Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-05-19 OrdinanceFILED Prepared by: Karen Howard, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5251 (REZ15-00005) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING 3.34 ACRES OF COURT STREET, WEST OF TAFT AVENUE FROM NEIGHBORHC DENSITY MULTI -FAMILY (RM -12). (REZ15-00005) WHEREAS, the applicant, Arlington LC, has requested a rezoni Street, west of Taft Avenue from Neighborhood Commercial (CN - Residential (RM -12); and WHEREAS, the Southeast District Plan, as amended, indicat developed with a mix of duplex, townhouse and low density multi- f m of 8-13 dwelling units/acre with d Iling units oriented toward the t wr Taft Avenue, and Huntington Driv with parking located centra to screened to provide an attractive resi ential character to the stre scaF 2015 MAY -6 AM 11: 42 SOUTH OF -1) TO LOW of property located south of Court Zone to Low Density Multi -Family that the subject property should be ily dwellings at a development density square park and toward Court Street, the lot and behind the buildings and ie: and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zon g Commission has revi ed the proposed rezoning and determined that it complies with the Comprehensiv Ian, provided the pr erty is developed in substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, building types, nd building elevati ns, and the design review committee reviews and approves the retaining wall design and landscaping pl to soften views of and reduce the perceived height of the retaining wall and to screen parki areas from blic view; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414.5 (2013) pr vides that he City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning quest, er and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested chan e; an WHEREAS, the applicant/owner has agreed that a roperty shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreem t attached hereto, to satisfy public needs caused by the requested development to ensure appropriate devel ent in this area of the city. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY TH TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I APPROVAL. Subject to the Conditio I Zonin greement attached hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is hereby reclassif d from its urrent zoning designation of Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family Re dential (RM- ): LOT 1 OF WINDSOR RIDGE — PART TWENT TWO, IOWA CITY, WA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT OOK 55, AT PAGE 346, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFIC CONTAINING 3.34 AC\approval D SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF R ORD. SECTION II. ZONING MAP. The build' g official is hereby authorizected to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to nform to this amendment upal passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved y law. SECTION III. CONDITIONAL ZON G AGREEMENT. The mayor ithorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the C ditional Zoning Agreement betwpro erty owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval this Ordinance. SECTION IV. CERTIFICATION AND RECORDING. Upon passage oval o the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordind recd the same in the Office of the County Recorder, J nson County, Iowa, at the Owner's, upon th final passage, approval and publication of this or nance, as provided by law. SECTION V. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. , 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. Ordinance No. Page 2 Passed and approved this day of 2015. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Prepared by: Karen Howard, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5251 (REZ15-00005) CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), Arlington Development, Inc. (hereinafter "Owner"). WHEREAS, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 3.34 acres of property located on Court Street between Huntington Drive and Taft Av6Que in Iowa City; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested the rez ning of said property from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family Flesidential (RM -12); and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has etermined that, with appropriate conditions to ensure that ere is an appropriate mix of low/0 medium density housing types oriented toward the town s are park and surrounding stree with parking behind buildings and screened from view to ensur harmony and compatibility, w' h the surrounding neighborhood as illustrated in the submitted s e plan, building types, a building elevations; and that any retaining walls located along the treet are attractively de igned and landscaped, the requested rezoning is consistent with the Co prehensive Plan, as mended; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414'provi s that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an pplicant's r zoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public nee4 caused)5y the requested change; and WHEREAS, certain conditions ar"K development of the property is consistent with attractive, and comfortable environment for re streets. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of agree as follows: strictions are reasonable to ensure the Comprehensive Plan and the need for a safe, itial living and pedestrian activity along public promises contained herein, the parties Arlington Development, Inc. is th legal title hold of the property legally described as follows: LOT 1 OF WINDSOR OE — PART NTY TWO, IOWA CITY, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE P AT THEREOF RE RDED IN PLAT BOOK 55, AT PAGE 346, IN THE RECORD OF THE JOHNSON C UNTY RECORDER'S OFFICEM CONTAINING 3.34 ACRES, ND SUBJECT TO EASerNTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. 2. The Owner acknowledges hat the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive PIP, including the Southeast District Plan, as amended, and the Owner intends to comp,& therewith. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2013) provide that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applican ' rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy publi needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owner and Applicant agree that development of the subject property will conform to all requirements of the zoning chapter, as well as the following conditions to be satisfied upon redevelopment of the 1 of 3 property: a) Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, building types, and building elevations (attached hereto and incorporated herein); and b) Design Review approval of the retaining wall design and a landscaping plan to soften views of and reduce the perceived height of the retaining wall(s) and to screen parking areas from public view. 4. The conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions tompose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2013), and that said conditions satisfy pu is needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. In the event the subject property is transferred, sold, rede loped, or subdivided, all development will conform with the terms of this Conditional Z Hing Agreement. 6. This Conditional Zo 'ng Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to t e land, and shall remain in full force nd effect as a covenant with title to the land, unless r until released of record by the C' of Iowa City. 7. This agreement shall inu to the benefit of and bind all uccessors, representatives, and assigns of the parties. 8. Nothing in this Conditional Zo%ng Agreement shall 0 construed to relieve the Owner or Applicant from complying with a other applicable l al, state, and federal regulations. 9. This Conditional Zoning Agreem ntshall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject prop , and tqht upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be rec ded in he Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Applicant's expense. Dated this day of CITY OF IOWA CITY 5. Matthew J. Hayek, Mayor By: Arlington evelopment, Inc. Attest: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk Approved by: City Attorney's Office 2of3 CITY OF IOWA CITY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on Hayek and Marian K. Karr as Mayor and City Clerk, ARLINGTON DEVELOPMENT, INC. STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged b by (M of Arlington Development, Inc. , 2015 by Matthew J. of the City of Iowa City. Notary Publi in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or eal) Title (an Rank) My c mission expires: DGEMENT: me on� s) of individual(s) (type of a 2015 , such as officer or trustee) of Notary Public in and for said County and State (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) My commission expires: 3 of 3 Prepared by: Karen Howard, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5251 (REZ15-00005) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING 3.34 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF COURT STREET, WEST OF TAFT AVENUE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN -1) TO LOW DENSITY MULTI -FAMILY (RM -12). (REZ15-00005) WHEREAS, the applicant, Arlington LC, has requested a rezoning of property located south of Court Street, west of Taft Avenue from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) Zone to Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -12); and WHEREAS, the Southeast District Plan, as amended, indicates that the subject property should be developed with a mix of duplex, townhouse and low density multi -family dwellings at a development density of 8-13 dwelling units/acre with dwelling units oriented toward the town square park and toward Court Street, Taft Avenue, and Huntington Drive with parking located central to the lot and behind the buildings and screened to provide an attractive residential character to the streetscape; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed rezoning and determined that it complies with the Comprehensive Plan, provided the property is developed in substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, building types, and building elevations, and the design review committee reviews and approves the retaining wall design and a landscaping plan to soften views of and reduce the perceived height of the retaining wall and to screen parking areas from public view; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414.5 (2015) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and WHEREAS, the applicant/owner has agreed that the property shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto, to satisfy public needs caused by the requested development to ensure appropriate development in this area of the city. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I APPROVAL. Subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is hereby reclassified from its current zoning designation of Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -12): LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 1 OF WINDSOR RIDGE — PART TWENTY TWO, IOWA CITY, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 55, AT PAGE 346, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICEM CONTAINING 3.34 ACRES, AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. SECTION II. ZONING MAP. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. SECTION III. CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT. The mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the property owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. SECTION IV. 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. 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. Ordinance No. Page 2 Passed and approved this day of —2015. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Approved by City Attorneys Office Ordinance No. Page It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton First Consideration 05/19/15 Vote for passage: AYES:Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Throgmorton, Botchway, Dickens. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration _ Vote for passage: Date published Prepared by: Karen Howard, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5251 (REZ15-00005) CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), Arlington Development, Inc. (hereinafter "Owner"). WHEREAS, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 3.34 acres of property located on Court Street between Huntington Drive and Taft Avenue in Iowa City; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested the rezoning of said property from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -12); and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions to ensure that there is an appropriate mix of low to medium density housing types oriented toward the town square park and surrounding streets with parking behind buildings and screened from view to ensure harmony and compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood as illustrated in the submitted site plan, building types, and building elevations; and that any retaining walls located along the street are attractively designed and landscaped, the requested rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414.5 (2015) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and WHEREAS, certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to ensure the development of the property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the need for a safe, attractive, and comfortable environment for residential living and pedestrian activity along public streets. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: Arlington Development, Inc. is the legal title holder of the property legally described as follows: LOT 1 OF WINDSOR RIDGE — PART TWENTY TWO, IOWA CITY, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 55, AT PAGE 346, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE CONTAINING 3.34 ACRES, AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. 2. The Owner acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan, including the Southeast District Plan, as amended, and the Owner intends to comply therewith. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2015) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owner and Applicant agree that development of the subject property will conform to all requirements of the zoning chapter, as well as the following conditions to be satisfied upon redevelopment of the 1 of 3 property: a) Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, building types, and building elevations (attached hereto and incorporated herein); and b) Design Review approval of the retaining wall design and a landscaping plan to soften views of and reduce the perceived height of the retaining wall(s) and to screen parking areas from public view. 4. Upon completion of the items specked in paragraph 3 above, the City shall promptly issue to the Owner a good and sufficient Release so that this Conditional Zoning Agreement will not constitute a cloud on the title to the property. The City reserves the right to enforce City ordinances that apply to the property. 5. The conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2015), and that said conditions satisfy public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 6. In the event the subject property is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all development will conform with the terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. 7. This Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full force and effect as a covenant with title to the land, unless or until released of record by the City of Iowa City. 8. This agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties. 9. Nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owner or Applicant from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 10. This Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Applicant's expense. Dated this day of , 2015. CITY OF IOWA CITY Matthew J. Hayek, Mayor Attest: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk *VVY\/\ :rlington Development, Inc. 2of3 Approved by: City Attorney's Office CITY OF IOWA CITY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 2015 by Matthew J. Hayek and Marian K. Karr as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) My commission expires: ARLINGTON DEVELOPMENT, INC. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on �, , 2015 by %a�^ ✓�61'��°��� Jr. (Name(s) of individual(s) as of Arlington Development, Inc. SHERRI L NOVAK E ommission Number 759;rMy Commission Expiry ----------------- SHERRI L NOVAK 2 Commission Number 759807 My C I cion Expires rows 7��—_ (type of authority, such as officer or trustee) of Notary Public in and for sai'd County and State (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) My commission expires: 7 29 1 l 5 3of3 To: Planning & Zoning Commission Item: CPA15-00002/REZ15-00005 E. Court St. and Taft Avenue GENERAL INFORMATION: STAFF REPORT Prepared by: Karen Howard Date: April 16, 2015 Applicant: Arlington LC 1486 S 1 st Avenue Iowa City, IA 52240 Contact Person: John Moreland Phone: 319-338-8058 Requested Action: Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning from CN -1 to RM -12 for 3.34 acres Purpose: Change Comprehensive Plan and Zoning from Neighborhood Commercial to Low Density Multi - Family Residential to allow development of duplexes, townhouses and a multi -family building Location: Size: Taft Avenue and Court Street 3.34 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Low Density Multi Family (RM -12) South: Public Park and Planned Development Overlay (OPD -RM -12) East: County Undeveloped West: Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5) Comprehensive Plan: Citywide Comprehensive Plan: Neighborhood Commercial Southeast Planning District: Shown as a mixed use neighborhood center Neighborhood Open Space District: Windsor Ridge (SE -3) File Date: February 26, 2015 45 Day Limitation Period: April 11, 2015 (waived by applicant) Good Neighbor Policy: Applicant held a Good Neighbor meeting on April 7. 2 of 4 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The subject property was rezoned to Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) in 1995 with a Conditional Zoning Agreement that required a town square -type development with mixed uses, including residential and neighborhood -serving commercial uses surrounding and oriented toward the square. Subsequently, the applicant, Arlington Development, dedicated the "town square" to the City as a public park. The Southeast District Plan was adopted in 2011 and in concert with the existing zoning, the area was designated as a mixed-use neighborhood center. In 2011, after building single family homes west of the park and townhouses south of the park, the applicant received approval to rezone the area east of the park to OPD/RM-12 and developed four townhouse -style 6-plexes, two of which face Taft Avenue and two that face the park. At the time the applicant made a convincing case that the amount of commercial development proposed around the park was not viable in this location at the edge of the city, but retained the Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) Zoning on the lot north of the park that has frontage on Court Street to maintain consistency with the Comprehensive Plan designation. There was some discussion at the time about rezoning this northern lot to Mixed Use (MU), but an application for Mixed Use zoning was withdrawn because the applicant wanted to study the market further for this type of zoning. Subsequent to the 2011 rezoning to OPD/RM-12, the applicant has built out the eastern portion of the property and the townhouse -style units have been well-received in the market. However, the lot north of the park and south of Court Street remains undeveloped. Arlington Development has now submitted an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan to indicate that this property is appropriate for multi -family development rather than commercial uses and to rezone the northern lot from Neighborhood Commercial to Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -12). The applicant argues that because the market for commercial development in this location has never materialized and is unlikely to given the proximity to other nearby neighborhood commercial areas, that the Comprehensive Plan should be amended to allow multi -family development similar in scale and type to the housing along the eastern and southern edge of the park. The applicant's statement is attached. ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Plan (Analysis regarding the requested change to the Comprehensive Plan was forwarded to the Commission in a previous memo dated April 2, 2015. For ease of reference, it is attached). Zoning The property is currently zoned Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1). The uses allowed in the CN -1 zone include small-scale retail and personal service uses in a neighborhood shopping area. The applicant is proposing to rezone the 3.34 -acre lot north of the town square to Low Density Multi - Family Residential (RM -12). This zone allows low-density multi -family residential buildings, duplexes, townhouses, and single family homes. Compatibility with the Neighborhood The applicant has submitted a conceptual site plan showing four duplexes, four townhouse - style four-plexes, and one 16 -unit multi -family building. The duplexes and four-plexes face Court Street, Huntington Avenue, and the Raleigh Lane, which is a private street that extends along the north side of the park. The 16 -unit apartment building is located at the corner of Taft Avenue and Court Street. Parking is located interior to the lot, behind the buildings with parking areas screened from view of the street and the park. In compliance with the zoning ordinance, the residential units that front on Court Street and Taft Avenue have been set back 40 feet to provide additional front yard buffer from these arterial streets. 3 of 4 As illustrated in the attached building elevation drawings, the multi -family building, townhouse - style units and the duplexes have been designed in a manner that orient entrances and windows toward the street frontages and toward the park. The duplexes at the west end of the block are designed as corner lot duplexes with one unit in each building oriented toward a different street. In staff's opinion these designs will create a pleasant pedestrian -oriented residential character to the street and provide views from the dwellings to the park, Court Street, Huntington Drive, and Taft Avenue. The units are of a scale and mix that blend well with the other residential dwellings in the neighborhood. Due to the sloping nature of the property, the northwest corner will include a retaining wall that is estimated to be about 8 feet tall at its highest point. The applicant is proposing to face the wall in a stone material that matches the stone facades on the dwellings and provide additional landscaping to soften the view of the wall. Traffic, access, and street design Residences around the park are accessed via private streets (Cardigan Lane and Raleigh Lane) from Huntington Drive. Sidewalks are provided along all public and private streets. The vehicular access to the townhouses and duplexes is from a private rear lane. The multi -family building has surface parking along its west fagade and underground parking within the building with access from Raleigh Lane. Currently Taft Avenue is a chip seal road at this location and its upgrade is not yet included in the CIP. The applicant paid a fee toward future improvement of Taft Avenue when the property was subdivided and rezoned in 2011. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of CPA15-00002, an amendment to the Southeast District Plan as follows: • Amend the Southeast District Plan Map designation from Mixed Use to a combined designation of "Medium/High Density SF and Townhouse" and "Multi -Family." This designation would indicate a mix of duplex, townhouse and low density multi -family residential at a development density of 8-13 dwelling units/acre. • Amend the Southeast District Plan narrative to indicate that development of this property should contain a mix of low to medium density housing types with units oriented toward the town square park and toward Court Street, Taft Avenue, and Huntington Drive with parking located central to the lot and behind the buildings and screened to provide an attractive residential character to the streetscape along the park and along neighborhood streets. • Delete text within the plan to eliminate reference to neighborhood commercial in this location. Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00005, rezoning of approximately 3.34 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Taft Avenue and Court Street from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family (RM -12), subject to a conditional zoning agreement that specifies: • Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, building types, and building elevations; and • Design Review approval of the retaining wall design and a landscaping plan to soften views of the retaining wall and screen parking areas from public view. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant's Statement 4 of 4 3. Rezoning Exhibit 4. Building elevations 5. Conceptual Site Plan Approved by: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services .6 N 0 � 7 _. CL (D 0 o �. G O O � 7 N y (D N G n T. CI (n 6 N N Q O 71:3 (D 7 p (D N � 7 7 f0 C Q N R. 0 _3 7 S11 O_ N CL w o (a 0 = o' N N fD G n T. S.0) U) Q N N O T :3 CD 7 fD d 41' 7 7 C Q 0) 7 IV 0 d v Q OIO I I UG I (�3YOP p G��I M N' Tf �qa MR aa�.KYV -warm�ro o �O , i a Oo x' �! o yy' � o� aiaoieruo Eli O --------------------------------------------------------- D00 50 12 o - �a `0^_ y$~� C Z� O [� n m Da P6igJ0 o 70 N y O M �^ m `La ADW O O D00 50 12 o - �a `0^_ y$~� C Z� O [� n m Da P6igJ0 o 70 N y O m `La ADW j}mi� 4 CPH��� T w z D00 50 °x y$~� C Z� [� n P6igJ0 `La j}mi� 4 CPH��� T �0 o c n7� Sm 8 $�6. 3 N p5 = m y q x m y W VC_C� °ymG) NNa N z 2 _ bIi m-m 0 rm o $�6. 3 0 ci o � baa x m o ;O = — £� D Z °ymG) NNa < _ m-m OBD D>z � bus m z =` o A m D A m I m y_ C) Z PRELIMINARY PLAN ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION onT� avwvae 'Vti-�4n•u..4\}nIJ• D �,• �' DUPLEXry <�taC y �A rym.mr �xa+ms i _ m D m ( A E � D � � Y A N a0 E D vnt•c vuxuacs oeeuM by ew Bey A �� � 6'-10• � g i 5"IK• r 8�--IK• 'T DUPLEX:.. | | | � | DUPLEX , • .[;i|� ; | : ( .m./< | | | � | DUPLEX -FMDUPLEX I I ¢°� r7 N 11W ui 121 6-, r -FMDUPLEX I I ¢°� L pI� I�j h 9q PRELIMINARY PLAN ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 9 1 . I oaTc ov2N1C o¢aw11 bY, aM CICKCV by. 4M oWmLEx wx ocrT-�M� K . ����` "•�§ ,§ � \\ / k(;• |� (} // `� \ DUPLEX 8gs� �Lq6C R��m2��3o€ 9oLR R'�,� R4�om,R�7m� o tl J� o n i� i °nuc U1� AL>R>> ,gg ip3w A�:"70 DUPLEX illi yR by arzO R-;'- w G-IIK @I• -I• A €F N gg 1s AA F 5 a 6'-0" I� s _ @ py C~ All • oo a. P Rn a �; Lo .3 ir 3 10•-1K• L T-0" - — 91109° o,o ... ., ° " •.1 mxva.m wu W 6'-IIK•' 21 -1; m b b X C'Iu III, t 15' IK" � R -- I' "�_ 19, 5•• 'Im i e n s lill,pp € fi e a d lo'ny .o ` 41'-0" OIILSOE OF STIO i� i °nuc U1� AL>R>> ,gg ip3w A�:"70 DUPLEX illi yR by arzO R-;'- A €F N gg a 6'-0" OI.EAR MIN. @ py C~ oo Rn i� i °nuc • pGSKIi 'J • GyL.AT�'�TS• A�:"70 DUPLEX by arzO R-;'- n o99�D-0 DIry2 IUmIf NAAAr< A Di11m r O mo�A �gm U SBi 13 e y w Y iN 0.1i ROOF PItGI y.R pOC! MLCII Q y8�j Iij� � � 15-3K I L 6-11K -I% —7, -, A s N d Q_ 1. ° li`"e61 A � O e d9' S,. I• K. 4' V' - " a S N A Ipp — 13'15 it Z f.tl ROO PIiCX AY ROM PRG1 Q op p ^ ]a a > j d� VA' - 12'6" Z ¢wg s y • - � � N 5.�. -, w<y �3 � � 13. I. 3 '.10�� � 5. 0., S F __ • L_ .J ' E Q W 1 P I Ile so A 8 -y .. - II -I l -5K" — - F u 1-16" q, 3.. v - N x 13'i5K" t3K" 41 d vv w q. � � y w Y iN 0.1i ROOF PItGI y.R pOC! MLCII Q y8�j Iij� � � � % T II I LL�1[�IV��L�� cJVJ . DUPLEX �,w..azm .s maa ww cxr� ...n. �c- _ R e11C OY241]L6 n N OrtdwH eYoa.1 R Q[O.'CO by. 6y • A A � O e �]jy a Ipp Z f.tl ROO PIiCX AY ROM PRG1 Q op p ^ ]a a > j Z LL�1[�IV��L�� cJVJ . DUPLEX �,w..azm .s maa ww cxr� ...n. �c- _ R e11C OY241]L6 n N OrtdwH eYoa.1 R Q[O.'CO by. 6y • S S °�sno;p�5 u���sF��s•. $$ z Pg IgP >&0 600 F hq Vp P P 5516 Ov1Nzc5 T nL ;5Y my wstcrNMsE2 u. I, •ESI KNi4LCAFN�3• --r.--6 71 I$' ]I' -I m o_ I e_ b €€ 1., A F S �• iFi� �I• x e 4 bA a 8 LI@ e [ w m�� ♦a - b 1Y -9K' w -IIK° • IB' I'h" � P ew g E s I e e I P 21-1 m m — e e e m g G E 5 I�I,•F j j `e P II a s� m �b s s K ......... w. `F Lffis i 5516 Ov1Nzc5 T nL ;5Y my wstcrNMsE2 u. I, •ESI KNi4LCAFN�3• OVD'� P$glZ N i °P nEs°Mg65 o 0 Wit �FFOH8 $"o R a WiZ 4l' -O" W751P.o Brvo SCK[ • G 1 C41G Vl3N3L6 •ai�11•�TS• IB -3K b-IIK' '-1' —71 �-I P aen bay P- IF 8 glg P s d 9,-B„ I,. y" 4,d° ^ICA •' i 6 rl c 1a -B A w Ira" b' -r:` 5 12 Y u Qw- 10 8 -4 b 11 4'"1 --9b- ,I � 8 b b � 'aK" �" I, � W ,-sla �,re�W' IO.I y• � d 4 N °1 4 ' 1L.—-10" a L 6. 6' fi-I• �- 11'10" 1 - m W P 414,�•�, a dpi% A d 13-11 K" pp F 4 I vl I �,Jg rY n ds •-an - "'� - c •`• 15' 3Ui` w 6' II'5• 12-11 II' Imo- l' 519° P L O V bi I_ly 4-3 U Sw a a � aaw d S 4l' -O" W751P.o Brvo SCK[ • G 1 C41G Vl3N3L6 •ai�11•�TS• auww er�e 4-PLEX aen bay nnnm Fu CI II —, (IIIIIIII' :: Sin. . :::: IIIDON: imulIIIIIIIC (IIIIIIII ���� I ILII �. (IIIIIIII ���� (IIIIIIII (IIIIIIII ���� (IIIIIIII ���� (IIIIIIII k�� m O ®�����'� �■� Imo: ��I�� .. ���.�iIIIIhIEllllllllll■� � ■ I �i7l �II M r' rG7r��ir��r� ■®�F© �- — L� ® LL, �r io s---- y ■��� uwu. ion ■ �� '��- poi o � � RE �ktl ",I�lIIIIIrIEllllllllll 1� r ?NCW1Y OF I O W C I T Y CITY101NH CITY MEMORANDUM UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: April 2, 2015 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Karen Howard, Associate Planner Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for property at the intersection of Court Street and Taft Avenue Introduction: The applicant, Arlington LC, has requested an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and the Southeast District Plan to change the land use designation for property located at the intersection of Court Street and Taft Avenue from Mixed Use to Multi -Family Residential. Background: The subject property was rezoned to Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) in 1995 with a Conditional Zoning Agreement that required a town square -type development with mixed uses, including residential and neighborhood -serving commercial uses surrounding and oriented toward the square. Subsequently, the applicant, Arlington Development, dedicated the "town square" to the City as a public park. The Southeast District Plan was adopted in 2011 and in concert with the existing zoning, the area was designated as a mixed-use neighborhood center. In 2011, after building single family homes west of the park and townhouses south of the park, the applicant received approval to rezone the area east of the park to OPD/RM-12 and developed four townhouse -style 6-plexes, two of which face Taft Avenue and two that face the park. At the time the applicant argued that the amount of commercial development proposed around the park was not viable in this location at the edge of the city, but retained the Neighborhood Commercial (CN - 1) Zoning on the lot north of the park that has frontage on Court Street to maintain consistency with the Comprehensive Plan designation. There was some discussion at the time about rezoning this northern lot to Mixed Use (MU), but an application for Mixed Use zoning was withdrawn because the applicant wanted to study the market further for this type of zoning. Subsequent to the 2011 rezoning to OPD/RM-12, the applicant has built out the eastern portion of the property and the townhouse -style units have been well-received in the market. However, the lot north of the park and south of Court Street remains undeveloped. Arlington Development has now submitted an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan to indicate that this property is appropriate for multi -family development rather than commercial uses and to rezone the northern lot from Neighborhood Commercial to Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -12). The applicant argues that because the market for commercial development in this location has never materialized and is unlikely to given the proximity to other nearby neighborhood commercial areas, that the Comprehensive Plan should be amended to allow multi -family development similar in scale and type to the housing along the eastern and southern edge of the park. The applicant's statement is attached. Analysis: Both the Southeast District Plan and the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan show this area as a mixed-use neighborhood center. The property is located in the far northeast corner of the Southeast District at the intersection of Court Street and Taft Avenue and is right across Court Street from the Northeast Planning District. When originally developing plans for this area, it was believed that development would occur more quickly in this area. A school site was proposed directly across Court Street from the proposed neighborhood commercial area and improvements to Taft Avenue to create an arterial street connection between the industrial area March 27, 2015 Page 2 to the south and Interstate 80 were anticipated. However, the school district chose not to build on the land to the north and improvements to Scott Boulevard have provided the needed arterial street capacity for commercial and industrial traffic from the south. In addition, the city's growth boundary is located approximately % mile to the east of this location, so it is unlikely, particularly without a school located here that there will be sufficient through traffic or local demand in the area to make it attractive for commercial businesses to locate on the subject property. Since conditions have changed, staff finds that this area is no longer as attractive for commercial businesses as originally anticipated. Furthermore, the City has focused considerable public resources in the ongoing effort to revitalize other eastside commercial areas, including Towncrest and Sycamore Mall. And as noted by the applicant, with the Scott Court neighborhood commercial area located less than a mile to the west and Olde Towne Village approximately 1.5 miles from this location, there are already a number of neighborhood -serving commercial uses nearby. Staff finds that encouraging commercial development in this outlying location may be counter-productive to our efforts to revitalize and maintain a healthy market for commercial services in existing eastside commercial nodes. The Comprehensive Plan encourages a mix of housing types within each neighborhood to provide housing options for residents of all incomes and stages of life. The applicant has requested changing the Comprehensive Plan designation to allow a mix of duplex, townhouse, and multi -family dwellings that will be compatible in scale and design to other homes in the area. The Comprehensive Plan also encouraging clustering medium and high density residential uses in proximity to parks to provide necessary open space for uses that typically do not have private yards. The park will remain a focal point and gathering place for residents in the neighborhood even if commercial uses are not viable in this location. Therefore, for all the reasons stated above, staff finds that it is appropriate to -change the Southeast District Plan Map designation from Mixed Use to a mix of duplex, townhouse and low density multi -family residential at a development density of 8-13 dwelling units/acre. Notwithstanding the absence of commercial uses, similar to how development is described in the Southeast District Plan narrative (see attached) development of this property should contain a mix of housing types with units oriented toward the town square park and toward Court Street, Taft Avenue, and Huntington Drive with parking located central to the lot and behind the buildings and screened to provide an attractive residential character to the streetscape along the park and along neighborhood streets. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission set a .public hearing for April 16 to consider the application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment as described above. Subsequent to that hearing and subject to a favorable recommendation by the Commission, the applicant's request for a conditional rezoning from CN -1 to RM -12 will be considered. The staff report and analysis for the rezoning will be forwarded to the Commission in your April 16 information packet. The applicant intends to hold a Good Neighbor meeting prior to your April 16 meeting to provide information to surrounding residents. b 5 Arlington Development 1486 South 1t Ave Iowa City, Iowa Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, In March of the year 2000, we rezoned this property from ID to C -N1 with the idea that there would be demand on that corner in the future. We were hopeful, but not promised that Taft would be paved within the next 20 years. In the last 15 years we have tried to market the property as commercial, but haven't had any luck. I'm asking to rezone the property to RM -12. That zoning would allow for multi- family use. I believe this would best use for that property and to mesh into the established neighborhood of mixed residential units. This includes RM -12 to the north, RS -5 to the west, and OPD -8 to the south. Here are the following reasons to support my position. Less than one mile away on SWtt Court is following business's that are currently operating. -_; .•t • Convenience Store and Donut/Coffee Shop- • Full Service Restaurant `� N • Day Care Center • Hair Salon • Massage Studio • Chiropractic Office Also there is Old Towne Village which is approximately 1.5 miles from my property. I don't need to list all the business's in the village because they are similar to Scott Court except they have a bank. They still have plenty of land to add more businesses in the future. I'm hopeful this request will be approved so we can start construction as soon as possible. Sincerely, PA • Arlington Development d V O Z u E O u �o M r+ O u N m M m o E w s 0 uw ro C- f0 0p o a .0ma� f° W Ta 3 w ro c a E> n o M> Q c ya� m o+ c o.�0 m -o E 3 1 -° 'a � -p 10 c o E 3 6j,= w o N c ao 0 'aG d .p C +. H to c W w c u L c N *' —'c N .O m C jS C 1C w w � � aw•+ w��� i L C O° > to c 0) 3° m E u ,° E p> w L N o o oExp 00 .0 V L w c to u 0p 43 u U 'O N to 'o w Lp w Iw/1 �-+ ; c _ c p E m i o m s 3 E -z. op E '° c p Y ` L M —> w 0 u m °° O E f0 °' *t' •3 M -° m �^ J � o to w c°, L '° u to ,.>- 3 to E c v E u w w o c N -p 3 to w o c c,E E a`o c o E_, c > � v _ C c4Wl W f° .° c w° •3 Co W 4'�o 3 to c td W O u L u o a y x o m w 3 0 w w U N w v °> c °' w e a.� c' E w w w L~ m 2 u 3 'p twit 3 to L2:- m O. w L ♦., 0 0o c w° f6 3 E - s N L o O. = u •- to c m(N0 X -° N :o .°a w w L w tF'O °C� cwm CN >++ m XOn LCa> o V u � L w oQ. w E o Eoin.° w Em ' w t-c000 o a OL Y t a� O N Y to O w +°+ •v L m a c C s 3 a m w O C `� C Y ar y d Z � iE u O O O Q. m w ca Lv .,— w° w c` 0 c w m c w 10 L L m to E >'o m 1` Z E 3 o w Q42 � Q. ° p p u ` .O t0 0 N m C N C 16 s L �+ d �~ w v um-�•c++ E t c N y 7='� C do to C O �6 P N E w" a s O= L c w d m U to v1 c s 1j �_ L u w to to N -0 Om r u L CQL p p = 0o 00-0 u to O O e .a ` 3 u ° N = L w s =00 O L 00 d C y ` w O c > C 4, to t0 O ? W 0Ni awi W N i p w u N N H U O N O w w eto c w s c 9 to C c 341 Z 0 L N C O "o_ O. U v U L C 0 - u ° ++ r+ w w� i w .Q U c E L c u c w w c 3 w O o *' � L w s L •- to w o, '� t0 0 �o •L a to _� :c L v L t'' f- C L w° E 3 f- r,Z u O w E oo L -f3> v •O N E 'C fC C C 7 C w O w O O w E i mW t0 LO .O C s u ,= M O a `� d '75 t O e� 0 M W 00 C 4S = w " ro to "' bf L S 1L L U 00 m N C Uam 41 'D C C V Q c E o E r n two tts Z 3 V' E E 8 16ILvIts ttS&&I(lb 4&444(6(4444444441444 � c ~ m D � 0- a c° a o m m a w w v � O O S d � d 7 m ° 3 O O O S � » a o � O V d 3 w C d A C m ° a D H 3 d m o= aw N C N O. O N D G N C I C d � D D y 'O C a o d N N d o a N a m ::p o n a d 3 'm m N S m A T O p in C M .Y N � d 3 c o � N � M ti fD M CL CL 3 A d rN, a �• N a O O N � M m m Q n 3 c- E n 'm 'm 'm L o F C. m � m c 0 4 C I n aCi o n D E �. y u a c z 3 m '< NL 3 a g N � c � a F x 3 / // cn Ili, n � TL lN. C �' s 3 5 o D M -' 3 v m v 0 a c< 3 a3 0a0 m� m A n m o J a a' J d p- d tD nd O o 3. J o_ o�aa d'3 x nom, a� aJm a3 aN o N» N 00 N O C d d tOD at o d � 7. N E 0 N QD J C 3 3 ? �e O c o °; D� � mm J :E 0 a o, 3 a o 3. 3 c 3 a, <j c m 01 0- aJa mo. p1 v c m N :° Q 7. N d N ❑ ❑ 3 0 0 a o N c 9 o T 3 c w -O f< N a a m a m N < o- J \ m p eD a 3 m m 3D ate' 0 d 3. m' a ti C O' y G J O_ ^ fl. - c W n o' �< M O_ C O fD < J aJa C O a OQ T T ❑. J N N �, C m N a 3 1 O ?. n N m N a) 0< 7 F+ N fD CM <N ? T 00 ° N �< -<0- 0 S m d d T N c n n c (D N c J 'a�. m m o '^ m m J N O N O' D_ O 44 A \ N M = R! r• N C d N J a m mJ 3 m a m o° ao m O tD - S j y MX mO wo cc o' D 7 3�`i a D O �O �. O c a .o m W w c m d 3 m °: o. v d a c °: c. C, o_ N. q o 3 v 3' m ao „ N" m J 0 a m D m o m .1. 3 r"D 'n 3 o -p o 3 Tam o 3 2 M n M n o d C i O d Q y D `^ rD a r�D M d 0 EL Q J. TO N G CL J c M N C D a m 0 J- a m m o a , O .' n J F re S C fD > T < {D S J n N 2 a C O y, m m J F a o o c0 n C M -•1 < 0 < K o? o .00 'o °' m 2. M N M C m m 3 m N 5' 3 �O 2. Q 'O O M N J J t3D vOi '00 a S O c �+ m s S F 3 .�. a <' m m c 3� T 3 .* c J 0 �y J T x O n O C.NO 7. J I N !D CT N O n �+ ID m N N J rI A MJ 'O O p 3 D M o uCi O c ofD, J c m a J J J aq N N i O_ O! V J d N T d n 'c 01 c a o ri c. a o' n v a o' 3 <, o c 0 x aa Ja o .i d' o c c m -'fD^ m' o 3 v o u' p N N c N n N N a O .y, N 7 m p d N 3 Oi N J d ID d S n C as M c OsJO n� fd O CL F O_ M Fo 3 x .a 3 o' md z om 3�3 . M< O p d c G COQ_ N CL C a) p S fD d J J fD N J an O C < N 0a N O M 0 n 0 m n N 3 J N 3 m a r -OD 3 J 3 o a) 0 v m WA W M V o� 3 d .6 R �eiALAAAASA AAAA A &So& 0° x n rl o c c 01 3 0- o o N o 0c 3 3 rD `c < G ^ N N» W O F m N i m °< °° w? n 0- a'a ?na G-om aNcv w.<O N c T a m m CC F T, °i O ID N O .0+ m n N N J J_, o f a0 O y L J ID W 0- m? °N— w —3.° m 3 m N m„ m o03 mG4`G O .' n J F re S C fD > T < {D S J n N 2 a C O y, m m J F a o o c0 n C M -•1 < 0 < K o? o .00 'o °' m 2. M N M C m m 3 m N 5' 3 �O 2. Q 'O O M N J J t3D vOi '00 a S O c �+ m s S F 3 .�. a <' m m c 3� T 3 .* c J 0 �y J T x O n O C.NO 7. J I N !D CT N O n �+ ID m N N J rI A MJ 'O O p 3 D M o uCi O c ofD, J c m a J J J aq N N i O_ O! V J d N T d n 'c 01 c a o ri c. a o' n v a o' 3 <, o c 0 x aa Ja o .i d' o c c m -'fD^ m' o 3 v o u' p N N c N n N N a O .y, N 7 m p d N 3 Oi N J d ID d S n C as M c OsJO n� fd O CL F O_ M Fo 3 x .a 3 o' md z om 3�3 . M< O p d c G COQ_ N CL C a) p S fD d J J fD N J an O C < N 0a N O M 0 n 0 m n N 3 J N 3 m a r -OD 3 J 3 o a) 0 v m WA W M V o� 3 d .6 R �eiALAAAASA AAAA A &So& Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 32 PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM (CPA15- 00002) A public hearing on amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from Mixed Use to Medium/High-Density Single Family, Townhouse and Multi - Family Residential for property located south of Court Street, west of Taft Avenue. Howard noted that Staff received some correspondence regarding this item prior to the meeting and that was distributed to the Commissioners. Howard summarized the staff report. This property is located at the corner of Court Street and Taft Avenue towards the far northeast side of Iowa City. The applicant has requested a change to the Southeast District Plan map from neighborhood commercial, or as the map shows it, mixed-use, as it is supposed to be a neighborhood commercial area that surrounds the park. Back in 1995 this area was rezoned to have a mixed-use area around a new town square type park. At the time that was planned, there was a plan to have in the northeast district, just to the north of this property across Court Street, there was a planned school site. At that time it was anticipated it would all develop much quicker than it has. Additionally the school district never took advantage of that school site and the property has returned to the ownership of the developer and it has been developed into multi -family buildings across Court Street. Howard showed the Southeast District Plan map showing the area still as mixed-use. The mixed-use talked about in the plan also includes residential and commercial. In 2011 the applicant requested to develop the east part of property into a series of six-plexes that appear as townhouses. That was approved at that time, but the applicant did not yet know what they wanted to do with the northern part of the property. Howard explained that in the Southeast District Plan they discuss commercial properties and to be careful not to dilute the area with retail shopping on the east side of Iowa City. The plan states "if the efforts to revitalize Towncrest and to maintain the viability of the Sycamore Mall and First Avenue commercial corridor are to be successful the City will need to be cautious about zoning additional land along the edge of the city for retail and office development". Howard noted that the land here was already zoned for neighborhood commercial at the time the plan was adopted so a mixed-use designation was left there. However she feels the cautionary statement from the Plan still applies, the City is still trying to revitalize Towncrest, there is also a small neighborhood commercial area at the corner of Scott Boulevard and Court Street, and therefore Staff feels the conditions have changed regarding the pace of development in this area and that Taft Avenue itself has not been improved to urban standards there is really not enough traffic to support a commercial zone. Howard stated that the Comprehensive Plan also encourages a mix of housing types within each neighborhood to provide housing options for residents of all incomes and stages of life, and the applicant has requested changing the Comprehensive Plan designation to allow for a mix of duplex townhouses and a multi -family building on this property that is compatible in scale and design to the other homes that surround this town square type park. Staff feels that is pretty consistent and complimentary to the existing neighborhood and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies of providing a mix of housing in the neighborhood. Therefore Staff finds that the amendment is warranted and is recommending creating a new combination of the two designations that are in the Southeast District Plan for the medium and high density housing that would be a good mix for the area but keep the density at 8-12 units per acre. Staff also recommends deleting the portion of the Southeast District Plan that states this area as commercial zoned. Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 —Formal Meeting Page 3 of 32 Freerks opened public hearing. John Moreland, developer of the site, stated he has owned the property for 20+ years and has built almost all the properties surrounding this area and has been honest with the people buying his properties stating that the property is commercial but that they are not having any luck with putting commercial in that area and therefore would like to rezone it to residential, but can't promise buyers anything. Moreland stated that everyone that lives around the area does prefer the property to be residential, they don't want the noise or the lights of commercial and they don't need the commercial out there, it's a short walk to a convenience store, Midtown Restaurant, etc. He stated that the townhouse concept has been well received, and feels the neighbors are in full support and only three people showed up to the neighborhood meeting and they were all in favor of the plan change. Moreland stated he hopes the Commission will close the public hearing on this item tonight and vote on it, so he can move this item onto Council, the spring season is here and they are pretty much sold out of all their other townhomes and need to build more units. Knowing he will have to go through two or three Council meetings he needs to proceed along. Freerks closed public hearing. Theobald moved to approve CPA15-00002 to amend the Southeast District Map from Mixed Use to a combined Medium/High-Density Single Family, Townhouse and low density Multi- Family and to amend the narrative of the Southeast District to contain a. mix of low and medium density housing with units oriented to the park and toward Court Street, Taft and Huntington with parking behind and to delete CN -1 reference from the narrative. Martin seconded the motion. Martin noted this change makes perfect sense. Eastham also agreed that this was a sensible request, but noted he did receive one communication about the rezoning request which will follow after this item and is unsure how to respond or consider that communication. He did say the person that sent the communication always has the opportunity to approach the developer to see if the developer wants to sell any part of the parcel. Eastham also said the Commission has discussed that the east end of Taft Avenue may eventually open up to commercial development. Freerks agreed, stating that the conditional of Taft Avenue has no change in sight at this time as well as the proximity to commercial and the willingness to support and reinvest in the commercial that already exists on the east side of Iowa City, makes her also support this Comprehensive Plan amendment. Thomas stated while he likes neighborhood commercial he doesn't see the need for it in this location. A vote was taken and motion passed 6-0. REZONING ITEM (CPA15-00002/REZ15-00005) Discussion of an application submitted by Arlington, LC for a rezoning from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -family (RM -12) for approximately 3.34 -acres of Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 32 property located south of Court Street, west of Taft Avenue. Howard explained that this rezoning request is on the same property that was just discussed and now that the Commission has amended the Comprehensive Plan, the application is now to rezone the property to low density multi -family residential (RM -12). Howard showed an aerial photograph of the property, showing the area is surrounded by single family homes and other six-plex townhomes. Howard stated the applicant has requested a conditional zoning, knowing exactly what they wish to build on this property, a 16-plex that faces Taft Avenue and Court Street, duplexes and townhouses that face Court Street and the new park, and then duplexes that face across Huntington Drive on the corner of Court Street and Huntington Drive. She noted that the duplexes that are at the corner of Huntington Drive and Court Street are on a sloped property so there will be a need for a retaining wall there which at its highest point would be approximately 8 feet tall. The applicant is proposing to face the wall with a stone material that would be similar to what would be on the homes and would include a sign with the name of the development. The duplexes are designed as corner lot duplexes, in the low and single family zones the City allows duplexes on the corners, and this is quite a nice design. She noted that all the unit frontages are oriented towards the park, Court Street, Taft Avenue or Huntington Drive. The multifamily building is oriented so all parking is located behind the building and screened from the view of the street and park. Therefore Staff feels this is a well thought out site plan, neighborhood oriented and scaled appropriate. Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00005, rezoning of approximately 3.34 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Taft Avenue and Court Street from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family (RM -12), subject to a conditional zoning agreement that specifies: • Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, building types, and building elevations; and • Design Review approval of the retaining wall design and a landscaping plan to soften views of the retaining wall and screen parking areas from public view. Eastham asked if the retaining wall could be terraced in steps due to the height needed, rather than one solid wall. Howard said that because the way the units will be oriented it would be difficult to fit in a terrace and there is a requirement of a 40 foot setback on Court Street for the buildings. She noted it is a substantial wall but does taper as it moves from the corner and with the landscaping around the wall Staff does not feel it will be obtrusive. Freerks opened the public hearing. John Moreland asked Howard to pull up the aerial that shows the houses on Huntington Drive, and stated that when he has been working with Staff on this plat they have worked hard to soften the transition from the single family homes on Huntington Drive to this new development with the duplexes. He noted that they are below the amount of density they could have done, showing they want this to be a compatible neighborhood, with more green space and landscaping. He also noted it was Howard's idea to switch the doorways on the duplexes along Huntington Drive and once again asked that the Commission vote on this application this evening. Moreland addressed to Eastham his belief that the person that wrote the letter of protest has never been to the unit, they live on one of the coasts and have never driven through this neighborhood. Freerks closed the public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 —Formal Meeting Page 5 of 32 Dyer moved approval of REZ15-00005, rezoning of approximately 3.34 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Taft Avenue and Court Street from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family (RM -12), subject to a conditional zoning agreement that specifies: • Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, building types, and building elevations; and • Design Review approval of the retaining wall design and a landscaping plan to soften views of the retaining wall and screen parking areas from public view. Eastham seconded the motion. Freeks noted this would be a nice addition to round out that neighborhood Thomas also said he supports the project, but shares the concern about the retaining wall. There is a walkway along the west side of the duplexes where the wall will be at a fairly tall height and just requests as they go through the more detailed plan design review that wall is looked at more closely, perhaps adding in two terraces. He said there are not many retaining walls out in that area, and this would be a fairly prominent corner. Theobald supports the application and hopes to see diverse landscaping. Eastham commends the developer and Staff for working together on this project, it is a very good plan and does incorporate multiple building types and somewhat higher density which is helpful in meeting more affordable housing goals. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. Sara Hektoen joined the meeting. REZONING ITEM (REZ15-00006) Discussion of an application submitted by City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Public Institutional (P-1) and Central Business Support (CB -5) to Central Business District (CB -10) for approximately 27,200 square feet of land located at NE corner of College Street & Gilbert Street. Yapp presented the staff report, stating that the majority of the property is at the northeast corner of College Street and Gilbert Street and is owned by the City of Iowa City and therefore the City is the applicant for this rezoning application. Mid -American Energy owns a small substation property which is the CB -5 property. Yapp said the City owned properties in this area were originally purchased to allow for growth for the municipal campus. In 2012 as part of a facilities study the City determined the properties were not needed for government use and should be redeveloped with mixed-use development. Yapp showed an aerial view of the property and surrounding areas. The property is the former location of the Grey Hound Bus Depot, which was previously a gas station. Wilson's Sporting Goods used to occupy the brick building on the property and part of the property is currently used for a surface parking lot. The property is part of the Downtown Planning District in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan. In the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan land use map the property is identified as general commercial use consistent with the rest of downtown. The remainder of the three blocks east of Gilbert Street are identified for public uses. In the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan introduction section it notes � r CITY OF IOWA CITY CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: April 2, 2015 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Karen Howard, Associate Planner Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for property at the intersection of Court Street and Taft Avenue Introduction: The applicant, Arlington LC, has requested an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and the Southeast District Plan to change the land use designation for property located at the intersection of Court Street and Taft Avenue from Mixed Use to Multi -Family Residential. Background: The subject property was rezoned to Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) in 1995 with a Conditional Zoning Agreement that required a town square -type development with mixed uses, including residential and neighborhood -serving commercial uses surrounding and oriented toward the square. Subsequently, the applicant, Arlington Development, dedicated the "town square" to the City as a public park. The Southeast District Plan was adopted in 2011 and in concert with the existing zoning, the area was designated as a mixed-use neighborhood center. In 2011, after building single family homes west of the park and townhouses south of the park, the applicant received approval to rezone the area east of the park to OPD/RM-12 and developed four townhouse -style 6-plexes, two of which face Taft Avenue and two that face the park. At the time the applicant argued that the amount of commercial development proposed around the park was not viable in this location at the edge of the city, but retained the Neighborhood Commercial (CN - 1) Zoning on the lot north of the park that has frontage on Court Street to maintain consistency with the Comprehensive Plan designation. There was some discussion at the time about rezoning this northern lot to Mixed Use (MU), but an application for Mixed Use zoning was withdrawn because the applicant wanted to study the market further for this type of zoning. Subsequent to the 2011 rezoning to OPD/RM-12, the applicant has built out the eastern portion of the property and the townhouse -style units have been well-received in the market. However, the lot north of the park and south of Court Street remains undeveloped. Arlington Development has now submitted an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan to indicate that this property is appropriate for multi -family development rather than commercial uses and to rezone the northern lot from Neighborhood Commercial to Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -12). The applicant argues that because the market for commercial development in this location has never materialized and is unlikely to given the proximity to other nearby neighborhood commercial areas, that the Comprehensive Plan should be amended to allow multi -family development similar in scale and type to the housing along the eastern and southern edge of the park. The applicant's statement is attached. Analysis: Both the Southeast District Plan and the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan show this area as a mixed-use neighborhood center. The property is located in the far northeast corner of the Southeast District at the intersection of Court Street and Taft Avenue and is right across Court Street from the Northeast Planning District. When originally developing plans for this area, it was believed that development would occur more quickly in this area. A school site was proposed directly across Court Street from the proposed neighborhood commercial area and improvements to Taft Avenue to create an arterial street connection between the industrial area March 27, 2015 Page 2 to the south and Interstate 80 were anticipated. However, the school district chose not to build on the land to the north and improvements to Scott Boulevard have provided the needed arterial street capacity for commercial and industrial traffic from the south. In addition, the city's growth boundary is located approximately % mile to the east of this location, so it is unlikely, particularly without a school located here that there will be sufficient through traffic or local demand in the area to make it attractive for commercial businesses to locate on the subject property. Since conditions have changed, staff finds that this area is no longer as attractive for commercial businesses as originally anticipated. Furthermore, the City has focused considerable public resources in the ongoing effort to revitalize other eastside commercial areas, including Towncrest and Sycamore Mall. And as noted by the applicant, with the Scott Court neighborhood commercial area located less than a mile to the west and Olde Towne Village approximately 1.5 miles from this location, there are already a number of neighborhood -serving commercial uses nearby. Staff finds that encouraging commercial development in this outlying location may be counter-productive to our efforts to revitalize and maintain a healthy market for commercial services in existing eastside commercial nodes. The Comprehensive Plan encourages a mix of housing types within each neighborhood to provide housing options for residents of all incomes and stages of life. The applicant has requested changing the Comprehensive Plan designation to allow a mix of duplex, townhouse, and multi -family dwellings that will be compatible in scale and design to other homes in the area. The Comprehensive Plan also encouraging clustering medium and high density residential uses in proximity to parks to provide necessary open space for uses that typically do not have private yards. The park will remain a focal point and gathering place for residents in the neighborhood even if commercial uses are not viable in this location. Therefore, for all the reasons stated above, staff finds that it is appropriate to change the Southeast District Plan Map designation from Mixed Use to a mix of duplex, townhouse and low density multi -family residential at a development density of 8-13 dwelling units/acre. Notwithstanding the absence of commercial uses, similar to how development is described in the Southeast District Plan narrative (see attached) development of this property should contain a mix of housing types with units oriented toward the town square park and toward Court Street, Taft Avenue, and Huntington Drive with parking located central to the lot and behind the buildings and screened to provide an attractive residential character to the streetscape along the park and along neighborhood streets. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission set a public hearing for April 16 to consider the application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment as described above. Subsequent to that hearing and subject to a favorable recommendation by the Commission, the applicant's request for a conditional rezoning from CN -1 to RM -12 will be considered. The staff report and analysis for the rezoning will be forwarded to the Commission in your April 16 information packet. The applicant intends to hold a Good Neighbor meeting prior to your April 16 meeting to provide information to surrounding residents. Arlington Development 1486 South 1t Ave Iowa City, Iowa Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, In March of the year 2000, we rezoned this property from ID to C -N1 with the idea that there would be demand on that corner in the future. We were hopeful, but not promised that Taft would be paved within the next 20 years. In the last 15 years we have tried to market the property as commercial, but haven't had any luck. I'm asking to rezone the property to RM -12. That zoning would allow for multi- family use. I believe this would best use for that property and to mesh into the established neighborhood of mixed residential units. This includes RM -12 to the north, RS -5 to the west, and OPD -8 to the south. Here are the following reasons to support my position. Less than one mile away on sjrott Court is following business's that are currently operating. • Convenience Store and Donut/Coffee Shop • Full Service Restaurant G� az • Day Care Center • Hair Salon , • Massage Studio • Chiropractic Office c n Also there is Old Towne Village which is approximately 1.5 miles from my property. I don't need to list all the business's in the village because they are similar to Scott Court except they have a bank. They still have plenty of land to add more businesses in the future. I'm hopeful this request will be approved so we can start construction as soon as possible. Sincerely, Arlington Development ' 9 < C) {)! § n� � z@ % 2 !| \\ •|Q\ ® 7 ! ®7§�k$[( \�` '§\ 2 /e \ \ i (q);Qm§§ ) d M O Z to :11- m m t V a- m m d 0 m O v N CO o v ++„m 1 E L -0pO tOH> •in A +tn 4 O U _ M ++ ma -1 dJ CL E O t .� C m -O (> C 0 a1 Y L L m L (Q y m °' a� U L a) 0 0 C — o= m c v o O 3 a-0 >, ai m a� 6 3 > �n m 41 a C °' s -2 A _ d s L v:3 r+ d ;[ +�+ ami L 41 o -a Z a Q o CL m M m n m c 41 .!= c 2 �a -° c 3 W o u f° C — ai aoi o v COJ N O c u LJ O 41 f0 N aJ L a! QJ t Ta - `° °c ami f0 v = Q o m o -0 3 L, 3 ° u a N m C f0 'D i0 3 = 41 L a! ' = m C Ln OD aJ O m U C C m m "O al L p -° U 0 E m E m -O u -= C m U a) U m �' = H O N 41 > Ln0 vii O _� In L a ,+O OA 41 1 ° m a+ a (� m N C Z 3 L L U a) Ln 0W ° o vi m '^ vm, �; _ ami m = °� . ; 0 3 -0 .° 3 -o '3 3 o= 41 E m Ltw ° rat 0 E p`� t aJ u to m _>_4 aOY O ama a aa L p bb C -0 W — `~ Lam m m m U a� 0 o E E _ m t v ,� a) 3 -m �C.+ z VV N °�' -° r, W y a' v1 4� C! `n LA -o .-• D o F- = O L L m o f aJ u L m u pp > 3 j E 'f0 p Z = U d 3 E E_ rS = QJ C L° E ate+ '8 S 'O cn a1 Q y C N C CL EE 41 E c Q °° ao ° m ate+ U X= 3 m L ,Lo c 5 5 c .� — d s +' m 4, 3 3 o o y O +� a>i c v v v m p C 3 m v* Z o a)” c 3 ro m V v ,° u 41 'o I v o c. ° }-� 41 U x �' c w m c 3 w o •L U O -0 d U a o` QJ 'L >. L 0) 4- U w� _u L Q� •L t L N t o � a N E a% w aI ba O m a m L L t6 E v Ln ` '"o c a ~ °' 6> Y c u u 3 3 a� 3 m s F°-° aU' m a° S- 41 v*'i E .o m oa e= 3 c a, o � t 0 C H o m *' rn o N m 4- E o m E 3 a G% E ie m m o-0 t m p `'n L p C u o O m v v CL X.= V m �n LC C O A a°+ L 4To 0 p m u 0) O 41 0)> 41 +' "O t' ` OCO 3 • V L C cr L ', � a 7 v C _ m $'+ a) O -C 4, Oq m , 41 ( 42 H m S E o E m 1n .2 tea, E ro U Q c E o E 4, .°° a m m -o Cob ar Z CDc c v m 4] O 7 c' � - _� £ � c c c 'gym' O � � C U m m n 'm a � O N.Y `Z •� � N m S o m N N = N m E x m �er w. hid P:,I ria. IN. a Mlia _ 1. �Ix„ = nnnanmin64 �.Of ®1 N. L0 r) ®1 N. L0 O` s s w �. O J m J d 'o o— d v 2 W m o. S �^ S O^ w M ° m n N N C o ° m O O< n f N 3 aw,�J ^. o° � C m'SO O . d ^ — � 3 gC.a O C N umi C =:3 f.n Mo N m n o m ° Qr °- 3 j m m C K N N m 7• M m oy N S W ° •< N rr 7 S 3 r 7 G> ID In° 3 w m oa c •� 3 3 N, a J=O. m m d< n .J+ C n J .-r C =. 0- d m m .