Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015-02-09 Public hearing
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 20th day of January, 2015, in Emma J. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; .at...which--hearing the 1. A rezoning ordinance to designate properties located at 608, 610 and 614 S. Dubuque Street as local historic landmarks (the building at 614 S. Dubuque Street has been removed). (REZ14-00024) 21.24 acres of property to amend the Planned Development Plan for the Planned Development Overlay/High Density Single Family Residential (OPD/RS12) zone to allow 72 multi- family dwelling units located south of Paddock Circle and west of Heinz / Road. (REZ14-00010) Copies of the proposed ordinances and resolutions are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK 02-09-15 6a Marian Karr From: letsknf@netscape.net Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 5:35 PM To: Council Subject: vote to preserve historic dubuque street cottages Members of the Iowa City Council As a long time resident and small business owner, I want to urge members of the Iowa City Councils members to vote in favor of preserving the cottages at 608 and 610 S. Dubuque St. as Historical Landmarks. It is highly regrettable that a third cottage has already been destroyed, but your vote tonight could help make up for that by preventing further waste and bad stewardship. The cottages' appealing functions as retail spaces for small businesses should continue as well, and the Council would also do well to proactively take any other steps possible to prevent our city from being overrun with these sterile, hastily erected apartment buildings with undesirable and expensive retail spaces below. Anything the Council can do to help increase and diversify the very few choices small business owners currently have trying to get good and affordable space downtown & elsewhere would be more than welcome. The privileged handful of owners of downtown real estate have demonstrated time and again erratic and capricious behavior that has been disastrous to small business and drained our downtown of too much of its character and appeal. Sincerely Lindsay Alan Park 401 Douglass St. Iowa City, IA 52246 (319) 248-3199 Ietsknf(a-netscape.net Marian Karr From: council@iowa-city.org Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 6:36 PM To: Council Subject: Cottages on Dubuque Submission New Form Submission Name: Neo McAdams Email: neo-buengermcadamskuiowa.edu Message:Dear Iowa City Council Members, Please designate the two remaining cottages on South Dubuque Street as Local Landmarks. They are historically important as markers of working-class culture in early Iowa City, the sites of a literary movement, and they provide homes for businesses today. Iowa City is enriched by having neighborhoods of mixed older and newer buildings that help to form an economically and culturally diverse community that values small businesses. Blocks of monotonous new -built structures with high rents benefit only the few who can afford them or who profit through them, not the community as a whole. Thank you, Neo McAdams Form submitted from website: www.salvagebam.org Visitor IP address: 128.255.128.209 Marian Karr From: council@iowa-city.org Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 8:58 PM To: Council Subject: Cottages Form Submission New Form Submission Name: Tom Smith Email: wksndays¢urylink.net Message:I understand Mr. Pacha's desire to sell the property and make a profit for himself and leace something extra for his family. After all, he owns the property. But if these cottages were maintained as historic structures that shed some light on Iowa City's past, they would serve as a gift to all people, for all time, including visitors and weekenders who might be interested in seeing some of the cultural side of Iowa City beyond the campus. I believe every effort should be made to arrive at an equitable compromise that preserves the cottages, and allows Mr. Pacha to either retain ownership or make some money from his property. There are more than enough apartments and condos in Iowa City, and very few (comparatively) structures that exist soley for cultural purposes, Please let these cottages stand, and let the people who know something of our history make something even more valuable from them. Form submitted from website: www.ic-fhp.org Visitor IP address: 75.167.219.100 Marian Karr From: Marybeth Slonneger <mbslonn@mchsi.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 11:01 AM To: Council Subject: RR Cottages Not having intended to speak last night, my thoughts may have been garbled. so I'd like to clarify: • the photos that Mr Jacobs showed indicate a need for tuck -pointing and for reenforcing bars; this should have been done 20 years ago. It's hard to believe that the property has been rented if the danger to others is so dire. Isn't it rather like having your cake & eating it too when the argument is based on deteriorated buildings, but rent was charged for 20 years? And it's hard to believe that Mr Jacobs is unaware of or unwilling to disclose some of the simple measures that can be used to remedy this situation. When doing my own restoration work, I asked around for the name for a good tuck -pointer & quickly got an answer for my project. Reenforcing bars are common all over the city & appropriate for the age of the houses. We are not talking about the Leaning Tower of Pisa ... this is a small one-story. What is needed is the will to save a building. * Mr Pacha pleaded ignorance of the age of his properties. After reading quite a few abstracts for old houses, I believe he would have been able to determine pretty accurately that he owned buildings of well over 100 years old. He does not strike me as an uninformed person. One would think that maintenance would have come to mind. • Because our settlement date is so much later than, say, VA or New England, our starting point for surviving buildings is around the mid -1850s to 1860s -- buildings before that, like log cabins & early frame buildings, have disappeared, so here we are talking about some of our earliest surviving homes, our legacy. Because I have restored 3 houses that are 150 plus years old (2 qualified for the National Register), I am particularly observant of this group. They are invariably modest & there are very few of them left. Therefore,each one of these homes that come up for discussion at this point should automatically be viewed as a very precious commodity that belongs to the community. They are a rarity & should be treated as such & individually prized. Few such buildings have survived downtown --one on Iowa Ave, one on Market. • Council is being presented here with a fork in the road. On the one hand there's a lot of talk about creating a vibrant culture downtown with fairs, concerts, public art, & our literary associations. On the other hand, when asked by the public to protect this culture, decisions are based on developers goals. Is it possible that what you are building is another area of the city as sterile, as ugly as "Old Capitol Mall"? 1 Marian Karr From: council@iowa-city.org Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 10:05 PM To: Council Subject: Cottages on Dubuque Submission New Form Submission Name: Johanna Crawford Email: crawfordacres(cr�,outlook.com Message:I was privileged to visit the bookstore on Dubuque, one of 3 ( now reduced to 2) cottages currently endangered in Iowa City. They are near the old railroad depot, and were probably lodging for new arrivals in the early days of this historic city. After shopping in the store and visiting with the owner of the business, we drove around and behind these buildings. It is a steep hill, but with no sign of mudslides or any other physical danger. It seems clear that the only danger here is modern-day income endangering a quaint and irreplaceable bit of the city's early history. The depot is in good condition, and would be ideal for restoration and display of various artifacts of travel and lodging in early Iowa City. The two small buildings under consideration are unique in the list of endangered buildings because they are small: most of the structures designated on the national register are large if not massive. These were built and used by the ordinary people of this city. If the current owner does not appreciate their value, it would be appropriate for someone to take care of them before it is too late. Sincerely, Johanna Crawford, Mt. Pleasant, IA Form submitted from website: www.salvagebam.org Visitor IP address: 209.152.112.205 Marian Karr From: Karen Kubby <kubby@pobox.com> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 10:14 AM To: Council Subject: process around cottages and rezoning City Council, The comprehensive plan is a vital guide for planning decisions. It is created via an extensive and grassroots public process. There are incredible goals that if lived out would have us appear on another 20 lists of "best places" in the country to live. Sometimes, local government process are very reactive. For example, the Riverfront Crossings district plan outlines the goal of preserving the cottages south of Burlington. Yet there is no proactive move to work with property owners of such historically valuable properties. It is really hard to rely solely on a volunteer based non- profit such as the Friends of Historic Preservation, as they have so much on their plate with so little staff to enact their list of things to do. From the property owner's and city's perspective, the plan to rezone and redevelop their land that the cottages sit on has been going on for months—ideas, engineering reports, architectural plans and the like have already seen investment. From the public points of view, the setting of a public hearing (either P&Z and/or at council) is the first that they have knowledge of the rezoning request. So to you, as a policy maker, who is reading their packet, it can seem like an eleventh hour effort to make a sea change in the plans. From the other side of the podium, it feels like systemic resistance. What