it's assured that the basin has been established according to requirement and
functioning properly.
Thomas said with respect to the condition that the storm water system would not exacerbate
drainage issues, he feels that at least establishes a base line by which to evaluate any future
storm event. Ralston says he doesn't know if the City has any good, solid baselines. He agrees
with Greenwood Hektoen that there are mechanisms in place to quantify to get a baseline.
Thomas says he thinks they need a good understanding of existing conditions in order to
evaluate its performance.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 13 of 16
Glenn Siders of Southgate Development Services said they have been working on this a long
time, designing and redesigning. He said the developer and the City are satisfied, and they are
ready to move forward with the final plat.
Kevin Den Adel of 54 Coll Court asked what kind of maintenance this type of swale would need
and for assurance about the obligation for maintenance. He wants to know how the swale will
integrate with some drainage trenches in his back yard, during and after construction.
Siders said this has been thoroughly studied and vetted by his engineers and surveyors and
they are comfortable with the design. He said the homeowners' association will be responsible
for maintenance, and those will be in the legal papers and reviewed. He said they will have
conversation with the engineers about how best to plant the swale.
Freerks said there has been a great deal of discussion about this, and it's in Sider's best interest
to make this work. Siders agreed.
E. Tony Kellems of 2432 Walden Court asked how wide the swale will be. Ralston said it will be
between five and six feet wide.
Siders said the depth of ditches will vary due to undulations of the ground but will be a minimum
of five feet at the bottom and he doesn't know how wide at the top.
Kellems asked how far to the west the swale will be. Ralston said he approximates twenty -five
feet, but would have to defer to an engineer to be more specific about grading and changes in
level.
Kellems asked if there will be any trees put on the south side of the swale. He said they would
need protection all along the south side of the subject property. He asked other technical
questions that would need to be answered by an engineer. He said his concern is that they have
had water coming into the homes where he lives, and they want to make sure that the problems
have been corrected. He pointed out which houses have had water in them. Ralston said the
City Engineer is satisfied with the plan, but it's actually the developer's engineers who put that
plan together. Kellems asked for a dirt berm. Ralston that's something they would definitely
work with the engineers on.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of SUB12- 00014, a preliminary plat of
approximately 4.29 acres of Walden Wood Part 10, a 20 -lot, residential subdivision
located at Walden Road.
Martin seconded.
Freerks said they have had much discussion about this property because of a number of issues
in this area. She said it's a property that's been difficult to find solutions for development but she
thinks they have something here that will be a nice addition to the area and perhaps even fix
some of the issues that occurred when the other areas were developed.
Eastham said this is a good example of how they can try to do planning and development, and it
does attempt to accommodate the externalities of development in a way that's reasonable for
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 14 of 16
the property owner and the nearby property owners. He said these designs are intended to
protect the properties to the north and south and they will hopefully do that.
Thomas said he agrees, but he does have some concerns about the properties in Walden
Court, as south of the detention basin there will be water running down the slope toward Walden
Court. He said he will have to rely on City staff to make sure those issues are addressed before
this project is constructed.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0.
Freerks called for a short break.
Freerks called the meeting back to order.
SUB13- 00011: Discussion of an application submitted by Summit Ridge, LLC for a
preliminary plat of Eastbrook Flats, a 1 -lot, 4.83 -acre residential subdivision located at
the northeast corner of the intersection of Scott Boulevard and American Legion Road.
Miklo said there is the need for a twenty -five foot construction easement along Scott Boulevard
and American Legion Road and the applicant has agreed to put that on the plat. He said staff is
recommending approval of this application.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Jesse Allen, the applicant, presented himself for questioning.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of SUB13 -00011 a preliminary plat for a 1 -lot,
4.83 acre residential subdivision located at the northeast corner of the intersection of
Muscatine Avenue and Scott Boulevard.
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0.
SUB13- 00013: Discussion of an application submitted by Steve Kohli Construction, LC
for a preliminary plat of Brookwood Pointe Third to Fifth Addition, a 61 -lot, 17.15 -acre
residential subdivision located on Russell Drive and Terrapin Drive.
Miklo said staff recommends approval.
Eastham asked if there is a sidewalk access to Weatherby Park on the western part of this
subdivision. Miklo said there is not because there is an intervening property. He said there will
be access just to the west.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 15 of 16
Freerks closed public discussion.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of SUB13- 00013, a preliminary plat of
Brookwood Pointe third to Fifth Addition, a 61 -lot, 17.15 acre residential subdivision with
one outlot located north of Vest! Lane and west of Sycamore Street.
Theobald seconded.
Consideration of Meeting Minutes: July 18, 2013
Eastham moved to defer approval of the minutes of July 18, 2013 to the next meeting.
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0.
OTHER
ADJOURNMENT:
Eastham moved to adjourn.
Martin seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 6 -0 vote.
z
O
g
v
Z
z
N
z
Z
z
J
a
0
v
W
lz
W
V
z
D
z
W
-i
r!
M
r
0
N
N
r
0
N
0
z
H
W
W
O
LL
ooXxXXOxX;
XXXXXXXII
oxXoXXXX
C4oxxxxxx!
MxXxxxxx
N
x
X
x
x
a-)xxxxxxo;
x
x
;oxxxxxx
°xxxxxxx
6
LO
i4xXXx0xx
&D
x
x
x
;
co
xxxxx;xx
&XXXXX6xx
ooxxxXxo
MXXXXx
11
x
�OxoxXXo
M
O x
x
x
x
;
x
x
c4xxxxx
XXxxX,x
oX
z q
X
X
x
x
x
;
X
x
;xxxxx
;
xx
�0XXXX00
�xxxxx;xx
C,4xxxoxIxx
lxxxxxxx
�w(fl(OMI��AOO�M
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
WarnLOLf)LO
FmX00000000
co
�wcD0mr--
r
r-
r-
r-
Lo
U)
LO
W
z
�-X0000000
W
W
Q
Mz
D
w
Paz
°Dz
O
ava
?
Q
=
pp
Q
'g
C6
LU
C�Q
=F=-
W~O2FN-
W
W
=HW�WrdN
('
=w
z0Wtia0P
a
w
w
w
a
coo
Z
C
W
LL
M
nn
-
0
z
p
W
W
O
LL
z
AD
�xxxxxxx
oxXoXXXX
MxXxxxxx
N
x
X
x
x
x
x
x
;oxxxxxx
i4xXXx0xx
M
axxxxxxx
ooxxxXxo
�OxoxXXo
XXxxX,x
�XXxXOxo
�0XXXX00
lxxxxxxx
xxxxxxx
co
�wcD0mr--
r
r-
r-
r-
Lo
0M
r-
-
5
z
�-X0000000
W
w
Paz
°Dz
Ova
=app
Q
C�QYZaNW
w
=F=-
W~O2FN-
a
>-aIa
=w
z0Wtia0P
U) 4)
=-0
X E
N
o
aQ¢z
n n n n
XOW;
W
Y
Al