°. m 0 G m< m G. s Q J n a m m m v o v w' m 3 m n m J L m 0 m S c m o 3 N m m m m m C n .Nr ^ N p^-�. m m < J m d mm o CL - 0 ^1. O .. J m J 0 n J N m F o 0 0 J J C 3 > a m W m m J C N y a Jd Q m h m'm < o m ad o 3>ID m �. n 5. m O. = m a 3 p o 0 m N o n n m 'i Q ° < F< n m 0 d n m 7 o m a i '° m' n vi c m n 0 W—m 10 OJOH = fD J. NKD 3 eN_} 'C m° m fm 'G 00 mn n3 0 .J+° N M ID w d N S F n S fM m T. 0 G j ° c .mi J C 7 Q N m W Z S c ^ n C `� m N, C J '°O L. d ° OJO m M J d cr ^ v m m m 0 $ 0 A O f A uci >• 3 a"i d D• O �. o S C o• m f O x `N° d d C CL >.mJ -e n N d ry .m. a ''. fC—D d CL C? CL w A �'• C z nv J e d s 3 n 3 o 0 3 T S m c 3 c W n 10 m d M O ° O m m a o CL ^ O J m _ < w' ^ CLm m S m n S o .0 m c m C 0 FL W o o m C- n c .Nr N C J ID m m n m 'r J m m Z;O m 0 •+ n O_ m S 0 N. G ti, 1Y 6 O m O �, a O y n J m .mi m o c J N m m z CL N 3 " < m< O f m m `1 m < W m O J d m S I+' S W N m V mS C CO m m m c S °— m< 3 o n a m N N C S O_ m mCi Zm o m •° m"° m N c m 3 o .° m _ m m d o OQ 3 C: K w d o- �, ^ 3 c �.c Q 2 \°= m. 3. 3 o m 3 CL .^ w mm O = m m m F> m n m v y a .Nr __ N O_ m 0_ m J F o; -O m m W a F y' .< C o_ m m m , my -i < m•� ^ O 0 O-0 -O m m , 0 N m m 0 m a m 3 m d v< °< W m N 3 ° F; 0= 'R o m 3 m m 3 m° o °'N m m J m N 3 3. m * n N G n m m J S m �, c d o m s N s f n 3. 3i v< m m c 3 F? 3 '• m y O' m, a i N m m d m C .Jo C J N O °' N m m M K X M N CL :ES m d 3 0 0' 7 -o J N I n S< cr J .mi m m O ^ 7 m m m m N n J m 3 f 0 o° 3> m o a o c f. 0. m n m '. 7 m N N C m S J J J KW jn m m m -0 d m s m o N c 3 c n 3 a 0 0= 3 7, m 3 m ^ v c m 3 s m n— ET.J J n< W O O y m m C m N m C N n m ^ 0 n 3 o h .°. 0. 0 m ^ n 0 O" C c C S N N 2 fD S m O J WJ s W C s 3 0 o a° S o m n c m a 3< m ? m m o Q f m e CL 01 n c o m Lh. O m OQ K m J m N. m n< J N N f C M �< m W N O m O N m 3 N 3 0 n N vW m ° N, c n 0 m m 3° n m m m J m< m^ 3 d 01 N 110 A& IS ! A& i AS A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A• 4/!•• Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015—Formal Meeting Page 2 of 30 PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM (CPA15- 000021 A public hearing on amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from Mixed Use to Medium/High-Density Single Family, Townhouse and Multi - Family Residential for property located south of Court Street, west of Taft Avenue. Howard noted that Staff received some correspondence regarding this item prior to the meeting and that was distributed to the Commissioners. Howard summarized the staff report. This property is located at the corner of Court Street and Taft Avenue towards the far northeast side of Iowa City. The applicant has requested a change to the Southeast District Plan map from neighborhood commercial, or as the map shows it, mixed-use, as it is supposed to be a neighborhood commercial area that surrounds the park. Back in 1995 this area was rezoned to have a mixed-use area around a new town square type park. At the time that was planned, there was a plan to have in the northeast district, just to the north of this property across Court Street, there was a planned school site. At that time it was anticipated it would all develop much quicker than it has. Additionally the school district never took advantage of that school site and the property has returned to the ownership of the developer and it has been developed into multi -family buildings across Court Street. Howard showed the Southeast District Plan map showing the area still as mixed-use. The mixed-use talked about in the plan also includes residential and commercial. In 2011 the applicant requested to develop the east part of property into a series of six-plexes that appear as townhouses. That was approved at that time, but the applicant did not yet know what they wanted to do with the northern part of the property. Howard explained that in the Southeast District Plan they discuss commercial properties and to be careful not to dilute the area with retail shopping on the east side of Iowa City. The plan states "if the efforts to revitalize Towncrest and to maintain the viability of the Sycamore Mall and First Avenue commercial corridor are to be successful the City will need to be cautious about zoning additional land along the edge of the city for retail and office development'. Howard noted that the land here was already zoned for neighborhood commercial at the time the plan was adopted so a mixed-use designation was left there. However she feels the cautionary statement from the Plan still applies, the City is still trying to revitalize Towncrest, there is also a small neighborhood commercial area at the corner of Scott Boulevard and Court Street, and therefore Staff feels the conditions have changed regarding the pace of development in this area and that Taft Avenue itself has not been improved to urban standards there is really not enough traffic to support a commercial zone. Howard stated that the Comprehensive Plan also encourages a mix of housing types within each neighborhood to provide housing options for residents of all incomes and stages of life, and the applicant has requested changing the Comprehensive Plan designation to allow for a mix of duplex townhouses and a multi -family building on this property that is compatible in scale and design to the other homes that surround this town square type park. Staff feels that is pretty consistent and complimentary to the existing neighborhood and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies of providing a mix of housing in the neighborhood. Therefore Staff finds that the amendment is warranted and is recommending creating a new combination of the two designations that are in the Southeast District Plan for the medium and high density housing that would be a good mix for the area but keep the density at 8-12 units per acre. Staff also recommends deleting the portion of the Southeast District Plan that states this area as commercial zoned. Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 3 of 30 Freerks opened public hearing. John Moreland, developer of the site, stated he has owned the property for 20+ years and has built almost all the properties surrounding this area and has been honest with the people buying his properties stating that the property is commercial but that they are not having any luck with putting commercial in that area and therefore would like to rezone it to residential, but can't promise buyers anything. Moreland stated that everyone that lives around the area does prefer the property to be residential, they don't want the noise or the lights of commercial and they don't need the commercial out there, it's a short walk to a convenience store, Midtown Restaurant, etc. He stated that the townhouse concept has been well received, and feels the neighbors are in full support and only three people showed up to the neighborhood meeting and they were all in favor of the plan change. Moreland stated he hopes the Commission will close the public hearing on this item tonight and vote on it, so he can move this item onto Council, the spring season is here and they are pretty much sold out of all their other townhomes and need to build more units. Knowing he will have to go through two or three Council meetings he needs to proceed along. Freerks closed public hearing. Theobald moved to approve CPA15-00002 to amend the Southeast District Map from Mixed Use to a combined Medium/High-Density Single Family, Townhouse and low density Multi- Family and to amend the narrative of the Southeast District to contain a mix of low and medium density housing with units oriented to the park and toward Court Street, Taft and Huntington with parking behind and to delete CNA reference from the narrative. Martin seconded the motion. Martin noted this change makes perfect sense Eastham also agreed that this was a sensible request, but noted he did receive one communication about the rezoning request which will follow after this item and is unsure how to respond or consider that communication. He did say the person that sent the communication always has the opportunity to approach the developer to see if the developer wants to sell any part of the parcel. Eastham also said the Commission has discussed that the east end of Taft Avenue may eventually open up to commercial development. Freerks agreed, stating that the conditional of Taft Avenue has no change in sight at this time as well as the proximity to commercial and the willingness to support and reinvest in the commercial that already exists on the east side of Iowa City, makes her also support this Comprehensive Plan amendment. Thomas stated while he likes neighborhood commercial he doesn't see the need for it in this location. A vote was taken and motion passed 6-0. REZONING ITEM (CPA15-00002/REZ15-000051 Discussion of an application submitted by Arlington, LC for a rezoning from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -family (RM -12) for approximately 3.34 -acres of property located south of Court Street, west of Taft Avenue. Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 30 Howard explained that this rezoning request is on the same property that was just discussed and now that the Commission has amended the Comprehensive Plan, the application is now to rezone the property to low density multi -family residential (RM -12). Howard showed an aerial photograph of the property, showing the area is surrounded by single family homes and other six-plex townhomes. Howard stated the applicant has requested a conditional zoning, knowing exactly what they wish to build on this property, a 16-plex that faces Taft Avenue and Court Street, duplexes and townhouses that face Court Street and the new park, and then duplexes that face across Huntington Drive on the corner of Court Street and Huntington Drive. She noted that the duplexes that are at the corner of Huntington Drive and Court Street are on a sloped property so there will be a need for a retaining wall there which at its highest point would be approximately 8 feet tall. The applicant is proposing to face the wall with a stone material that would be similar to what would be on the homes and would include a sign with the name of the development. The duplexes are designed as corner lot duplexes, in the low and single family zones the City allows duplexes on the corners, and this is quite a nice design. She noted that all the unit frontages are oriented towards the park, Court Street, Taft Avenue or Huntington Drive. The multifamily building is oriented so all parking is located behind the building and screened from the view of the street and park. Therefore Staff feels this is a well thought out site plan, neighborhood oriented and scaled appropriate. Staff recommends approval of REV 5-00005, rezoning of approximately 3.34 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Taft Avenue and Court Street from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family (RM -12), subject to a conditional zoning agreement that specifies: • Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, building types, and building elevations; and • Design Review approval of the retaining wall design and a landscaping plan to soften views of the retaining wall and screen parking areas from public view. Eastham asked if the retaining wall could be terraced in steps due to the height needed, rather than one solid wall. Howard said that because the way the units will be oriented it would be difficult to fit in a terrace and there is a requirement of a 40 foot setback on Court Street for the buildings. She noted it is a substantial wall but does taper as it moves from the corner and with the landscaping around the wall Staff does not feel it will be obtrusive. Freerks opened the public hearing. John Moreland asked Howard to pull up the aerial that shows the houses on Huntington Drive, and stated that when he has been working with Staff on this plat they have worked hard to soften the transition from the single family homes on Huntington Drive to this new development with the duplexes. He noted that they are below the amount of density they could have done, showing they want this to be a compatible neighborhood, with more green space and landscaping. He also noted it was Howard's idea to switch the doorways on the duplexes along Huntington Drive and once again asked that the Commission vote on this application this evening. Moreland addressed to Eastham his belief that the person that wrote the letter of protest has never been to the unit, they live on one of the coasts and have never driven through this neighborhood. Freerks closed the public hearing. Dyer moved approval of REZ15-00005, rezoning of approximately 3.34 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Taft Avenue and Court Street from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family (RM -12), subject to a conditional zoning Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 12 of 14 Eastham seconded the amendment. Eastham moved to amend item 3 to state to recommend the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan be amended to update the Central District Plan map as shown on exhibit B. Dyer seconded the amendment. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. Martin rejoined the meeting. Set a public hearing for April 16, 2015 for discussion of amendments the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from Mixed Use to Multi -family Residential for property located south of Court Street, west of Taft Avenue. Miklo noted the Staff memo explains the proposed amendment and it will be available to the public over the next couple of weeks. The Commission will hold the public hearing at the next meeting and there may also be a zoning change associated with this amendment on that agenda as well. Eastham moved to set a public hearing for April 16, 2015 for discussion of amendments the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from Mixed Use to Multi- family Residential for property located south of Court Street, west of Taft Avenue. Theobald seconded the motion. Hektoen noted that she owns property in that area and will not be advising the Commission with regards to this amendment. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Miklo noted that the March 16 and March 19 minutes were not available at this time. Eastham moved to approve the February 3 and February 19 meeting minutes as amended. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Eastham moved to defer the March 16 and March 19 meeting minutes. Swygard seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. PLANNING & ZONING INFORMATION Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 13 of 14 Theobald asked about plans for a University power plant on the westside. Miklo answered that he was not aware of the plans. Theobald had read in the paper that the University was planning a new westside power plant. She feels it could have an impact on evelopments to the west, as it will be across from West High School. Eastham noted that at the Council meeting last week they were considering appointments to the Commission and there was a discussion where the word dysfunctional was used to describe this Commission. Freerks and Eastham agree that is not an accurate term to describe their Commission. Eastham noted that perhaps the Council used the term dysfunctional as a positive term and that he would do his best to live up to their dysfunctional standards. Freerks noted that she has received many positive comments on the way the Commission conducts business in the most open fashion possible and prides themselves in that very much. She said perhaps the reason it might seem dysfunctional to others is because they work to do all their business out in the open and that means things don't happen quickly and swiftly, they explain things and talk about things, and then get them done eventually and hopefully in the right fashion. She noted that perhaps City Council and others do a lot of work not during public meetings. They are a political body, the Commission is not. Additionally they no longer have informal meetings on the Mondays prior to the formal Thursday meetings that was taken away with some budget cuts, so they use the Thursday meetings to discuss and talk through some of the points. Freerks agreed with Eastham that she was slightly offended, but thinks it is naive for someone to say that. Eastham agreed and noted that if any Council member wants to meet with him personally, or talk to the Commission as a whole, they are welcome. He noted that this Commission is the best group he has ever been a member of that diligently tries to follow the rules, all have read the zoning code, all have read the Comprehensive Plan, the elements they are responsible for implementing, and he feels they do a better job of following the zoning code and following the Comprehensive Plan and are not second to any other government body in that regard. ADJOURNMENT Swygard moved to adjourn. Theobald seconded. Motion carried 7-0. Prepared by: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator, PCD, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; I?_1L 319-356-5252 (REZ15-00006) ORDINANCE NO. ONDITIONALLY REZONING 1LLOOCATATELY 0.62 ACRES OF ED"AT �NQQTHEAST CORNER OF COLLEGE STREET AND GILBERT STREETT,,P FROM PU P ) D CENTRAL BUSINESS SUPPORT (CB -5) TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT )006) O WA WHEREAS, the applicant, the City of Iowa City, has requested a rezoning of property located at the northeast corner of College Street and Gilbert Street from Public (P-1) and Central Business Support (CB -5) Zones to Central Business District (CB -10) Zone; and WHEREAS, the City owns a majority of the property and has determi d that the property is not needed for public use; and WHEREAS, the property is within one block of several public facilities, i cluding City Hall, the Recreation Center, the Swan Parking Facility and Chauncey Swan Park and is within a sy walking distance of the Public Library, Downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa campus, fronts o a four -lane arterial street (Gilbert Street) and is served by multipl public transit routes; and WHEREAS, the property c ntains no residential properties, no istoric properties, and is currently underutilized for substandard stor a uses and surface parking; and WHEREAS, the IC2030 Co rehensive Plan Future Lan Use Map identifies the property as appropriate for general commercial u s; and WHEREAS, the IC2030 Compreh sive Plan identifies the operty as being in the Downtown Planning District; and WHEREAS, the IC2030 Comprehens a Plan acknowl ges there is increasing demand for higher - density urban housing and supports quali infill devel ment, maintaining a strong, accessible and pedestrian -oriented downtown, compact and a cient de v lopment, and the construction of Class A Office space in new mixed-use buildings; and WHEREAS, the CB -10 Zone is an appropriate o ing designation to encourage higher density, mixed use projects in the downtown area on property which i ell -served by street access, public transit, sidewalks and parking facilities; and WHERES, pursuant to Iowa Code § 414.5, th a publi needs can be addressed through the imposition of certain conditions over and above the existing ning code limit the building height and massing, require certain on-site parking, and include Class A off space; and WHEREAS, the owners have agreed that a property shall b developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agr ment attached here to ensure appropriate development in this area of the city. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAIN D BY THE CITY COUNC OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I APPROVAL. Subject to t e Conditional Zoning Agreement a ched hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is her y reclassified from its current zoning esignation of Public (P-1) to Central Business District (CB -10): Lots 5, 6, and the West 160 feeYof the 20 -foot wide alley in Block 43, Original To%\Plat, Iowa City, Iowa SECTION II. ZONING MAP. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. SECTION III. CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT. The mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the property owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. SECTION IV. 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 120. MAYOR Q 7C o Cr% AF' Pre -flit: inp, Development Services Coordinator, 4 06) Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5252 2015 MAY -5 AM 11 : O6 CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THX--Jy Is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hOAd the City of Iowa City and MidAmerican Energy Company (hereinafter WHEREAS, Owners are the legal ti le holder of approximately 0.62 acres of property located at the north east corner of College reet and Gilbert Street; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa CitV has requested the rezoning of said property from Public (P-1) and Central Business Supp rt (CB -5) Zones to Central Business District (CB -10) Zone; and WHEREAS, I a Code §414. (2015) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions n granting a applicant's rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to s 'sfy public qeeds caused by the requested change; and WHEREAS, the ONing knowledge that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to ensure thpment of the property enhances the goals of the Comprehensive Plan spece need for Class A Office Space, on-site parking for residential uses, a mixed -ug, and step -backs in height at the third and fifth floors to minimize the impression of eight; and WHEREAS, theOwn rs agree develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Conditional oning Agree ent. NOW, THEREFORE, in/consideration of a mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. The City of Ia City and MidAmerica Energy Company are the collective legal title holders oft property legally described s Lots 5 and 6, and the West 160 feet of the 20 -foot wid alley in Block 43, Original To Plat, Iowa City, Iowa. 2. The Ow rs acknowledges that the City wishIN to ensure conformance to the principles of the omprehensive Plan. Further, the pa s acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2015) rovides that the City of Iowa City may im ose reasonable conditions on granting an ap licant's rezoning request, over and above he existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject roperty, Owners agree that development of the subject property will conform to all oth r requirements of the zoning chapter, as well as the following conditions: a. Any building constructed there on shall be a mixed-use building no more than 15 stories in height; shall contain a minimum of two floors of Class A Office space; b. The building height shall step -backs at the third and the fifth floors along the Gilbert Street frontage and at least 70 feet of the College Street frontage; c. All required parking for residential uses being provided on-site; and 1 d. The exterior building design shall be approved by the City's Design Review Committee prior to issuance of any building permit. 4. The Owners acknowledge that the conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2015), and that said conditions satisfy public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. The Owners acknowledge that in the event the subje property is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will c nform with the terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. 6. The parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning greement shall be deemed to be a c venant running with the land and with title to the and, and shall remain in full force and ect as a covenant with title to the land, unle s or until released of record by the City of wa City. The partie94,,urther acknowledge that this agree nt shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successor representatives, and assigns o he parties. 7. The Owners ac k ledge that nothing i this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve VCo o plying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 8. The parties agree thnal Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordthe subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at t. Dated this day of CITY OF IOWA CITY Matthew J Hayek, Attest: r Marian K. Kafr, City Clerk Approved by: City Attorney's Office 2 20_ MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY By: MidAmerican Energy Company By: c), z c7�*� CJ7 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on 20_ by Matthew J. Hayek and Marian K. Karr as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the 4ty of Iowa City. Notary Public in and fbr the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Raq�) MIDAMERICAN ENERGY ACKNLEDGEMENT STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged Inc. g 7 me on , 20_ by as of , Notary Public in NQd for said County and State (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) 3 a ems+ .rte y► cr 05-19-15 6(a;'k - rsC Prepared by: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator, PCD, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5252 (REZ15-00006) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 0.62 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COLLEGE STREET AND GILBERT STREET, FROM PUBLIC (P-1) AND CENTRAL BUSINESS SUPPORT (CB -5) TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CB -10). (REZ15-00006) WHEREAS, the applicant, the City of Iowa City, has requested a rezoning of property located at the northeast corner of College Street and Gilbert Street from Public (P-1) and Central Business Support (CB -5) Zones to Central Business District (CB -10) Zone; and WHEREAS, the City owns a majority of the property and has determined that the property is not needed for public use; and WHEREAS, the property is within one block of several public facilities, including City Hall, the Recreation Center, the Swan Parking Facility and Chauncey Swan Park and is within easy walking distance of the Public Library, Downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa campus, fronts on a four -lane arterial street (Gilbert Street) and is served by multiple public transit routes; and WHEREAS, the property contains no residential properties, no historic properties, and is currently underutilized for substandard storage uses and surface parking; and WHEREAS, the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map identifies the property as appropriate for general commercial uses; and WHEREAS, the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies the property as being in the Downtown Planning District; and WHEREAS, the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan acknowledges there is increasing demand for higher - density urban housing and supports quality infill development, maintaining a strong, accessible and pedestrian -oriented downtown, compact and efficient development, and the construction of Class A Office space in new mixed-use buildings; and WHEREAS, the CB -10 Zone is an appropriate zoning designation to encourage higher density, mixed use projects in the downtown area on property which is well -served by street access, public transit, sidewalks and parking facilities; and WHERES, pursuant to Iowa Code § 414.5, these public needs can be addressed through the imposition of certain conditions over and above the existing zoning code to limit the building height and massing, require certain on-site parking, and include Class A office space; and WHEREAS, the owners have agreed that the property shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto to ensure appropriate development in this area of the city. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I APPROVAL. Subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is hereby reclassified from its current zoning designation of Public (P-1) to Central Business District (CB -10): Lots 5, 6, and the West 160 feet of the 20 -foot wide alley in Block 43, Original Town Plat, Iowa City, Iowa SECTION II. ZONING MAP. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. SECTION III. CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT. The mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the property owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. SECTION IV. 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_. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Approved by City Attorneys Office 3%r Ordinance No. Page It was moved by and seconded by _ Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton First Consideration Vote for passage: Second Consideration _ Vote for passage: Date published that the Prepared by: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5252 (REZ15-00006) CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), and the City of Iowa City and MidAmerican Energy Company (hereinafter "Owners"). WHEREAS, Owners are the legal title holder of approximately 0.62 acres of property located at the north east corner of College Street and Gilbert Street; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City has requested the rezoning of said property from Public (P-1) and Central Business Support (CB -5) Zones to Central Business District (CB -10) Zone; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code §414.5 (2015) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and WHEREAS, the Owners acknowledge that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to ensure the development of the property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the need for Class A Office Space, on-site parking for residential uses, a mixed-use building, and step -backs in height at the third and fifth floors to minimize the impression of building height; and WHEREAS, the Owners agree to develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. The City of Iowa City and MidAmerican Energy Company are the collective legal title holders of the property legally described as Lots 5 and 6, and the West 160 feet of the 20 -foot wide alley in Block 43, Original Town Plat, Iowa City, Iowa. 2. The Owners acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2015) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owners agree that development of the subject property will conform to all other requirements of the zoning chapter, as well as the following conditions: a. Any building constructed there on shall be a mixed-use building no more than 15 stories in height and shall contain a minimum of two floors of Class A Office space; b. The building height shall step -back at the third and the fifth floors along the Gilbert Street frontage and at least 70 feet of the College Street frontage; c. All required parking for residential uses shall be provided on-site; and d. The exterior building design shall be approved by the City's Design Review Committee prior to issuance of any building permit. 4. The Owners acknowledge that the conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2015), and that said conditions satisfy public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. The Owners acknowledge that in the event the subject property is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will conform with the terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. 6. The parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full force and effect as a covenant with title to the land, unless or until released of record by the City of Iowa City. The parties further acknowledge that this agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties. 7. The Owners acknowledge 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. 8. The parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the City's expense. Dated this day of CITY OF IOWA CITY Matthew J Hayek, Mayor Attest: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk Approved by: ity Attorney's Office 2 20_ MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY By: MidAmerican Energy Company By: CITY OF IOWA CITY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 20_ by Matthew J. Hayek and Marian K. Karr as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) MIDAMERICAN ENERGY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 20_ by as Inc. of , Notary Public in and for said County and State (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) 3 ,t mom; CITY •� CITY OF IOWA CITY IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: May 13, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator %y'�'1� Re: Protest petition for the proposed rezoning at the NE comer of College St / Gilbert St Introduction City Code Section 14 -8D -5G states that if a protest against a zoning map amendment is presented in writing to the City Clerk, duly signed and notarized by the owners of 20% of the area of the lots included in the area for which a zoning map amendment is proposed or by the owners of 20% or more of the property which is located within 200 feet of the exterior boundaries of the area for which the amendment is proposed, such amendment shall require the favorable vote of 3/ of the members of the City Council for passage. This is referred to as the '20% rule.' Discussion The City Clerk's office has received a 'Protest of Rezoning' from Trinity Episcopal Church related to the proposed rezoning at the NE corner of College St and Gilbert St (see attached). To date, this is the only zoning protest received related to this proposed rezoning. Using a Geographic Information System (GIS) map, staff has calculated the total area within 200 feet of the property proposed to be rezoned, and the area of the Trinity Church property within 200 feet. The Trinity Church property is approximately 7% of the area within 200 feet of the property proposed for rezoning (see attached map). Total area within 200 feet: 257,575 square feet Trinity Church property within 200 feet: 18.152 square feet Percentage of Trinity Church property: 7.05 percent (%) Conclusion The Protest of Rezoning represents approximately 7% of the area within 200 feet of the area proposed for rezoning. Therefore, the 3/4's majority vote requirement is not triggered for the proposed rezoning of the NE corner of College St / Gilbert St. V � #10 C� V N3iing NVn _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ / • / O n C V a d a IL a .o d C O 3 r I O a �_ U I d VJ m I d I O I U I 1 I ' 1N38110 / \ZE > > = a F2 a � w w J U • PROTEST OF REZONING TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ( j IOWA CITY, IOWA CITY OFIOI•VA CITY We, the undersigned, being the owners of property included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property: ff r;7 x I rte: fc I Y z ri oclo .f . it 16t yE,cor-n.Pr'o� a,,-A,5k Cqiltoe✓f-Yre-R_� 115-00CVi;, This protest is signed and acknowledged with the intention that such rezoning shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the members of the council, all in accordance with Section 414.5 of the Code of Iowa. Property Address: 32-4 & . L I ! e r ( - , 1 Z) , Yt" CLQ 5+ �► INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER(S): 0 N W M 0 STATE OF IOWA ) JOHNSON COUNTY) ss: This instrument was acknowledged before me on (Date) by and (name(s) of individual property owner(s)). Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SIGNING FOR PROPERTY OV NER(S): STATE OF IOWA ) JOHNSON COUNTY) ss:C►%6$4 SfA' 1,.pwt� This instrument was acknowledged before me on ._.......Z' n Zo15 (Date) by __ AVi an A,11AL S u1StkA (name(s) of person(s)) as 4'i t�¢,r 5 (type of authority, such as officer, trustee) of (name of property owner) . 4tart' Public ' d for the State of Iowa �amrn;53roYt ���.5�b3 tin�il�5 tt ��b+2p1� Orig: Subd Folder 02/2013 Cc: CA — PCD - Council - Media File CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: May 8, 2015 To: John Yapp; Development Services Coordinator From: Kent Ralston; Transportation Planner 6� Re: Parking Demand for `The Chauncey' Development Proposal Background This parking analysis is regarding the proposed Chauncey development at the corner of College Street and Gilbert Street. While all of the required parking for the residential units will be provided on-site (52 spaces), there will also be off-site parking demand generated by the project. Staff has estimated that the development, as proposed, would require an estimated 161 off-site parking spaces during peak daytime hours (9AM-5PM) and approximately 146 off-site parking spaces during peak evening hours (5PM-9AM). Both daytime and evening parking demand estimates were created to reflect the reality of actual parking demand for different land - uses. For instance, hotels have a peak parking demand during evening hours - while a one parking space to one hotel room ratio was used to calculate evening peak parking demand, a 40% reduction was applied to calculate daytime peak demand. At the April 16th Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, there was public input questioning whether City -owned parking ramps have the capacity for additional off-street parking generated by the proposed development. Per your request, this memo provides additional detail on the capacity and occupancy of City -owned parking structures and the City's ability to provide for the additional parking demand. Analysis The Chauncey Swan parking ramp has a physical capacity of 457 spaces. Data collected between April 13th and May 10th shows the facility has an average occupancy of 315 vehicles (or 69% of total capacity) Monday -Friday 9AM-5PM. On average, this means there are 142 available spaces per hour — nearly enough for the 161 estimated peak daytime off-site parking demand of the proposed development. Occupancy data after 5PM for the ramp is not available. However, City employees currently hold 116 permits in the Chauncey Swan ramp. Assuming that conservatively 50% of these employees vacate the ramp at 5PM, this provides an additional 58 available spaces. These 58 spaces in addition to the 142 spaces currently available at 5PM would, on.average, leave 200 available spaces per hour after 5PM — more than enough to accommodate the estimated evening peak hour demand of the development. Data collected for Saturdays shows that between 9AM-5PM there are approximately 218 spaces available per hour in the Chauncey ramp. Given that the office uses of the development are assumed to be closed on weekends, there should be ample parking in the ramp to accommodate the proposed development. At times when the Farmer's Market is in operation the number of available spaces in the Chauncey ramp is greatly reduced. However, between 8AM-noon on an average Saturday, the Dubuque Street and Tower Place parking ramps have more than 500 parking spaces available to accommodate any overflow. Data for the Chauncey ramp is not available for Sundays. May 14, 2015 Page 2 Conclusion Data collected shows that even during. peak hours, the Chauncey Swan ramp would be able to accommodate most, if not all, of the parking demand generated by the proposed development. As noted in our previous analysis, the Transportation Services Director has indicated that he is confident the City will be able to accommodate the off-site spaces necessary by reallocating current Chauncey Swan permits to other facilities, if needed. Data shows that on an average weekday, at peak demand, there are an additional 340 spaces available in existing city -owned parking structures between 9AM-5PM (not including the Chauncey Swan ramp or the future Harrison Street parking facility). The Harrison Street parking ramp, scheduled for completion in 2016, will add an additional (approximate) 600 spaces to the parking system, providing additional flexibility to reallocate parking permits if necessary. Such a reallocation would ensure adequate capacity for the general public and the proposed development in the Chauncey Swan ramp. To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ15-00006 NE corner College St / Gilbert St GENERAL INFORMATION: STAFF REPORT Prepared by: John Yapp Date: April 16, 2015 Applicant: City of Iowa City Dept. of Neighborhood and Development Srvcs. 410 E Washington St Iowa City, IA 52240 Property Owners: Contact: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: City of Iowa City MidAmerican Energy John Yapp, Development Services Coor. Rezoning from Public (P) to Central Business District (CB -10) To allow development of a mixed-use building Northeast corner of College St / Gilbert St Approximately 27,200 square feet Vacant; storage and parking North: Chauncey Swan Park — Public South: Recreation Center — Public East: Swan Parking Facility - Public West: Religious Institution — CB -10 March 25, 2015 May 9, 2015 The majority of the property at the NE corner of College St / Gilbert St is owned by the City (MidAmerican Energy owns an electricity substation property adjacent to the Swan Parking Facility — the MidAmerican Energy property is included in the rezoning application). The properties at the NE corner of College St / Gilbert St have contained a mix of uses in the past including retail, bus depot, parking, gas station and auto repair. They are currently underutilized in being used for surface parking and substandard storage. The City -owned properties were originally purchased by the City to allow for future growth of the municipal campus. In 2012, as part of a facilities study, the City determined the properties were not needed for government use 19 and should be redeveloped with mixed-use development. ANALYSIS: Current zoning: The current zoning of the City -owned property is Public (P); the MidAmerican Energy substation is zoned CB -5 (Central Business Support Zone). Proposed zoning: The proposed Zoning designation is CB -10, Central Business District. The Central Business District Zone is intended to accommodate a wide range of retail, service, office and residential uses. The CB -10 Zone serves as the high density, compact, pedestrian oriented shopping, office, service and entertainment area in Iowa City. The CB -10 Zone is intended to foster pedestrian -oriented structures located close to the front property lines, as reflected in the dimensional standards (see below). CB -10 Dimensional Standards Min. lot area Min. setback Max. front setback Min. height Max. height Floor to Area Ratio None None 12 feet 25 feet None 10 Comprehensive Plan: The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map identifies this property as 'general commercial' consistent with downtown and other commercial areas of the City. The property is also identified as being a part of the Downtown Planning District (see images below). CORRIDOR NORTH J Z\�u a ? NORTHEAST NORTHWEST lxl��� CENTRALS. �. r s SOUTHWEST IOWA CITY PLANNING DISTRICT -S 3 O _-1 Kuril Htsweillni I L_J Cnmvn uliun Daei4 2.8 DG:A uUmar IFIb - 11674 - 25+ VL.A - Pul+licPrivetr Ilpen \parr - ?r{Hhborlwod l'enler - I:a,rral Crnn,rlcW I- Withw85 ronme.1.1 3 O _-1 Inlrmhcl on,IRlti lvl I L_J 11R 1'mlmlrtial LmKellonmerrm uUmar Hnrarrh nna, cranrn .mere] Wrl dw ^— I I I'uhl Ic'Rm�l' a bl i. - Pul+licPrivetr Ilpen \parr NII" t tlbn City Lnd. — — ('in Grmlb &endan Excerpt from IC2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2013, identifies the NE corner of College St / Gilbert St as general commercial, which allows mixed-use development. The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan Introduction section notes that this area has not been added to any particular Comprehensive Plan sub -district plan, and recommends a process be initiated to appropriately address how this area redevelops. A process was conducted in 2012-2013 regarding redevelopment of the subject property. This process included a request for proposals, public input on proposals, public City Council interviews with five finalist proposals, and ultimately the selection of a preferred developer for the property — the developers of 'The Chauncey.' As part of this process and selection of finalist proposals, the City Council supported mixed-use development for this property at a downtown density. Staff initiated a Comprehensive Plan amendment process for the larger area east of Gilbert St last fall and recommended that the three blocks east of Gilbert St, west of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St be added to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, rather than the Central District Plan. These properties are better suited for development at the urban densities contemplated by the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan rather than the more residential densities contemplated by the Central District Plan, for reasons set forth below. For the time being, however, no sub -district plan applies to this area and therefore any rezoning of this property must be analyzed for compatibility with the goals and objectives of the current IC2030 Comprehensive Plan. Rezoning the subject property is consistent with the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan goals that support mixed-use development on property close to downtown. For example, the Plan states: Shifts in demographics and housing trends have led to "continued construction of Downtown high-rise condominiums suggest there is increasing demand for higher - density urban housing for people other than college students" (IC2030 page 12) ii "One of the principal goals of the Comprehensive Plan is to foster an environment in the Downtown area that is attractive to new employers, especially professional, knowledge- based and entrepreneurial firms and small businesses, cottage industries, artists and artisans that thrive on and expect urban amenities. One means of accomplishing this goal is to encourage the construction of Class A Office space in new mixed-use buildings... " (IC2030 page 13) "Quality Infill development plays an important role in neighborhood reinvestment and may include rehabilitating existing structures or encouraging new development of vacant, blighted, or deteriorated property" (IC2030 pg. 20) A Land Use goal is to "encourage compact, efficient development that is contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods to reduce the cost of extending infrastructure and services and to preserve farmland and open space at the edge of the City. (IC2030 page 23). Another Land Use goal is to "maintain a strong and accessible Downtown that is pedestrian -oriented with a strong and distinctive cultural, commercial and residential character." One way of doing this is to encourage continued investment in the Downtown to assure its place as the center of arts, culture, entertainment, commercial and civic activity within the city and the metro area (IC2030 page 24) Encourage projects that attract long-term residents to Downtown.. (IC2030 page 27) Encourage compact, efficient development that reduces the cost of extending and maintaining infrastructure and services (IC2030 Page 40) The IC2030 Plan focuses on sustainability, which seeks to promote in -fill development to foster and achieve a more livable, viable and equitable community. The Community Vision Statement references the big -city vitality of our downtown, and notes that the City should support growth and investment that contributes to the sustainability of Iowa City by fostering a resilient local economy that increases the tax base; stimulates job growth; promotes the overall prosperity and progress of its citizens; protects and enhances the environment by encouraging the responsible use of our natural and energy resources; creates attractive and affordable housing for all people; promotes civic engagement. (IC2030 Pg 7) Land Use Factors that support CB -10 designation The property at the NE corner of College St and Gilbert St has many land use factors that make it appropriate for commercial development at a higher -density (CB -10) designation: These factors include: • The IC2030 Plan indicates that Iowa City is experiencing increasing demand for higher - density housing located in walkable neighborhoods, especially those close to downtown and campus, and for more housing options to accommodate seniors and empty -nesters. P. 11; • Adjacency to a 475 -space parking structure, to accommodate an increase in parking demand and serves as a buffer between development on the subject property and the neighborhood to the east; 5 • The property is already a part of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District; • Frontage on a 4 -lane arterial street (Gilbert St); • Easy access to Public Transit service, including the 7th Avenue route, the Towncrest route, and the Court Hill route. In addition, the East Side Express route has a stop one block away at the corner of Washington St / Gilbert St; • Adjacency to Chauncey Swan Park, providing easy access to open space for residential living; • The property is within walking distance of several public facilities — the property is one block or less from City Hall, the Recreation Center, the Public Library, and the Linn St entrance to the Pedestrian Mall. In addition, the property is within easy walking distance of downtown, several grocery and convenience stores, a movie theatre, the farmer's market, several parks, trails, and the University of Iowa campus; • The property is underutilized as surface parking. It does not contain any historic landmark properties, and will not require the relocation of any businesses or residents; • The property is across the street (Gilbert St) from existing CB -10 zoning, and is surrounded by public property and facilities on three sides; • The property is not adjacent to any residential zoning or land uses — the nearest residential zone is approximately 340 feet to the east; • In -fill development a) requires no additional infrastructure and makes better use of the existing infrastructure; b) lowers the cost of public services such as transit, sidewalks, water and sewer, school and public safety; c) takes pressure off of developing farmland; d) reduces the time, money and energy and air pollution associated with commuting and other use of single -occupant cars; e) strengthens the real estate market and property values; and f) additional population in the downtown area helps strengthen the downtown economy. Project associated with the rezoning application As noted, the project associated with the rezoning application is `The Chauncey' a proposed 15 - story mixed-use building. In order to meet the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, The Chauncey is a proposed mixed-use building with uses intended to complement and add to the vibrancy of Downtown Iowa City. These uses include: • Commercial Recreational land uses on the first two floors, including: Approximate 100 - and 150 -seat movie theaters, two approximate 6 -lane boutique bowling centers (one on each of the first two floors), a cafe, and open art and sculpture galleries, and outdoor patio/seating facing Chauncey Swan Park • Two floors of Class A office space, approximately 19,000 GSF per floor • Lower -level parking to accommodate parking of residents in the building • An approximate 35 -unit hotel • Eight floors of residential units, up to 66 units inc. studios, 1- and 2 -bedroom units. C.1 The commercial recreational uses on the first two floors and the small hotel help to meet the City's goals to 'encourage continued investment in the Downtown to assure its place as the center of arts, culture, entertainment and commercial activity.' The two floors of Class A Office space help meet the City's goal 'to encourage the construction of Class A Office space in new mixed-use buildings.' The residential units, including parking for residents, help meet the City's goal to 'attract long-term residents to Downtown.' Scale of building As proposed, the building will be 15 stories in height. Two step -backs for the street -facing building facades are proposed to help mitigate the mass of the building, including a small step - back at the third floor and a more significant step -back at the fifth floor. Staff recognizes the need to require building step -backs in order to limit the height of the front facade of the building particularly at the corner of Gilbert St / College St. Beginning at the fifth story, a majority of the building will be set back approximately 70 feet from the Gilbert St right of way; along the south property line (College St) approximately 70 feet of the building will be four stories tall. These step -backs help to minimize the appearance of the height particularly along the public street frontages at the corner of College St and Gilbert St (see Exhibit B for building height step - backs). The approximate size of each of the uses in the proposed building are detailed in the project description, attached. Off -Site parking demand Using the conceptual square footage of office, commercial recreational, hotel and residential units, Staff performed a parking generation study using parking demand factors for a downtown setting (taking into account that a percentage of 'trips' are accommodated by pedestrian and/or public transit) from the Institute of Traffic Engineers Parking Generation Manual. The development will provide approximately 52 on-site parking spaces - all required parking for residential units will be provided in this lower -level parking to be accessed from the Swan Parking Facility. The parking demand analysis indicates that for other uses (including visitors to residential uses) the development would require approximately 161 off-site parking spaces during the day and 146 off-site parking spaces during the evening. The highest parking generator during the day is associated with the office use; the highest parking generator during the evening is the bowling alley and movie theater use. Off-site parking will be accommodated in the Swan Parking Facility and by on -street metered parking on College St. In addition, the Tower Place Parking Facility is one block to the north. Given its location directly to the east of the proposed development, the Swan Parking Facility is likely to attract a majority of the off-site parking demand. The Transportation Services Director has indicated the Swan Parking Facility will be able to accommodate this parking demand, through redistribution of permit parking to other facilities. The construction of the new Harrison St Parking Facility will assist with this accommodation. Roadway Capacity The Highway Capacity Manual indicates that a four -lane minor arterial street in a central business district has a capacity of approximately 26,000 vehicles per day; and a two-lane street has a capacity of approximately 11,800 vehicles per day. Given that Gilbert St (a four -lane 7 street) currently has an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of approximately 10,400; College St has an ADT of approximately 3,173 and Washington St has an ADT of approximately 3,402, the streets surrounding the proposed project have adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development. It is common for traffic engineers to examine peak hour traffic in more detail, as it is during the peak hour of traffic that roadway infrastructure is most affected. Staff has estimated that the proposed mix of uses will generate approximately 143 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour, and it is likely these trips will be distributed on College St, Gilbert St, Washington St and Burlington St. The vehicles associated with the residential units will access the site using Washington St or Burlington St. Excluding residential trips, staff estimates 105 vehicles during the PM Peak hour, or less than 2 vehicles per minute added to the street network. The relatively low vehicle trip generation for a building of this size is due to a combination of location (a high percentage of pedestrian and transit trips) and the mix of uses (the commercial recreation uses primarily generate traffic during `off-peak' times). Staff does not anticipate the need for any infrastructure improvements associated with this project. Compatibility with surrounding land uses As noted, the properties abutting the subject property to the north, south and east include public facilities and uses and are zoned Public. The land to the west of this property is zoned CB -10 and used for mixed-use purposes. The nearest residential zone is the RNS-20 Zone approximately 340 feet to the east. The west side of the College Green Historic District is approximately 480 feet to the east. The attached map (Exhibit C) identifies land uses surrounding the subject property. Shadow effect of proposed building One of the concerns brought up during the project selection process for the NE corner of College St / Gilbert St was the shadow effect of a taller building. The attached images (Sun Shadow Study dated April 9, 2015) provided by the Rohrbach Associates identify the shadow effect at different times of the day / different times of the year compared to a 75 -foot tall building, which is the maximum height in the CB -5 zone. The images show that the primary shadow effect to the properties on the west side of Gilbert St in the summer months is during the early -morning hours — by 9 AM the properties on the west side of Gilbert St are not significantly impacted by shadow. The step -back in building height from Gilbert St helps to mitigate the shadow effect to the west. Chauncey Swan Park is not affected by shadow during the summer months, as the sun is higher in the sky. In the fall and spring, with the sun lower in the sky and to the south, the shadow cast is northerly, affected the Chamber of Commerce building in the morning hours and Chauncey Swan Park during the lunch hour. In the winter months, the shadow cast is more northerly and the park is in shadow more of the day, regardless of a 75 -foot tall building or 15 -story building as proposed. Staff notes that the park is not used nearly as intensively in the winter months. N. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that REZ15-00006, a rezoning of approximately 27,200 square feet of property from P-1 (Public Institutional) and CB -5 (Central Business Support) Zones to CB -10 (Central Business District) Zone for property located at the Northeast corner of College St and Gilbert St be approved subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement requiring: 1. Construction of a mixed-use building no more than 15 stories in height 2. A minimum of two floors of Class A office space 3. Step -backs in building height at the third and fifth floors, consistent with the graphics in Exhibit B 4. All required parking for residential units being provided on-site 5. Approval of the exterior building design by the City's Design Review Committee ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Aerial Photograph 3. Exhibit A — general description of Chauncey project 4. Exhibit B — Visual description of building height step -backs 5. Exhibit C — Surrounding land uses 6. Sun Shadow Study Approved by: LO m U Cf)T" z w U V _ W C � O m ( } U � o _ a U � CO o ,— U U) L aim C rm G. L .� ... _........ O Cl) N N � LU -0-0 1S NNII S L Q� O � U L a O IL _0 x E 0 0 0 0 N W 5 L2 O N CL m co U O J_ U a_ t m a C N E 7 U O n a CU 2 m 0 N C m 7 m .0 C CU @ m n C O N a)> m C m 0 m o C: 0 m° m N U N m C 0 N a « L The Chauncey, L.L.C. College St. I Gilbert St Northeast Corner Project Iowa City, Iowa 49 Exhibit A A visual description of the proposed Project, including: a. conceptual drawing or schematic b. conceptual square footage of commercial and/or office space c. conceptual square footage and size of residential units d. schematic layout of commercial and residential floors and parking e. schematic of the pedestrian -level fagade Executive Summary The Chauncey The Chauncey is a dynamic fifteen (15) story urban building which will include first floor commercial/retail space, class A office space, hotel guest rooms and residential units. The facility will connect to Chauncey Swan Park and Chauncey Swan Parking Facility. The overall theme for the project is arts and entertainment including two movie theaters operated by FilmScene, art and sculpture gallery areas, bowling facility and a restaurant which opens onto Chauncey Swan Park. The mixture of arts and entertainment will create a destination location for people of all ages. The commercial/retail public levels on the first and second floors are surrounded by a transparent perimeter exterior wall system, exposing the theaters within. Curved sculptural theater forms contrast with the rectilinear lines of the building. A north -south lobby and gallery area connect the building's main entrances. The Site The proposed site is the quarter block parcel located on the northeast comer of the intersection of Gilbert and College streets. Additionally, this proposal includes the redevelopment of Chauncey Swan Park to reach its full potential as a city park, and to better support the overall project theme of an arts and entertainment complex. An existing, mid -block alley between College Street and Washington Street, will be incorporated into the development and will provide transition space between the park and the new building. The interior of the park will provide daytime recreation space and a lawn area for viewing evening movies. This proposal also incorporates the MidAmerican site and will require the removal and relocation of the existing MidAmerican equipment. 1 The Chauncey, L.L.C. Iowa City, Iowa 49 Exhibit A College St. I Gilbert St Northeast Corner Project The Architecture The Chauncey is clad mostly with glass and metal. The vertical planes are clad in a warm color material and the vertical planes on the office levels are clad in darker material. These exterior design elements clearly delineate the functional areas within the building. The use of warm colored material and darker metal panels will allow the building to transition from the "cool" central business district on the west, to the "warm" residential areas to the east. The darker cladding, and large loft warehouse style punched openings, identify the commercial levels, The darker material at these levels create a simple form in contrast with the building's lighter materials and colors. The building continues vertically with the use of a curtain wall system to create light filled hotel rooms and residential condominiums with panoramic views. Hotel and residential levels are tied together vertically by continuous metal screen walls which also separate the different portions of the balconies. The warm color and texture of the vertical circulation core tie these elements together with a grid that extends from grade level to the roof coping. Patio gardens soften the strong contemporary lines of the "L" shaped tower. The top of the tower terminates in a canted roof. The Chauncey will serve as a landmark that identifies the eastern edge of the downtown area and transitions to the east residential area of Iowa City while adding interest and texture to the skyline. The Parking The Chauncey will provide on-site parking spaces which will meet the residential required parking. This proposal requests the utilization of the existing Chauncey Swan parking ramp to accommodate the needs of the hotel, commercial and retail components of the project. The Building Height The Chauncey is planned to maximize the site for commercial, class A office, retail, hotel and residential uses. This addresses the present and future needs of Iowa City and represents smart growth. 