this really says to me is two things. First, it would be grand to have a program through planning that proactively pinpoints these types of preservation goals and work with property owners before they have plans to redevelop the property. Second, at the point in the process of the public hearing, it can be too late for such a sea change. The city and developer may be entrenched in their views and analysis, yet the public hearing is the first time the community without financial interests have had a chance to express their viewpoints. In terms of this specific rezoning request, it is so important to remember that there is no inherent legal rights to this property owner to have a zoning change. It is up to the elected body to determine that this change is in the interests of the community and follows the comprehensive and district plans. There can be conditions set upon the rezoning through a Conditional Zoning Agreement if you think the change is a good idea "but for" a few things. Any interpreted property "takings" via cottage preservation is mitigated by density bonuses. What role might the city play to assist the property owner and Friends of Historic Preservation to have a working partnership similar to that around the preservation of Tate Arms? That was a positive role model for collaboration, historic preservation, and developer rewards (density bonuses) for "doing the right thing". Let's do more of that. Karen Kubby Marian Karr From: TJ Brandt <TJ@brandtheating.com> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 7:51 AM To: Council Cc: TEDPACHA@GMAIL.COM Subject: Dubuque Street Cottages Dear Members of The City of Iowa City Council, I am writing this letter to you as a concerned citizen of Iowa City. My work schedule has not allowed me to sit down and take the necessary time to write this letter concerning my thoughts on the City's actions or lack thereof concerning Mr. Pacha's Dubuque Street cottages. As a former member of the City's Board of Adjustment, I know all too well how the City Staff functions. Just as it was back when I served, it amazes me how this City bends over backwards for the loud minority, in any given situation. The majority of Iowa City residents could care less about those cottages and their so-called significance to our historical preservation,(matter of opinion). I have personally been in all three of them, as Mr. Pacha's HVAC servicer. They are in no better terms, rat traps. It is my understanding that the City's Inspection Department Red Flagged them, saying they were not safe to inhabit. Eviction notices were served, with only one tenant abiding by that notice. How is it that the Planning Department can override the Inspection Department and allow what has truly turned into a farse. If the City's responsibility is to protect and serve us, then why have those cottages not been sealed off and the tenants evicted? What happens if the tenants get hurt now? Does the City take any responsibility for their safety or does Mr. Pacha shoulder that burden? It is my understanding that Mr. Pacha started the process to re -zone HIS property, so as to fall into the City's comprehensive guidelines for the River Landing area. He was trying to be proactive and it has bitten him in the rear end. He's in a catch 22, on one hand the City is fining him for still allowing the tenants occupancy, and on the other hand, his hands have been tied by the same City, by imposing the moratorium. How can he take any action at all? It would be my sincere hope that as City Council members elected to serve, that your common sense would prevail and allow Mr. Pacha to do what he needs or wants to do with his properties. Unless the City is going to take on the liability for the safety and welfare of not only the two tenants, but also the general public, then please allow him to move forward. He has offered substantial settlements to the tenants, only to have them thrown back in his face. The amount of money he has spent trying to protect his rights as a property owner is mind boggling. You really should ask Mr. Pacha to give you an itemized expense account for what you have put him through. As a tax paying property owner, it scares me to think that those of us supporting our City services through property taxes can be subjected to this same scrutiny, because of one or two tenants. Where is the justice? Where are our priorities? I am a staunch supporter of OUR city. I appreciate everything this City has done for me. I also know that those services come with a price and someone has to pay for them. If we continually force property owners to shoulder that burden, then the staff should work with and for those property owners, not against us! If the standards are met or not met, the City's only responsibility is to insure that the safety of the general public is covered, otherwise they should back off and allow the property owners the opportunity to make things right. In closing, I appreciate the work and sacrifices that you have all undertaken to serve our community. I know that nothing is ever as easy as one might think, but remember, what's right is right and what's wrong is wrong. There should be no gray area! If the roles were reversed and you were Mr. Pacha or any other property owner, for that matter, would you want to continue supporting a staff that doesn't seem to have your interest at heart! When two different departments aren't on the same page, it falls on you as the council to bring the staff around. As citizens, we expect our council to do what is right for the betterment of our City, which usually means supporting the silent majority, not the loud minority. I don't always agree with your decisions, but I accept them, because they serve the greater good. Please use your common sense and allow Mr. Pacha the opportunity to move forward with no more expense. Sincerely, TJ Brandt, 1912 Rochester Court: 337-7490 Rezoning Item REZ14-00024: Discussion of an application submitted by Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission for a rezoning to designate the properties located at 608 and 610 S. Dubuque Street as Iowa City Historic Landmarks. Note — the structure at 614 S Dubuque St has been demolished and therefore no longer qualifies for Historic Landmark designation 611TY OF I011A CITY oun ty Pos It Court ff/ce - Ho e rf / P r - T - - *HA R R 11' BZ N = - - 4_ . Z Q N Z / z 2 (~ p z w Z OF QP ' W CL z a v v o m _J PRENTISS S L� P 1 Is AF9YETT SITE LOCATION: Dubuque & Prentiss Streets REZ14-00024 Scale: I"=ioo' CITY OF IOWA CITY moo. '� m•0.. � zWw' 1 Z 8 PRE ISS S , y 6 Ye �aq" 'd` y39 a ar, nr. lam; 4 �'". •UC ��r .wu Ao r7'-�A f i 4, d Now Uj. r b , v •. d � iY1Wmm SITE LOCATION: Dubuque & Prentiss Streets REZ14-00024 ♦ +i . " �ti+`�' • 1 Sit sI Rr •� 'e91 :gam �i /,%,f t } rF bS `+61�... T x 1 . -<xy. .ill. L..i, 'rs 0.r` 4 � i �' � N �� ,�F r '�s•`�Q�i �y t ..'� � , � Y7r� .-F�',e, ' ;. "3 4`13f v "" .� i�' �i J _♦may ,r`p! ' Yi y ' • z' :` .,u 6 '>� l . r a .. f ,tr s �� .� � *t+'i.'7 .,, .5 -40 { JM NDS NDS ,Vv I i t Oft M c r _ u AL 'C ,ol OL v .l "Cl .rr.14-�.i4s"► _3fdLYS {ti �c�u�SV�$afi .'..'c<.il���...'t"ay'..'. t•":.,� 6b NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 20th day of January, 2015, in Emma J. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider: 1. A rezoning ordinance to designate properties located at 608, 610 and 614 S. Dubuque Street as local historic landmarks (the building at 614 S. Qubuque -Street~-h-as. been removed). `fJ (REZ14-00024) _ _ -- . .-.'� 2. An ordinance conditionally rezoning IA-'. 21.24 acres of property to amend the Planned Development Plan for the Planned Development Overlay/High Density Single Family Residential (OPD/RS12) zone to allow 72 multi- family dwelling units located south of `� l Paddock Circle and west of Heinz Copies of the proposed ordinances and resolutions are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK r CITY OF IOWA CITY C YOMEMORANDUMCITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: February 4, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator 71 7r--�_ Re: Shire Lane extension in the proposed Saddlebrook Planned Development (REZ14- 00010) Introduction At the January 20 City Council meeting, the applicant for the proposed Saddlebrook Planned Development (Paddock Circle and Heinz Road) discussed his desire to not pave Shire Lane all the way to the south property line, and offered a Letter of Credit as collateral to ensure eventual construction. Normally, the City accepts escrow funds (based on an estimate of construction cost) for unconstructed infrastructure. The City has accepted letters of credit in some limited circumstances. Discussion Staff recommends escrow funds as the primary means of ensuring unconstructed infrastructure will be constructed. Letters of Credit require administration and annual renewal, and are not as secure as escrow funds. The City carries more financial risk with letters of credit compared to escrow funds, which are funds `in hand.' Staff discussed this with the Saddlebrook applicant, and he has agreed to sign the Conditional Zoning Agreement as it was recommended by staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission, which requires construction of Shire Lane to the south property line, including a temporary turn- around at the southern terminus. Recommendation Staff recommends proceeding with consideration of the Saddlebrook Planned Development and the Conditional Zoning Agreement as drafted. (O V, Prepared by: Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, NDS, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5239 (REZ14-00010) DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING 21.24 ACRES OF PROPE TY FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY/HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTI L (OPD/RS12) ZONE TO ALLOW 72 MULTI -FAMILY DWELLING UNITS LOCATED SOUTH PADDOCK CIRCLE AND WEST OF HEINZ ROAD. (REZ14-00010) WHEREAS, the applicant, Sve Gordon, haswrequested a rezoning of Circle and west of Heinz Road order to amend thePfa`rmed Develop Family Residential (OBD/RS12) allow 