HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-12-15 Public hearing1
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will
be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at
7:00 p.m. on the 15th day of December, 2015, in
Emma Harvat Hall, City Hall, 410 E. Washington
Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is
cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council
thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; at which
hearing the Council will consider:
• AN ORDINANCE REZONING 16.3
ACRES OF LAND FROM INTERIM
DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH PARK
(ID -RP) ZONE TO LOW DENSITY
SINGLE FAMILY (RS -5) ZONE
LOCATED SOUTH OF KENNEDY
PARKWAY AND WEST OF CAMP
CARDINAL BOULEVARD. (REZ15-
00018)
• AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY
REZONING APPROXIMATELY 1.03
ACRES OF PROPERTY FROM
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC -2)
ZONE TO RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS
- CENTRAL CROSSINGS (RFC -CX)
ZONE LOCATED AT 602, 604, 608,
610, 614, 620, 628 SOUTH DUBUQUE
STREET. (REZ15-00020)
• AN ORDINANCE REZONING
APPROXIMATELY 7.98 ACRES OF
PROPERTY FROM COMMERCIAL
OFFICE (CO -1) TO INTENSIVE
COMMERCIAL (CI -1) ZONE LOCATED
EAST OF MORMON TREK
BOULEVARD BETWEEN GRACE
DRIVE AND EAGLE VIEW DRIVE.
(REZ15-00021)
• A VACATION OF AIR RIGHTS 25'
ABOVE PAVEMENT GRADE OVER
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE
NORTH -SOUTH ALLEYWAY
BETWEEN EAST HARRISON STREET
AND EAST PRENTISS STREET TO
ALLOW A PEDESTRIAN SKYWALK.
(VAC15-00005)
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
City Council December 15, 2015
0 ---------------------------------------
Planning and Zoning Items
Rezoning/ Development Item
0
REZ15-00018/SUB15-00023:
Discussion of an application submitted The
Crossings Development, LC for a rezoning from
Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) zone to
Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone and a
preliminary plat of Cardinal Pointe west — Part 1, a
31-10t, 16.3 acre residential subdivision for property
located south of Kennedy Parkway, west of Camp
Cardinal Boulevard.
Proposed rezoning from
Interim -Develop Research Park (ID -RP) to
Low Density Single Family (RS -5)
a
Mtp hMw tgv.W"Oen'CMS'�FNaglanmgwb lzomngmap.pOf
�I a
ce.y 01
Cardinal
Iowa
000iii
-. N
-
Proposed rezoning from
Interim -Develop Research Park (ID -RP) to
ID -RS
Low Density Single Family, (RS -5)
'
00
zI
OPDS
IDLRS
-
--
---' r
o D-
a
y
k- ID -RP
OPDEn
8sF
OPD5
oC
ID -RP ID -RS
RR1
�SLPIEfI
-3I S - 1G:3C CSI'MA,'
[ _. [I u: - 39 ..
pW
w
14
�
x
ti
w>
�'�'
��
ry
�� l p��'�
l
'J
f.
I
l t
��
v.
�. ��h i�'
�
r 1�
�
i.
��x
t s�.
r
_
i r"� v. �
_. � ,:
� /
v �
P�
� �.i
T) "
�
( ,. ,�..
r
c
�.
_
�.
� r
l..
9
Cardinal Pointe West
CONCEPT PLAN
IOWA CITY, IOWA
AUGUST 2015
KEY
m
.!.uurr..rnen mi ®rarwrm rwi �rw�nnervmr rwi ®v.�n ou.nrrvucaxr ror
I
I
I
I
/ MIOlE I �
/ m p111pEE i
5-7
i
YN
�
q'^s�e �� u
�'
W
•
��
RWM
q
a•
I q
m -T
�.�.in:: r
,•�
i
r
��mR use
Yb
111
q REwi
K
r
i
Wb
a
e
a
i---------------
1
�
---------
j_= .�'.
asaK �L9'f191ViiWA@��r._x".=,iriwaa�ixi.•.
°la�r
IOWA
Cf1Y a�sa�m_aar G•'",ws°mnaul°n": awe' u . d �n,�n6 �p_
Cardinal Pointe West Summary
• Property is within City Limits
• Comprehensive Plan encourages `conservation design.' The
concept plan reflects conservation design for the larger
property, with development clustered away from the
wooded slopes
• Request is for rezoning of approximately 16 acres to single
family residential — future phases of development will
require rezoning actions
• Concept plan for larger property includes townhouse, multi-
family, and single family
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00018, a
rezoning from Interim Development Research Park
(ID -RP) zone to Low Density Single Family (RS -5)
for approximately 16.3 acres located south of
Kennedy Parkway, west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval by a vote of 7-0
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Item: REZ15-00018/SUB15-00023
Cardinal Pointe West — Part I
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Prepared by: Bob Miklo
Date: October 15, 2015
Applicant: The Crossings Development, LC
755 Mormon Trek Boulevard
Iowa City, IA 52245
(319) 337-4195
jwaddilove@southgateco.com
Contact: Brian Vogal
Hall and Hall Engineers, Inc.
1860 Boyson Road
(319) 362-9548
iosha—halleng.com
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
Neighborhood Open Space District:
File Date:
45 Day Limitation Period:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Rezoning from ID -RP to RS -5 and a preliminary plat.
31 residential lots
South of Kennedy Parkway west of Camp Cardinal
Boulevard
Rezoning 16.18, subdivision 39.77 acres
Undeveloped — ID -RP
North: Undeveloped and residential - Coralville
East: Undeveloped — ID -RP
South: Undeveloped — ID -RP
West: Undeveloped — ID -RP
Conservation Design — Clear Creak Master Plan
NW -1 - Clear Creek
August 28, 2015
Waived to October 15, 2015
The applicant, The Crossing Development, LC, is requesting approval for the rezoning of 16.18
acres of land from Interim Development - Research Park (ID -RP) zone to Low Density Single -
Family Residential (RS -5) and a preliminary plat of Cardinal Point West — Part 1, a residential
development with 31 single-family lots. The plan also includes five outlots. Outlots A,B and C
are for private open space to be maintained by a homeowners association. Outlot D is for
stormwater management facilities to be maintained by the homeowners association and Outlot
E is for future development.
The applicant has also submitted a concept plan showing how Preston Drive will continue to the
south to connect to Camp Cardinal Boulevard, and the potential for of single-family, townhouse
and multi -family development to the south of the current proposal. The area shown on the
concept plan will require additional rezoning and subdivision approvals and is subject to change.
Approval of Cardinal Pointe West — Part 1 does not include approval of the concept plan.
This and the surrounding areas were annexed into the city between 1969 and 1972. Since
1983 the area has been zone Interim Development — Research Park (ID -RP) to reflect possible
development of an office park along Highway 218. In May 2002, -the City Council signed a
Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Coralville and Southgate Development
Services, LLC to agree upon a concept that envisioned a "conservation -type" development
including residential and commercial uses in the area surrounding Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
The master plan also laid out the financial participation of the cities and Southgate for the
reconstruction, realignment and extension of existing infrastructure including the construction of
Camp Cardinal Boulevard to facilitate the development.
Good Neighbor Policy: The application indicates that the applicant plans to follow the Good
Neighbor Policy, but no details have been submitted.
ANALYSIS:
Current Zoning: Based on the previous Comprehensive Plan, the area is currently zoned as
-Interim Development - Research Park (ID -RP). The text of the 1997 Comprehensive Plan,
however, recognized that with the establishment of Oakdale Campus north of Interstate 80, the
possibility of additional development of office and research park type uses in this area may not
be realistic. The Plan also recognized the topographical and infrastructural limitations of the
area, and therefore, supported the development with a mix of uses, such as low density
residential and office commercial uses. The Plan also supported clustered development that
would result in pedestrian friendly neighborhoods with minimal disturbance of the sensitive
areas. The ID -RP zoning allows only agricultural uses by right so a rezoning is necessary to
allow development of this property.
Proposed Zoning: The RS -5 zone is primarily intended to provide housing opportunities for
individual households. The regulations allow for some flexibility of dwelling types to provide
housing opportunities for a variety of household types (duplexes and attached single family on
corner lots). This zone also allows for some nonresidential uses that contribute to the livability of
residential neighborhoods, such as parks, schools, religious institutions, and daycare facilities.
The RS -5 zone allows for single family lots with a minimum lot area of 8,000 square feet, and a
minimum lot width of 60 feet. All lots within the proposed subdivision meet the minimum
requirements of the RS -5 zone.
Comprehensive Plan: This property is located within the Northwest Planning District. The
current Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as suitable for "Conservation Design" and refers
to the Clear Creek Master Plan (a more detailed district plan has not been prepared for the
Northwest District). The Clear Creek Master Plan lays out a general development concept with
possible street layouts, and shows areas for residential, commercial and office development. In
staff's view the requested rezoning and subdivision design conforms with the conservation
design envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan for this area.
3
Subdivision/Planned Development Design: The applicant is proposing a residential
development with a mix of typical RS -5 lots (approximately 9,000 to 12,000 square feet) and
larger lots (approximately 13,000 to 20,000 square feet) Following the principles of the master
plan, the subdivision has been designed to minimize the impact on the sensitive areas that exist
on the land. As shown on the concept plan development is being clustered away from the
wooded slopes. Although woodland clearing is being proposed for the extension of Kennedy
Parkway, to allow grading to create the single family lots and to provide for a stormwater
management basin on Outlot D, when considering the overall subdivision (lot 1-31 and Outlot D
together) over 50% of the woodlands will be preserved.