4 u Ch,,,, Soon P.rk I I I 1 T(�J_I ... WFxisting Chauncey Swan Parking Ramp Mi Sol The Ch, V I ■ The Chauncey, L.L.C. College St. I Gilbert St Northeast Corner Project Iowa City, Iowa Exterior Images li Exhibit A View from the Southwest Exterior The exterior of the building will be clad with a combination of warm colored material, darker panels and aluminum and glass curtain wall systems. Twenty-eight foot (28') tall glass walls dramatically enclose the FilmScene theaters. The Chauncey, L.L.C. College St. I Gilbert St Northeast Corner Project Iowa City, Iowa Exterior Images Exhibit A View from the Northwest Exterior A richly colored material will be used to clad the vertical stair and elevator components as they run continuously up the exterior walls of the north and south side of the building. Dark panels surround the large windows on the office levels which provide natural daylight into the office floors. The hotel ad residential floors will be an aluminum and glass curtain wall syste maximizing light and views. Uff 1!, y. ,. lou Ott o a The Chauncey, L.L.C. Iowa City, Iowa College St. I Gilbert St Northeast Corner Project Site Plan 48 Exhibit A The Site The south entrance on College Street incorporates a covered drop-off lane for hotel guests. This entrance and a north entrance off the park provide convenient pedestrian access for the public and for building occupants. An interior connection through the building core promotes easy navigation to all building areas from the north or south entrances. A signature feature of The Chauncey is the integration of the site into the arts and entertainment theme. The entertainment concept within the building will transfer to the reconfigured park to facilitate evening outdoor movie screenings and will be inviting to the public for a variety of activities and public use of the park. The Chauncey, L.L.C. College St. I Gilbert St Northeast Corner Project Iowa City, Iowa Architectural Building Sections Sectional view through the FilmScene theaters and the Commercial Class The Chauncey, L.L.C. College St. I Gilbert St Northeast Corner Project Iowa City, Iowa Basement Parking Floor Plan i� 0 4 616 F1 Basement Level Vehicular access is from the lowest level of the adjacent Chauncey Swan Parking ramp. The private secured lower level garage accommodates parking stalls dedicated to building occupants. This level is approximately 24,000 GSF 49 Exhibit A 9 The Chauncey, L.L.C. College St. I Gilbert St Northeast Corner Project Iowa City, Iowa Conceptual Square Footages -15 Floors with Two office Levels The conceptual building areas are as follows: Basement Floor- Parking 24,000 GSF First Floor - Retail 24,000 GSF Second Floor- Retail 19,000 GSF Floors Three thru Four - Commercial Class A Office Space 38,000 GSF Floors Five thru Seven - 35 Hotel Units 33,750 GSF Floors Eight thru Fifteen Loft - Residential Units 87,382 GSF Level 8: 14 Studios (potential hotel expansion) Levels 9 - 14: - 8 units per floor (studio, 1 & 2 bedroom) Level 15: 4 units (2 bedroom) Total Building Gross Square Feet 226,132 GSF d-+ .a t x W P - 1 Pi MU C/) L IL L LL LL LL1 no P 5 z z Pi WASHINGTON S Swan Office Park ------------ Trinity Church E COLL GE ST Exhibit C Q—M RM44 -1 1 Coll -N� -T IOWA AV CB5 City Hall IT,\\\ \ \\\\'�, , 7 Swan MixedCB2 Parking use L 480' C B 1 OMixed P 1 Swan Office Use 00 r - (D P1 Parking Mixed 0 a. Use E BURLINGTON ST z -6 0 F F— Historic and Conservation Districts College Green Historic District College Hill Conservation District Jefferson Street Historic District * Zoning designations available online at: http://www.icgov.org/site/CMSv2/File/planning/urban/ZoningMap.pdf I F Document Path: SAPCD\Location Maps\CivicDistrictZoningChai C B 1 OMixed Use 00 r - (D P1 Mixed 0 a. Use E BURLINGTON ST F F— Historic and Conservation Districts College Green Historic District College Hill Conservation District Jefferson Street Historic District * Zoning designations available online at: http://www.icgov.org/site/CMSv2/File/planning/urban/ZoningMap.pdf I F Document Path: SAPCD\Location Maps\CivicDistrictZoningChai CD rn r C N LL •� C c •v � 0 o m Z 0 m LO S T- a CD rn C LL •� O m 0 o 0 LL Ln N S 0O a L u C W U ¢ � m rn r c N LL C c m O L u7 m N o O V 0 m a u LO a rn c LL m O L u7 r 'N N o O V O LL u LO a � a 7� OI m § v to C U ¢ 7 m = N r ¢ N M l4t tc" W T— N N rn c 'v Lm r 0 0 LL N U ;aai3S ija41!J 'S rn c v m H O O LL r— rn c DO 0 rn rn c v 00 F� 0 0 LL ti rn c a m 0 .. CO LO C) c CIO 9 0 0 LL LO 1- L___ Qi C m Z O r �n v oo x O Q W N L E Q� C. .r - cu cu OE� rQ m O O LL U) ti X O C a' W T- N N I- E E 4-4 CL 0 co T- rQ m O O LL U) ti X O C a' W T- N N I- E E 4-4 CL 0 co i W 3884S tisgUJ 'S 0 d d W 1� I;f"Ia cm C X O O 0) C O cr W m m N o m U) .O E L .a? V a s cu 2 cm C m O O u L V a 6 7 yy1 MW fA a Z yj W a CU � m to � rc FAM m LL 0O f i w c C U N rt- X O C .5 c' W T- E E Qi CL U U L (0 0� C a .3 m O 4. CD r rn S �v m F� 0 O LL Ln J F- m OF. cx 7 co O O LL LO I- l 00 X O C cr W T— N L .Q C c� CL 0 co 0: LL O O rrl ol i / d o iA 1 0 20 AM () CO, _ r own LL1 LFN 3�agl!J ,s � U E 1• r 3 8 T = o �7 0 a o � � � d c Y j of LLi TUMM ;aaj;S 3ja41!J "S t r E ) i i r N rn 0 C LL •� O E co m � N c o LO w r T - cm C LL •� O co — O N O U O w r U._ U N K y < CIU ¢ NI � � U) 'I3 'l W aaa�;S Ua41!J 'S rn S m 0 0 LL LO I- KI ct jaajjS paqpq *S loads ljaql!c) 'S 0 0 LL U) :- iptr uj E loads ljaql!c) 'S 0 0 LL U) :- iptr From: Amber Capps <ambercapps@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 9:30 AM To: Plan ningZoningPublic Cc: <Ilyon@trinityic.org> Subject: Re: Chauncey discussion for 4/16/15 meeting April 15, 2015 Dear Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission Members: Thank you for the opportunity to submit to you our concerns about the proposed Chauncey building at the corner of Gilbert and College in downtown Iowa City. As members of Trinity Episcopal Church and Iowa City residents for the past six years, we have a vested interest in the impact of this new development. While we certainly are in favor of smart growth and development projects that both enhance the vitality of our downtown and create a positive economic impact, we feel strongly that this is a flawed plan. Trinity is an active church that is in use seven days a week. While naturally working to meet the needs of congregation members, Trinity does much more than that. The church has been home to University of Iowa music classes and rehearsal spaces since the flood, and it hosts a variety of other community outreach events on a weekly basis. It is an incredible community asset with a great legacy. As planned, The Chauncey does not allow for adequate parking, which will, in turn, present a significant hardship for not just our parishioners, but also the many others who utilize our facility. In short, it simply seems that the building, as proposed, is not "right -sized" for this location. As you likely know, Trinity received LEED Gold certification as part of its major rehabilitation effort several years ago. This was no small undertaking, especially for a 135 -year-old building. It is disappointing that this multi-million dollar, for-profit development project, which has received extremely generous public funding commitments, is not designed with an emphasis on that kind of environmental stewardship and sustainability. Furthermore, when viewed more closely, what has been billed as "affordable housing" seems to be little more than a talking point aimed at those who might not dig deep enough to really understand the plan. As a congregation committed to social justice and basic human rights, such as decent housing, many of us at Trinity find this whole scenario to be pretty unfortunate. We believe deeply in the value of downtown churches, and we've seen too many of our fellow faith -based institutions leave the heart of Iowa City in recent years. It's not inconceivable that this version of The Chauncey could cause us to reconsider our downtown location, as well. I urge you to factor into your discussions the negative impact that this development, as now planned, could have not just on our church and those whom we seek to serve, but also the larger community. Thank you for your time on this issue and for all you do for the betterment of Iowa City. Respectfully, Jeff and Amber Capps Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 5 of 32 Dyer moved approval of REZ15-00005, rezoning of approximately 3.34 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Taft Avenue and Court Street from Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) to Low Density Multi -Family (RM -12), subject to a conditional zoning agreement that specifies: • Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, building types, and building elevations; and • Design Review approval of the retaining wall design and a landscaping plan to soften views of the retaining wall and screen parking areas from public view. Eastham seconded the motion. Freeks noted this would be a nice addition to round out that neighborhood Thomas also said he supports the project, but shares the concern about the retaining wall. There is a walkway along the west side of the duplexes where the wall will be at a fairly tall height and just requests as they go through the more detailed plan design review that wall is looked at more closely, perhaps adding in two terraces. He said there are not many retaining walls out in that area, and this would be a fairly prominent corner. Theobald supports the application and hopes to see diverse landscaping. Eastham commends the developer and Staff for working together on this project, it is a very good plan and does incorporate multiple building types and somewhat higher density which is helpful in meeting more affordable housing goals. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. Sara Hektoen joined the meeting. REZONING ITEM (REZ15-00006) Discussion of an application submitted by City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Public Institutional (P-1) and Central Business Support (CB -5) to Central Business District (CB -10) for approximately 27,200 square feet of land located at NE corner of College Street & Gilbert Street. Yapp presented the staff report, stating that the majority of the property is at the northeast comer of College Street and Gilbert Street and is owned by the City of Iowa City and therefore the City is the applicant for this rezoning application. Mid -American Energy owns a small substation property which is the CB -5 property. Yapp said the City owned properties in this area were originally purchased to allow for growth for the municipal campus. In 2012 as part of a facilities study the City determined the properties were not needed for government use and should be redeveloped with mixed-use development. Yapp showed an aerial view of the property and surrounding areas. The property is the former location of the Grey Hound Bus Depot, which was previously a gas station. Wilson's Sporting Goods used to occupy the brick building on the property and part of the property is currently used for a surface parking lot. The property is part of the Downtown Planning District in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan. In the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan land use map the property is identified as general commercial use consistent with the rest of downtown. The remainder of the three blocks east of Gilbert Street are identified for public uses. In the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan introduction section it notes Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 32 that this area has not been added to any particular Comprehensive Plan sub district area and recommends a process be initiated to address how this area redevelops. A process was conducted in 2012-2013 which included a request for proposals, public input, public City Council interviews, five finalists' proposals and then ultimately the selection of a preferred developer of the property, the developers of the Chauncey Project. Yapp said that as part of this process and selection of project finalists the City Council supported mixed-use development at a downtown density. Staff initiated a process for the larger area east of Gilbert Street last fall, and recommended the three blocks immediately east of Gilbert Street be added to Downtown District section of the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. It was felt these properties were better suited for development at the urban densities contemplated in the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Master Plan rather than the more residential densities contemplated in the Central District Plan. Yapp said that because this property has not been adopted as any part of any sub district area, Staff reviewed the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan which does have some general goals, including on page 12 of the plan, at statement that says "continued construction of downtown high-rise condominiums suggest there is increasing demand for higher density urban housing for people other than college students". Page 13 of the plan states ""One of the principal goals of the Comprehensive Plan is to foster an environment in the Downtown area that is attractive to new employers, especially professional, knowledge- based and entrepreneurial firms and small businesses, cottage industries, artists and artisans that thrive on and expect urban amenities. One means of accomplishing this goal is to encourage the construction of Class A Office space in new mixed-use buildings... " Page 20 of the plan states "Quality Infill development plays an important role in neighborhood reinvestment and may include rehabilitating existing structures or encouraging new development of vacant, blighted, ordeteriorated property" Yapp said there are additional goals stated in the Staff report. Page 27 of IC2030 Comprehensive Plan states "Encourage projects that attract long-term residents to Downtown.." and page 40 of the plan "Encourage compact, efficient development that reduces the cost of extending and maintaining infrastructure and services" Yapp continued stating the Staff reviewed the many land -use factors for this property which are rather unique for a near downtown location including adjacency to the Chauncey Swan parking facility, a 475 space parking structure. The property is already a part of the Downtown/Riverfront Parking District. There is frontage on a four lane arterial street, Gilbert Street, with access to public transit, the 7th Avenue route, the Towncrest route and the Court Hill route. It is adjacent to Chauncey Swan Park and within walking distance of several public facilities, including City Hall, the recreation center, the library and the Pedestrian Mall. It is within easy walking distance of downtown, grocery stores and convenience stores, a movie theater, parks, trails and campus. The property is across the street from existing CB -10 zoning. Yapp showed the proposed project associated with the rezoning, the Chauncey Project, and showed a picture of the proposed building. He pointed out that Staff is recommending as a condition of the rezoning a step -back in height starting at the third story and then again at the fifth story, and noted the architect for the project will speak later at this meeting to better describe the step backs in the building and the architecture as well as the shadow study which was distributed to the Commission. Yapp showed more images of the proposed project, including the lower level parking that will be connected to the Chauncey Swan Parking facility. He noted that one of Staffs recommendations as a condition will be that all required parking for the residential units be located onsite. He showed images showing the properties Obutting the subject property to the north, south and east include public facilities and uses and are zoned Public. The land to Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 32 the west of this property is zoned CB -10 and used for mixed-use purposes. The nearest residential zone is the RNS-20 Zone approximately 340 feet to the east. The west side of the College Green Historic District is approximately 480 feet to the east. Yapp presented more details on the proposed project. Commercial Recreational land uses will be on the first two floors, including two small movie theaters, two approximate 6 -lane boutique bowling centers, a cafe, and open art and sculpture galleries, and outdoor patio/seating facing Chauncey Swan Park. Two floors of Class A office space will be provided, which help meet some of the Comprehensive Plan goals for Class A office space. There will be lower level parking for the residents of the building, an approximate 35 unit hotel, and eight floors of residential units, up to 66 units including studios, 1- and 2 -bedroom units. Yapp noted with regard to offsite parking demand, Staff conducted an analysis of parking demand, using the Traffic Engineers Parking Generation Manual and does estimate the development would generate a need for approximately 161 off-site parking spaces during the day and 146 off-site parking spaces during the evening. The highest parking generator during the day is associated with the office use; the highest parking generator during the evening is the bowling alley and movie theater use. Off-site parking will be accommodated in the Swan Parking Facility and by on -street metered parking on College St. In addition, the Tower Place Parking Facility is one block to the north. Given its location directly to the east of the proposed development, the Swan Parking Facility is likely to attract a majority of the off-site parking demand. The Transportation Services Director has indicated the Swan Parking Facility will be able to accommodate this parking demand, through redistribution of permit parking to other facilities. The construction of the new Harrison St Parking Facility, a 600 space parking facility to open in 2016, will assist with this accommodation. Yapp said they also looked at traffic generation and Staff has estimated that the proposed mix of uses will generate approximately 143 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour, and it is likely these trips will be distributed on College St, Gilbert St, Washington St and Burlington St. The vehicles associated with the residential units will access the site using Washington St or Burlington St because that is the streets used to access the lower level parking facility. Excluding residential trips, staff estimates 105 vehicles during the PM Peak hour, or less than 2 vehicles per minute added to the street network. Staff does not anticipate the need for any infrastructure improvements associated with this project. The relatively low vehicle trip generation for a building of this size is due to a combination of location (a high percentage of pedestrian and transit trips) and the mix of uses (the commercial recreation uses primarily generate traffic during 'off-peak' times). Staff recommends that REV 5-00006, a rezoning of approximately 27,200 square feet of property from P-1 (Public Institutional) and CB -5 (Central Business Support) Zones to CB -10 (Central Business District) Zone for property located at the Northeast corner of College St and Gilbert St be approved subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement requiring: 1. Construction of a mixed-use building no more than 15 stories in height 2. A minimum of two floors of Class A office space 3. Step -backs in building height at the third and fifth floors, consistent with the graphics in Exhibit B 4. All required parking for residential units being provided on-site 5. Approval of the exterior building design by the City's Design Review Committee Yapp also noted that although the Chauncey is the project associated with this rezoning, Staff recommends these conditions regardless of the Chauncey Project. If for some reason the Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 8 of 32 Chauncey Project fell through, Staff still feels these conditions are appropriate for this property. Eastham noted that there is a historically significant building to the west of this property, across Gilbert Street, the Trinity Church property. Eastham asked if the Staff conducted a good neighbor meeting. Yapp replied not specifically for this application however several meetings were held during the project selection process several years ago, additional public meetings during the recent Comprehensive Plan process, which included this property, as well as a web -based survey for those that could not attend meetings. Martin clarified that this rezoning application is not specific to this project, and that the Staff would recommend this rezoning regardless of what would happen with this project. Yapp confirmed that is correct, stating that often with rezoning there are projects associated with the rezoning application, but they are not married to each other. Eastham acknowledged that this rezoning would allow this project to go forward however. Yapp said yes from a zoning perspective it would permit that project to go forward. Hektoen reminded the Commission that members of the Commission need to disclose any ex - parte communications have had, the nature of those conversations, before public hearing is open. No member of the Commission has had any conversations about this particular application. Eastham also asked Staff if the original proposal for a building for this site was a 20 story building, and if so why the height has been reduced now. Yapp said that the original proposal that the City Council selected for this site was a 20 story building, however through negotiations with the applicant and the FAA requirements from the airport, it was reduced to 15 stories. Thomas asked about the conditional zoning agreement requiring all residential parking for the units to be onsite. In the Staff report it states there will be up to 66 units but there will only be 52 parking spots, which is less than one parking space per unit. Yapp noted that is correct, in the CB -10 zone efficiency and 1 bedroom units are only required one half of a space per unit. Freerks opened the public hearing. Steve Rohrbach, Rohrbach Associates Architects, began by addressing two items Yapp asked him to discuss, the design elements on the building and the shading study they had conducted. He also wants to discuss sustainable design with the Commission. Rohrbach showed a close up image of the proposed building showing how they have made the corner of the building on Gilbert Street and College Street the focal point and that when they reduced the scale of the building that part of the building became four stories instead of five stories. This is good in relationship to the scale of the building with the pedestrian traffic on that street. There are a number of step backs at the third floor and fifth floor and facing Gilbert Street will be a four story massing and the majority of the College Street facing would be four story massing with the majority of the tower pushed back. He showed the setbacks and explained that they are doing a lot to break down the scale of the building. He said they also tried to make the design as open and inviting as possible so that is why the first two floors of this building are glass with a sculpture and art gallery in the area. The next step back is at the fifth floor, giving some green space for use for the hotel as well as the residents on the fifth floor. They are trying to use warm materials to break up all the glass that is also used in the building. Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 9 of 32 Rohrbach next discussed the shading study. They used a sketch -up software tool which they find to be very accurate. The only thing the software does not do is recognize vertical contours on the grade, but in this area there is not a whole lot of vertical change except for a step up a bit to the Trinity Church. He showed two diagrams, one showed a comparison to what could potentially be on a CB -5 zone or a 75 foot tall building, the other diagram showed the proposed site of the 15 story building. The study showed primary shadow effect to the properties on the west side of Gilbert St in the summer months is during the early-moming hours — by 9 AM the properties on the west side of Gilbert St are not significantly impacted by shadow. The step - back in building height from Gilbert St helps to mitigate the shadow effect to the west. Chauncey Swan Park is not affected by shadow during the summer months, as the sun is higher in the sky. In the fall and spring, with the sun lower in the sky and to the south, the shadow cast is northerly, affected the Chamber of Commerce building in the morning hours and Chauncey Swan Park during the lunch hour. In the winter months, the shadow cast is more northerly and the park is in shadow more of the day, regardless of a 75 -foot tall building or 15 -story building as proposed. The complete shade study diagrams are included in the staff report. Rohrbach next discussed sustainability, and noted they see sustainability in this project from two factors. One is from the living side, they have talked with many people who want to live in this project that currently live 5, 10, 15 miles away and want to live here because they don't want to drive their cars anymore, if they live here they are close to restaurants, grocery stores, etc. Rohrbach himself plans to live in project, and doing so will allow him to sell one of his two cars. That makes the project very sustainable from the standpoint of the environment with the number of cars that will no longer be on the roads for all the people that will live in this project. The other factor is in terms of energy, the project will be a minimum of 30% more energy efficient than code dictates, it will be built to the silver leed standards, and there are many sustainable factors. They have priced a geothermal well system which will provide geothermal heating and cooling heat pumps for the building, as well as solar energy from all the glass on the facades of the building. To reiterate, Rohrbach noted they have been very cautious of pedestrians with the scale of the building, the step backs, and the use of materials. They know they will shade the church at some points of the year very early in the morning, but they will be a very sustainable project for the community. Martin asked for clarification on the difference between silver and platinum leed certification and why silver was chosen. Rohrbach answered that silver certification was something they could achieve at this site with the materials and the budget and development of the project. Silver is a recognized level in the industry right now, pushing it to gold or platinum would have caused a budgetary issue. Dyer asked if there were less glass on the north side of the building, would that create more sustainability, and increase energy savings. Rohrbach said that because of the U value in the glass they will be using, it is such a high U value, the north glass doesn't factor into energy savings. The glass on the south side is where there will be more UV light and heat rays into the building and that is where they would probably want to mitigate some of the glass there. Dyer also asked about the small bicycle storage area and questioned that if part of the rationale is people will not be using so many cars, shouldn't there be more bicycle storage. Additionally the location of the bicycle storage is far from the parking area and in the back far corner, which means people would have to ride their bikes through the parking lot, which could be dangerous. Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 32 Rohrbach noted that they are not done with the final design, and those comments are well received and the bicycle storage area could be moved closer to the front entrance and they will take that into consideration. Eastham asked about green space between the sidewalk and the building on College and Gilbert Streets, the images shown don't show any green space. It appears to also have no green space east on College Street by the parking ramp and wondered why there is not setback to allow for green space. Rohrbach said that choice was made primarily on the Gilbert Street and College Street corner due to the architecture of the building and the way they want pedestrians and motorists to see the building and the elements of what is going on inside the building. They wanted pedestrians to be able to come right up to the glass and be able to see right inside the building. They also wanted a nice clean environment along the base of the building so there was that access to the building. People will be able to stand outside and see the sculptures and artwork inside the building. Eastham asked about the shadow study and if they determined the number of shadow days that the building will cast a shadow on the Trinity Church. Rohrbach said they had not done that, they had just picked the major event days of the year to show the overall shadow study. The worst day would be January 21 st but have not calculated how many days on either side of that would also cast a shadow on Trinity Church. And it would all be early in the day, in the 7 and 8 a.m. time frame. Eastham asked if they analyzed any other impacts this building might have on the church property. Rohrbach noted that shadow does not mean pitch black, there is still light on the church property, and they have mitigated the height of their building so therefore he does not see any other impacts their building would have on the church property. The church should be able to maintain sustainability in their own regard, with no affect from the new building. Theobald questioned how the building/project would affect the park. Rohrbach said that they would use a majority of the park for their construction zone, so as part of their project they have allocated funds with the City to refurbish the park, so when this project is done the park will be completely rebuilt and re -landscaped as part of this project. Theobald asked if that meant removing the mature trees in the park during the construction process. Rohrbach said they may be able to work around some of them, but may have to remove some. Additionally there are some trees in the park that have been donated that they need to figure out what to do with, but they have made a commitment to the parks and rec department to work directly with them in terms of the design of the park during this process. Maria Conzemius (2833 Sterling Drive) commented that in the presentation that Mr. Yapp gave she noticed that there was no mention of the transitional areas in the Comprehensive City Plan, only residential and urban areas mentioned. She stated she knows for a fact there are transitional areas in the Comprehensive City Plan, in fact the Chauncey would be in one of those transitional areas. She questioned why he omitted the mention of transitional areas which are supposed to be intermediate height throughout the transition between residential and urban areas. Freerks asked if Yapp could respond. Yapp showed the overhead of the Comprehensive Land Use Map showing the property as commercial land use and the surrounding area as public use. The east side of Van Buren St is identified as mixed-use which then transitions to residential further to the east. He noted that the Comprehensive Plan text does note transition areas and the City has been going through a Comprehensive Plan amendment process over the past several months, part of which is on its way to City Council for consideration on the east side of Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 11 of 32 Van Buren Street. The three blocks between Van Buren Street and Gilbert Street was recommended for denial from the Planning and Zoning Commission and did not pass a super majority of Council and therefore the City is following the adopted Comprehensive Plan for the City. Conzemius stated that when the Chauncey Project was first proposed it was only 35% energy efficient, while some of the rejected proposals were up to 75% or 85% efficient and wondered if that was still the case, is the Chauncey only 35% energy efficient. Hektoen stated that if the public has questions or comments about this application it must be directed towards the Commission and not for Staff to answer. Freerks noted that questions could not be made back into the gallery as well, the Commission will be able to answer questions, or direct questions to the Staff or applicant, after all public have had a chance to comment. Conzemius stated one more question, noting there once was a gas station in this particular lot, and wanted to know if there was any investigation into whether there was gas storage tanks rotting underground. Yapp stated he believed there were gas storage tanks under the lot at one time, but he would have to check the files to answer the details on that question. Freerks noted that this discussion will likely go onto another meeting, so if there are unanswered questions they will research them and bring answers to the next meeting. Rockne Cole (1607 East Court Street) stated that one of the things he learned growing up in Decorah Iowa is that before you tell your neighbors why they are wrong, listen and try to understand what your neighbor's concerns are to see if you can resolve your neighbor's concerns. Cole believes they are here tonight, not because of differences of opinions that is welcomed, we are here because the City has failed to address the neighbors concern and to truly understand what their issues are with this development. Not only that, but they are here tonight because the City has failed to address your concerns, they were here a little over a month ago when the City initiated a process to change the Comprehensive Plan. This Commission offered a number of substantive changes to try to come to a proposal that they would like to work with, they submitted it to Staff, and he feels the expectation was that Staff would try to come back and address those concerns and that has not been done so far. Cole said that Mr. Yapp has indicated that process failed to carry a super majority of the Council and therefore we are left with one document, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Cole believes that one of the things that is key here, nothing he says tonight will persuade the proponents, just as nothing the proponents say will persuade him, but that is not why they are here, they are here to resolve the development complex and that is precisely the purpose of the Comprehensive Plan. It represents countless community vision sessions, where neighbors, diverse community members, share their vision for the City. It represents the City's method of helping neighbors find common ground with one another. When one looks at what that Comprehensive Plan states, at page 2 it states (specifically refereeing to the College/Gilbert Street site) "While both areas have the potential to redevelop at higher densities due to their proximity to the Downtown and University, both should comply with policies and goals of the Central District Plan in order to assure quality design and appropriate transitions to the lower density neighborhoods that border them." Cole stated that first clause reads like a conditional clause acknowledging the possibility Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 - Formal Meeting Page 12 of 32 that it could have this sort of intensity of use, but Thomas hadendicated during the Comprehensivey say they reject it and want to 'de Plan transitions. And one of the things M roach the neighborhood or discussions was does that mean the intensity increases as you app does it decrease. And that is what this Commission is here to do tonight, they are iate heaare'ate transition not here to decide if this is a good project or not, tof this cases the City's fa they rewhether to addressthe impact on exists. Finally the most troubling p neighbors. As it has been identified, the Cityhas not utilized the good neigbor policy, and on the City to listen to Trint yhs concerns as wtell as he public calls upon them to do that. They ca p r. Yapp had indicated that the adjoiningneighbors' failed to note that there s near unanimity y in Trilnity Church against this this is compatible, , hhe s the land owners. project, those concerns have not been tinto of this so he berecord as wellaeves the, time tnow is not to Both sides of the project are in opposition delay, but to reject the CB-10 est Ilow us to find a e the shared vision for theound, to City of IowatCityh Comprehensive Plan, and to Cole urges the Commission to vote no to this application. Hektoen stated that before they proceed further, a findings wl2 the ere that 'ty nofurther id a research oase 1 and r action hase 2 environmental study of the property and 9 needed to be taken regard to contaminations. Nancy Bird, Executive Director Iowa City Downtown hat on behalf of he Iowaistrict, began ythanking the City Downtown Commission for listening to public comment. Bird state proposed rezone of this property to allow for dense amenity driven they support the City's of Downtown er to residences downtown. The Iowa City theirsupport ofBinf Ildresidential de development that helps discuss this matter and are unanimous P support the business climate that will help support da is the! ge Iowa loal to help provide. They arety shopper. More apparel, oes, deans, socks that everyday people can g every Y zza, beer and coffee are covered. appreciated and thankful for a strong studenthe fall nett d than students tend to shop closer to The retail strategy her board completed would home and there are significant gaps in apparel and dry goods that the Iowa City shopper like to see downtown. Her fear with the CB-5 zoning is while it's also and there is number o f thing, is that they could end up with additional student apartments, community members that understand the financing hntmakes a much'bus bu sier a area. The potential for sometimes to in those residents