72 dwelling units to be �gvidec buildings; and WHEREAS, the roperty is cu rently zoned for manufactured hou the future land use m in the Sout District Plan; and WHEREAS, rece changes in mancing have made it difficul to I housing on leased lots; nd WHEREAS, the pro sed plan fo 72 multi -family units will t lead o units of manufactured hou 'ng currentl allowed; and WHEREAS, the applica t has desi ned the site to bei egrated itf with buildings oriented toward a street, extension of trails and Pres rvati all residents of the Saddlebrook eighbor ood; WHEREAS, the mass, scale, nd de ign development; and WHEREAS, the applicant will a end pt Mustang to City street standards, includi si E WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoni determined that it complies with the Compr need for extension of public infrastructure, construction; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414.5 (201 ) I conditions on granting an applicant's r onir satisfy public needs caused by the req sted prop located south of Paddock ne Overlay/High Density Single i four multi -family condominium I and is designated for this use in tain mortgages for manufactured an increase in density over the 73 adjacent streets and open space m of open space for the benefit of and of the pr osed buil Ings are compatible with the surrounding bIicJa ctur by platting and building Shire Lane and wa eet rees; and �o ha the reviewed the proposed rezoning and nsivided that it meets conditions addressing the tudrooms, site layout, and building design and ro the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable g rver and above existing regulations, in order to ;ha WHEREAS, the owner and appli nt have agr i with the terms and conditions of th Conditional Z ii development in this area of the city. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RDAINED B TH IOWA: SECTION I APPROVAL. S bject to the Co ditiona herein, the attached planned evelopment pl n for pr approved: iat the property shall be developed in accordance 4reement attached hereto to ensure appropriate COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, g A§eement attached hereto and incorporated described below, zoned OPD/RS12 is hereby A PART OF LOT 4 AND WT 6, SADDLEB OOK ADDITION RT 2, AS'2ECORDED IN JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE BqfOK 42, PAGE 9AA, AND A PART OFA DITOR'S PAj CEL 2004093, AS RECORDED IN JOHNSON COUNTY REVORDER'S OFFI BOOK 48, PAGE 161. SECTION II. ZONING MAP. T;r1tc uilding official is hereby au orized and &ected to change the zoning map of the City of:1owa City, low conform to this amendme t upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. SECTION III' CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT. The Mayois hereby authci ed anTdirected to sign, and the gity Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement be een the proporowns) artde City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. "`''—� c� SECTION IV. CERTIFICATION AND RECORDING. Upon passage and approval"IK e 'VJQb City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance, and rer the same�c e Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owners expense, upon9fle fid pa sa e, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. ` _' ZZ71 SECTION V. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict wiftthe pros ions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. tom" Ordinance No. Page 2 SECTION VI. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION VII. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect a er its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of , 20_. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Approved by City Attorneys Office AAy' l� �q ,. C�7 W N / m� .Da m x t / z00R b 5 8 fv Y Q" v i ..: _Fut_ure Conne.6 ° x + .,... y ( / ' Ire ane Pu61 _ IC N 6 B ca ` w• C 9 r _ Q 3 � m a a 3' m� mog f �,_ ; o �€BoC. mu,D o g o o f=it X000 o0o �O r , m ' W I I � O -q. { J I a Z y a'i o o' O 0' R The Overlook at Saddlebrook 45.'9R I I I � WDNZrZ \/ e9 my Preliminary OPD Plan o 3 �� o r�� I l am +�+ , o - ° PADDOCK L.L.C. y"z'> 9e 11 +34y7 a S ol IOWA CITY / IOWA o m i r t51 ; m Part of Lot 4 and Lot 6 of Saddlebrook $ ; ;` Addition Part 2 „ m 3 �n $� g gRm n� �8v -g8 gz sR8R °8 4JR8 3 net �m e£ uS .5 : k a z o z g3x6$ `; A$ $z z' �' z 'g $3� '> zsz 9z e6 3e d E„R� 3 zm„ 3e & m zzc �0m oDDac C { m Rig "y m, 'aS N$S 4 �s o •'8eu �mzznc a �� N, om 9'>>qm y6. 3m sn 4 8F ��o w gg& aR 3 g ng 8=9 � 8�g Rg"^_ pNNI �� ” ;qog ys O N-. 2a3 6EL - _ N2 o 8 u ' n vv<3 ZI n p H3; as gW ° aR'3 a$ is f 5 N g S 4$m • ul°go p, - n2ia 3 � v; ,8 mmg cg :-q B no g,E.° 6° a m omm wm9 A sm ° " ° e m� ° '0 8A M f - 0 ° o A S "r d m gfl m ^ v i c m -,3„ 3 4 eo s= 3 3 W N / m� .Da m x t / z00R b 5 8 fv Y Q" v i ..: _Fut_ure Conne.6 ° x + .,... y ( / ' Ire ane Pu61 _ IC N 6 B ca ` w• C 9 r _ Q 3 � m a a 3' m� mog f �,_ ; o �€BoC. mu,D o g o o f=it X000 o0o �O r , m ' W I I � O -q. { J I a Z y a'i o o' O 0' R The Overlook at Saddlebrook 45.'9R I I I � WDNZrZ \/ e9 my Preliminary OPD Plan o 3 �� o r�� I l am +�+ , o - ° PADDOCK L.L.C. y"z'> 9e 11 +34y7 a S ol IOWA CITY / IOWA o m i r t51 ; m Part of Lot 4 and Lot 6 of Saddlebrook $ ; ;` Addition Part 2 „ m o0o . . . . . r V O >'mooei °i m zzc �0m oDDac C { e $ a$R$RRO > �mzznc pNNI v o' 47OF � O N-. 2a3 u ' n vv<3 ZI oT^` p H3; i m A rmi. 00z,z�l N N NN { 3 m A M W N / m� .Da m x t / z00R b 5 8 fv Y Q" v i ..: _Fut_ure Conne.6 ° x + .,... y ( / ' Ire ane Pu61 _ IC N 6 B ca ` w• C 9 r _ Q 3 � m a a 3' m� mog f �,_ ; o �€BoC. mu,D o g o o f=it X000 o0o �O r , m ' W I I � O -q. { J I a Z y a'i o o' O 0' R The Overlook at Saddlebrook 45.'9R I I I � WDNZrZ \/ e9 my Preliminary OPD Plan o 3 �� o r�� I l am +�+ , o - ° PADDOCK L.L.C. y"z'> 9e 11 +34y7 a S ol IOWA CITY / IOWA o m i r t51 ; m Part of Lot 4 and Lot 6 of Saddlebrook $ ; ;` Addition Part 2 „ m Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5239 (REZ14-00010) CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made between the City of Iowa/,City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), Paddock LLC (hereinafter "Own r"), and Steve Gordon (hereinafter "Applicant"). WHEREAS, Owner ' the legal title holde of approximately 21.24 acres of property located south of Paddock Circle and west of Hein Road: and WHEREAS, the Owler has requestedApproval of a Planned Development Overlay Plan of said property to alto alternative pwnership under its current Overlay Planned Development/High Density S ngle-Family PJAsidential (OPD/RS-12) zoning; and WHEREAS, the Planni and Zo Ing Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding extensi n ofp lic infrastructure, site layout and building design and construction, and number of edro s per unit, the requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code 414.5 (2013) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on gra ng an applicant's rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy u lic needs caused by the requested change; and WHEREAS, the O ner acknowledges that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to ensure the evelo mc of the property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the need for im oved c nectivity and long-term stability of the development; and WHEREAS, the Owne agrees t develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Conditi nal Zoning greement. NOW, THEREFOR, in agree as follows: of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties 1. Paddock LLC i� the legal title holdek of the property legally described as: A PART OFVOT 4 AND LOT 6, SADDBROOK ADDITION PART 2, AS RECORDED IN JOHNSON COUNTY RE ORDER'S OFFICE BOOK , PAGE 246, AND A PART OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2004093, AS RECOR D IN JOHNSON COUNTY CORDER'S OFFICE BOOK 48, PAGE161. 2. The Own acknowledges that the City Comprehen ive Plan and the South Dist Code §414.(2013) provides that the Ci granting an applicant's rezoning request, satisfy public needs caused by the reques ishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the t Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on er and above the existing regulations, inMrder to change. r_- 2=: 1._� 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the bject property, Owner agrees fiVie\e�opme.� of the subject property will conform to all othe requirements of the zoning ch#kr, aciwell the following conditions: .v ppdadm/agt/rez14-00010 shire lane cza final.doc 1 a. Any development shall be in substantial compliance with the site plan and elevations submitted on November 6, 2014 (including the use of masonry and cement board siding) and shall be limited to one- and two-bedroomunit ; b. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any devel pment activity on the above- described property, thefollowing must occur: i. The Owner sh I agree, in writing, to install a d dedicate Mustang Lane west of Heinz Road an extend Heinz Road to Muang Lane as a public improvement prior to any de lopment east of Shire La e, which agreement may be done by amendment to t e Saddlebrook, Part T Subdivider's Agreement, recorded at Book 3037, Pag 304, in the Records o the Johnson County Recorder's Office; ii. Shire Lane and stang Lane shall platted as public streets; iii. The applicant wil provide a sta ment from his engineer indicating that the stormwater detenti n pond is ad uate to handle the proposed development and that all necessary odification due to the extension of McCollister Boulevard can be constructed n site. c. Prior to the issuance o an oc pancy permit for any dwelling units constructed on the above-described pro erty, hire Lane shall be extended to the McCollister Blvd. right-of-way with a tem or turnaround constructed at the south end of Shire Lane. The cost of rem ng the temporary turn -around improvement shall be deposited in an escrow ccount to ensure that it is removed when McCollister Boulevard is extended; d. The City will accept d is tion of Shire Lane as a public improvement concurrent with the dedication of einz oad and Mustang Lane. Prior to dedication, Shire Lane will be inspected by a Pu lic Works Department. Any repairs deemed necessary must be made by thedevelo er before the City will accept dedication; and e. The Owner ackno ledges th t a portion of the Stormwater detention pond serving the above-descri d property ncroaches on to City -owned property upon which the City intends to c nstruct McCo lister Boulevard. At such time as the City determines that it will const uct McCollister oulevard, the Owner shall be solely responsible for timely perform ng any and all modifications to said stormwater detention pond necessary to liminate this all achment and maintain compliance with the storm water obligaf ns pursuant to th Iowa City Code of Ordinances. This cost shall be born solely y Owner, who mu provide the City with a letter of credit prior to issuance of any building permit fo development on the above-described property to ensure sat' faction with this obliaat n. 4. The Owner and City acknowledge that t e conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impo on the land under Iowa ode §414.5 (2013), and that said conditions satisfy public need that are caused by the requ ted zoning change. 