The subdivision code requires that block lengths range from 300 feet to 600 feet. Longer block
lengths may be considered where topographic conditions, water features or existing
development prevent shorter block lengths, although midblock pedestrian connections may be
required. To avoid disturbing ravines located to the west and east, Ava Circle is designed as a
loop street that will exceed the 600 maximum block length. A pedestrian access is being
provided between lots 11 and 12 and along the south side of lot 5, to connect Ava Circle with
Preston Lane. In staff's view the proposed design helps to minimize the disturbance of the
wooded ravines located on the property and complies with the Comprehensive Plan's emphasis
on conservation design for this area.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The property contains steep and critical slopes and
woodlands. The Sensitive Areas Site Plan indicates that approximately 46% of the woodlands
will be removed and approximately 40% of the steep slopes and 11 % of the critical slopes will
be graded to allow the extension of Kennedy Parkway, grading residential lots and stormwater
management. The disturbance is less than 35% of the critical slopes and 50% of the woodlands
and therefore does not require Planning and Zoning review.
Traffic implications and pedestrian facilities: Kennedy Parkway, a collector street, will be
extended from its current terminus at Preston Lane (Vintage Parkway to the north in Coralville)
to provide two access points to Ava Circle. In the future Kennedy Parkway will extend father to
the west to intersect with the future Highway 965. Preston Lane will extend south from Kennedy
Parkway to provide access to lots 1 to 8. The concept plan shows that in the future Preston
Lane will extend further to the south and intersect with Kennedy Parkway. These streets will be
adequate to serve the 31 single family dwellings proposed at this time.
To provide a pedestrian connection to this development the preliminary plat notes that a
sidewalk will be constructed (outside of this subdivision) along the south side of Kennedy
Parkway to connect with Camp Cardinal Boulevard. Curb ramps will also need to be provided at
the intersection of Kennedy Parkway and Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
Neighborhood parkland: A subdivision of this size is required to dedicate .38 acres of
neighborhood open space or pay fees in lieu of. The Parks and Recreation Department has
indicated that fees should be collected in lieu of dedication of land. This requirement will need
to be addressed in the legal papers at time of final plat approval.
Storm water management: A stormwater management basin will be provided in Outlot D. The
City Engineer has requested corrections and clarifications to the stormwater management plan.
Staff is working with the applicant's engineer to resolve these concerns prior to the October 15
Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Infrastructure fees: This subdivision is subject to the water main extension fee for $435 per
acre and sanitary sewer tap on fee of $570.98 per acre. Payment towards the cost of
constructing Camp Cardinal Boulevard will also need to be addressed at the time of final plat
4
approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends deferral of this application pending resolution of deficiencies and discrepancies
noted below. Upon resolution of these items staff recommends approval of REZ15-
00018/SUB15-00023 a rezoning of 16.18 acres from Interim Development - Research Park (ID -
RP) zone to Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS -5) and a preliminary of Cardinal Point
West - Part 1, 31 -lot residential subdivision located south of Kennedy Parkway and west of
Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES:
1. There will need to be an easement to convey storm water from Preston lane to the detention
basin and Outlot A and Outlot B should have easements for drainage and easements to
cover the storm sewer or be blanket easements for drainage and storm sewer.
2. There needs to be a drainage swale or some other way to convey the storm water from the
storm sewer outlet in Outlot B to the detention basin. There also appears to be a gap in the
plans where the entire 30' storm water drainage easement between Outlot B and the
detention basin is not shown.
3. The proposed drain tile in the detention basin should be extended north so that it is under all
the 8' wide bottom area that is at a 1 % slope.
4. If the detention basin is filled with water, it would be hard to gain access to around the
detention basin since the sides of the basin are not proposed to be cleared and graded.
What would you propose as the best way to gain access if there was a problem and
emergency maintenance was required and the detention basin was full?
5. The water lines should be designed to create a loop system for serving the property west of
lots 18 to 22.
6. There will need to be easements for the off-site sanitary sewer and a plan is needed for the
proposed off-site sanitary sewer alignment back to the where it connect to the existing
sewer system.
7. The sanitary sewer and storm sewer in Ava Circle are very close and cross in multiple
locations. There may be a way to change the alignment of both the sanitary sewer and
storm sewer to make this work better and further consideration should be given.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Preliminary Plat
3. Concept Plan
Approved by: _7,,,-`
John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
ppdadmin\stfrep\documenl2
v
i
.q m
-O S
OX
m
t'
Q
N
o
O
O
.<
.v
C)
00
C
AA
CD
c �
.
CD
N
•
•
W
•
•
v
i
.q m
-O S
j 1FL TT 33 c
.ep�ao-0�•]ie'DopTI'r1se®.eeel/b1�11
°si€€ Qi3 i3 0
A{ m� `3RA 9A a+Y6ie6id`'i°fi Baa€dF�FBF gfi, 33 y, € �rn
as 4 g.� aRsa�t a6
R o
nlemf♦3.1'. R �=x.s... F .aa�.eY {p��..yaa i ���`s '-i?fe rn
b a F gg
;IIIA � ILII $ Yg3C S :Y
as �gapypslgapepee�gg�gg�tgi' S€ea � fjifa�i'sgii
R£
:4 �z
E �C„�A4gCp 9 F Ay@ A 3 1S=`"1 FFAysa$gg �FA9'Y6� m Od ~ O
A�31 �� F aYp7 rEF�6 9I g m ` A
A 4A1S3+f'FAa6p9Ae• ° 9A9 a ipp N e5xy n `�55.R n
a11111, 1:1 j�9
{iS,gg�ai z
y�3`A� E.RI
W. a�A O 4 { 9
A a� 9E: eq {Ali' iip93 E E N
7@ FS d3'i iC�'933�€qP€,ap, .A, y j8 F� RaA{565yiy 8
d $ 6 E�tS�{ yp� '9FA0!0P t
tla€$ m
R, ZO
g R3
yjga$E�{.a9y;ga 'i e,:: o ig g
5a
ill -it �AA AFAS� as Yj a
pe� Aa 9i eirE �a �� 'aiE� ii ii g�'
O mxixe.r.euuixue.ruruwxRurue axu erte Hullo CARDINAL POINTE WEST - PART I
)
fill
|�
`
�
�
\
ƒ
I
- - -
�
{ s
§ qRq
§k11if
;
/At
/
\
��\ .2■
§
ƒ
�
� .
`
-
---.-|-�,
--
.
--- --
|
$
�
|�
)�------
�
�
\
— »--
- - -
§a
»
{ s
§ qRq
§k11if
�
/
\
��\ .2■
§
ƒ
�
� .
All .
ƒ
A
-Z--,-- ' - -- ---AN
-----
%
.w S ,
- §,
,®«_�
---w�E/\--�:�
, �
.�
�
;
�
\
— »--
- - -
- -:
ƒ
�
`
AV
ƒ . }� �
--
.
--- --
All .
ƒ
A
-Z--,-- ' - -- ---AN
-----
%
.w S ,
- §,
,®«_�
---w�E/\--�:�
, �
.�
�
D
/
/
,
/
/
,
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
,
/
/
/ o
/
/
/ f
.. ___ —T_7/ _____ — I
F
o Rao t
,
,
/
,
,
Rm
II \I '
I � I
I � �
I � I
I � I
\ 1
fau s3mmonals A Yno a3iym. fain IVl Gls3a WS H ® wAB s3nu-snw NAll aoi All"A 310HIs
AD
3LOZ isnond
VMOI 'Allo `dMO1
NVI8 1d3ONOD
IsaM aluiod IauipaaD
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 12
ways and in the discussion of the Nagle property there were no deviations.
Digmann stated he is willing to come back to the next meeting with answers and more details asp
requested this evening, but wanted to note that at this stage of the project that won't have exact
plans. Freerks said she understood that but the applicant now knows what the Commission is
looking for.
Freerks closed the public hearing.
Eastham moved to defer this item until the November 5, 2015 meeting.
Dyer seconded the motion.
Freeks noted the discussion has been constructive and informative. She asked if there was
anything else the Commission would like to add. Parsons said that this is too important of a
block to take lightly. Martin added that opportunity for this property is very important for the
Riverfront Crossings Plan.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ15-00018/SUB15-00023)•
Discussion of an application submitted The Crossings Development, LC for a rezoning
from Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) zone to Low Density Single Family (RS -
5) zone and a preliminary plat of Cardinal Pointe West - Part 1, a 31 -lot, 16.3 acre
residential subdivision for property located south of Kennedy Parkway, west of Camp
Cardinal Boulevard.
Miklo began the staff report showing illustrations of the property. The area has been zoned
Interim Development - Research Park (ID -RP) to reflect possible development of an office park
along Highway 218. When the Comprehensive Plan for the area was updated this area became
a concept that envisioned a "conservation -type" development including residential and
commercial uses in the area surrounding Camp Cardinal Boulevard. The application is for the
northern portion of the area, however if approved this evening, Preston Lane will continue to the
south to connect to Camp Cardinal Boulevard, and the potential for of single-family, townhouse
and multi -family development to the south of the current proposal. Miklo pointed out the
concept plan for future phases, showing Preston Lane extending to the south and the possibility
of multifamily or townhouses being clustered to transfer development away from the wooded
ravines. The application is to rezone the property to RS -5 which Staff has determined does
comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The plan is to do a residential subdivision with a loop
street, Ava Circle and'a north/south street, Preston Lane.
Parsons asked why the street was named Preston Lane to the left of Kennedy Parkway and
Vintage Boulevard to the right. Miklo replied that area to the north of Kennedy Parkway is in
Coralville where the street is named Vintage Drive. The street south of Kennedy Parkway will
intersect with Preston Drive farther to the south in Iowa City. So to keep it consistent, the Iowa
City portion of the street between Kennedy Parkway and Camp Cardinal Boulevard will be
named Preston Lane.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 8 of 12
Miklo noted there are some sensitive areas on the property but most of those are being set
aside in future development stages. In this stage there will be some grading and tree clearing in
the back of the RS -5 lots and some grading and tree clearing to allow for the stormwater
management basin. But even with the grading and tree clearings, it is below the threshold for
the sensitive area rezonings with less than 50% of the woodlands and less than 35% of the
critical slopes on the site. The City Engineer has reviewed and is satisfied with the stormwater
management plan and it will drain into a detention basin.