to make them want to live downtown this site, if the zoning isn't flexible enough to build those amenities that draws residents downtown it also makes it more challenging to convince the landlords to trust the City that community oriented retail will work and 'much for the Commission oasten tothe nother erty her with an attached bar. Bird reiterated community and the time they have taken to hear the multiple visions for the area. Dan Cilek, works downtown at Meta e`CommunicationsCityand moved downtown stat nAuguseta t At that t time they munications made a commitment to downtown had 33 employees and are now up to he Ci50 t doing to provide Class rapidly. continuing to grow A office spacer They have want to stay in Iowa City, but what is t y looked at other office space downtown, but thp h tech building such as the Chauncey.e of employee they hire are engineers aWith nd young professionals and they want to work in a g regards to energy efficiency, they used to be Southon Gilbert twice as much space and half las ding with half as much space, and in the new space they e much energy. If they build Chauncey with geothermal, Cedar Rapids, savings n1000 square feet, his utilityt His son lives in a geothermal 53 unit building Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 - Formal Meeting Page 13 of 32 robably bill is around $35 a month. Cilek feels any that questions all ne ghbors need to beconsidered not correct. With regards to the comments abut neighbors, and what is a neighbor. He says when theyu look only the downtown disict, a lot of the coming down here to work. If you go neighbors don't necessarily live downtown, and th y are Y downtown to the Java House, you will see 20 or 30 of his employees are in the Java House re neighbors als every day, same as the pizza places and Jin tiered s Johns,my obably and sonrth. They a foot correct. Cilek personally o and to say the neighbors have not been cothat feels that on the Trinity Church when you brings a mahe p beua shadow at 7 aon of a l m. inthe morning. is probably going to benefit the church. Yes there Y you can He feels the arguments being statthe ereon ofe-si hes application because from argument,dd and just like any business argue both ways. Cilek encourages passage standpoint they need a place to put their employees. inst Amy Ruth McGraw, an elected lay leader e Trinity and Gilbert Episcopal Streets s rice 1871 city yThe (purpose of whose building has stood at the corner of College zoning regulation is to develop and promote a common intended to med age resat onshipstbetween f how land is used to serve the common good. neighbors with diverse interests in a manner that looks serve the coammunity ast is itia wholete and The IY focused toward overarching values and purposes lan involinghe corner previous discussion of rezoning and changes to the Comprehensivethe conceptof m xedvuse t What does College and Gilbert Streets has consistently emphasized that term mean in dowrange town and scope of1ty? In persons,rinstitutio sopinion it s that crosses boundahould incorporate ries of economic usefulness, to a range a pbenefits in a status age and purpose. It should balance public and private resources commitment to he common good and The proposal under matter that represents an understanding and comm consideration tonight to rezone the co f Bouilding nCllege t p'urpurposet is stated as mixert Sres to CB -1 0 ed use n he for the construction of the 15 story ChaunceY commercial sense, incorporating office, residential, the larger dense of he terml space but she . The Chauncey as its impact on the surrounding area will inhibit mixed-use in flable parking in area it's currently envisioned will put additional pressu t at Trinity Church. Thoshe even syinc udend increase the difficulty for persons that attend Sunday morning worship, they also includese are 12 -step nd and day concert even,, meet meetings that are scheduled hosted at no charge for University students The every day of the week at various times of l suslta ty gabil ty. Growing in pmembership ort of causes as verse as youth empowerment and environmental is essential to the mission of any church, m ip begins with an inial visit and the hence of parking and subsequent access to o b that experience is significantly impacted y conven the building. The impact on available parking emooret to seryices at Trinity on Sunday the visitors resulting from �mornings and Chauncey will make it more difficult fort 9 other times. The impact will potentially impact future sons of ar broadship s tinge ages and abilit es is our congregation. Welcoming and incorporating p those with central to the mission of any church. Trinity's to the church in orderto take part in activities. ysical challenges depend on access to parking close The demand for parking imposed the Chcey Building Church has provided classrothe om andlprraity of ctice spaces with easy access to the church. TrinityCrotty space for the UI Jazz Department since the h RC Shelter OCte pari ! sh originated and r House overflow program, and its to support shelter house book sale, it hosted t sponsors the Agape Cafe, the free weekly ho a schoolst ydriues.h eir members rtin These activities not the free lunch program and the community outer wea commercial ventures, nor do they generate tax revenue, but institutions that support the arts and Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 - Formal Meeting Page 14 of 32 he downtown Iowa charitable work have a legitimate part in the mixed-use and Agudasin the life of tAchim Temple and Sty. Downtown is already poor for the loss of First Christian from the center city in Patrick's Church. Faith communities that have chosen to relocate away ears the Unitarian ctive order to safe guard their ability tf tpursue their is changrespe ed t CB 110 to allowpthe Chaunceyof to ich Church will soon follow be them. here Trinity and oth may forced to follow their lead. At built, she sees a day in her lifetime w have been in downtown Iowa City since the 19th century,come readily that time, the extent to which they contribute to therCihety's qualityof zoning cbe hange to CB 0. ° apparent. She urges the Commission to vote no proposed ce Summerwell, resident of downtown Iowa City, began by thanking the City for theircarefulreful J0Y — fulfilling the needs of all types of people, all types consideration of the upcoming project they can all neighbors, all types of housing, and the future of Iowa weya a to inglto do in owat City, she feels, agree on, change is difficult for everyone and yet what is create a vibrant community that will attract people here in the future, it will encourage schools, churches to stay here, be y one of the here, and build upon it. S ill thinks eet the needs of urban denis project is sity, most of putting most successful that she sees on the horizon that w more people can live without vertical alignment and having a smaller footprint, which ears ods and having inexpensive constantly destroying some of the histone around g worthy one. apartment houses put up just for students. Sothis �stown anld she eels t s a very get all P different ages, all different economic situations own She encourages the Commission to vote yes for this Peen incredible, probably the biggest not an unknown developer they are workinject. Ad g with, they have sbeen change that has happened in the 50+ years she has been in Iowa City, has places different 9 Moen Group. They have taken properties in various times of this 5 years p on into processes of deterioration and have given their financial of that and the City has beenbuild very a better Iowa City and we are now seeing the manifestations cooperative in seeing the changes that can be made, the University has worked very diligently in in to make these changes come to be and she thanksos'i ive changes that havethe Commission for serving come about having and try9 to make this decision, but cannot say enough about t e p in downtown Iowa City thanks to the Moen Group. up a Jim Kna stated that one thing that really shocked oors'm was when he we finally reachedcourddeccions newspaper h Mr. three e�o r months ago it said behind close Moen". That is wrong, that should not have beendone ould have 'been open meetings.nd closed doors that ' He called he that should impact everybody in Iowa City s something and shuld be $720 Cit and asked for the records of those meetings and the meetingng. Attorney He feels that is ridiculous. There Y he would need to spend to see the records from that m should not be secret meetings and deal with one developer ) • O bout this found out bout it in the ork around Iowa City for many yea ed as news aper after it had already been announced, aftero d . o it unlessthe City ga enhim a and he's been doing wTIF. P the developer chosen, who also said he could not athe ramps are losing Knapp stated he found out from a former City have space Accountant tw h n the Central Business °D strict already that they are not being full, but yet which is not supposed to be allowed parking, it's in the 'lodr ordinances, an but ng CB -10 zone. permit to have a parking lot here. Why not build his comesars g oin to be used to buy the Knapp also questioned wher at the 'aluationllion l of the condominiums they are a million dollars apartments, when he looked apiece. Is that what this will be, more million dollar condominiums. He also feels there shout P not be any building higher in the city than a congregational church steeple. Especially in times Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 - Formal Meeting Page 15 of 32 like these where Christians are facing difficult situations all over the world. He wrked why we en'o I the n that congregational steeple, it was 138 feet in the air. Knapp questioned developers known, it was like back when Plaza Towers and Karen Franklin came to a meeting and said she had two developers interested in building on the library parking lot, the two developers were Marc and Monica Moen. 10 and stilacreatelso estioned office space,tbus Hesother s ns space othand I wing than the Chauncey could be done in the Ccause it's space downtown and relocated the Pioneer which the City to have to be do these thingsiteventually toethe publicin a flood zone. He wonders why we allow Y on something that is this major in changthin in athat needs to be putchanging up to a vote, andof hf not then the e Central Business District. He feels that is some g City Council should be unseated. It's actdidn't develop op north Dubuque Streeting the taxes and the lives of oand could d have dy in Iowa City. Iowa City dropped the ball once when they put a mall up there but Karen Franklin wanted a water treatment plant. He asked the Commission if they would vote tonight. Freerks epKnapp wanted to know who waslied that some vote would be knew on this but could not say what type of vote that would be Commission, who the City put on this Commission so they could get a positive vote. Freerks stated that this evenings meeting was the last meeting for Thomas, and Swygard was not present. Knapp said the Mayor and the Council want to create a Commission that will vote in their favor and put this thing on their shoulders and nobody will be allowed to be on the Commission that is not in favor of the Chauncey. And he doesn't feel that is proper. The City ought to have a choice, the people of Iowa City ought to have a choice. He questioned if they really need two bowling alleys. Questioned if everything will be held to what is proposed exactly and not changed, or will along the way changes be make on the Plaza Towers was required to submit an audited the time every person wng less glass in. it is just like ho was working financial statement, Mr. Moen didn't submit one and he sued the City to suppress his financials. Knapp would like to see an audited financial statement from everyone and like to see the IRS. looking at some of these tax benefits. Phil Beck (109 South Johnson Street) feels that everyone here tonight is in agreement that economic development of this lot is a very good idea. No one would argue against that. But the question is what kind of development, what kind of building is going to go on there. How tall does a building have to be to bring a vibrancy and vitality to downtown that a lot of people have talked about? Does it have to be something as tall as 15 stories? Does this lot have to be rezoned to CB -10? Beck stated that about a month ago this Commission took a vote on to rezone on the entire Civic District to CB -10 and it was voted down. He feels that was the right decision. He does not understand how the issue about this particular lot differs from that more general vote. It is not about the entire district, but about a very important lot in that district and if you saw a good reason not to allow the Comprehensive Plan to be amended a month ago, then he sees no reason why the decision should be any different tonight because it would be a change in the Comprehensive Plan. In the Comprehensive Plan, on page 1 that Mr. Cole referred to earlier this evening, it states "while both areas have the potential to redevelop at higher densities due to their proximities tPthe n in rder`to assure quality design n and University, both sand appropriate hould comply with policies and goals of the Central District la transitions to the lower density residential neighborhoods that border them. Staff recommends a process be initiated to appropriately address how these areas redevelop over time. Once a redevelopment plan is completed, both areas should be dedto the you refer the Cenntral traPD'strict " And one of these areas is the area being discussed tonight Plan and read through it, you will see many statements stressing how it should be a transitional zone between downtown and residential areas. Beck read one statements on page 21 of the Central District Plan "One of the goals should be to provide for an attractive and functional Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 16 of 32 ent of transition between residential areas and adjacent commercial that provides for afety but avoids n traffic, landscape buffering and screening, outdoor lighting over lighting and glare, effective management of outdoor by the Comprehensv storageervice work and Plan areas, Beck tc. That is from the Central District Plan which is end Y concluded his remarks by urging this Commission to vote the same way they es the Commis onvlotes no to ago' it is the same issue, and the same thing is at stake. He p rezoning this site CB -10. Hektoen clarified that the vote recently wasn't a oit arezon his a ena CBP10 previously. an amendment. The Commission has not considered whet 09 but Geor a Philli s (14 Durango Place) has been a bee of Trinitsident of wEpiscopal Church siny proper since ce 2002has been a participant of this downtown area as member Y Since this process has begun, the parish has been a visible and vocal presence in these community discussions, hopefully this has reflected theivibrant dor trust in nwntown neighborrocess of public He said on rezoning decisions as well as their commitment to a his fellow parishioners have excellently articulated ns the church has of a number of key the concepts potent al d direct comments, they have clearly delineated the cone affects the Chauncey Tower will have on their congregation. Significantly the decreased access to local parking and the impact of the size of the tower hat they feel are criticag on the l aspects sanctuary. His fellow church members have also remunerate and roved downtown development including environmentallyslthe first tworpoints� T u to the decision access to affordable housing. He would like to focuson making process and commitment to a vibrant downtown neighbar have not been thorough argueorhood. No one could that the discussion surrounding the Chauncey and this to p articulThere have been multiple opportunities for public comment. The process led eto asame plan fission vote against the broader rezoning as well as failure for the Council to app y a arceI b with the necessary super majority. No rtwacross the streete are seeing the from the church. rocess rejoined bAnd while he can parcel approach starting with the property acknowledge that the original zoning construct that hasr this beencoject ions stently del vered by the e fears the process is now obscuring the messageort for this project as it process. Which is the co cess is becomity has ing more politicizedt yet clearly atndted positions of division are currently stands. The pro becoming further entrenched by social media ec ed nouneed o defend on either productive which has conversations. And as a result there is a pe reach taken over the ability of some in the comm unity as well as som effective compromise. This conflict now threatens the shared goal of ae of the vibrant downtownecision makers oIowa leased to home. So to be City especially in this neighborhood that Trinity hs aedowntown parish, a decade ago they clear, he believes Trinity remains fully committed to being process, their congregation thoughtfully and undertook their own strategic planning envisioning pto the prayfully confirmed their commitment and calling to be an active participant in serviceoutreach and downtown community. They have speeedslly their downtowntneighbors. That stewardship for physical building to meet a variety of nbeing their community, and hopefully partnership with their neighbors ibecomes more focused on what lcan ost as this process continues to be drawn out and the decision e all be done and the dollars involved rather than the i ants to continue pact on the to trust i nthis nprocessat legally actually comprise the neighborhood. Phillips stated he wfeels are important values thk he and maintains hope that the ultimate decision will reflect from downtown development, but also community. There are so many positives that can come ct course and refocus on the true spirit of building up hope as a community we can corre Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 17 of 32 neighborhoods and not just building up buildings. CB 10 zoning He urges the Commission to vote against this Nora Boerner, resident of Iowa City and works as Parish Life s evening Coordinator The ssues she wouad Church, and shares many of the concerns already raised like to speak specifically about revolve around community.bedtime. The livly and her chose Iowa Ced here, moved away, ands they were here this evening but had to go home for then decided to come back as her husband moved hi f neS'hbo hood and business ness here, she found a 1and ere, and chose Iowa City on purpose. They love the mixture o gthey appreciate the human scale that already exists. The walk arks and bikxea e anytime with homescan. They appreciate the bike lanes, the green spaces, andp en. As others have said, Trinity Church is developments, commercial, and places of develoSunday da t mornings and she knows this even more more than just a place of worship u They only on are deeply connected with the community at large, their now that she is there every day. Y kitchen is used to prepare food for the free stab programsthey weekly they, offer free community t Run for the Schools, they house between 10 and 151 p pin yoga classes, have a vibrant healing ministry University Iowa Jazz Department, and servem that serves the community at eas various health concerns, they house The Y recital and performance venue for many locgroups rom psi use theiirrtjust college students but they uspace throughout the year, they the facility as well. Many community youth g p free house summer programs and youth action groupssuhmmerat e, andet rtheir�parshioners sulpportof charge. RAGBRAI teams will stay with them thistown they y are a down businesses and restaurants downtown most vigorouthe smee commun ty that Trinity ty is part of ve back and support the Iowa City community at large, and that her family and she chose to live in. This gent csunny rezone the northeast coy helped create an �ner the Comprehensive Plan and in her opinion the cuproposal he Comprehensive of Gilbert and College Streets from P-1 to CB -10 is {he Colin re'he ne sitvetP an, the character ofan. She believes we need to honor the community and P downtown, and really consider the concept of mixed-use. computer in a building woer stated her aking on design d is an architect so she has spent many a day with him in front of a c p and have learned from him that good design isn't fortall our neighbors.or the elite and that Shthe CB -10 tonight. Let'e turgesothewa City as well. It is for everyone, for our entire community, Commission to take action tonight and vote to denyonsible developmenthat willbenefitbenefit the and expand Iowa City but let's make sure we have resp bmade earlier tonighpr With red entire community and that takes into account all of our neig entsh the comments, but she has two comments bas ed on parking concerns, she didn't hear any concerns king during the hotel the day asit parking but she wonders wonders f having about that. She noted there is trouble parking 9in ths a number of hotel guests will add to that. She respeh herrown work with CAD softwarequests at -they move e here' s with process a neutral shadow study phase, she knows appreciate that. Boerner thanked the a number of ways that can be done and would app appreciates their time. Commission for their service, it is not an easy task and she app Freerks asked for a three minute break. Pam Michaud (109 South Johnson Street) said hernitiaia d the°ighthesnfohthe eft sed 'nto the And she room was the usual, the lefties, looking out for neighbors,all their ees is thinking that does this mean that Meta Communications lapartmen 9 That wouldbe pbe great t $100,000 per year so they can buy a $300,000 one bedroom And FilmScene, those employees are going to make a lot of money too, that is where we will get Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 —Formal Meeting Page 18 of 32 our diversity. These people will move right into those condos, it's going to be so affordable. The people that say that are the investors, the investors are here, they need a place to put their money, and this is it. She said they could live south of Burlington and build a nice building there, it is not needed in the transitional zone. It's not affordable, it's not diverse, it's going to be upscale and that is not where the strongest need is by population. Mark Plum, a resident of Iowa City and also a lay leader of Trinity Church. He began by thanking the Commission for the opportunity to speak this evening. He stated his fellow parish members have made it very clear how their church depends on the parking on Gilbert Street for theirle mission, there was a gentleman here in support of this rezoning who spoke of how many peo p it would bring downtown and Plum agrees with him, it will bring a lot of people downtown and ironically because of the CB-10 zoning the Chauncey will not have to provide parking for those people so it will be taken up on the street. And ironically if the rezoning were at a lower level than CB-10 they would have to provide for their parking. This rezoning would likely move the Trinity Church into the outer parts of Iowa City like many other churches and would alter their mission drastically. He also wished to raise a couple of concerns, not as a parish member but as a citizen. He feels the people of Iowa City have spoken strongly about the use of TIF funding for this project and he doesn't think the people of Iowa City are in agreement with TIF funding being used to provide housing for people who don't need help with housing. There is going to be five affordable houses out of more than 50 living spaces and that affordable housing is $200,000. That is not affordable on his salary.gees but does notm also stated at many have see why that office'oned the neespace cannotber office space downtown and he fully g provide where it is already zoned CB-10 or in a smaller building in this area. Lauren Lvon, the Rector of Trinity Episcopal Church, thanked the Commission for this opportunity. She stated that Trinity is an Iowa City institution whose building has stood at the corner of College and Gilbert Streets, across the street from the site of the proposed rezoning, since 1871. The proposed zoning change of land at that corner will allow for construction of the 15 story Chauncey building. Zoning is used to prevent new development from interfering with existing uses and to preserve the character of a community. Ideally zoning allows for thoughtful consideration and regulations of differing needs and desires between diverse constituencies within a community. A city gains its character from the interactive relationships between its businesses, cultural institutions, government agencies and its individual citizens and visitors. Churches fall into the category of cultural institutions, among their unique contributions to a city's character is their ability to draw people together across boundaries of race, age, economic status, and personal interest. They are instrumental also in sheltering and providing for those for whatever reason cannot compete in the marketplace. They break down barriers that the marketplace tends to establish and uphold to the detriment of true community. She believes that the impact on the neighborhood that will follow from this proposed zoning change will harm churches, particularly Trinity Church due to its proximity to the proposed Chauncey building. Trinity and other downtown churches operate seven days a week, hosting community group meetings, educational and social activity meetings, and arts performances in addition to offering worship and spiritual care for their members. A 15 story building that towers over existing nearby buildings will bring an inappropriate level of intensity to the built in environment to the transitional neighborhood between residential areas to the east and the Central Business Dis the buildd densely ely populated building whose users monopolize the nearest parking garage, be itself does not supply sufficient parking, will place a particular burden on Trinity. It will create a barrier to participation to activities, it will inhibit the hospitality to those whose age or different ability would prevent them from using a more distant garage. The restrictions on growth and mission imposed by limited parking will potentially impact Trinity's viability in its present location. Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 19 of 32 She urges the Commission members as they consider moving forward with this plan to reflect on the less tangible but no less important elements of the quality of life downtown those in which faith communities have a particular role. In more familiar terms she asks the Commission to consider what may seem trivial, unworthy, or frustratingly intangible, like the quality of light in a neighborhood, worries about traffic on Sunday morning, or sufficient parking spaces for volunteers on a weeknight are elements in which Trinity's market share o vote no on the proposed zoning change. and bottom line depend. She urges the Commission t Ann Christensen, member of Trinity and a member of 100 Grannies for a Future, member of the Sierra Club, member of Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, and a climate change activist. Began by saying she left The University of Iowa 57 years ago and immediately moved to New York City and never expected to be back. Because of family concerns and connections she is back. In that intermediate time she has traveled the whole world, spent extended time in Europe, Africa, Australia, and Panama. Now that she has returned here, it is not the city that she left in 1958, she sees what is happening to our entire earth because of choices that are made that are not compatible with how we should be living. She stated it is important that we begin to look further ahead of what's happening in this state, we know our water is dirty, we know we have a problem with animal confinements, with this country and this earth. If our cities don't start to take this into account, things are rapidly deteriorating. She said we can build better buildings, build more sustainable buildings, get off fossil fuel now if we had the political will, we must give up fossil fuels. She stated she believes that corner does need to be developed, but this building is the wrong building in the wrong place. This building could very well be down in the Riverfront Crossing area and with modifications be a very viable building, a very sustainable building, a very worthy building, but it doesn't fit this corner. Christensen stated she is tired of seeing new buildings in Iowa City being built right up to the sidewalk, they make the streets fortresses, and they do not make visual attractiveness. If you look at the great cities of Europe like Paris or Barcelona they are tree lined, with lower buildings with big trees for shade. They are beautiful cities, we admire them, and we travel to them. Here we are cutting down our trees and when we build new we aren't allowing for new trees. We are allowing buildings like on the Ped Mall that stick out sore thumbs. Christensen feels this is inexcusable and stated we can do better. Iowa City likes to pride itself on being a progressive city, it isn't. Seattle is a progressive city, Oberlin Ohio is a progressive city, Iowa City is not a progressive city but it could be and it should be. She stated it's time to take a longer approach to what is put on the corners, on our streets, and where we put them and make it appropriate instead of convenient for the powers that be. She stated Iowa City is just doing the same old same old and using the tax payer's money and the tax payers don't want their money used that way. She feels Iowa City needs to get away from the same old same old. Christensen brought an example of the most sustainable building in the world, it's in Seattle, it was built in 2013, the Bullet Building for the Commission to review. She would like the Commission to say no tonight and to say to the Council that we can do better. Amanda Ward, lives in the Park at 201 building in the Ped Mall, and she is the director of VIP services for the Sheraton and Hotel Vetro located in the Ped Mall. She wanted to talk about numbers, because not much about the numbers side of the argument has been shared tonight. She began by sharing an example of a full occupancy weekend for both Sheraton and Hotel Vetro where Sheraton would have 234 booked rooms and Hotel Vetro 56 booked rooms for a total of 290 rooms. Of that 290 rooms, perhaps on a Friday night of full occupancy, if you were to take the parking revenue and extrapolate out those numbers 60% of the people that stay at their hotels are coming in via shuttle from Cedar Rapids and are what they call a walking participant of the city. So on a weekend where 60% of the occupancy is walking participants, that is 174 rooms, times two people, so 390 people per night you would see our on the Ped Mall Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 20 of 32 walking around enjoying our downtown district. Therefore, Ward says yes we do need a bowling alley, two bowling alleys, we definitely need another movie theater, we need places for people to go when we have 300, 400, 500 people in our Ped Mall walking around downtown. Ward said she fully supports the rezoning and would hope there would be opportunity for people to take part of that when they are coming to our city to visit. Ward noted that the revenue that the people bring to the downtown through both of these hotels is incredible. The revenue that also comes from what you would call high income earners who are going to own into the new Chauncey building, if it goes through as it is proposed, are also going to likely be contributing to the church we are having so much discussion about. What she finds interesting is the argument seems to be Chauncey vs. Church and she doesn't understand, they are not demolishing a church, knocking it down, or putting it out of business in any kind of way. It really is a reciprocity for both, there is revenue coming in and revenue going out, and it's likely going to be going out into that church which is a great thing. That church has been there for a 100 years, she imagines 100 years ago when people had horses and buggies parking might have been an issue then as well, just like it is today. It might change, but 100 years of proof shows that adaptation rules out. Ward is in favor of the bowling alleys and hopes the Commission goes forward with this rezoning. Jon Foaartv, co-chair of the Iowa Coalition Against The Shadow, began by stating that a friend of his, Sue Futrell, had to leave but submitted a letter and asked the Commission if they would prefer to have that letter in paper, or to be emailed, or to read it now. Freerks stated that Fogarty could do whatever he felt comfortable doing. Fogarty said he would read it later if times allows, but would submit it to the Commission. Fogarty stated there has been a lot of discussion on the Comprehensive Plan, and he was just here a little over a month ago, had a long night discussing that and it ended up that democracy said, what the Commission decided, was that what the City submitted was not acceptable, the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Prior to that, the original plan, the 2030 Plan, there was about 2 years of community engagement and somewhere between literally and figuratively 15 minutes later we start talking about this plot with only passing mention, as Rockne Cole mentioned, stating that it deserves its own sub district. Fogarty stated that the supporters of this particular development have consistently emphasized over the past couple of years that this is going to stop urban sprawl in a city that has gained 3000 residents every year from 