5. The Owner and City acknowledge that in the a ent thesubject property is transfgred, sold, redeveloped, or ubdivided, all redevelopment wil conform with the termsw& this?9onditional Zoning Agreeme t. 'In 6. The parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zon g Agreement shall b4�'eemed t a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain it or% and. ct as a covenant with title to the land, unless or until release of record by the sof Ira C C) Nj ppdadm1agVrez14-00010 shire lane cza final.doc 2 7. The parties further acknowledge that this agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties. 8. The Owner acknowledges that nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owner from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 9. The parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreem nt shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, nd that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agr ment shall be rec ded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Owner's exoens . Dated this day of CITY OF IOWA CITY Name of current, Mayor Attest: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk Approved by: City Attorney's Office CITY OF IOWA CITY ACK OI STATE OF IOWA ) /ss. JOHNSON COUNTY /) DGEMENT: 20 By: This instrument wasI/acknowledged before me on , 2015 by Susan Mims I and Marian K. Kar �as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the Cit of Iowa City. C Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) ppdadMagt/rez14-00010 shire lane cza final.doc 3 4 This instrument wasI/acknowledged before me on , 2015 by Susan Mims I and Marian K. Kar �as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the Cit of Iowa City. C Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) ppdadMagt/rez14-00010 shire lane cza final.doc 3 CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) 1 This instrument was acknowledged before me on 20_ by l as of , Inc. Notary Public i and for said County and State (Stamp or al) Title (an Rank) r"'a Paddock LLC ACKNOWLEDGMENT: State of County of This record was acknowledged before m on_ by (Na (s) of i was executed). (Date) idual(s) as (pe of authority, such as officer or trustee) of name of party on behalf of whom record Notary P blic in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp o Sea[) Title (and ank) My commis ion expires: ppdadm/agt1rez14-00010 shire lane cza final.doc 4 �E �n (Date) idual(s) as (pe of authority, such as officer or trustee) of name of party on behalf of whom record Notary P blic in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp o Sea[) Title (and ank) My commis ion expires: ppdadm/agt1rez14-00010 shire lane cza final.doc 4 Prepared by: Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, NDS, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5239 (REZ14-00010) bg DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING 21.24 ACRES OF PROPERTY FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVE MHIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (OPD/RS12) ZONE TO ALLOW 72 MU TI -FAMILY DWELLING UNITS LOCATED SOUTH OF PADDOCK CIRCLE AND WEST OF HEIN ROAD. (REZ14-00010) 1 WHEREAS, the applicant,teve Gordon, has requested a rezoning Circle and west of Heinz Road 'n order to amend the Planned Devel Family Residential (OPD/RS12) allow 72 dwelling units to be provig buildings; and WHEREAS, the property is cu ently zoned for manufactured the future land use map in the South istrict Plan; and WHEREAS, recent changes in f ancing have made it diffiq housing on leased lots; and WHEREAS, the proposed plan for multi -family units units of manufactured housing currently a owed; and WHEREAS, the applicant has design d the site to be with buildings oriented toward the street, a nsion of trails all residents of the Saddlebrook neighborhoo ; and WHEREAS, the mass, scale, and design f the development; and WHEREAS, the applicant will extend pub'c Mustang to City street standards, including sidew WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Co determined that it complies with the Compreh si need for extension of public infrastructure, umbo construction; and property located south of Paddock 'nent Overlay/High Density Single in four multi -family condominium and is designated for this use in to obtain mortgages for manufactured lead to an increase in density over the 73 integrated with adjacent streets and open space and preservation of open space for the benefit of buildings are compatible with the surrounding ifrastructure by platting and building Shire Lane and and street trees; and ssion has the reviewed the proposed rezoning and Plan provided that it meets conditions addressing the k of bedrooms, site layout, and building design and WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414.5 (201 providesat the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's re ning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requ sted change; an WHEREAS, the owner and applic t have agreed th\thee ty shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the onditional Zoning tached hereto to ensure appropriate development in this area of the city. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DAINED BY THE IL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I APPROVAL. Subject to the Conditional Zoent attached hereto and incorporated herein, the attached planned d#velopment plan for propebelow, zoned OPD/RS12 is hereby approved: A PART OF LOT 4 AND LOT 6, SADDLEBROOK ADDITION PART 2, ASCO RDED IN JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE BOgk 42, PAGE 246, AND A PART OF AUDITOR'S PA CEL 2004093, AS RECORDED IN JOHNSON COUNTY RECT' DER'S OFFICE BOOK 48, PAGE 161. i' SECTION II. ZONING MAP. The building official is hereby authorized an\fil change the zoning map of the City of loka City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon tage, approval and publication of the or ance as approved by law. SECTION III. 0NDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT The mayor is heed and directed to sign, and the Ci Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement betweenowner(s) and the City, following p sage and approval of this Ordinance. SECTION7. CERTIFICATION AND RECORDING. Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance, and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. SECTION V. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Ordinance No. Page 2 SECTION VI. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION VII. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of 20_ AMOW ATTEST: CITY CLERK Approved by City Attorney's Office fGj Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5239 (REZ14-00010) CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is mad .. between the City of Iowa City, I?wa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), and The �addock LLC (hereinafter "Owner"). 1 WHEREAS, Owner is \the legal title holder of approxi ately 21.24 acres of property located south of Paddock Circlo and west of Heinz Road; and WHEREAS, the Owner has requested approval of a lanned Development Overlay Plan of said property to allow alternative ownership u er its current Overlay Planned Development/High Density Singla-Family Residential (OP /RS -12) zoning; and WHEREAS, the Planning an� Zoning Commissi n has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding extension o public infrastructi, site layout and building design and construction, and number of bedrooms per unit, t e requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414. (2013) ovides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a applic is rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public ne ds cafised by the requested change; and WHEREAS, the Owner ackno a ges that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to ensure the development the property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the need for improved connecti it and long-term stability of the development; and WHEREAS, the Owner agrees to d velop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Conditional Zoning A eement' NOW, THEREFORE, in conside�tion of the��nutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: �\ 1. The Paddock LLC is the le " I title holder of the operty legally described on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorpord herein by referenc _ 2. The Owner acknowledges that the City wishes to ens re conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan and the South District Plan. Furth , the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2013) pro des that the City of Iowa City m y impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's y`ezoning request, over and above t e existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs ca 'sed by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, O ner agrees that development of the subject prope will conform to all other requirements oft zoning chapter, as well as the following condif ns a. Any development shall be in substantial compliance with the ite plan and elevations submitted on November 6, 2014 (including the use of masorV and cement board siding) and shall be limited to one- and two-bedroom units; I\' b. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any development activity, on the above- described property, the following must occur: (00030418 2) ppdadm/agt/00030418.doc 1 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description (00030418 2) ppdadm/agt/00030418.doc Rezoning Item REZ14-00010: Discussion of an application submitted by Steve Gordon for a rezoning to amend an OPD -12 plan to allow 72 multi -family condominium dwellings for property currently zoned for single-family manufactured housing on 21.24 acres of property located south of Paddock Circle and west of Heinz Road. CITY OI' IOIIA CITY PADD')CK CIRCLE 0.1 a _gillI N � U y w \ J 1pu SITE LOCATION: Shire Lane ,' I LN PDGF S1;2 V, I I VUS NC LII W F -- Q l� i ry 0 U U Q REZ14-00010 p 100' 200' 400' Scale: 3" = 200' 05/24;)102:23:53 iU Y�0 sc,,le: 1°=300 CITY OF IOWA CITY * P DDOCK CkG Gx , P 8k, 'al BLAZING STAR OR`-' Z a a U n SHET ANJ LN I 1111 '■ ¢ KI � Q w a < z cZ i d N Y Z � Q Q x` MLSTANG LN W 7 ^fir SITE LOCATION: Shire Lane REZ14-00010 6C NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 9th day of February, 2015, in Emma J. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider: An ordinance rezoning 34.21 acres of property from Interim Development research Park (ID -RP) Zone to Commercial Office (CO -1) Zone located North of Northgate Drive. REZ14-00023) A copy of the proposed ordinance is on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above- mentioned time and place. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ14-00023 Northgate Drive GENERAL INFORMATION: STAFF REPORT Prepared by: Robert Miklo Date: January 15, 2015 Applicant: Southgate Companies 755 Mormon Trek Blvd. Iowa City, IA 52244 319-466-4321 jhughes@southgateco.com Contact: F. Joe Hughes 755 Mormon Trek Blvd. PO Box 1907 Iowa City, IA 52244 319-325-8113 jhughes@southgateco.com Property Owner: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: Bilam Properties LLC Rezoning from Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) to Commercial Office (CO -1) To allow for office development North of Northgate Drive 34.21 acres Agricultural (ID -RP) North: County Agricultural (A) South: Office (CO -1) East: Agricultural (ID -ORP) West: Agricultural (ID -ORP) and Office (CO -1) November 25, 2014 January 15, 2015 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This property was annexed in to the City sometime between 1969 and 1972. It was zoned RI -A, a single family residential zone. In 1983 was zoned Interim Development -Office Research Park (ID -ORP), when a new city-wide zoning map and ordinance where adopted. In 2005 when a new zoning ordinance and map were adopted the zoning of all ID -ORP districts was changed to Interim Development -Research Park (ID -RP). The applicant is now requesting that the property be rezoned from ID -RP to Commercial Office (CO -1). 2 On December 10, the applicant conducted a Good Neighbor Meeting. Eleven area property owners attended. The attached summary provides a description of the meeting. The applicant has also submitted the attached concept plan showing how the property may develop in the future. ANALYSIS: Current zoning: This property is currently zoned Interim Development — Research Development Park (ID -RP). The purpose of the ID zone is to provide for areas of managed growth in which agricultural and other non -urban uses of land may continue until such time as City services are provided and urban development can occur. Upon provision of City services, the City or the property owner may initiate rezoning to zones consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended. Proposed zoning: The purpose of the Commercial Office Zone (CO -1) is to provide specific areas where office functions, compatible businesses, apartments and certain public and semipublic uses may be developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The CO -1 Zone can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or industrial areas. Comprehensive Plan: This property is located in the North Corridor District. Although a detailed district plan has not been adopted for the North Corridor District, the Comprehensive Plan land use map depicts this area as appropriate for Office Research Development Centers. The proposed CO -1 zoning, as well as the Research Development Park (RD) and Office Research Park (ORP), are appropriate zoning districts to implement the land use plan. Compatibility with neighborhood: The property to the south is currently zoned CO -1 and developed as Northgate Office Park. Properties to the west, north and east are currently used for agriculture, including a farm residence that is located directly north. The land use plan depicts the areas to the west and east of the subject property as also being appropriate for Office Research Development Centers. The property to the north is identified as Rural Residential. The CO -1 zone is generally viewed as being compatible with residential neighborhoods. It has a maximum building height of 25 feet (generally two stories) and does not allow more intense commercial uses that may detract from nearby residences. The Commercial Site Development Standards that apply to the CO -1 zone require street trees, parking lot coverage trees and landscaping around the perimeter of parking lots to further improve compatibility with nearby residential uses. Environmentally sensitive areas: The property has been used for row crops for several decades. There are no known sensitive areas present. Traffic implications: Initially the only street access to this property will be via Northgate Drive, which intersects with Dodge Street (Highway 1) approximately'/2 mile to west of this property. In the long-term Oakdale Boulevard is planned to cross the northern portion of this property to provide additional access to Highway 1. Additional access may also be available from Moss Ridge Road as shown on the concept plan. Staff measured existing traffic volumes, and forecasted future volumes, at several locations along Northgate Drive. It was concluded that at the Steindler Orthopedic Clinic Driveway the average daily traffic (ADT) on Northgate Drive would be approximately 5,547 upon full `build -out' of the subject property — assuming similar land -uses currently present on Northgate Drive. This 3 figure was derived using existing traffic counts and existing developed acreage which resulted in an additional 84 vehicles per day per acre. Traffic volumes were measured at the Steindler driveway as there is a secondary means of access at this point which allows egress between Northgate Drive and the Quality Inn Property. Subdivision requirements state that a secondary means of access can be required on a collector street when average daily traffic exceeds 2,500 vehicles per day. However, adherence to this requirement is often driven by sensitivity for appropriate traffic volumes in residential areas, or when there is an increased sensitivity to a single means of access being blocked to special populations (facilities serving elderly or persons with disabilities) — neither of which appear to be significant factors in this case. As noted, the subject property has also been appropriately planned to allow for the future extension of Oakdale Boulevard east of Highway 1, as well as a future connection to the Moss Ridge Drive / Highway 1 intersection. Staff used traffic signal software to measure the effects of the proposed development on peak hour operations at the Northgate Drive / Highway 1 intersection. The unit measurement for traffic signals is "Level -of -Service" (LOS), which is a graded scale, A -F. Level of Service A is free-flow traffic, and Level of Service F is gridlock. Level of Service E during peak traffic periods is considered acceptable. Current PM peak hour Level -of -Service (LOS) for westbound vehicles is acceptable at a LOS D (53.9 seconds of delay per vehicle) with all other movements operating at a LOS D or better. With the addition of development traffic (and with optimizing traffic signal timing to account for new traffic), the LOS remains at a LOS D and shows slight improvement compared to existing conditions. To measure future conditions, a 2025 scenario was developed which included the proposed development traffic and future Moss Ridge Drive development traffic. Under these conditions, westbound PM peak hour traffic would operate at a LOS E (59.1 seconds of delay per vehicle) with all other movements operating at an acceptable LOS D or better. Given the results of the Synchro analysis, it does not appear that the addition of turning lanes is necessary (nor would help to reduce overall intersection delay) at the Northgate Drive / Highway 1 intersection due to the anticipated traffic generated by the proposed development. As demonstrated in the aforementioned analysis, staff does not foresee any major traffic implications related to the subject plat. Traffic volumes will be managed through optimizing the traffic signal timing at the Northgate Drive and Highway 1 intersection. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that REZ14-00023, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a rezoning from Interim Development -Research Park (ID -RP) to Commercial Office (CO -1) zone for approximately 34.21 acres of property located north of Northgate Drive be approved. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Concept PI 3. Summa of Good Approved by: Dou r y, Dir, ctor, Departm nt f Neighborhood and Dev lopment Services J - ' H ¢mN titpp Z p W W N uS ... C Z O Q \ I Z p�2FOi.1 ' 6 a w q 0 Q Z r, o, A a �! e Q �-. OI Q>I ` i U 4 N W WU I 1 I� riw OK typo OK OC' 1 �� �NmQ rvin Q� lnVpQ mN fi 11 ' m.Q r- 303D 3010 ...� 3A do 31VON1a0N .