Staff recommends approval of REZ15- 00018/SUB15-00023 a rezoning of16.18acresfrom
Interim Development— Research Park (ID- RP) zone to Low Density Single -Family Residential
(RS -5) and a preliminary of Cardinal Point West — Part 1, 31 -lot residential subdivision
located south of Kennedy Parkway and west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
Hensch asked if there would be any connections to the existing Deer Creek Road. Miklo stated
that Deer Creek Road runs parallel to Highway 218 and there will not be any connections to that
road. There is a possibility Deer Creek Road may be vacated in the future. Miklo pointed out
that the future alignment of Highway 965 is just to the west, but there are no plans to build it in
the near-term. Parsons assumed that the quarry to the north will not be going away anytime
soon. Miklo agreed and indicated that the quarry is not within Iowa City's jurisdiction.
Hensch asked if the water structure to the south was connected to this development. Miklo said
that was designed when Camp Cardinal Boulevard was built and it may have some capacity for
this subdivision but the City Engineer determinedd the current proposal must provide its own
stormwater management.
Eastham asked if consideration was made to go ahead with the rezoning for the entire area so
that it would clearly state future development in the area would be townhomes and multi -family.
He said that it is close the elementary school. Miklo said the applicant only requested this
parcel, they are responding to the market at this time. He said the concept plan shows the
intention for the remainder of the property include multifamily and townhouses. He noted that
there will need to be some changes to the concept plan to meet code requirements.
Miklo noted that with this development the sidewalk will be constructed (outside of this
subdivision) along the south side of Kennedy Parkway to connect with Camp Cardinal
Boulevard.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Josh Entler (Southgate Companies) addressed the walkability to the elementary school and
noted they will install an 8 foot wide trail along the north side of Kennedy Parkway and will install
the 5 foot sidewalk along the south side of Kennedy Parkway from Preston Lane to provide
access to the elementary school. To address the question of rezoning the whole area: they did
not want to commit to a master plan of the whole area and need to see how the market will drive
future development. With regards to the stormwater management, the current pond to the south
will be impacted but in a quality and quantity controlled manner. The developments stormwater
basin will overflow and drain to the pond and other stream ways in the area, but will be
controlled. He explained that the ownership of the pond is broken up into a pond association
which means anyone whose water (either through piping or hard surface) drains into the pond is
part of the ownership, so it is just not Southgate's responsibility. Entler noted that they will be
clearing as few trees as possible, they share a desire to preserve as much of the woodlands as
possible. Freerks said that the woodlands does provide a good buffer that can't be easily
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 9 of 12
replaced.
Hensch asked what the density of the development will be when fully developed. Entler was not
able to say exactly what the final number would be a this time, the plans for the whole area have
undergone several revisions. Hensch noted his concern is the number of vehicles and
pedestrians all relying on just one entrance onto Camp Cardinal Boulevard, and when might
Highway 965 be extended. Entler did not have information on that highway extension. Miklo did
point out that when Preston Lane is extended to intersect with Camp Cardinal Boulevard, it will
provide two ways in and out of the area.
Hensch asked what the price point for the single family dwellings in this development will be.
Enstler could only give a guess on what the price point would be and thought maybe in the
range of $250,000 to $325,000.
Freerks close the public hearing.
Hensch moved to approve application submitted The Crossings Development, LC for
a rezoning from Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) zone to Low Density
Single Family (RS -5) zone and a preliminary plat of Cardinal Pointe West - Part 1, a
31 -lot, 16.3 acre residential subdivision for property located south of Kennedy
Parkway, west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard. (REZ15-00018/SUB15-00023)
Parsons seconded the motion.
Freerks said it was good to see more development in this area
Hensch just noted his concern about water drainage as that is an ongoing concern with
every application the Commission reviews.
Theobald noted her concern about diversity of housing and that area is neighborhood after
neighborhood of the same. She is concerned that there is not guarantee that there will be a
mix of housing in the future phases. She would like to see some mix and sooner rather
than later.
Eastham agreed and feels future developments in that area will need to include more
diverse housing types to meet the Comprehensive Plan and School District diversity goals
throughout the community.
Martin said there area east of Camp Cardinal Boulevard does have a good mix of houses
and thinks they did a good job of providing a range. Miklo showed on the aerial photograph
the area along Ryan Court which has a mix of office, single family, townhouses and
duplexes.
Parsons pointed out that when they first built Camp Cardinal Boulevard development was
slow to start but with the construction of the new school there has been some good
development in the area.
Hensch said a more general concern is that this is on the far edge of the city and is only
accessible by car. His hope is that not all developments are dependent on access by cars.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0
Rezoning Item
0
REZ15-00020:
Discussion of an application submitted by HD
Capital Partners, LLC for a rezoning from
Community Commercial (CC -2) zone for to
Riverfront Crossings - Central Crossing Subdistrict
(RFC -CX) zone for approximately 1.03 acres of
property located at 602, 604, 6o8, 61o, 614, 620,
628 S. Dubuque Street.
J
Cly o` Iowa City
REZ15-00020
S Dubuque Street
e
Feet
10
Prepared by Mart W
Date Prepared: October 20
E PRENTISS, ST
M7-11 Q
CC2 ell,
PRM PRM CC2
(Application for rezoning forAl tic
0010
,602,604,608,610,614,
620, and 628 S Dubuque St
to Riverfront Crossings
Lj¢ral Crossings Subdistrictilk
10W
cli
PRMPRM
PRM
PRM PRM
PRM PRM
PRM
PRM PRM
PRM
PRM
PRM
PRM
PRM
PRM
CC2
E PRENTISS, ST
M7-11 Q
CC2 ell,
PRM PRM CC2
(Application for rezoning forAl tic
0010
,602,604,608,610,614,
620, and 628 S Dubuque St
to Riverfront Crossings
Lj¢ral Crossings Subdistrictilk
10W
cli
Current Zoning
Community Commercial (CC -2)
Iowa City's general commercial zone
Low -scale commercial buildings — maximum 35' height limit
There are no specific location standards for buildings and
parking other than a 10 foot front setback and typically
parking is located between the buildings and the street
No building design standards
Residential apartments allowed above commercial space by
special exception at approximately 15 units per acre.
Proposed Zoning
Riverfront Crossings — Central Crossings (RFC -CX)
Allows a broad mix of commercial and residential uses and buildings
types (multi -dwelling, townhouse, commercial, mixed-use, etc.)
Maximum height is 4 stories (with no height bonus) with a io-foot
facade stepback above the 3rd story.
Southern half of this block is designated as a required retail frontage
For the remainder of the block residential building types would be
allowed as well.
Building design standards apply, including facade articulation and
composition, minimum window coverage and design, entranceway
and frontage standards, exterior building materials standards,
awnings and canopy standards, and location of mechanical
equipment.
Elements of a Form -based Code
Building and parking location is more strictly controlled.
Building Placement Diagram
I
—i Q
V
Frontage Condition
A building's frontage condition - the transition
from public to private space, from indoor to outdoor
at the main entrance, the design treatment of first
story building facades, the configuration of fagade
projections, and the disposition of improvements
within required setbacks - strongly influences the
quality and character of public streets and
spaces.
i
hub lir F. �-,N M PtiVato_Lot
Iand;cape Public
Strip Sidevelk
Streezxape ; Private Frontage
Roadway Improvement Area Improvement Area
LOA
fill
max.IW
'in. 1
max. 100'
Cornice
Corner
Emphasis
MIN
Window
Pattern
- ------ 7 7-7 77
Awning
Storefront
Corner
Entrance
General
Requirements
stoma
Pedestrian Streets
Public 6
Private
N
L
tm
L
W!i
L
Special
Provisions
Usable Open Space
Requirements
b
k4 u � III
l� � a
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
0
Located in the Central Crossings Subdistrict of Riverfront
Crossings
Defining features of this subdistrict include two rail lines, the historic
Rock Island rail depot, and Ralston Creek
Master Plan objectives for Central Crossings include:
Encourage contextual infill
Leverage fiiture investments in transit through TOD
Restore and enhance conditions along Ralston Creek
Provide a mix of residential and retail uses
Promote new housing options
Development Character:
Build on efforts to improve the quality of residential design
Maintain moderate scale and intensity of use
SITE I'LAN
F Usl E <1�ulITeGTS burs u 4, u E a T R E E T f P t 9 THE N T S $'{nce8 G•NctR��tl�
u 11 old
ago
4 11 111 11 Ii
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00020, a proposal to
rezone approximately 1.03 acres of property from
Community Commercial (CC -2) to Riverfront Crossings —
Central Crossings (RFC -CX), subject to the following
condition:
Mid -block shared, useable open space is required between the buildings and
between building wings as conceptually shown on the submitted site plan.
The mid -block space between the buildings must be at least 35' wide and
must be designed as a "private pedestrian street" as set forth in the form -
based code. Courtyard space between building wings must be a minimum 35'
in width and must be configured as shared useable open space meeting the
design standards in the form -based code.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval by a vote of
4-1
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Item: REZ15-00020
GENERAL INFORMATION:
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Karen Howard
Date: October 15, 2015
Applicant: HD Capital Partners, LLC
711 S. Gilbert St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Contact: Kevin Digmann
319-354-2233
kdigmann@yahoo.com
Requested Action: Rezone from Community Commercial (CC -2)
Zone to Riverfront Crossings — Central Crossings
(RFC -CX)
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
File Date:
45 Day Limitation Period:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Redevelopment according to the Riverfront
Crossings District Plan and form -based code
600 block of S. Dubuque Street in the Central
Crossings Subdistrict of Riverfront Crossings
Approximately 1.03 acres
commercial; vacant / CC -2
North: multi -family residential (PRM)
South: commercial (CC -2 and CIA)
East: commercial (CIA)
West: multi -family and commercial (PRM and CC -2)
September 24, 2015
November 8, 2014
The subject properties are located in the 600 block of South Dubuque Street in the Central
Crossings Subdistrict of Riverfront Crossings and comprise almost the entire western half of this
city block. The properties are currently zoned Community Commercial (CC -2)). The existing
buildings along South Dubuque Street include a small mixed-use building containing commercial
space and three apartments, a single family house, three vacant lots, and a small strip
commercial building.