2010 to 2014, that it's going to draw retirees downtown, young professionals downtown, businesses are going to love it and that the Iowa City arts scene's very existence hinges on its being built. Fogarty stated that there are no options that he has heard from the supporters of this building, absolutely no options, it must go there, it is the Romeo and that plot is Juliet. Regardless of whether this building gets built, Fogarty stated his group is against CB -10. Rockne, himself, and Mark McCallum came before the Commission about 18 months ago with a proposal to zone this CB -5 and they still support that. He believes there are lots of options, all the arguments in favor of this building in this spot strike him as limited in vision, they underestimate the resourcefulness of the City, they are frankly ignorant of the options for this building and they are incongruent with the Comprehensive Plan because the Commission voted down what the City presented just over a month ago. Fogarty would like to offer a hypothetical for the Commission to consider. If they were talking about the Corridor State Bank on Market Street, or any number of those lots on Market Street, just a block or so from the Northside neighborhood, Corridor State Bank, parking lot, the old Gilpin Paint, Bluebird now, prime teardowns for redevelopment of this scale. He asks would we be having this discussion about a building of this size with virtually no transition to the block that has Pagliai's and all those Victorians to the north. He sees the parallel as the same for the College Green neighborhood. Both neighborhoods, 100+ year old houses, but petticoats, bowler hats, and brick pavers are nonexistent to very rare, those neighborhoods have changed, he accepts that, but those houses Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 21 of 32 and those neighborhoods as they are today they are all that we have left of the heritage and the history they represent and they are irreplaceable. When looking at the Comprehensive Plan amendment over a month ago he asked the Commission to look at the proposed change in the context of the whole neighborhood. The plan for those three blocks that the City proposed it threatened those neighborhoods to the east. It frankly was a mess. He states that we have the opportunity to learn from what happened on Washington Street where we lost several older homes, historic or not they were in line with the fabric of that neighborhood and now it is a radically different feel when you walk down that block today than a couple of years ago. Fogarty stressed again there are options and those options are the Riverfront Crossings. When the City passed the 2030 Plan in late 2012 or early 2013, they said "young men and women go south, find your fortunes in the frontier of what will soon be downtown Iowa City. We will give you money from the school district, the City coffers, the County coffers. You do not need empty bellies you just need an outstretched hand. If there is something historic there, we will shed tears over the loss and it's inevitability of going away". So fine, we are losing those cottages and south of Burlington is open for business, let's fulfill the promise of that district and site buildings like this, the Chauncey, over there. Because all these arguments for a walkable downtown, amenities vs. students, and all that, there is no logic, the amenities here are valid but the amenities south of Burlington are invalid as that is not walkable and that is not part of downtown. That is clearly meant to be a part of downtown that is the new frontier with plenty of space and not encroaching on a historic neighborhood. Fogarty also stated they have heard there was a lack of good neighbor engagement with this particular parcel which he feels is really the damming piece of the 2030 Plan and the church, which he does not attend, but whose members are members of our community so taking all that into consideration he urges the Commission to consider the options that are the Riverfront Crossing, putting a building of this scale so close to historic neighborhoods is a 100 year mistake, there is no going back. He reiterated he fully supports some type of CB -5 or some other sort of development as options for this parcel, and there are options for this building, just not together. Ann Holton, a member of Trinity Church, stated she feels this evening's discussion is between Trinity and any other development and that is not really the truth. Trinity wants to be good neighbors but when this project is described it is always talking about being consistent with the downtown but the reality is there are neighbors to the east of this project just as much as there are neighbors to the downtown area. She thinks as she is hearing all the people come forward, the concerns from the people of the neighborhood have not been heard. Trinity's concerns are very important to all of us but it is not an either or kind of consideration. Trinity, one place or another, will be surviving. One hears the phrase location, location, location. Trinity has chosen to remain at its location at 320 College Street since 1871 which you've heard at least 17 times tonight. Trinity's plan was to grow a downtown ministry and mission for their members and the community at large. They do have some members that chose to walk or bike to church, but the greater portion of Trinity's membership must rely on vehicles to reach Trinity. And for many, close proximity is essential, especially for members with limited mobility. With no on street parking on Gilbert Street, Burlington, or parts of Washington, street parking within a blocks walk of Trinity is limited to 65 spaces. This includes spaces used by the Senior Center and City Hall offices. Competition for all of these spaces is already very brisk. The City suggests that parking for the Chauncey will come from the Chauncey Swan ramp; on street metered parking, and the Clock Tower ramp. With the zoning designation of CB -10 the parking requirements for the developer are less stringent than for CB -2 or CB -5. The City information indicates that all required parking for the residential units are provided on the lower level of the ramp and while there may be some residents of the Chauncey that chose to forgo owning a car one cannot assume that number will be very high. While the opportunity to walk to downtown locations may Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 —Formal Meeting Page 22 of 32 be a draw for Chauncey residents, most l for a For CB-1park. place to 0 units one bedroom and a City requirements for what they have to provide parkingor efficiency units are required to provide 0.5 t or anywhere spaces here nthe state of er unit. llowaton t This means t atshe has yet to see a 0.5 car driving anywhere in Iowa y Yw other half of that car is competing for either ramp or street parking. And there are no guarantees other than Mr. Rohrbach is going to give up a car and have only one car if they are in two bedroom unit. There are no guarantees And Trinity certainly welcomes growth and sn arking spaces needed for businesses and hotel guests. development of the downtown. As a century long neighbor they would like to be courted the same respect from the City as they are electing foto lve to the developers of r ministry and mission areef tthe people who Chauncey. It won't matter how wonderful Trinity's opportunities are intended to receive the benefits, or worship in our wonderful space, are unable to access them. She urges that the Planning and Zoning Gilbert to CB -10 mission rejects the City's request for rezoning the corner of College an Joe Tiefenthaler (227 East Washington) is the Executive Director at FilmScene which is right downtown in the Ped Mall so he has much empathy to places that don't have any parking right nearby, it is an issue they deal with consistently but get over. Also he has empathy for the homes and B&B's in the neighborhood, he used to work for the International Writing Program and would rent from a lot of those and is very aware of the housing costs in the neighborhood as well. This isn't about those who have money and then are going to be neighbors because those to places are not exactly affordable either. He has lived in Iowa City for 15 years and it appears him there is a concentrated effort to make downtown more friendly to families. One of the biggest components is a shift seen over the past few years has been the development group, the Moen Group and what they have actively built and have actively centered families downtown. They've made a better mix, but it's not done yet. At FilmScene they continue to deal with customers, donors, and members who want to come to the theater on a Friday or Saturday night but might not because of the high intense he Chation unce f undergraduates downtown. It feels as if Project is sustainable and a development the City has made the case that budding Y towards families and having and contributing to the downtown core. Other projects that would be in congruency with CB -5 wouldn't necessarily, if you look to the south of Burlington, the buildings are for more undergraduates. So ask the neighbors, the people that own those beautiful homes and at the church, do you want more undergraduates parking and living and walking and going out and being your neighbor downtown on the weekends. Tiefenthaler strongly urges the Commission when they look at this proposal, when you look at the Moen history, he strongly urges them to vote yes. Tim Conroy said he is here tonight to support the passing of CB -10 zoning and hope that the Commission as a well-informed committee go route. He mentioned that like many others, he has been at all the meetings at the starting point of this project, when there were presentations of what development would go onto this spot, the various off shoots of that in what the zonings would change to, and he feels like a narrative is starting to be created here that conspiracies and neurosis are happening around us, this is not the case. Everyone has been informed about o this project as progressed from day one. Individuals in this room that have said the opposite of that were at those meetings. Conroy urges that this go forward because we're on a tremendous amount of change right now as Iowa City. He understands that is scary to some people but it is exciting and that excites some fear amongst everyone. Conroy noted that he does not live directly downtown, but works downtown right on College Street across Ralston Creek. He is familiar with how that street operates Iowa City day to day to buy homes,hes' a also real estalliar with te agent, and there is demographic of who is moving Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 —Formal Meeting Page 23 of 32 a market for this type of housing and the people coming in, whether you are a retiree or a young professional, they want mixed-use. They don't want to drive around, they want to walk to work, and you can't park at UIHC, hardly ever, so the doctors want to walk to work. It's a model that is working, it's a progressive model, which is what Iowa City has always been about. There is a lot of conversation about throwing it down in Riverfront Crossings, but the majority of those projects thus far have been for undergraduate markets. We are also talking about a vacant concrete lot, next to an under-utilized public park. Conroy said let's move forward as a City together on this rather than trying to create a conspiracy narrative about decisions. This is a progressive town, this is a progressive developer that cares about this community, who gives back to this community, and has also provided space for places like FilmScene to come in and add to the fabric of our daily lives. Conroy once again urges the Commission to go forward with this zoning and to also not be afraid to go forward on this zoning because we are starting to go down the path of Groundhogs Day with waking up to the alarm clock, the same old message on the radio, we are all informed, people want this to happen. Joseph Pittit (4009 Laredo Drive) he noted a common theme he has heard and also himself has, is there are worries about this project, there have been plenty of worries from the Trinity Church folks. He also has some worries of his own. The architect mentioned that Chauncey Swan Park would be revamped and re -landscaped and he feels that could spark some sort of backlash from people who go to the farmers market. That park is not exactly under-utilized during spring to early fall months. He feels this project might also affect what goes on at the farmers market, would the people in the occupancies complain about the live music being played at the market or would they be aright with it. He also stated he would not be in favor of TIF, money being used for this project. There is an article in the Little Village Magazine, last year or a few months ago, talking about how TIF money has been used and what is supposed to be used for. It is supposed to be used for affordable housing or to encourage opportunities where there are none. But what TIF money has been used for is projects like the Chauncey, a subsidy for someone to help them create their own dream. A dream for a niche rather than for all of the city. Pittit also has a few questions about the architecture of the Chauncey, with the extensive use of glass makes him think there will be some issues with glare at certain times of the day and doesn't know if that would impact people driving to or from work at certain times. He also wonders if there would be any sort of heat affect from that glass, he is not an architect or structural engineer of any sort but wonders if there would be any sort of heat reflected from the glass to any other parts. It wouldn't be much affect for the Robert E. Lee Center but it might be noticeable for people walking by. The architects also mention he didn't calculate how many shadow days there would be that Trinity would have a morning of shadow for some amount of time. Pittit feels that might be an oversight on the architect's part, but it would be necessary for Trinity Church to know what will happen. In closing, he commented that this City is changing in ways he does not want it to happen, he has lived here since he was born and these days when he goes downtown he looks at the development already there and it feels like a mix rural Iowa and urban Iowa that's a pleasant mix. But the plans for the Chauncey just look like a big splinter sticking up out of the city that is just suddenly there. It's out of place, it doesn't look like it's for normal city folk, and it's for high powered elite who might now care for things that the rest of us care for. Additionally to counter Tim Conroy's point about narrative of conspiracies or neurosis, it's not about the Chauncey itself, the rumblings of conspiracies are due to recent moves City Council has made and also as other people have mentioned, the increased tensions and increased politicizations of this matter. With all he has heard tonight, and with what he has to offer, he strongly advises that the City vote against rezoning. Diane Dylan-Rid4ley stated she has lived in Iowa City since 1991. She wanted to say she is not Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 24 of 32 scared, she is not afraid and is focused on the forward and the future. Her children were very excited to move to Iowa City from Burlington, Iowa, they lived in Burlington for 10 years and before that Boston Massachusetts. She noted she has lived all around the world, grew up the daughter of an engineer and her uncle was an architect. She grew up all her life around design. She had not planned to speak this evening, she has been concerned about this project for some time, and has attended a few meetings, but was moved to speak after a couple of points were made during the showing of the building renderings and she would like to made points or ask questions for the Commission to consider in relation to that. She made it clear she is not a leed AP professional but has been trained in the teed process and the U.S. Green Building Council which created the process, one of her mentees is the current chairman of that board. She said that in the listing where it was said this building would be silver leed consistent, that is very different than saying it would in fact be certified teed. So she asks that in the process, to be told that this is equivalent is not the same thing as going through the process of seeking and guaranteeing the certification as a leed building. She also pointed out that the Trinity Church made the commitment to be a leed certified building when they made the decision to remain and be a downtown building. One other point, when the reference was made to having geothermal, Trinity considered having a geothermal system and were told they did not have the land mass in order to achieve that. Looking at the design of this proposed building, there is no possible way on this property to have the adequate excavation to put in a geothermal facility, plus these renderings have given no information as to the lower level excavations that will take place in terms of this building and any good design in 2015 should also show you what is going on in terms of the excavation given the nature of Iowa City as a flood potential property. These are questions that she feels could be answered in time, but are not currently correctly addressed. Dylan-Ridgley stated that in the 1990's she had a Presidential appointment to the President's Council to Sustainable Development in Washington, and one of the things she was particularly proud to be able to do was to be able to take a little pamphlet that had been generated in Iowa City in the early 1990s talking about Iowa City's green space planning and black space planning. In that document we made as a City a commitment to every single development to having green space, and this would be honest green space not on the third or fourth floor with trees that are in boxes, and it could be discussed what type of green roof will really be on this building. She noted design is not truly sustainable, truly progressive and truly embraces the future. Therefore if the commitment to green space is by virtue of including the park, that is the public park, that is not really a commitment to green space. Additionally the parking was discussed, stating there was available parking on Gilbert and College Streets but nowhere on the drawings does it show any on -street parking on Gilbert or College Street. It appeared from the renderings there was only availability in the overhang for a single car at a time to be able to pull off in front of this building. She asks the Commission to think about a building that would have that level of occupancy, particularly in winter and inclement weather, people would need to be able to have the ability to pull up to the building to off-load packages and other things. There will still be people using cars, particularly as Iowa continues to age and the number of people that would be able to afford to live in this building will be older people who like the idea of living closer to downtown. She reiterated that the Commission consider all of these practical matters that seem to not have been addressed. Lastly she stated, not on behalf of the Church, but on behalf of herself, as someone who lives here, both children went to school here, loves Iowa City and believes there is a richness to the future and the history of Iowa City. Iowa City intends to be progressive and hopes that we don't find ourselves seduced by a bit of TIF money here or someone that has done something there. This particular project is a time for the Commission to have the courage and convictions and to listen to the community and the people who as patrons and as residents live near this area say they don't want this. It's not that they don't want anything on this property, just not this design. There are better designs, there are ways to be truly Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 25 of 32 sustainable. She thanked the Commission for their time and asked that they reject this project. Nancy Carlson, a resident of Iowa City for 50 years and has lived in the College Green Neighborhood for 35 years. When she moved into her house in the 80s, interest rates were 18% and banks did not give loans to women. She managed to buy her house on her own with no help from anybody else. And because she and other women did that now a woman can walk into a bank and get a loan without being looked at like some crazy person. When she moved into that neighborhood, she realized if she were to live in that neighborhood she would have neighbors. She had to learn how to get along with them and how to respect them. Over the years Carlson has been before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council numerous times because of the neighborhood she lives in, there are various projects, various developers that come in with these grand wonderful things and ways they are going to change the neighborhood. After a while you get a feel for the ones that are going to work for you and the ones that are not going to work for you. She said there are examples of both in her neighborhood that they have lived with, do live with, and will continue to live with forever more. So when people say they are excited about these new ideas, well she was excited about her house when she moved in. She is still excited. She is excited about the fact that there are people in her neighborhood who were probably excited as she was when they bought their house. There are people living here that have lived here for long periods of time who have attempted to be good neighbors, who have attempted to work to make the neighborhood better and who want neighbors who understand and enjoy the neighborhood. She does not feel that this particular project at this particular site works for her neighborhood. She is not saying it is a good or bad project, it just doesn't work here. She would appreciate it if people would take into consideration that when they have needs there are already people here that have needs too, who would like to be heard and appreciated and understood. Sometimes Carlson feels when she listens to all the people coming in with all these great ideas, she knows what it feels like to be an Indian living on the plains when the white man came in and said they have a great idea and are just going to push you out because our idea is better than your idea. This is supposed to be a community of neighborhoods where people learn to get along with one another. She said she has nothing against FilmScene, nothing against the bowling alleys, she just doesn't believe that the scope of this project belongs on this corner. Fogarty came forward again to read a letter written by Sue Futrell (311 Fairchild Street) dated April 16, 2015 to the P & Z Commission regarding rezoning of land at the north east corner of Gilbert and College REV 5-0006. The letter reads "I urge you to honor the wisdom of the Comprehensive Plan and maintain a more gradual buffer between this part of Gilbert Street. The blocks surrounding, including City Hall, border on three different historic districts. The City, property owners and neighbors have worked hard together over nearly 20 years to stabilize and ensure that the oldest residential area in Iowa City. It is wrong to disregard all that planning, considerations, and the decisions that have been that determine how to blend these neighborhoods with the new high density and very positive development that is taking place downtown. The Comprehensive Plan does a very good job of providing just that kind of vision that should guide your decision regarding this parcel and I urge you to vote against the rezoning application". Freerks closed the public hearing. Eastham moved to recommend approval of REZ15-00006, a rezoning of approximately 27,200 square feet of property from P-1 (Public Institutional) and CB -5 (Central Business Support) Zones to CB -10 (Central Business District) Zone for property located at the Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 —Formal Meeting Page 26 of 32 Northeast corner of College St and Gilbert St be approved subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement requiring: 6. Construction of a mixed-use building no more than 16 stories in height 7. A minimum of two floors of Class A office space 8. Step -backs in building height at the third and fifth floors, consistent with the graphics in Exhibit B 9. All required parking for residential units being provided on-site 10. Approval of the exterior building design by the City's Design Review Committee Martin seconded the motion. Freerks noted that generally with something discussed hasfthis s time many times. Thomas want to take more than one meeting, but the Commission Thomas agreed this discussion has been with the Commission for a long time in various forms with the CB -5 application, the Comprehensive Plan amendment, so he is ready to make a decision this evening. Eastham stated there are a number of considerations that have been broached this evening and in his mind the central consideration is the Comprehensive Plan. As he understands it the Comprehensive Plan for this area is essentially at this stage silent. The plan as it exists right now as it applies to this area was passed in 1997 and there has been no update to that plan to this point and time. There was an amendment before the Commission earlier this year but it was not agreed upon. Eastham noted that the provisions of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan that are listed in the staff memo do not give enough guidance other than a land use map that permits commercial uses, but there are no direct policies or goals for this particular parcel or area that he feels are necessary to guide his decision for this specific application. Eastham stated he is not comfortable proceeding on this application at this time given the state of the Comprehensive Plan. As the 2030 Plan states, the City should engage in a process for planning for not just this parcel, but the whole three block parcel, and he agrees. Many of these issues could be resolved if they engage in that process. That has not been done successfully yet but he looks forward to doing that. He feels that many of the issues that were brought up this evening, the uses, the needs, the effect of zoning this parcel CB -10 with the historic building to the west, the Trinity Church building, and the neighborhoods to the east, all those issues can be considered well and thoughtfully if we engage in a full planning process for this three block area. Hektoen noted that the 1997 Comprehensive Plan has been replaced by the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan, so that is the plan that applies to this property. Eastham stated that as he understands it the 2030 Plan doesn't do anything for this neighborhood. Hektoen just wanted to clarify that the 1997 Comprehensive Plan is no longer in effect. Theobald feels that the IC20330Comprehensive siPlan such as and provide general vision for overall any development within the City ddeals Thomas noted there were a couple of references during the public comment on the Comprehensive Plan introduction and he would say that the last paragraph, while they bounced Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 27 of 32 around talking about other aspects of the Civic District, does refer specifically to this question because it identified the two areas the Commission has been discussing over the last couple of months. And it does state that while both areas have potential to redevelop at higher densities due to their proximity to the downtown and the University both should comply with policies and goals of the Central District Plan in order to assure quality design and appropriate transitions to the lower density residential neighborhoods that border them". Thomas read the plan goes on to say "The staff recommends a process be initiated to appropriately address how these areas redevelop over time" which Thomas agrees with Eastham should have happened and it didn't happen. Thomas feels everyone in this room is a booster of the downtown and the central neighborhoods, which is what he sees to be one of the great tragedies of the situation we are in. But nevertheless, the Commission didn't have that redevelopment plan, once a redevelopment plan is completed, this area should be added to the Central District Plan map. The Central District Plan map does not contain CB -10 zoning, it contains CB -5 and CB -2. It is part of the Central Downtown Planning District and so does have virtually all the commercial central business zones within it except for CB -10. CB -10 has always been limited to the downtown itself and as the Commission went through the Comprehensive Plan amendment in February our decision was not to incorporate this area within the downtown. Therefore the way he is interpreting the 2030 Plan is very clear that when all is said and done this Civic District area is to be incorporated into the Central District rather than the Downtown District. Thomas noted that aside from that, given that the Comprehensive Plan is the funnel in which everything flows, economics, urban design, everything. Thomas asked Yapp to show the shadow settings information as this was new information to the Commission and pointed out the 11:00 a.m. and the 1:00 p.m. during the equinox show that through the midday there is a considerable difference from what a CB -5 building would cast and the proposed Chauncey in terms of the effect on Chauncey Swan Park. In fact a better designed CB -5 building could improve on the shadow effect by reducing it. With the Chauncey building the park will be in the shade during the midday from the fall equinox to the spring equinox. Even for some time after March 21 and before September 21 you will see shadow effects as well. In some cities this type of analysis would stop a project, they use the equinox at midday as a reference point to determine the impacts on a public open space because those shadows affect the activities that occur in the public space. Thomas believes this is specific to this project, if this were a 7 or 8 story building possibly if well - articulated there wouldn't be those issues. This particular building does pose issues. Freerks noted that this is complicated, and knows people on both sides of this issue, not that she talks to anyone about it, and she walks by the area five times a week on her way back and forth to work and is familiar with this space and the spaces around it. She said she has thought about this area a lot, she says the Commission talks a lot about CB -5 and CB -10 but she thinks about what could be done in the area and what should be done, what would do damage, what would benefit, and what could be done to mitigate damages that may be done so that whatever is placed in this spot is best for the community as a whole. She mentioned she is a little puzzled why a church that has been in the spot for so long feels this one development will alter their mission. There is a way to get beyond that. There have been many changes since 1871 and the church has prevailed, there is no reason it cannot continue to. Freerks stated that what is in the lot now, while the Wilson building is cute, the area is underutilized now and something better needs to happen there. Changes have occurred in the community and the State in the way taxes are distributed so that has increased pressure on City Council. She reiterated they need to make the best of this situation and to try to come back together as a community with whatever happens here. Freerks questions what can happen in CB -5, there have been some really dreadful things in CB -5 as well, noting that she used to work in the old Public Library building before that big building was built behind it and doesn't feel that new building is any real treasure Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 28 of 32 for the community as well even though is many fewer stories. It is a home for some people, but is mostly student oriented. Jumping across the street on Gilbert does give her pause, she does e like to see development go south, but when thinking realistically there is a reason why this lot has been an enticement for the City to sell off to someone and to utilize in a better fashion. It's near City amenities and is certainly underutilized. She also noted concern about the tallest building in Iowa City going in that area and concern for the buffer situation. However in the end it must be decided if harm will be done and what is really beneficial for the community. She also thinks there is a need for higher end housing in downtown Iowa City in order to maintain and diversify the type of population there is downtown. She restated that they are all here to see something beneficial happen in this space, the question is what is it. She feels that City Council has already outlined what they wish for this space. Overall it could be a really nice project in this space and could perhaps bring a benefit to the community. Freerks did agree that parking does seem to be an issue and perhaps that does need to be addressed so it does not improach on other functions in the area. She knows she might make some unhappy this evening, but she is inclined to vote for this application. Thomas had one more addition to the shadow aspects and how it speaks to Eastham's concern about doing a redevelopment plan is that if you remember the RFP one of the proposals came back and flipped their project to avoid the shadow effects on the open space so they wanted to move the building to the north and the open space to the south. He stated that the problem they have been facing with this project is it took