•':- ' 3AIa031VOH1a0N ,-.. �8. ,..... , oo.c 09,18 00.0; a � � tlQ rvmQ 66A0 N� �NQ rvmQ Ll CY $ h� n r� m� o.R a row � ,am Pos §a - I n a o3soeoae � N p r y z l I 0 e _ I _ n o I J ; u; I Q ,r t I EI I r i Summary Report for e. —4, �,� Good Neighbor Meeting CITY OF IOWA CITY Project Name: Highlander 4th Addition Project project Location: North - Northgate Drive Meeting Date and Time: December 10, 2014 from 4:30-6 p.m. Meeting Location: Robert E Lee Rec Center, Meeting Room A, 220 S. Gilbert St., Iowa City, IA Names of Applicant Representatives attending: Joe Hughes, SouthGate; James Langel, HBK; Brian Boelk, HBK Names of City Staff Representatives attending: Kent Ralston Number of Neighbors Attending: 11+ Sign -In Attached? Yes X No General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - Most neighbors are in support of the project, and feel that continuing Northgate Drive with the same CO -1 zoning that currently exists makes the most sense. The commercial owners and tenants are happy to see their park grow with similar types of businesses. Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - The concerns most often brought up are regarding the ability for vehicles to exit Northgate Drive onto Highway 1. Currently, traffic becomes very congested at 5 p.m. on weekdays when many of the workers leave for the day. Concerns about secondary access have been expressed. There is, however, secondary emergency access through the Clarion hotel parking lot. Also, the homeowners to the north would like screening between their farmstead and Oakdale Blvd. Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe: There will be no changes to the proposal, however we will look at additional screening options for the neighbors to the north. Staff Representative Comments I (Kent Ralston) attended the meeting and concur with the information presented in this meeting summary. I have no additional comments with respect to the input received via the public meeting. 12-10-2014SIGN I N S H E ET. NAME ADDRESS PHONE NO. COMMENTS E #/ L.'s 75S ./lilor ��7"r kf � 3D5-R//�; G,?4f nj4F%- Sal IS. 1,8 --7*1557 F,4Cr, l c.t✓�Gn 2q�3 dy�-ft,ak YZ, 21,--(£- 1!;o o L C 45ZG f�--S` hc) c7 lb �ras- .515-Aa,7' V4, /1,,/- o 44 dig- 3�, , / wl ►c 12 c 2 S 1�r 319,351 S tr-vo AA.o 11 QNNi° Lc�o f�ir:wrr f vta'�a� �%�' ©f "'owe Cr�c Iowa City Cancer Treatment Center January 12, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Commission members, On behalf of the Iowa City Cancer Treatment Center I would like to voice our concerns regarding the consideration of additional commercial zoning at the end of Northgate Drive, Iowa City. We are an outpatient radiation therapy facility. On any given day we have an average of 40 people through our building. Northgate Drive has become the home to several other medical offices whose patient volume is larger than ours. Our concern is one of safety; specifically that of access in emergency situations. With the large number of medical offices along Northgate Drive there is the possibility of medical emergencies. Access for ambulances and other emergency vehicles from more than one entry should be strongly considered. We do not object to growth, but with growth comes the need for better access to and from the site. In December 2014, I attended a Southgate Companies open house regarding the rezoning of this site. They informed me that every interested party that attended the open house had safety concerns regarding access. An Iowa City Transportation Planner was also at the meeting who stated the site had been evaluated and with this rezoning there was still no need for a second access point. Although the numbers might not show the need for another access point, common sense certainly does. We respectfully request that the City of Iowa City work toward a second access point to Northgate Drive businesses at its earliest convenience. Thank you for your time and consideration. We look forward to growth in our area. Best Regards, / 1a,rcy le llo ji or Nancy Reed Hoffman, MBA, MHSA, RTT Office Manager 3010 Northgate Drive Iowa City, Iowa 52245 Phone: 319-354-8777 FAX: 319-354-9545 www.icradonc.com FUHRMEISTER APPRAISAL LLC January 15, 2015 To: Bob Miklo City of Iowa City RE: North of Northgate Drive / proposed rezoning by Southgate (REZ14-00023) I have very recently become the owner of the farm to the east of the property that has been proposed for rezoning for 17 additional commercial properties. My farm has been in my family since the 1880's. This is my great, great grandparents farm. I'm not going away anytime soon. I am not for or against the development. I want the city to be aware that i have cattle and row crops. I just hope that some sort of buffer or green space with trees will be between my property and more 17 more commercial buildings. Thank; ,you Dan J. rmeister 319-321-7912 312 College Street • Iowa City, IA 52240 • 319.321-7912 • fuhrmeisterappraisal®gmail.com Original email accepted # 3f(8) on 1/20 Consent Calendar Marian Karr From: Kent Ralston Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 3:14 PM To: 'hartwig_oralsurg@hotmail.com' Cc: "City Council; Doug Boothroy; John Yapp Subject: FW: rezoning REZ14-00023 Hello Mr. Hartwig —Your correspondence was forwarded to me for response. We have received similar concerns about peak period traffic exiting onto Hwy 1 from other motorists. In response to those concerns we adjusted the traffic signal at the Northgate Dr. / Highway 1 intersection this fall to allow for more 'green time' for Northgate traffic. As you recommend, we have also investigated the benefits of providing a turning lane for northbound motorists at the intersection. While the City has no immediate plans to provide a turning lane, we will continue to monitor the situation as future development occurs and provide as much relief for Northgate motorists as we can. Please let me know if you have any additional concerns. Best Regards, Kent Ralston, AICP Executive Director I Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County Transportation Planner I City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319.356.5253 From: hartwig—oralsurg@hotmail.com [mailto:hartwig_oralsurg@hotmail.com] On Behalf Of Dr.ACH Hartwig Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 7:43 AM To: Council Subject: rezoning REZ14-00023 I own & occupy 2814 Northgate Drive, Suite 2 (Oral Surgery Associates of Iowa City). I have just one concern about adding further office space out here: traffic flow. There is a real back log of traffic getting in and out of Northgate Drive. This is especially painful between 4:45-5:20pm most every day. Adding another turning lane (for people heading north on Hwy 1 toward Solon) may be worth looking in to. Thanks for considering this comment. Andrew Hartwig Dr. Andrew Hartwig www.iowacityoralsurizery.com Notice: This e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 19 of 24 Swygard had a question regarding the motion, and if the motion is to delay to the next meeting or further. Freerks stated it could be discussed again at the next formal meeting, but hopes an informal meeting can be held as well. A vote was taken, motion carried 7-0 REZONING ITEM (REZ14-00023) Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a rezoning from Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) to Commercial Office (CO -1) zone for approximately 34.21 acres of property located north of Northgate Drive. (REZ14-00023) Miklo showed the location map of the property, this property is located in the North Corridor District. This property is currently zoned Interim Development — Research Development Park (ID - RP) and the proposal is to change the zoning to Commercial Office Zone (CO -1). The purpose of the CO -1 zone is to provide specific areas where office functions, compatible businesses, apartments and certain public and semipublic uses may be developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The CO-Izone can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or industrial areas. Miklo said the Comprehensive Plans show this area as Office Research Development Center. The proposed CO -1 zoning, as well as the Research Development Park (RD) and Office Research Park (ORP), are appropriate zoning districts to implement the land use plan. The property to the south is currently zoned CO -1 and developed as Northgate Office Park. Properties to the west, north and east are currently used for agriculture, including a farm residence that is located directly north. The land use plan depicts the areas to the west and east of the subject property as also being appropriate for Office Research Development Centers; the property to the north is identified as Rural Residential. Miklo said the CO -1 zone is generally viewed as being compatible with residential neighborhoods. It has a maximum building height of 25 feet (generally two stories) and does not allow more intense commercial uses that may detract from nearby residences. The Commercial Site Development Standards that apply to the CO -1 zone require street trees, parking lot coverage trees and landscaping around the perimeter of parking lots to further improve compatibility with nearby residential uses. Miklo said that there are some traffic implications with this development. Initially the only street access to this property will be via Northgate Drive, which intersects with Dodge Street (Highway 1). In the long-term Oakdale Boulevard is planned to cross the northern portion of this property to provide additional access to Highway 1. Additional access may also be available from Moss Ridge Road as shown on the concept plan. Staff measured existing traffic volumes, and forecasted future volumes, at several locations along Northgate Drive. It was concluded that at the Steindler Orthopedic Clinic Driveway the average daily traffic (ADT) on Northgate Drive would be approximately 5,547 upon full 'build -out' of the subject property — assuming similar land -uses currently present on Northgate Drive. This figure was derived using existing traffic counts and existing developed acreage which resulted in an additional 84 vehicles per day per acre. Traffic volumes were measured at the Steindler driveway as there is