The subject property falls within the Central Crossings Subdistrict of the Riverfront Crossings
District and, therefore, the recently adopted form -based zoning code for Riverfront Crossings will
apply if the property is rezoned. The applicant has indicated their intent to redevelop the
properties "in accordance with the updated Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Development
standards."
ANALYSIS:
Current and proposed zoning: The Community Commercial Zone (CC -2) is intended for major
retail commercial areas that serve a significant segment of the community population. The
maximum building height in the CC -2 Zone is 35 feet, or approximately 3 stories. The zone is
primarily a commercial zone, but allows upper floor residential uses at a density of approximately
15 units per acre by special exception. Since the area is approximately 1 acre, the current zoning
would allow up to 15 dwelling units. Minimal parking and building setbacks apply, but in this zone
parking may be placed between buildings and the street.
The Riverfront Crossings form -based zoning for the Central Crossings subdistrict (RFC -CX) would
be a significant upzoning. The RFC -CX zone allows for a broad mix of commercial and residential
uses, similar to uses allowed in the Central Business Zones. Unlike the CC -2 Zone, the Riverfront
Crossings code allows for a variety of building types (Townhouse, Multi -Dwelling, Live -Work
Townhouses, Commercial, Mixed -Use, and Liner buildings). The southern half of the block along
Dubuque Street is designated as a required retail frontage on the Riverfront Crossings Regulating
Plan. A commercial building or mixed-use building would be required in this area. Residential uses
are not allowed within required retail frontages and the buildings must be designed with a
storefront or urban flex commercial frontage with generous storefront windows opening onto a
pedestrian -oriented streetscape. For the remainder of the block residential buildings types, such
as townhouses and multi -dwelling buildings are allowed with residential uses allowed on the
ground level floor of these building types.
Buildings must be set back a minimum 10 feet and maximum 20 feet from the Dubuque Street
ROW and be designed according to an allowed frontage type appropriate to the chosen building
type. Parking must be located behind or within buildings and screened from the sidewalk and the
street. The maximum building height in the Central Crossings subdistrict is four stories with a
required upper story fagade stepback above the 3`d story. Up to four additional stories may be
granted through the applicable bonus height provisions. Building design standards apply and will
be administered through the staff design review process. These include requirements for
streetscape improvements, open space, pedestrian passages, landscaping, fagade composition
and articulation, fenestration (window coverage), entranceway design, and building materials.
Residential density is limited only by building height standards and parking requirements, so a
rezoning from CC -2 to RFC -CX could yield a considerable number of residential dwelling units as
well as space for commercial uses. The rezoning would have the potential to yield conservatively
five times the residential density than would be allowed under current zoning due to the lower
parking requirements in the RFC -CX zone and the absence of a maximum residential density
standard. One of the primary goals of the Riverfront Crossings District is to encourage new high
quality housing options for people to live in a mixed-use neighborhood that is within walking
distance of Downtown and the university campus. In the Central Crossings Subdistrict moderate
scale housing options designed in a manner that is attractive to more permanent residents is
encouraged. Staff finds that rezoning the property to RFC -CX would provide a better opportunity
for higher quality development to occur than currently exists with the CC -2 zoning.
Comprehensive Plan: The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan was adopted in
January 2013 as an integral part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is
located in the Central Crossings Subdistrict of Riverfront Crossings. Rezoning and
redevelopment consistent with the Riverfront Crossings Plan is more appropriate than the
current CC -2 Zoning.
3
The plan highlights some of the defining features of this subdistrict, including the two rail lines,
the historic Rock Island Rail Depot, and Ralston Creek. In the future, the rail lines may provide
opportunities for passenger service, both regional and local. The plan also highlights
redevelopment opportunities along Ralston Creek. It notes that Ralston Creek has been
degraded to the point that it is no longer a healthy waterway. Stream restoration efforts could
vastly improve the health of the stream, provide an amenity for the entire district, and create a
more attractive location for new development, provided buildings are more appropriately set
back from the floodway and designed to be flood resilient.
The Riverfront Crossings Master Plan specifically calls out this block for special attention due to
its location along Ralston Creek, as noted above, and because of the former cluster of mid -19th
century cottages located along the property's Dubuque Street frontage. Since the cottages have
since been demolished, the preservation of these buildings is no longer a relevant consideration
for the rezoning process. The plan also states that redevelopment should be contextual in
nature, meaning that it should maintain a rhythm of fagade articulation and appropriate frontage
and building types in context to its location. Looking at the Riverfront Crossings Plan, the 320 -
foot block lengths were originally divided into four, 80 -foot x 150 -foot lots, with mid -block alleys.
In response to this rhythm of block and lot layouts the plan illustrates redevelopment scenarios
typically broken into at least two modules with significant mid -block breaks, such as forecourts
or open air pedestrian passages. Staff recommends that since the entire block face is proposed
for redevelopment that a minimum 30 -foot mid -block break be required as a condition of
redevelopment, which can be designed as a forecourt frontage with minimum dimensions of 30'
or by a minimum 30 -foot wide pedestrian passage. Given the sloping topography of the site, this
passage may extend over the underground parking garage. This will allow additional space for
open space amenities for residents or outdoor courtyard seating for a future restaurant or other
commercial tenant. In addition, such a mid -block break will correspond with a potential change
from a mixed-use building with ground level storefront frontage, which is required on the
southern half of the block to a more residential building typology for the remainder of the block,
at the developer's discretion. Staff has discussed this idea of a mid -block break with the
applicants and they have agreed that this would be an attractive option to provide additional
open space for the future residents and/or commercial tenants.
Compatibility with neighborhood: The applicant has not developed specific building plans for
the property, but intends to submit a conceptual site plan prior to the meeting on Thursday of
how a building or buildings would fit on the site and provide the mid -block break and open space
discussed above. Therefore, provided a minimum 30 -foot open air pedestrian passage or
forecourt frontage is established mid -block, staff finds that the zoning standards in the Riverfront
Crossings form -based zoning code will provide appropriate standards for redevelopment of this
block along South Dubuque Street. Staff notes that the proposed zoning would allow
development that is more consistent with the goals for the future of this neighborhood than the
existing CC -2 zoning.
Traffic implications: The streets and public alley are already in place in this block that will
provide for adequate traffic circulation if redevelopment of the subject properties were to occur
according to the proposed zoning and the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00020, a proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres of
property located within the 600 block of South Dubuque Street from Community Commercial (CC -
2) to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings (RFC -CX), subject to a conditional zoning agreement
requiring a minimum 30 -foot wide pedestrian passage or a mid -block forecourt frontage with
minimum dimensions of 30'x 30' is established upon redevelopment.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Aerial Photograph
Approved by:
✓h
John Yapp, OevelopmerA ServiEes Coordinator
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
w w
•CD DO
•
• •
•
• • L
•.
•. •
• • • �.
• • ie
cn
• •
•
a
I
a
rIP9
C)
C/)
;o
0
aom
(D �
D Q
r-
�2v
(D �
6 d
Lr,C)
a
A
O
a �
m �
I N G
O
=
O
(D
O
hi
in
O
CD
t'
<D
a
rIP9
d
tD
(D �
D Q
fU �
(D �
6 d
a
A
O
a �
m �
I N G
O
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 5, 2015
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Karen Howard, Associate Planner
Re: REZ15-00020 600 Block of S. Dubuque Street
At your last meeting, the Commission requested additional information from the applicant
regarding future development intentions for the properties proposed for rezoning from
Community Commercial (CC -2) to Riverfront Crossings — Central Crossings (RFC -CX). The
applicant has submitted an updated schematic site plan and conceptual building elevations
showing how future buildings are likely to be placed on the site. In addition, they have submitted
a statement that describes their general development intentions for the property. These
submittals give an idea of the number and mix of residential units, amount of retail space, mass
and scale of the buildings, setbacks, and amount of open space.
The rezoning request and the supporting documents submitted by the applicant should be
reviewed for compliance with the master plan objectives, development character, and
development program for the Central Crossings District as stated on p. 66 of the Riverfront
Crossings Master Plan (for a summary see below). The concept plan included in the master
plan is intended to illustrate one scenario for how the desired objectives and character could be
achieved. Additional special goals and objectives are also described in the master plan for
specific properties and locations. The specific goals for this property included potential
preservation of the cottages. However, since these have been torn down, the question is how
future development will meet the goals of the plan and if the form -based zoning will ensure that
these goals are met.
Centfal +;,rt;s inns Dl,,trit_t S 1_11nI narY
t//aster Plan ObieCVVGt s:
> Encourage contextual infill
> Leverage future in estmentsintransit-TOD
> Restore and enhance conditions along Ralston creek
> Provide a m ix of residential and retail uses
> Promote new housing options
> Leverage the Clinton Street mobility spine
> Create a new Civic space as a focal point - thetransit playa
DevF,Iopn et it c_ arac_ wr:
> Integrate with South Downtown and Park District
> Build on on-going efforts to improve quality residential design
> Enhanced public realm (Clinton Street Promenade, Ralston
Creek, etc.)
> Maintain moderate scale and intensity of use
Dwr-Icfrmrk-.�tit Prograni,
> Multiple housing option typologies.
> Office
> Limited convenience retail inTOD area
> Civic, such as future regional passenger rail station and light
rail stop
October 30, 2015
Page 2
Analysis:
Staff has reviewed the submitted site plan and building elevations in relation to the applicable
goals of the plan. Most relevant are the goals to encourage contextual infill, building on efforts to
improve quality residential design, promote new housing options, provide a mix of residential
and retail uses, and leverage future investments in transit.