that particular site and concentrated the development there rather than looking at the three municipal blocks to work with. We need to look at how to distribute the development so that it works for all concerned rather than favoring one particular interest group over another. He feels there was a misstep there, to not see this as an urban design problem with the interface and the transition. How can it be addressed so that the downtown feels there issues are being addressed as well as the neighborhood's issues being addressed. Thomas stated that one great example of this notion of transition is what happens north of Iowa Avenue. North of Iowa Avenue follows the transition concept, it extends the character of the downtown to the north through the University properties and creates rather than a division a seam between the downtown and the neighborhoods to the north. There is a very nice flow in that area, and is the opportunity for these three city blocks. Freerks agreed but stated she has different feelings about the three block area and is just focusing her comments this evening on this one particular area noted in this application. Thomas said everyone is in agreement that they want urban development, there are just various ways to satisfy the needs. There is a need to place the development so there isn't this type of division. Freerks noted that the parking ramp plays a big part in this development and where it will located. There is also the issue of the creek. Theobald stated that she has struggled with many of the issues Freerks talked through and she pulls out phrases from the Comprehensive Plan, "a vision that includes more open space"; "looking at land uses being compatible and complimentary to the surrounding area". Theobald says they try to look at things that are typical Iowan traits when we plan for the City and she doesn't see that in this plan. She worries about the history of Iowa City being preserved in only very small areas. She agreed there is still a struggle with what can happen in CB -5 zones which is typically student housing. She likes that the Chauncey is down to 15 stories, loves bowling alleys, but it hurts that the trees would be taken down in the park and that there is not more open Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 29 of 32 space. Martin stated she feels it is very important for Iowa City to stay relevant to our growth, to our progression, especially with what has happened in the communities around Iowa City. She noted that the work the City has done on this application in comparison with what has been seen prior, they have put in the conditional zoning requirements that states this isn't just one particular project but that CB -10 is appropriate in context of what the alternative is. Freerks noted that she would like to think that City Council and the Staff have seen how this has put a divide into the community and hopes this can be done better in the future. Martin agreed and said that whatever development goes into this property has a great opportunity to partner with the surrounding neighbors to better the community and there does not have to be that divide. Dyer stated that in regards to the parking, on farmer's market days there are often no spaces available in the parking ramp. This proposed building will add to the lack of parking spaces, so parking is an issue. Additionally the parking on College Street where this building will go will be lost. Dyer also noted that she is concerned that they have spent a lot of time on the 2030 Plan and the Riverfront Crossing Plan. There are acres and acres of space in the Riverfront Crossings District which is no farther downtown than this location and there are opportunities to lots of different things there. She said she cannot consider a CB -10 as a transition to CB -5. The transition should start at this place to CB -5, there is no guarantee that CB -5 development would be for students. She stated she cannot see any reason why this building needs to be there. Eastham stated that the thing the City has going for itself with regards to this parcel and the entire three block area is they own the land, so they can control the housing developed there if it is to be for short-term occupancy or long-term occupancy. Eastham does feel for the cautious concern the people of Trinity Church have voiced about this project. He feels the Trinity caution is well taken, a building lasts an awful long time so after a decision is made it cannot be changed. Thomas noted this evening was his last meeting on the Commission and wanted to say that something he feels that was raised that he feels is the core issue it not building height, it's long- term residency in the central neighborhoods and in the downtown. This is the issue that both sides want, they all want more long-term residents in the downtown. That should be bonding the sides together, but this project has created a wedge. A vote was taken and the motion failed 3-3 (Dyer, Eastham, Thomas voting no). Yapp noted that it takes 4 positive votes for a motion to pass. Hektoen said the application will still go to City Council. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: March 16, March 19, and April 2 2015 Theobald moved to approve the minutes of the March 16, March 18 and April 2 meetings as amended. Martin seconded the motion. w�® CITY OF IOWA CITY =;_- -�MEMORANDUM Date: May 14, 2015 To: Mayor and City Council From: Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney Doug Boothroy, Neighborhood Development Services Dir. Sarah Greenwood-Hektoen, Asst. City Attorney Marian K. Karr, City Clerk John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator Re: College / Gilbert At the May 5 Council work session Council requested staff develop some scheduling information for the College / Gilbert rezoning. Staff has developed the attached options your consideration. Staff is recommending that Council make a decision on scheduling after the public hearing on May 19 to provide as much notice to the public as possible. Once a schedule is determined staff will follow-up with specific dates and times. Option A Option B Option C Rezoning Public Hearing May 19 May 19 May 19 If inclined to not approve first consideration process ends May 19 May 19 May 19 If inclined to approve first consideration, continue public hearing May 19 May 19 May 19 Offer P&Z opportunity for a consult May 19 May 19 May 19 First consideration deferred to June 2 May 19 May 19 May 19 Set public hearing on vacation of alley for June 2 May 19 May 19 May 19 P&Z considers request to consult and notifies Council May 21 May 21 May 21 P&Z considers vacating alley May 21 May 21 May 21 Consult with Council at work session (if P& Z accepts) re rezoning June 2 June 2 June 2 No discussion at work session if P&Z declines June 2 June 2 June 2 Continued public hearing June 2 June 2 June 2 First consideration of rezoning June 2 June 2 June 2 Hold public hearing on alley vacation June 2 June 2 June 2 First consideration on alley vacation June 2 June 2 June 2 Second consideration of rezoning June 16 August 18 June 4/5 Second consideration of alley vacation June 16 August 18 June 4/5 Set public hearing for dev. Agreement and proposed conveyance of property June 16 August 18 June 2 Set public hearing for bonds June 16 August 18 June 2 Final consideration of rezoning ordinance July 27 Sept 1 June 8 Final consideration of alley vacation July 27 Sept 1 June 8 Hold public hearing on dev. agreement on and proposed conveyance of property July 27 Sept 1 June 8 Resolution vote on development agreement and proposed conveyance of property July 27 Sept 1 June 8 Hold public hearing on bonds July 27 Sept 1 June 8 Resolution on bonds July 27 Sept 1 June 8 Notes: 16; and key staff are not available for the meeting on July 27 Option A - The developer is out of town June Option B - Final approval would be extended three months Option C - Allows Council (with electonic participation) to proceed with developer and key staff available. *specific date and time to be determined Prepared by: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240; (319) 356-5040. ORDINANCE NO ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE 1, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION," CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED "MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL," TO CHANGE THE REVIEW PROCESS FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR. SECTION I. PURPOSE. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish a policy for further review of City Council compensation for the City of Iowa City, Iowa. Section II. AMENDMENT. Repealing Section 1-5-3(C) in its entirety and adding a new section to read as follows: C. Adjustment. Staff will adjust City Council compensation based on an annual adjustment for inflation. The annual adjustment for inflation will be equivalent to the cumulative annual percent change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) - A I I U r b a n C o n s u m e r s (CPI -U), Midwest Region, All Items, using the third quarter ending September 30 of the prior year and September 30 of the current year. The calculated amount will be included in the annual budget for review by the City Council in each regular election year in accordance with State Code. SECTION 111. REPEALER. All other ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION IV. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinances 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 V. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall be in effective on January 1, 2016. Passed and approved this day of May, 2015 Mayor ATTEST: CITY CLERK City Attorney's Office S:aouncilsalary.doc 8 Ordinance No. Page It was moved by and seconded by _ Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton that the First Consideration 05/19/2015 Vote for passage: AYES: Throgmorton, Botchway, Dickens, Dobyns, Hayek, Mims. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Payne. - - - - Second Consideration _ Vote for passage: Date published 05-19-15 9 Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Asst. City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030 ORDINANCE NO. 15-4620 ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 1, ENTILTED "ADMINISTRATION," CHAPTER 4, ENTITLED "GENERAL PENALTY," AND TITLE 8, ENTITLED "POLICE REGULATIONS," CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED "MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES," TO ELIMINATE THE DEFAULT PENALTY OF JAIL TIME FOR UNSCHEDULED SIMPLE MISDEMEANORS AND ESTABLISH THE PENALTY FOR INDECENT EXPOSURE. WHEREAS, on April 3, 2015, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled in State v. Young (No. 13-0983) that the Iowa Constitution requires court appointed counsel for indigent defendants in simple misdemeanors if the penalty includes the possibility of jail time; WHEREAS, the penalty for many of the City's simple misdemeanors is a set fine (aka, a scheduled offense), but Section 1-4-1 B of the City Code provides that if the penalty is not specified in the ordinance, the penalty defaults to Iowa Code section 903.1(1)(a); WHEREAS, under Iowa Code section 903.1(1)(a), the fine for a simple misdemeanor is "at least sixty- five dollars [$65.00] but not to exceed six -hundred twenty-five dollars [$625.00 and] [t]he court may also order imprisonment not to exceed thirty [30] days...'; WHEREAS, the City Attorney's Office can only recall one instance in over twenty (20) years in which the City requested that a defendant be sentenced to jail and the offense was for indecent exposure in City Park, and in that case, the Court appointed the defendant an attorney; and WHEREAS, the appropriate default penalty for simple misdemeanors under the City Code should be a fine, but jail as a penalty for indecent exposure should remain a possibility; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to adopt this ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. AMENDMENTS. 1. Title 1, entitled "Administration," Chapter 4, entitled "General Penalty," Section 1, entitled "Violations; Criminal Penalty," Subsection B, is hereby amended by deleting the words "as set in Iowa Code section 903.1(1)(a), as amended" and inserting in lieu thereof the following: with a fine of at least sixty-five dollars ($65.00) but not to exceed six -hundred twenty-five dollars ($625.00). 2. Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations," Chapter 5, entitled "Miscellaneous Offenses," Section 6, entitled "Indecent Exposure," is hereby amended by adding a new Subsection C as follows: The penalty for violation of this section is punishable by a penalty as set in Iowa Code section 903.1(1)(a), as amended. 3. This amendment shall apply to all simple misdemeanors issued on or after the effective date of this ordinance and all simple misdemeanors on file as of the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION Il. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION Ill. 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 IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this 19 th day of May , 2015. i�.�-�t LTA W1 01 ATTEST: CITY CL K Apr ed City Attorney's Office Ordinance No. 15-4620 Page 2 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Dobyns that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne x Throgmorton First Consideration 05/05/2015 Voteforpassage: AYES: Botchway, Dickens, Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Throgmorton. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration _ Vote for passage: Date published 05/28/2015 Moved by Mims, seconded by Throgmorton, that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. 10 Prepared by: Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030 ORDINANCE NO. 15-4621 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE IOWA CITY CHARTER PREAMBLE, AND ARTICLE II (CITY COUNCIL) SECTION 2.06 (MAYOR), ARTICLE III (NOMINATION, PRIMARY ELECTION AND REGULAR ELECTION) SECTION 3.01 (NOMINATION), ARTICLE IV (CITY MANAGER) SECTION 4.02 (ACCOUNTABILITY; REMOVAL), ARTICLE V (BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES), SECTION 5.01 (ESTABLISHMENT) AND SECTION 5.02 (APPOINTMENT; REMOVAL), ARTICLE VI (CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES) SECTION 6.03 (DEFINITION) AND ARTICLE VIII (INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM) AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION. WHEREAS, the Iowa City Charter provides for the establishment of a Charter Review Commission at least once every ten (10) years; WHEREAS, on January 7, 2014 by resolution No. 14-9 the City Council established a nine (9) member Commission to review the Charter with a term beginning April 1, 2014 and ending no later than April 1, 2015; WHEREAS, the Charter Review Commission met twenty-five (25) times to review the Charter and held two public hearings and a public meeting with interactive discussion; WHEREAS, the Charter Review Commission submitted its recommendations to the Council by written report dated March 9, 2015; WHEREAS, the Charter requires that the City Council either adopt each Commission recommendation by ordinance or submit it to the voters; and, WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to adopt said recommendations by ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. AMENDMENTS. 1. The Preamble of the Charter is amended by deleting the entire preamble and substituting the following new preamble in lieu thereof: We, the people of Iowa City, Iowa, pursuant to the Constitution and statutes of the State of Iowa and the principle of self-determination, proclaim that the government of Iowa City belongs to all its residents and all share the responsibility for it. We hereby adopt this Charter and confer upon it the full home rule powers of a charter city. By this action we adopt the following principles: 1. Resident participation on an inclusive basis in democratic self-government. 2. The provision of service relating to the health, safety, and welfare of its residents in a fair, equitable and efficient manner. 3. The conduct of city business inconformity with due process, equal protection under the laws, and those individual liberties protected by the Constitution of the United States, the State of Iowa, and local ordinances. 4. Civility by city employees in their interactions with the public. 2. Article II, entitled "City Council", Section 2.06, entitled "Mayor', subparagraph B is amended by deleting subparagraph B in its entirety and substituting the following new subparagraph B in lieu thereof: B. The mayor is a voting member of the council, the official representative of the city, presiding officer of the council and its policy spokesperson. The mayor may add items to the City Council agenda. The mayor Ordinance No. 15-4621 Page 2 shall present to the city no later than February 28 an annual state of the city message. (Ord. 95-3671, 3- 28-1995) 3. Article III, entitled "Nomination, Primary Election and Regular Election", Section 3.01, entitled "Nomination" is amended by deleting Section 3.01 in its entirety and substituting the following new Section 3.01 in lieu thereof: Section 3.01. Nomination A. An eligible elector of a council district may become a candidate for a council district seat by filing with the Johnson County Commissioner of Elections a valid petition requesting that his or her name be placed on the ballot for that office. Unless otherwise provided by state law, the petition must be filed not more than eighty-five (85) days nor less than sixty-eight (68) days before the date of the election. Unless otherwise provided by state law, the petition must be signed by eligible electors from the candidate's district equal in number to at least two (2) percent of those who voted to fill the same office at the last regular city election, but not less than ten (10) persons. (Ord. 05-4152, 3-1-2005) B. An eligible elector of the city may become a candidate for an at -large council seat by filing with the Johnson County Commissioner of Elections a petition requesting that the candidate's name be placed on the ballot for that office. Unless otherwise provided by state law, the petition must be filed not more than eighty-five (85) days nor less than sixty-eight (68) days before the date of the election. Unless otherwise provided by state law, the petition must be signed by eligible electors equal in number to at least two (2) percent of those who voted to fill the same office at the last regular city election, but not less than ten (10) persons. (Ord. 85-3227, 3-12-1985) 4. Article IV, entitled "City Manager", Section 4.02, entitled "Accountability; Removal" is amended by deleting subparagraph A in its entirety and substituting the following new subparagraph A in lieu thereof: Section 4.02. Accountability; Removal. A. The city manager is under the direction and supervision of the council and holds office at its pleasure. A city manager removed by the council is entitled to receive termination pay as provided by contract. 5. Article V, entitled "Boards, Commissions and Committees", Section 5.01, entitled "Establishment" is amended by deleting Section 5.01 in its entirety and substituting the following new Section 5.01 in lieu thereof: Section 5.01. Establishment. A. With the exception of the community police review board, the council may establish boards in addition to those required by state law and shall specify the title, duties, length of term, qualifications of members and other appropriate matters. The council may reduce or increase a board's duties, transfer duties from one board to another or dissolve any board, except as otherwise provided by state law or this charter. B. There shall be a permanent community police review board, which shall have vested in it the following minimum powers: 1. To hold at least one community forum each year for the purpose of hearing views on the policies, practices, and procedures of the Iowa City police department; 2. To make recommendations regarding such policies, practices, and procedures to the city council; Ordinance No. 15-4621 Page 3 3. To investigate claims of misconduct by sworn police officers and to issue independent reports of its findings to the city council; and 4. The authority to subpoena witnesses. (Res. 07-262, 8-31-2007) 6. Article 5, entitled "Boards, Commissions and Committees", Section 5.02, entitled "Appointment; Removal', is amended by replacing he word "citizens" with the word "residents". 7. Article VI, entitled "Campaign Contributions and Expenditures", Section 6.03, entitled "Definition", is amended by deleting "chapter 56" and substituting "chapter 68A" in lieu thereof. 8. Article VII, entitled "Initiative and Referendum", Section 7.01, entitled "General Provisions", Section 7.03, entitled "Petitions; Revocation of Signatures", Section 7.04, entitled "Procedure After Filing", Section 7.05, entitled "Action on Petitions", Section 7.06, entitled "Results of Election" and Section 7.07, entitled "Prohibition on Establishment of Stricter Conditions or Requirements", are amended by deleting said sections in their entirety and substituting the following new Sections 7.01, 7.03, 7.04, 7.05, 7.06 and 7.07 in lieu thereof: ARTICLE VII. INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM Section 7.01. General Provisions. A. Authority. (1)lnitiative. The eligible electors have the right to propose measures to the council and, if the council fails to adopt a measure so proposed without any change in substance, to have the measure submitted to the voters at an election. (2)Referendum. The eligible electors have the right to require reconsideration by the council of an existing measure and, if the council fails to repeal such measure, to have it submitted to the voters at an election. (3)Definition. Within this article, "measure" means all ordinances, amendments, resolutions or motions of a legislative nature, however designated, which (a) are of a permanent rather than temporary character and (b) include a proposition enacting, amending or repealing a new or existing law, policy or plan, as opposed to one providing for the execution or administration of a law, policy or plan already enacted by council. B. Limitations. (1)Subject Matter. The right of initiative and referendum shall not extend to any of the following: (a) Any measure of an executive or administrative nature. (b) The city budget. (c) The appropriation of money. (d) The levy of taxes or special assessments. (e) The issuance of general obligation and revenue bonds. Ordinance No. 15-4621 Page 4 (f) The letting of contracts. (g) Salaries of city employees. (h) Any measure required to be enacted by state or federal law. (i) Amendments to this charter. (j) Amendments affecting the city zoning ordinance or the land use maps of the comprehensive plan, including the district plan maps. (k) Public improvements subsequent to city council action to authorize acquisition of property for that public improvement, or notice to bidders for that public improvement, whichever occurs earlier. "Public improvement" shall mean any building or construction work. (2)Resubmission. No initiative or referendum petition shall be filed within two years after the same measure or a measure substantially the same has been submitted to the voters at an election. (3)Council Repeal, Amendment And Reenactment. No measure proposed by initiative petition and adopted by the vote of the council without submission to the voters, or adopted by the voters pursuant to this article, may for two years thereafter be repealed or amended except by a vote of the people, unless provision is otherwise made in the original initiative measure. No measure referred by referendum petition and repealed by the vote of the council without submission to the voters, or repealed by the voters pursuant to this article, may be reenacted for two years thereafter except by vote of the people, unless provision is otherwise made in the original referendum petition. C. Construction. (1)Scope Of Power. It is intended that this article confer broad initiative and referendum powers upon the eligible electors of the city. (2)lnitiative. It is intended that (a) no initiative petition will be invalid because it repeals an existing measure in whole or in part by virtue of proposing a new measure and (b) an initiative petition may amend an existing measure. (3)Referendum. It is intended that a referendum petition may repeal a measure in whole or in part. D. Effect Of Filing Petition. The filing of an initiative or referendum petition does not suspend or invalidate any measure under consideration. Such measure shall remain in full force and effect until its amendment or repeal by council pursuant to section 7.05(A) or until a majority of the qualified electors voting on a measure vote to repeal or amend the measure and the vote is certified. E. City Obligations. An initiative or referendum vote which repeals an existing measure in whole or in part does not affect any obligations entered into by the city, its agencies or any person in reliance on the measure during the time it was in effect. (Ord. 05-4152, 3-1-2005) Ordinance No. 15-4621 Page 5 Section 7.03. Petitions; Revocation Of Signatures. A. Number Of Signatures. Initiative and referendum petitions must be signed by eligible electors equal in number to at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the number of persons who voted in the last regular city election, but such signatures of eligible electors shall be no fewer than three thousand six hundred. B. Form And Content. All papers of a petition prepared for filing must be substantially uniform in size and style and must be assembled as one instrument. Each person signing shall provide, and the petition form shall provide space for, the signature, printed name, address of the person signing and the date the signature is executed. Petitions prepared for circulation must contain or have attached thereto throughout their circulation the full text of the measure proposed or sought to be reconsidered. The petition filed with the city clerk need have attached to it only one copy of the measure being proposed or referred. C. Affidavit Of Circulator. Each paper of a petition containing signatures must have attached to it when filed an affidavit executed by an eligible elector certifying: the number of signatures on the paper, that he or she personally circulated it, that all signatures were affixed in his or her presence, that he or she believes them to be genuine signatures of the persons whose names they purport to be and that each signer had an opportunity before signing to read the full text of the measure proposed or sought to be reconsidered. Any person filing a false affidavit will be liable to criminal penalties as provided by state law. (Ord. 05-4152, 3-1-2005) D. Time For Filing Initiative Petitions. Signatures on an initiative petition must be secured and the petition filed within six months after the date the affidavit required under section 7.02(A) was filed. (Ord. 85-3227, 3-12-1985) E. Time For Filing Referendum Petitions. Referendum petitions may be filed within sixty days after final adoption by the council of the measure sought to be reconsidered, or subsequently at any time more than two years after such final adoption. The signatures on a referendum petition must be secured during the sixty days after such final adoption; however, if the petition is filed more than two years after final adoption, the signatures must be secured within six months after the date the affidavit required under section 7.02(A) was filed. (Ord. 05-4152, 3-1-2005) F. Revocation Of Signature. Prior to the time a petition is filed with the city clerk, a signatory may revoke his or her signature for any reason by filing with the city clerk a statement of his or her intent to revoke his or her signature. After a petition is filed a signatory may not revoke his or her signature. The city clerk shall cause to be prepared and have available to the public, forms suitable for the revocation of petition signatures. (Ord. 85-3227, 3-12-1985) Section 7.04. Procedure After Filing. A. Validity Of A Petition. A petition is valid if it contains the minimum required signatures by eligible electors in the required form and with the required content and accompanied by the Affidavit of Circulator as set forth in Section 7.03. The petition shall be examined by the city clerk before it is accepted for filing. If the petition appears valid on its face it shall be accepted for filing. If it lacks the required number of Ordinance No. 15-4621 Page 6 signatures it shall be considered invalid and returned to the petitioners. Petitions which have been accepted for filing are valid unless written objections are filed with the city clerk within five working days after the petition is received. B. Hearing On Objections; Objections Committee. Written objections timely filed with the city clerk shall be considered by an Objections Committee made up of the mayor and city clerk and one member of the council chosen by the council by ballot, and a majority decision shall be final. The hearing on the objections shall be held within ten days of receipt of the objections. C. Court Review. To the extent allowed by law, court review of the Objections Committee's actions shall be by writ of certiorari. Section 7.05. Action On Petitions. A. Action By Council. When an initiative or referendum petition has been determined valid, the council shall promptly consider the proposed initiative measure or reconsider the referred measure. If the council fails to adopt a proposed initiative measure and fails to adopt a measure which is similar in substance within sixty days, or if the council fails to repeal the referred measure within thirty days after the date the petition was finally determined valid, it shall submit the proposed or referred measure to the qualified electors of the city as hereinafter prescribed. If at any time more than thirty days before a scheduled initiative or referendum election the council adopts the proposed initiative measure or adopts a measure which is similar in substance or if the council repeals a referred measure, the initiative or referendum proceedings shall terminate and the proposed or referred measure shall not be submitted to the voters. B. Submission To Voters. (1) Initiative. The vote of the city on a proposed measure shall be held at the regular city election or at the general election which next occurs more than forty days after the expiration of the sixty day period provided for consideration in section 7.05(A), provided that the initiative petition was filed no less than 80 days prior to the deadline imposed by state law for the submission of ballot questions to the commissioner of elections. (2) Referendum. The vote of the city on a referred measure shall be held at the regular city election or at the general election which next occurs more than forty days after the expiration of the thirty day period provided for reconsideration in section 7.05(A), provided that the referendum petition was filed no less than 50 days prior to the deadline imposed by state law for the submission of ballot questions to the commissioner of elections. The council may provide for a special referendum election on a referred measure any time more than 120 days after the filing of the referendum petition with the city clerk. C. Ballot. Copies of the proposed or referred measure shall be made available to the qualified electors at the polls and shall be advertised at the city's expense in the manner required for "questions" in section 376.5 of the Iowa Code. The subject matter and purpose of the referred or proposed measure shall be indicated on the ballot. (Ord. 05-4152, 3-1-2005) Ordinance No. 15-4621 Page 7 Section 7.06. Results Of Election. A. Initiative. If a majority of the qualified electors voting on a proposed initiative measure vote in its favor, it shall be considered adopted upon certification of the election results. The adopted measure shall be treated in all respects in the same manner as measures of the same kind adopted by the council, except as provided in section 7.01(13)(3). If conflicting measures are approved by majority vote at the same election, the one receiving the greatest number of affirmative votes shall prevail to the extent of such conflict. B. Referendum. If a majority of the qualified electors voting on a referred measure vote in favor of repealing the measure, it shall be considered repealed upon certification of the election results. (Ord. 05- 4152, 3-1-2005) Section 7.07. Prohibition On Establishment Of Stricter Conditions Or Requirements. The council shall not set, except by charter amendment, conditions or requirements affecting initiative and referendum. (Ord. 76-2792, 1-2-1976) SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION III. 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 IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective after its final passage, approval and publication as required by law. Passed and approved this 19 th day of May , 2015. MAYOR 1-1 ATTEST: CITY CeERK d by 2_ City Attorney's Office Ordinance No. 15-4621 Page 8 It was moved by Mims and seconded by _ Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Dickens that the AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne x Throgmorton First Consideration 04/21/2015 Voteforpassage: AYES: Botchway, Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Throgmorton. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Dickens. Second Consideration 05/05/2015 Vote for passage: AYES: Dickens, Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Throgmorton, Botchway. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Date published 05/28/2015