a secondary means of access at this point which allows egress between Northgate Drive and the Quality Inn Property. Therefore, Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 20 of 24 staff does not foresee any major traffic implications related to the subject plat. Traffic volumes will be managed through optimizing the traffic signal timing at the Northgate Drive and Highway 1 intersection. He said that Kent Ralston, Transportation Planner, was available to answer questions about the traffic study. Staff recommends approval of REZ14-00023, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a rezoning from Interim Development -Research Park (ID -RP) to Commercial Office (CO -1) zone for approximately 34.21 acres of property located north of Northgate Drive. Freerks questioned some of the notes the Commission received stating concern about some buffer. Miklo responded that staff did discuss whether there is a need for a buffer in addition to what is required in terms of landscaping. He said all parking lot areas will be landscaped. Parking lot and trees are also required. The required setbacks are not very great in the CO -1 zone, however when you look at a typical office use, there are larger lawns and greenspaces around these buildings. As noted in the zoning ordinance, because of the CO -1 zone's low intensity and limit to two-story buildings, typically no buffering is required, and staff does not feel it is necessary in this case due to the intensity of the development. Most of the areas around this development will continue to be used as agricultural for some time. Additionally in the future when Oakdale Boulevard is developed there would be a right-of-way and buffer between the office development and the farm to the north. Dyer asked about Moss Ridge Road. Miklo answered that the development of that road would also depend on future development of the properties to the west. Freerks asked Miklo to discuss the future developments possible in the area, and he replied that there would be no drive-thru fast food restaurants permitted in this zone, so the noise and lighting from those would not be an issue. Restaurants are permitted by special exception, but he doesn't feel there is a market for a restaurant in this area. Freerks discussed the lighting pollution, and effect on neighboring properties. Miklo stated that the requirements state that when next to a residential property the light poles have a limit of 25 feet, but since there is no residential next to this property, that would not be enforced. However the Commission could add that condition onto their approval if so desired. Eastham asked if in the staff recommendation if there was any language in requiring a right-of-way to be reserved for Oakdale Boulevard. Miklo stated that would be a condition that would be dealt with when the development is platted. Eastham then questioned if there were to be additional traffic due to the development of this parcel, is here any way to stop additional development until Moss Ridge Road is constructed? Kent Ralston, Transportation Planner, addressed the question stating that in the study they did for this area, they took into consideration full build -out of the rezoned area. There are some concerns about the delay at the intersection of Northgate, but it does meet the existing delay perimeters and will not in the future even at full build -out. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 21 of 24 Eastham asked about the request of the right turn lane, and it that would be off of Northgate. Ralston replied that they have looked a lot of options for dedicated right turn or left turn lanes and feel that it is not necessary. Ralston stated there would be traffic delays at certain times of day, especially in the evening when everyone is leaving work, however it is really for only about a half hour a day and still meets the standards used throughout the city. Martin asked about the traffic survey process, Ralston spoke about a computer model, but Martin wanted to know if someone physically goes out to the site during the peak times and observe the traffic? Ralston confirmed that they do, and all the software and reports are based off actual traffic counts and then they add in an estimate of the traffic that would be generated by the new development. Freerks opened public hearing. Joe Hughes, representing Southgate Companies, stated they are nearly built -out on the other lots on Northgate Drive and have had great success with the area and it has brought lots of jobs to the community. The main feedback they received at the good neighbor meeting was the concerns about having to wait at the intersection, it would be nice if some of the bigger employers would stager the employee release times, but as Ralston stated the traffic situations are confined to a certain time of day. Hughes stated that having Oakdale Boulevard eventually extend to the property allows for 100 feet from the edge of the office lot to the edge of the Furhmeister's property so it gives quite a bit of distance. The Furhmeisters have mentioned in the past the need for some screening so people aren't looking at the backside of their farm buildings, so Hughes is asking the City to allow them to put some landscaping in the 100 foot right-of-way it would benefit both sides. Eastham asked Hughes if the developer could also add screening on the north side of the property. Hughes replied that the screening will be on their property which will eventually become the right- of-way when Oakdale Boulevard is built. Miklo stated the difficulty in planting the trees at this point on the right-of-way is there isn't yet a construction layout of Oakdale Boulevard, and the staff position is this is an office park and not an intensive type of commercial that requires some type of screening other than what is required by the zoning code. Deanna Furhmeister said that she and her husband Leo own the property directly north of the parcel being considered for rezoning, and their lane is the only thing that separates them from this property. Their property is agriculture and they actively farm, there is livestock, and they smell, they have drying bins that are very loud when in use, and use fertilizer and chemicals on their fields. Having said all that, she urges the Commission to give considerable thought on how to approach the situation of rezoning, and what kind of buffer strips or distance between the two properties can be used to secure the best results for harmony for a commercial property and a Century Farm of 122 years. Dan Furhmeister has very recently become the owner of the farm to the east of this property that is being rezoned for 17 additional commercial buildings. His farm has been in his family since the 1880's having just purchased his great, great grandparents farm. He stated he is not for or against the development in any way, he just wanted the City to be aware that he also has cattle and crops and is concerned that there is a need for a buffer between the properties. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 22 of 24 Miklo pointed out that the right-of-way for Oakdale Boulevard will be 100 feet and they don't anticipate that being built anytime soon so there will be a 100 foot buffer built in until such time that Oakdale Boulevard is built and the City Forester could work to ensure that there is some landscaping on the north side of that right-of-way. Freerks asked Hughes if he, as the developers, were willing to put landscaping in that right-of-way area. Hughes confirmed that he feels it makes sense for both sides, they just need to hear from City staff if they would allow trees in the right-of-way and if they are not worried then if construction of Oakdale Boulevard in the future would then destroy those trees. Miklo stated that was the concern, that if the trees are planted today, and then with the road design, the trees may need to be taken out. Miklo suggested that felt it was necessary to put in screening rather than putting it screening in the right-of-way of Oakdale Boulevard, to put the screening on the north side of lots 31 and 30, and requiring a 10 foot landscaping buffer on the north side of those lots. Thomas asked if it would also have to be on the east side, since there is also agriculture on the east side as well. Hektoen mentioned that when the Commission talks about any conditions they may impose they must be addressing public needs generated by this rezoning, and thinks it is reasonable to have the screening on lots 30 & 31 due to the farm residence to the north, but not for the additional screening to the east. Deanna Furhmeister also added they have another farm just north west of the proposed rezoning and feels there needs to be buffer strips all the way though the property because they have cattle on all their property. Miklo suggests that the buffer be to benefit the farm house and if the concern is buffering the office uses from the agricultural uses the office developers can do that themselves for their own benefit. Hughes stated the zoning already calls for buffering on the specific lots, City staff is recommending no additional buffering, perhaps they can move forward now in good faith and the specifics be worked out in the platting stage. Dan Furhmeister asked if the buffer had to be trees, or if it could be a berm. Freerks replied that the reality was once Oakdale Boulevard is built, the businesses would want to be able to be seen from that road, so a berm would not be appropriate. Freerks stated for the record that if the Commission were to move forward on good faith with this rezoning application, that the issue of buffering and trees needs to be addressed at the time of development. Hektoen stated that when Miklo and her work to draft the rezoning they could put in a whereas statement addressing the special issue of buffering. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham moved that the Commission approve REZ14-00023, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a rezoning from Interim Development -Research Park (ID -RP) to Commercial Office (CO -1) zone for approximately 34.21 acres of property located north of Northgate Drive. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 23 of 24 Martin seconded the motion. Freerks stated this rezoning seems compatible to the area, and likes the idea of extending the commercial area into this part of the city. Thomas questioned if they had seen a summary report on the good neighbor meeting in the staff report before? Miklo answered it was the first time that one has been submitted by the applicant. Miklo said it is a new procedure that staff has implemented for the Good Neighbor Policy. Commissioners indicated that it was very helpful. A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: December 18, 2014 There were several corrections where Swygard and Theobald's names were mixed up. Theobald moved to approve the corrected minutes for December 18, 2014. Eastham seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Miklo reported that the Council has asked staff to form a citizen committee to draft an inclusionary housing requirement for the Riverfront Crossings Area and is seen as being a pilot that might or might not be expanded. ADJOURNMENT: Swygard moved to adjourn the meeting. Eastham seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 6-0. �C Prepared by: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5240 (REZ14- 00023) ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE REZONING 34.21 ACRES OF PROPERTY FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH PARK (ID -RP) ZONE TO COMMERCIAL OFFICE (CO -1) ZO E LOCATED NORTH OF NORTHGATE DRIVE. WHEREAS, the ap licant, SouthGate Companies, has requested a ezoning of property located on Northgate Drive from Inte ' Development -Research Park (ID -RP) to Co ercial Office (CO -1); and WHEREAS, the Comp hensive Plan indicates that this area is ap ropriate for Office Research Park; and WHEREAS, the Planning nd Zoning Commission has re recommended approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAI D BY THE CITY COUNCIL SECTION I APPROVAL. Prope described below is he designation of ID -RP to CO -1: Section: 36 Range: 6 NW SE except Hig nder Developm t described as Auditor's Parcel #2008020 in rvev book 53 ac the proposed rezoning and has THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: reclassified from its current zoning 1s' Addition and also except that land e 258. Section: 36 Range: 6 that part of NW SE descris Auditor's Parcel #2008020 in survey book 53 page 258. r SECTION II. ZONING MAP. The Building Inspe or is ereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to confor to this endment upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance by law. SECTION III. CERTIFICATION AND RECOR ING. Upon pa age and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to ce ify a copy of this inance and to record the same, at the office of the County Recorder of Johnson CountyIowa, at the owner's xpense, all as provided by law. SECTION IV. REPEALER. All ordinance and parts of ordinancesX conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION V. SEVERABILITY. If any se ion, provision or part of the Or 'nance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudicatio shall not affect the validity of the rdinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjud ed invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION VI. EFFECTIVE DATE. T is Ordinance shall be in effect after its I`Mi l passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. MAYOR ATTEST: R, CITY CLERK Approved by ' City Attorney's Office =µ� ry IDRP RDP CHI SITE LOCATION: Northgate Drive CITY OF IOIfA CITY CITY OF CITY CORPORATE LIMITS IDRP _ 11 REZ14-00023 Scale: 1"=400' CITY OF IOWA CITY a rrlt-�r..tr!i `� •� .. � �.Y ��i��-Sup I i � Y � rl r � so I - ��� -Mml SITE LOCATION: Northgate Drive REZ14-00023 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 9th day of February, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the Emma J. Harvat Hall of the Iowa City City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider a Resolution Authorizing Conveyance of 936 East Bloomington Street, also described as the East 47.3 feet of the South 150 feet of Out Lot 7, Iowa City, Iowa, to an income -eligible family. Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK —essri 5 CITY OF IOWA CITY � MEMORANDUM - DATE: January 29, 2015 TO: Tom Markus, City Manager FROM: Lucy Joseph, Code Enforcement Specialist Tracy Hightshoe, Neighborhood Services Coordinator RE: February 91h City Council meeting agenda item: sale of UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership home Introduction On February 9th, City Council will hold a public hearing and vote on a resolution authorizing the conveyance of 936 E. Bloomington Street as part of the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership Program. Once this home is sold, the program will have sold 40 homes. 936 E. Bloomington Under the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership, the City proposes to sell 936 E. Bloomington St. for $185,000 plus carrying costs of approximately $17,000. "Carrying costs" are all the costs incurred by the City to acquire, maintain and sell the home, including abstracting and recording fees, interest on the loan to purchase the home, mowing and snow removal, utilities, and real estate taxes. City funds were used to rehabilitate and sell the home as a single-family owner occupied home to an income -eligible buyer. Renovations included electrical work, plumbing, repaired ceilings and walls, new light fixtures, a new high efficiency furnace, removed any existing knob and tube wiring, updated bathroom, refinished wood floors, and the installation of brand new appliances, cabinets and counters. The cost of renovations is not included in the sale price and forgiven once the homeowner has lived there for five years. The home must also be owner -occupied for 20 years. This turn of the century house has 1,312 square feet of finished living space, including three bedrooms and one bathroom. The buyer will receive down payment assistance in the amount of $5,000. Statement of Fiscal Impact The home was purchased for $185,000 and the sale price is approximately $202,000. There will be no impact on the General Fund for ongoing operating expenses. Recommendation This home is located on a street where there are many rental properties. The home needed several updates and was rehabilitated for homeownership. The renovated home will be an asset to the neighborhood and community. Staff recommends approval of the resolution to authorize the conveyance of 936 E. Burlington St. as part of the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership program. January 30, 2015 Page 2 936 E. Bloomington — before renovations 936 E. Bloomington St. — after renovations 7 1,-"4 Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Assistant City Attorney, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52 12,A 31 W56-5 RESOLUTION NO. - -� RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 936 EAST BLOOMINGTON STREET. WHEREAS, the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership Program is a joint effort between the University of Iowa and the City to encourage home ownership and reinvestment in designated neighborhoods surroun g the University of Iowa; and WHEREAS, the City purch ses rental units located in designated neighborhoods surrounding the University of Iowa, rehab) 'tates them, and then sells them to income -eligible buyers; and WHEREAS, the City purchase and rehabilitated a single family home located at 936 East Bloomington Street, Iowa City; anc WHEREAS, the City has received a offer to purchase 936 E t Bloomington Street for the principal sum of $185,000 (the amoun the City paid to acquir the home), plus the "carrying costs" of approximately $ which re all costs incurred y the City to acquire the home, maintain it and sell it, including abstracting nd recording fee , interest on the loan to purchase the home, mowing and snow removal, utilit s, real estate axes, and any costs in excess of $50,000 to repair and rehabilitate the home; a d WHEREAS, this sale would provide affordable �us In a designated area surrounding the University of Iowa; and WHEREAS, on January 20, 2015, the City CouncItopted a Resolution proposing to convey its interest in 936 East Bloomington Street, uth izing public notice of the proposed conveyance, and setting the date and time for th public"h, earing; and WHEREAS, following the public hearing on that the conveyance is in the public interest. nce, the City Council finds NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, that: ti 1. Upon the direction of the Ci Attorney, the Mayor and the�,ity Clerk are authorized to execute a warranty deed nveying the City's interest in 9East Bloomington Street, legally described as the st 47.3 feet of the South 150 feet of Opt Lot 7, Iowa City, Iowa. 2. The City Attorney is h eby authorized to deliver said warranty deed and to carry out any actions necessary to 4onsummate the conveyance required by law. 'iii NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT AND ESTIMATED COST FOR THE LANDFILL GAS FLARE REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS: Public notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost for the construction of the Landfill Gas Flare Replacement Project in said City at 7:00 p.m. on the 9th day of February, 2015, said meeting to be held in the Emma J. Harvat Hall in City Hall in said City, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk. Said plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost are now on file in the office of the City Clerk in City Hall in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any interested persons. Any interested persons may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making objections to and comments concerning said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improvement. This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and as provided by law. MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK pweng\masters\nph. doc 9/99