The site plan shows two buildings that will likely share below grade structured parking accessed
from the rear alley. The steep topography of the site will make it easier to provide below grade
parking that will be hidden from public view along the street frontages. The L-shaped building to
the north will likely be a 4 -story multi -dwelling building. The code will require the 4 th story to be
stepped back a minimum of 10 feet along both street frontages. Between the two buildings a
minimum 35 -foot -wide "pedestrian street" is proposed that will be designed as usable shared
open space between the two buildings. The building to the south will be required by Code to be
a mixed-use building with commercial space on the ground level floor. The lot size and
configuration makes a U-shaped building an attractive choice as it will provide the maximum
fagade area to provide generous window coverage for upper floor residential uses. The lot size
will allow two 60 -foot building wings and a 35' wide rear courtyard that can also be designed for
shared use by the residents. With this type of configuration most units will have views toward
the street, the shared interior courtyard or of the private pedestrian street between the buildings.
Units on the south will look out over the 80 -foot -wide railroad right-of-way, which will ensure
light, air, and views are maintained to the south.
The conceptual building elevation indicates how recessed areas and the open pedestrian street
will help to break up the mass and scale of the buildings along Dubuque Street. The form -based
code includes fairly extensive standards to help ensure quality residential design. The code
provides a menu of allowed frontage types (portico, stoop, or terrace) that are allowed for
residential buildings. The frontage types include detailed design standards to ensure that
entranceways are configured with appropriate architectural features and recessed doorways.
Front yard landscaping is required by code in areas that are not used for entryways and the
relationship between the private frontage area and the public space along the street is also laid
out in the code. A minimum 6 -foot sidewalk and street trees will be required. On -street parking
may be allowed with agreement by the City to help the required retail be successful. The south
building will be required to meet the storefront frontage requirement that includes 70%
transparent window coverage, at grade entranceways at least every 50 feet, and canopies or
awnings that extend across a minimum of 60% of the length of the storefront fagade. The
minimum upper story window coverage for street -facing facades is 25%. There are also specific
requirements for building modulation and articulation in the form -based code to prevent long flat
facades with little visual interest. Blank walls greater than 15' in length are not allowed in areas
within public view.
It should be noted that the site plan and building elevations submitted are conceptual in nature,
so details have not yet been determined. However, the form -based code includes a fairly
extensive set of building design standards that must be met and all new buildings in the
Riverfront Crossings zones must be approved through the design review process. Additional
standards of note beyond what is mentioned above include window type and design,
entranceway design, minimum floor to ceiling heights, exterior buildings materials, and location
and screening of mechanical equipment. In addition there is an open space requirement that
ensures that a minimum amount of shared private open space is included on each property.
There are standards in the code that ensure that this space is designed to be usable shared
space, while maintaining privacy for individual units.
As stated in the original staff report, staff finds that in general, the extensive site and building
design standards in the form -based code will ensure that goals of the Master Plan will be met
upon redevelopment. The proposed zoning will allow higher residential density, which will help
leverage future investments in transit and other public infrastructure, such as the new riverfront
October 30, 2015
Page 3
park. The proposed zoning will also ensure that opportunities for neighborhood -serving retail
uses will be provided. However, as stated in the original staff report, we recommend that
additional open space be required beyond what would be required to meet the minimum open
space requirement in the form -based code. This block -long redevelopment will be more
contextual with the surrounding neighborhood character if the building is broken into two
buildings and more generous usable courtyard and pedestrian areas between the buildings and
within the rear courtyard is provided. This additional open space will help create higher quality
living space for the higher density residential development anticipated with the rezoning. The
applicant's site plan illustrates how this can be achieved on the property. To ensure that the
additional open space shown on the conceptual site plan is provided upon redevelopment, staff
recommends the following condition:
Mid -block shared, useable open space is required between the buildings and between
building wings as conceptually shown on the submitted site plan. The mid -block space
between the buildings must be at least 35' wide and must be designed as a "private
pedestrian street" as set forth in the form -based code and also meet the design
standards for "open space" as set forth in the form -based code. Courtyard space
between building wings must be a minimum 35' in width and must be configured as
shared usable open space meeting the design standards in the form -based code.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00020, a proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres of
property located within the 600 block of South Dubuque Street from Community Commercial (CC -
2) to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings (RFC -CX), subject to the condition as stated above.
Attachments:
• Conceptual site plan
• Schematic building elevation drawing
• Applicant's statement
Approved by:
IJBIA
John Yapp, Development tervices Coordinator,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
A.
00411
-1 7 owl
4 1
ludIF i
.44 -
To the Planning and Zoning Commission,
The developer recognizes the unique opportunity presented in the ability to redevelop nearly half a city
block in a well-planned, phased development.
The project will occur in two phases. Phase one will be a residential building sitting on the northern
portion of the block. Fagade breaks, materials, height, window openings, etc. will all be in accordance
with the Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Development Standards. Building A will contain
approximately 29 units: 50% 2 Bedrooms, 25% 1 Bedrooms and 25% 3 Bedrooms. Building B will be
constructed during Phase two and contain approximately 59 units at the same bedroom ratio. Building
B will also contain approximately 7,250 square feet of commercial space on the first floor. The layout of
this commercial space can be divided up to accommodate a variety of smaller or mid-sized retail spaces
and larger spaces, such as restaurants.
Constructing two levels of parking on the lower portion of the land addresses the difficult elevation
change and allows the streetscape to extend into a level courtyard, creating attractive amenity space for
the residents and patrons to businesses on the block. There will be approximately 7,000 square feet of
usable, functional open space provided by the two courtyards, which far exceed the Open Space
Requirements outlined in the Riverfront Crossings Standards. This redevelopment in two phases allows
the developer to create a thoughtful and functional open space for the neighborhood, not just leftover
space around buildings.
The developer believes this project fits within the goals of the City to create a vibrant community in the
Riverfront Crossings district that encourages walkable neighborhoods and looks forward to future
revitalization of Ralston Creek and potential railroad development.
Respectfully Yours,
HD Capital Partners
r"7777777777 -
I LI
Mal
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 15, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch,
Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Karen Howard, Bob Miklo
OTHERS PRESENT: Kevin Digmann, Josh Entler, Jerry Eyman
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of an application submitted The
Crossings Development, LC for a rezoning from Interim Development Research Park (ID -
RP) zone to Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone and a preliminary plat of Cardinal
Pointe West — Part 1, a 31 -lot, 16.3 acre residential subdivision for property located south
of Kennedy Parkway, west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of the requested rezoning of 3.72 acres
from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R) conditioned on the requirement for a shared driveway.
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There were none
REZONING ITEM (REZ15-00020):
Discussion of an application submitted by HD Capital Partners, LLC for a rezoning from
Community Commercial (CC -2) zone to Riverfront Crossings - Central Crossing Subdistrict
(RFC -CX) zone for approximately 1.03 acres of property located at 602, 604, 608, 610, 614,
620, 628 South Dubuque Street.
Howard began the staff report showing a location map of the area. The properties are currently
zoned CC -2 and the request is to rezone the properties to Riverfront Crossings — Central
Crossing Subdistrict RFC -CX. The current zoning is Iowa City's general commercial zoning
which calls for low scale commercial buildings with a maximum building height of 35 feet. There
are no specific standards for buildings and parking other than a 10 foot front setback. Typically
in most Community Commercial zones parking is located between the building and the street
because they tend to be in more auto oriented locations. The current zone requires commercial
buildings but is also a mixed-use zone in that residential apartments can be above the
commercial by special exception.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 2 of 12
Howard said that the requested zoning in Riverfront Crossings allows a broad mix of residential
and commercial uses and buildings. The maximum building height is four stories with a 10 foot
facade step back above the third story. There can be additional stories if the developer qualifies
for bonus heights up to four additional stories. Howard explained that the southern half of the
South Dubuque Street block in question is a required retail frontage so it has to be built as a
mixed-use building or a commercial building with store front frontage. There cannot be any
residential units on the ground floor within a required retail frontage area, which is specified on
the regulating plan in Riverfront Crossings. The reason that requirement is in this location is
because there was an existing commercial building in that location which is close to what was
the transit hub there and the Rock Island train depot. At the time of the Riverfront Crossings
plan development there was still hope that there would be Amtrak service on that railway.
Howard explained that there are quite a few building standards in the Riverfront Crossings
Form -based Code that must be met, including facade articulation and composition, minimum
window coverage and design for both residential and commercial buildings, entrance way and
frontage standards, building material standards, awning and canopy standards, and location
standards for mechanical equipment to ensure they are screened from the street.
The Central Crossings Subdistrict is the center of the Riverfront Crossings Zone so the
Comprehensive Plan that applies to the area highlights some of the defining features of this
subdistrict, including the two rail lines, the historic Rock Island Rail Depot, and Ralston Creek.
The master plan objectives encourage contextual buildings, meaning that it should maintain
a rhythm of facade articulation and appropriate frontage and building types in context to its
location. Additionally it should restore and enhance conditions along Ralston Creek and
provide a mix of residential and retail uses and to promote new housing options for the
area. The development character that is expressed in the Plan is to improve the quality of
residential design and to maintain the moderate scale and intensity of use in this area.
Howard showed the existing block plan and pattern and new development should respond
to that design and character. In general the conceptual plans show the blocks with
buildings that have mid -block open spaces. In the Code the terms mid -block breaks, such
as forecourts or open air pedestrian passages and Howard showed photos of examples from
other cities of such areas. She also noted that the mid -block pedestrian passageways are
necessary for the retail spaces, if the parking is in the back of the building, the passageway
can be a way to get to the front of the building where the entrances to the retail spaces are.
Howard said that Staff discussed with the applicant rather than doing a block long
development there is an opportunity to do some of those urban spaces within this block
face. The applicant was agreeable and Howard showed a preliminary site plan the
applicant's architect created. It would be a U shaped building with a private courtyard in the
center for the residents. Due to the topography of the area, the space would allow for
underground parking for the building.
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00020, a proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres of
property located within the 600 block of South Dubuque Street from Community Commercial {CC -
2} to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings (RFC -CX), subject to a conditional zoning agreement
requiring a minimum 30 -foot wide pedestrian passage or a mid -block forecourt frontage with
minimum dimensions of 30'x 30' is established upon redevelopment.
Freerks asked if there was any information on proposed building height for the conceptual
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 3 of 12
development at this area. Was there an idea of the number of units and mix bedrooms
Martin asked how the developer could get bonus heights on buildings. Howard replied the Code
allows for bonus height for Leed buildings, affordable housing, elderly housing, protecting
historical properties, and art donation to Riverfront Crossings. She noted this area would not
qualify for historic building bonus nor student housing bonuses due to the location.
Theobald asked about the 30 foot wide passage or a courtyard and if that was one or the other
or could it be both. She said the staff recommendation includes one or the other but not both.
Howard said Staff discussed the requirement in their recommendation prior to discussing with
the applicant and their architect creating a conceptual plan. Howard stated if there is a
courtyard, the Code does require minimum dimensions for the size of courtyards. Freerks said
that is why she would like to see a little bit more information about what is planned.
Eastham noted that in the Comprehensive Plan for this area, the block in question shows more
green space than what is being shown in the conceptual plan for this development. Eastham
asked about the amount of green space compared to the overall Riverfront Crossings Plan.
Freerks agreed and is concerned the area will just be filled with large structures and that
development will not be in character with what is shown in the Riverfront Crossings Plan.
Eastham asked if this rezoning is approved is Staff developing a design concept the next step.
Howard answered that no, Staff does not develop the design concept, they would respond to an
application of a possible building concept for the property. Eastham asked if at the time Staff
could negotiate more green space. Howard stated Staff can only enforce what is in the Code, if
the Commission wanted more green space than what is shown or required by the code, it would
have to be a condition of the rezoning. Currently in Riverfront Crossings there is an open space
requirement, it is 10 square feet per bedroom so the application must meet that requirement.
She said the concept plan probably far exceeds what is required by code for open space.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Kevin Digmann (HD Capital Partners) said that Karen did a good job of describing their plan.
He explained their concept plan for the site. First he said the site will be developed in phases
with building A first then building B will be later so there will naturally be a courtyard between
them. He also noted the maximum the width of the buildings will be is 60 feet, and may very
well be narrower which would provide more than the 30 foot required passage way. Additionally
building B would have commercial frontage along Dubuque Street.
Freeks noted that the Comprehensive Plan discusses current business placement. She said
that we said we would address that as the area redevelops and feels that was lost in this plan
on both the applicant's and City's part. Freerks is concerned about the existing businesses on
this property and the Comprehensive Plan specifically states "as areas transition to more mixed-
use pedestrian focus strategies should be developed to help businesses remain in the area or
assist them to find new locations that better meet their business goals". Freerks would like
some thought in the community regarding these existing businesses. She said that it may not be
the applicant's job to address it, but is the City's. She would like some thought given to this by
staff. If we don't we are ignoring what we said in the Plan.
Digmann asked if what the existing businesses there that Freerks is speaking of. Freerks said
yes that is something that was talked about when we draft the Riverfront Crossings Plan. She
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 4 of 12
said we have the small business there like the Broken Spoke bike shop and the shoe repair
business. She said that it was not necessarily the developers problem, but one that the City
said would be addressed in the plan.
Digmann said they have had discussions with all the current businesses on the property. He
said they have Kennedy Plaza nearby and offered to relocate them. Some they had already had
found another place and some said they had not. Additionally he noted the businesses that
are currently on the property take up less than a fourth of the total property being developed.
Digmann also noted those businesses are in their locations for next to nothing rents and any
development would change that factor. Dyer noted the businesses in that area have all been
there for quite some time. Digmann said they are willing to extend the current leases for the
businesses to May of 2017.
Freerks replied that she is being upfront with her concerns. She would like to see a concept plan
before voting on this rezoning application. She does not want to vote it down because of lack of
information, but is not ready to vote on it at this time.
Digmann noted he was encouraged by City Staff not to bring the concept plan at this time.
Freerks noted that the staff is not voting on the application. Digmann understands but noted he
watched the rezoning go through on the Nagle property. Freerks answered that the Nagle
property did not deviate from what we had outlined in the Riverfront Crossings Plan for that
area. She emphasized it matched the Plan closely and in this application it is deviating from the
Plan with the removals of the cottages, removal of most of the green space as shown in the
Plan and finally removal of the businesses. Additionally the concept does not show the scale of
the building, the heights, density, etc. All those are questions for which she is requesting more
information.
Martin asked why the zoning being requested is Riverfront Crossings status rather than CC -2
zoning. Digmann said the request is because the area is Riverfront Crossings and that is the
best fit for the area. They could do something similar to what they did at the Depot lot which is
PRM but knows that request would be denied by the City. He also feels that CC -2 would be
denied and Freerks agreed and said that the applicant going for Riverfront Crossings zoning is
the best for them as they will get more benefits in density. Martin said she asked the question
because the work that went into creating the Riverfront Crossings made so many opportunities
for the community and she wants to hear how this project fits into the community. What does
that mean for this project.
Digmann said their goal is to create a quality project and market it successfully. He said we are
experienced developers who did Sycamore Mall and Old Capitol Mall. We have done lots of
residential projects. We aren't here to just put up cheap student housing. We want to do a
quality project like the pictures that Karen has shown. We will be providing additional housing
downtown, new business spaces, and provide what the community needs and wants. We have
a lot invested in this community and want to do quality.
Martin noted that the conceptual plan shown is not in the same quality as other project
Digmann's group has done around the City and that is her concern. She was surprised when
she saw it. Digmann noted that it costs tens of thousands of dollars to create such plans so they
are trying to stay within the Code and Comprehensive Plan (noting yes things have changed
with the cottages gone). Freerks noted that for the applicant to say it's going to be quality
buildings and an upgrade for the site needs to be confirmed with the plans noting that the trust
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 5 of 12
level with regards to this property is low. Digmann said he can't help with what the prior owner
did.
Digman asked what further information the Commission wanted to see. Freeks explained that
the Commission is asking for more information about the concept for the property, a more
detailed site plan with schematics of what the buildings would look like and how they will lay out
on the property, how tall the buildings will be and the approximate density. Martin asked how
the concept connects to downtown.
Freerks noted the current concept plan shows no guarantee to even meet the Staff
recommendation. Digmann said they would be willing to do a CZA (Conditional Zoning
Agreement) stating their concept must comply with the particular code. Freerks noted it is not
uncommon for the Commission to ask for more detailed information as they only want what will
be positive for the community. Digmann understands but asked what assurances they would
have if they invest in more detailed plans. Freerks said we refer to the examples in the photos,
but there is no guarantee that anything like that will be built. With more substantial plans the
Commission would be better equipped to understand the plans and be able to vote accordingly.
Freerks said perhaps she was the only Commissioner who was concerned with this. Eastham
agreed he shared these concerns.
Dyer noted her concern is that block shown on the Comprehensive Plan shows more green
space and the conceptual plan is big blocks of buildings and very little green space. Digmann
pointed out with regards to the green space it is really a misnomer because the space elevation
changes 20 feet, so it is not usable green space. Freerks acknowledged that but noted it is still
green space and part of the property landscape.
Hensch noted that the property topography is steep, it has a significant drop off and a part of it
is hard packed gravel. He feels the proposal is already an improvement to what is there
currently. He did agree though it would be useful to see building heights, open space is also
important to him and more details would be helpful, but noted it is a tough space to develop with
the gravel and elevation changes and feels the form -based design gives good directions but
understands if people want to see more of a concept.
Digmann explained his frustration is they meet with the City and follow the direction of Staff not
to submit a concept plan. Freerks asked if Staff instructed the applicant to not present more of
a concept plan. Digmann said John Yapp and Doug Boothroy did.
Parsons stated he doesn't necessarily want the applicant to have to spend a lot of money on
this but agrees that the schematic may show the back portion and the cross through. He also
noted that the staff recommendation and the current concept plan are not consistant. Dyer
noted that other developers do present more detailed plans with elevations and more details.
Howard noted that there is sensitivity to this block because of the cottages and Freerks said it is
more than just the cottages that and there are a number of changes to this area from what was
visualized in the Riverfront Crossings Plan so it's not just about the cottages and she wanted to
make that clear.
Hektoen noted that the Commission's job is to vote on if this application is compatible with the
Comprehensive Plan and asking for more information is just to clarify questions in that regard.
Eastham noted the illustration in the Comprehensive Plan for this block is not in line with what is
being shown in the applicant's concept plan.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 6 of 12
Howard said what she is hearing is that the Commission would like to see how more opens
space might be incorporated into this block. Freerks and other commissioners said yes and
Freerks noted she would like to see a drawing or schematic of what a structure might look like.
Martin asked if the proposed concept would be LEER certified or what type of quality would the
building be as just stating "quality" can be subjective. She also stated that with Riverfront
Crossings it is the perfect opportunity to do something creative and innovative. Digmann said it
would not be LEED certified as that is typical for an office type building but all their buildings are
of high quality and the Commission is welcome to tour their buildings. Martin said that she
wanted more of an understanding of what quality means, it can be subjective. Martin noted she
is interested in articulation of the structure and hopes to see examples and specifics they can
see so they know it will be a positive project for the area.
Freerks is interested in the height and scale. Digmann said he could say now that the height
would be four stories with the fourth story setback. Freeks appreciated that but that was not
specified in the Staff report and recommendation so that is not what they would be voting on
tonight. She is also interested in more green space and how this building will sit on the property
and the streetscape in terms of mass and scale. Freerks also asked what the mix of bedrooms
would be, if they would be three-bedroom units, one -bedroom units. Digmann answered it
would likely be a blend but noted that until they do definitive construction documents at scale
they will not know the specific mix of units. Freerks understands that but asked for what is the
applicant's goal. Dyer agreed and noted that usually the applicants do come forward with more
information. She also wanted to know if there would be some affordable housing, is it LEED
certified, are sustainable building practices used, these are all questions the Commission
reviews and in this application there is none of that information. Dyer noted this is a valuable
piece of property to the community. Freerks said it is a major up -zoning.
Digmann agreed and said he is not trying to be argumentative but looking at everything else in
the Riverfront Crossings District that gets zoned, it is some type of up -zoning. Freerks agreed
but reiterated that is why they need to see more details.
Eastham reiterated that the illustration of this block in the Riverfront Crossings Plan and the
illustration shows some type of commercial building along Dubuque Street, a couple of buildings
on the north, the three cottages (which we know are now gone) and the concept in the
application tonight is basically two large building with little open space. He said he did not
expect development to match the Riverfront Plan exactly, but would like to see some notation as
to why there is a deviation from that Plan. Additionally what that deviation means to the rest of
the development to the Riverfront Crossings area in terms of streetscape and green space, not
just the building appearance. Howard said the reason the illustration in the Comprehensive Plan
was shown that way was to highlight the possibility of the preservation of the Cottages. That is
why there was not a redevelopment plan for this block. Clearly that has not occurred so now it is
important to figure out what would be appropriate for this site. Freerks agreed that the plan
does not need to match the Riverfront Plan exactly, but feels it is from one extreme to the other.
Knowing the Cottages are not there, perhaps now more green space can be achieved, or ways
to address the existing businesses. Those are the deviations she is concerned about from the
Comprehensive Plan to the applicant's concept.
Digmann asked if the buildings in the illustration were higher heights than what his concept
shows. Digmann pointed out things change and that his concept is not the only deviation to the
Comprehensive Plan. Freerks said they are saying this concept is deviating in a number of
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 15, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 12
ways and in the discussion of the Nagle property there were no deviations.
Digmann stated he is willing to come back to the next meeting with answers and more details as
requested this evening, but wanted to note that at this stage of the project that won't have exact
plans. Freerks said she understood that but the applicant now knows what the Commission is
looking for.
Freerks closed the public hearing.
Eastham moved to defer this item until the November 5, 2015 meeting.
Dyer seconded the motion.
Freeks noted the discussion has been constructive and informative. She asked if there was
anything else the Commission would like to add. Parsons said that this is too important of a
block to take lightly. Martin added that opportunity for this property is very important for the
Riverfront Crossings Plan.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ1 5-0001 8/SU 1315-00023):
Discussion of an application submitted The Crossings Development, LC for a rezoning
from Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) zone to Low Density Single Family (RS -
5) zone and a preliminary plat of Cardinal Pointe West — Part 1, a 31 -lot, 16.3 acre
residential subdivision for property located south of Kennedy Parkway, west of Camp
Cardinal Boulevard.
Miklo began the staff report showing illustrations of the property. The area has been zoned
Interim Development - Research Park (ID -RP) to reflect possible development of an office park
along Highway 218. When the Comprehensive Plan for the area was updated this area became
a concept that envisioned a "conservation -type" development including residential and
commercial uses in the area surrounding Camp Cardinal Boulevard. The application is for the
northern portion of the area, however if approved this evening, Preston Lane will continue to the
south to connect to Camp Cardinal Boulevard, and the potential for of single-family, townhouse
and multi -family development to the south of the current proposal. Miklo pointed out the
concept plan for future phases, showing Preston Lane extending to the south and the possibility
of multifamily or townhouses being clustered to transfer development away from the wooded
ravines. The application is to rezone the property to RS -5 which Staff has determined does
comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The plan is to do a residential subdivision with a loop
street, Ava Circle and a north/south street, Preston Lane.
Parsons asked why the street was named Preston Lane to the left of Kennedy Parkway and
Vintage Boulevard to the right. Miklo replied that area to the north of Kennedy Parkway is in
Coralville where the street is named Vintage Drive. The street south of Kennedy Parkway will
intersect with Preston Drive farther to the south in Iowa City. So to keep it consistent, the Iowa
City portion of the street between Kennedy Parkway and Camp Cardinal Boulevard will be
named Preston Lane.
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 5, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Mike Hensch, Max Parsons,
Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ann Freerks, Phoebe Martin
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Karen Howard, Martina Wolf, John Yapp
OTHERS PRESENT: Kevin Digmann, Jane Driscoll, Ben Logsdon, Dan Tiedt, Carolyn
Wallace, Nick Lindsley
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 4-1 (Eastham voting no) the Commission recommends approval of REZ15-00020,
a proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres of property located within the 600 block of South
Dubuque Street from Community Commercial (CC -2) to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings
(RFC -CX), subject to the condition as stated in the staff report.
By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of VAC1 5-00005, a vacation of
approximately 4,200 cubic feet of airspace (from 25 feet above pavement grade to 46 feet
above said grade) above the alley running north -south between East Harrison and East
Prentiss Streets to allow for the installation of a pedestrian walkway connecting MidWestOne
Bank and a municipal parking facility.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There were none
REZONING ITEM (REZ15-00020):
Discussion of an application submitted by HD Capital Partners, LLC for a rezoning from
Community Commercial (CC -2) zone to Riverfront Crossings - Central Crossing Subdistrict
(RFC -CX) zone for approximately 1.03 acres of property located at 602, 604, 608, 610, 614,
620, 628 South Dubuque Street.
Howard stated this item was deferred at the last meeting and began by showing a map of the
area of the proposed rezoning and what the existing zonings in the area currently are. She
noted the Community Commercial zone is the general commercial zone for Iowa City and does
not have a lot of design standards. It is the same zoning that is along Highway 6 and Highway 1
in Iowa City and does not allows only 15 units per acre by special exception. In contrast, in
Riverfront Crossings, the Central Crossings Subdistrict zone has form -based zoning standards
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 2 of 16
for building and parking placement and fairly extensive building design standards. The zone
allows a maximum of 4 stories with a 10 -foot stepback above the 3`d floor. It allows a mix of
uses, in this particular area there is a requirement for a retail frontage on the south end of the
Dubuque Street frontage.
Howard refreshed the Commission on the elements that are in the form -based code, and how
those standards would relate to buildings on this site if it were rezoned. The applicant submitted
a schematic site plan, building elevations, and some general information regarding their intent
for redevelopment of the property. Howard said there is a regulating plan with the form -based
code that specifies the primary street; which in this case is Dubuque Street. According to the
regulating plan, a retail frontage is required on the ground level floor of the southernmost
building. The form -based code has specific standards for placement of buildings and parking.
Parking must be located behind off an alley with active building space located at the front of the
lot. Buildings must be built toward the front of the lot and meet standards for front entrances
designed to meet the building type. The density in Riverfront Crossings is controlled by building
height and the parking requirements. Builders must be able to meet the parking requirements
for the number of residential units and also the height limitations in each subdistrict. In this
particular case there is a four-story height limit with a step -back on the fagade on the fourth level
which gives it a general three-story height character of the district. The step -back creates a
visual change from a pedestrian view. Howard said the form -based code is mostly focused on
the form of the buildings, the parking placement and building design, less on the land uses
allowed. There is a broad range of uses that can locate in buildings over time and the uses can
be mixed both vertically (ground level commercial and residential above) or horizontally with a
commercial building right next to a residential building. It is mostly up to the developer as to
what they think will be most successful. There are a lot of building types that are allowed in
Riverfront Crossings and each one of the subdistricts of Riverfront Crossings lists the building
types allowed in each subdistrict. In this case the developer has an interest on building a multi-
dwelling building to the north and a mixed-use building on the southern portion of the block.
Associated with those building types there are certain frontage types that they can choose from
but each as specific standards. The building frontage requirement is one of the most important
requirements of a form -based code, it is the transition of the public space along the street to the
private space of the property, the transition from outdoor to indoor, and the design treatment of
the first floor building fagade, the configuration of the fagade projections and the disposition of
entranceways and other front yard improvements between the building and the public sidewalk.
Howard explained that in this application the storefront frontage would apply to any building on
the south end of Dubuque Street and showed images of good store front designs. Eastham
asked if the storefront elements Howard was showing were required by the form -based code
and Howard replied that they were. For example, the form -based code specifies how much
window coverage there must be; in this case 70% window coverage on the ground floor, with an
entrance every 50 feet, entrances must be at grade, and there is a minimum floor to ceiling
height of 14 feet on the ground level floor.
Howard explained that for multi dwelling buildings there are several different frontage types. If it
is a building where you enter into a lobby and then go up an elevator or stairways to get to the
units it would need a portico frontage. Stoop frontages are allowed for individual entrances, and
some buildings can incorporate both portico and stoop frontages. Terrace frontages may also
be used for individual entrances into units. Each of these types of entrances require specific
landscaping as well.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 3 of 16
Howard stated there are detailed design standards in the form -based code, building articulation
standards, building entryway standards, and building materials. There is also an open space
code requirement which in Riverfront Crossings is 10 square feet per bedroom, so it will depend
on the number of bedrooms/units on the site. That open space requirement can be met in a
number of different ways, it can be ground level, or it can be up on a terrace or rooftop.
Howard explained that with regards to this particular application, the question is whether the
requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In this particular situation the
Comprehensive Plan that applies is the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. So this application
must meet the goals and objectives stated in the Plan, encouraging contextual infill, leveraging
future investments in transit through higher density development, to restore and enhance
conditions along Ralston Creek, to promote additional housing options and to improve the
quality of residential design.
Howard noted that the plan map shown in the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan was intended to
demonstrate one way the Plan's goals could be met.
Howard stated the applicant has provided a more detailed plan for the development than was
shown at the last meeting. It shows two buildings with a 35 foot space between the two
buildings that would be configured as a pedestrian street. A U-shaped mixed use building on
the south has retail in the front with residential behind and above and that building would have
useable open space for the residents that would be configured as a rear courtyard between the
wings of the building. The building to the north is shown as a multi -dwelling building with the
main entrance off the open space that would be configured as a pedestrian street between the
two buildings. These open spaces would be located on top of a below grade parking structure
that is accessed from the rear alley. The minimum front and side setbacks are 10 feet and a 5
foot setback is required from the rear alley. Howard showed the conceptual elevation drawings
of the proposed buildings, showing the character and scale of the buildings.
In the Staff review they looked at if the application achieves the goals of the Plan and felt it does
generally but thinks there is a need for additional open space on the property over and above
what is required in the code, to respond to the context, character and scale of the neighborhood
and existing lot and block pattern. In addition, a mid -block break between the buildings will
provide a higher quality living environment for residents.
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00020, a proposal to rezone approximately 1. 03 acres of
property located within the 600 block of South Dubuque Street from Community Commercial
(CC -2) to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings (RFC -CX), subject to the following condition:
Mid -block shared, useable open space is required between the buildings and between
building wings as conceptually shown on the submitted site plan. The mid -block space
between the buildings must be at least 35' wide and must be designed as a "private
pedestrian street" as set forth in the form -based code and also meet the design
standards for "open space" as set forth in the form -based code. Courtyard space
between building wings must be a minimum 35' in width and must be configured as
shared usable open space meeting the design standards in the form -based code.
Dyer asked if there were any provisions for handicap accessibility on the street side and
residential since the stoops and porticos are all up steps. Howard said every multi -family
building is required by City Code to have accessible entrances so that will need to be shown in
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 4 of 16
the final plans.
Eastham asked if the accessible requirement could be fulfilled by having an elevator from the
garage entrance into the building. Howard answered that the building would have to be
accessible from both the garage and pedestrian entrances.
Hensch asked about the below grade parking with entrance to the rear of the building and how
the determination was made for the required number of spaces. Howard said it is based on the
number of units and the number of bedrooms and in the Central Crossings District the
requirement is 0.75 parking spaces for one bedroom units, 1.5 spaces for 2 bedroom units and
2.5 spaces for a 3 bedroom unit.
Eastham asked about the recommendations to require garage doors of some type on the
garage entrances and if that was required by the Code. Howard said they are not required by
the Code but developers tend to put them in and the applicant can better answer that question.
Eastham then asked about the side of the building on the south, which will be next to the
railroad tracks, and if that side of the building is only required to be setback 10 feet even if it is
next to a railroad right-of-way. Howard said the railroad right-of-way is pretty wide so it's not like
the building will be right next to the railroad tracks. She suggested the applicant could comment
on types of materials they have used in other situations when buildings are built next to railroad
tracks. Eastham noted concern if children live in the building.
Eastham noted that Freerks raised the questions at the last meeting the provisions of the
Riverfront Crossings Master Plan regarding existing business placement and providing some
tools or strategies to help existing businesses remain in this area. He asked how that is met in
this particular application. Howard explained that the zoning will not control the displacement of
businesses, it would have to be solved by some other policy means. Eastham asked if it could
be a conditional zoning. Howard said that would be difficult to enforce because they do not
know what the desires of the existing tenants are in this situation. Hektoen agreed that was
beyond the realm of zoning and into other policies. Dyer asked what other policies would
address this issue. Howard said there could be incentive programs or relocation assistance
programs.
Eastham opened the public hearing.
Kevin Digmann (HD Capital Partners, LLC) first wanted to address a couple of the questions
that were raised. With regards to the handicap accessibility, they do show a couple of stoops
on the residential building but the main entrance to both buildings would be off the courtyard
and pedestrian street between the buildings which would be handicap accessible. The units
with stoops out front will also have an access to from a corridor to the rear of the unit that would
be handicap accessible. Because of the elevation change of the lot (from Dubuque Street to the
alley behind is more than a 20 foot drop), they are proposing one or two levels of parking behind
there that would have elevators. Digmann noted that with regards to the property line along the
south building next to the railroad tracks, the proposed building will actually be 10 feet more
north than the current building that is there now (because it is built on the property line) and for
noise reduction they will use laminate windows that are three panes thick to abate the noise.
Digmann stated that they have worked with the current commercial tenants on the property and
the current tenants have leases until May 2017 so Digmann's group will complete the
development in phases to not disturb the tenants. They have also offered up vacant space in
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 5 of 16
other buildings for the commercial tenants to move to, but none of them have shown any
interest. Digmann noted that his group took the notes from the Commissioners at the last
meeting and have come back with more details and efforts to accomplish all the requirements of
the Riverfront Crossings Plan. He also noted that the residential units will be marketed towards
young professionals, not that no students will live there, but the units will be more upscale and
attractive to young professionals.
Hensch asked about the sloping of the lot and would the buildings be at only one level.
Digmann said yes and the courtyards will have a retaining wall and fencing for safety due to the
sloping of the lot
Dyer asked if Digmann anticipated the residential units being rentals or condos. Digmann said
they would be set up as condominiums originally but the market will dictate if they will be sold or
rented. Dyer asked if there would be any affordable housing units. Digmann said that has not
been decided, they have talked to the City about details for those types of units and what bonus
opportunities they would receive for having affordable housing units.
Yapp noted that City Council has provided staff to prepare an inclusionary housing ordinance for
the Riverfront Crossings District that would require affordable units for new projects. If that is in
place prior to this project commencing then they would have to meet that requirement.
Hensch asked what percent of the units would be three bedrooms. Digmann said about 50-60%
would be two-bedroom units, 20-25% will be one -bedroom units, and 20-25% will be three-
bedroom units.
Hensch noted that most of the commercial tenants on that block have already moved out of their
spaces. Digmann said that was correct. Racketmaster was still there, the bike shops lease runs
out in December and he bought a property on Gilbert Street and will move there. Theobald
asked about the other commercial shops along that property. Digmann answered yes at the
other end of the property there is a shoe repair shop, a hair place, and an alterations place and
those are the businesses that have leases until May 2017 so that area of the development will
be part of a phase two of the project. Theobald asked if Digmann anticipated the rents being
substantially higher in the retail spaces of the new developments. Digmann replied yes, the
current rents those tenants are paying are substantially below current market rates. Dyer noted
that is the concern with this project, the displacement of businesses that cannot afford brand
new storefronts and the community needs to accommodate them. Digmann agreed and said if
someone wants to subsidize a commercial business they would accept them as a tenant but as
a private developer they have to meet their costs needs.
Eastham asked if the entrances to all the residential spaces will from the building courtyard or
front, none from the U -shape open space area. Digmann confirmed that was correct. He also
noted that the common greenspace was about 7000 square feet and with regards to City Code
that would accommodate almost 700 bedrooms and they will not be close to that with this
project.
Theobald asked about the garage doors. Digmann said they will put in garage doors so that
they have secure buildings, there will be secure access to the buildings on all entrances.
Dyer asked if they had any renderings of what the back of the buildings would be like, because
of the height of the lot and buildings it will be visible when the creek is developed. Digmann
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 6 of 16
said it will be a decorative retaining wall with garage doors, it will not be an eyesore. Parsons
noted that there was something in the Code that specifies what materials the building has to be
so it would not be an eyesore. Howard confirmed noting there were more standards for fronts
of buildings but this plan will have to go through design review and Staff always reviews all
sides and elevations of the buildings. She acknowledged that the parking level is often less
ornamental than the residential levels but they will review the whole plan to make sure it meets
the intent of the Code. Eastham asked about the north side of the building, Howard said that is
a street facing side of the building so it would need to meet all the design standards. Eastham
asked about the south side of the first building, facing the pedestrian walkway. Howard said
that was not a street facing side so it does not require as much windows, but since this will be a
residential building every bedroom is required to have a window. Digmann noted that they
would use similar window coverage on all four sides of the buildings with the exception of the
commercial space that will meet those particular design standards. Dyer noted her concern that
the back of the buildings will be visible and not typical building backsides, so it should be treated
the same as a street facing side. Howard said a garage structure parking is required in the
Code to be designed to have character of a residential building and appear to be part of the
design of the building. Howard reiterated that Staff will review the proposed design elements of
the buildings, including elevations of all four sides and sample materials.
Eastham closed the public hearing.
Hensch moved to approve REZ15-00020, a proposal to rezone approximately 1.03 acres
of property located within the 600 block of South Dubuque Street from Community
Commercial (CC -2) to Riverfront Crossing -Central Crossings (RFC -CX), subject to the
condition as stated in the staff report.
Theobald seconded the motion.
Hensch noted that from Digmann and Staff's presentations it's been shown compliance with the
Master Plan objectives and assesses the character and development programs for the Central
Crossings District. Parsons agreed with that statement.
Theobald agreed but noted her concern that the area will lose its character of the existing small
businesses that are located there as it is a diverse mix of businesses.
Dyer stated her appreciation for the elevations and feels it will be a good addition to the
downtown area.
Eastham also appreciates the elevations and the potential building design and the expansion of
the gaps between the buildings from 30 to 35 feet but has a concern about the distance from the
building to the railroad right-of-way being only 10 feet. In other residential areas of the city the
distance from the railroad right-of-way and the houses is closer to 20 or 25 feet. He said one of
the issues with this application is the major use of these two buildings will be residential and if
they are to be attractive to families with children the proximity to the railroad tracks will be an
issue. He feels the building could be shifted 5 feet, even if that meant reducing the gap
between the buildings or shortening the length of the building. Eastham noted additional
concern about lack of assisting existing commercial users to either relocate to another space in
this area or somewhere else in town or to eventually be placed into the new building. He
reiterated that the Master Plan for this area is very specific stating "tools and strategies should
be developed to help existing businesses remain in the area in assisting them in finding new
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 16
locations that better meet their business goals". Eastham noted he feels that is an obligation on
part of the City and Staff has not addressed that. It is a lack of infrastructure support in this and
other rezoning applications. He would be much more comfortable if the Staff could address
those tools and strategies before construction begins or current leases expire. Since this
language is in the Master Plan, the City does have some obligation to develop assistance for
such situations. He hopes Council notices that when this application comes before them.
Dyer noted this is the first project in Riverfront Crossings to deal with this situation but it will
come up again in future developments in the area.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-1 (Eastham dissenting)
REZONING ITEM (REZ15-000211:
Discussion of an application submitted by Built to Suit for a rezoning from Community Office (CO -
1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for approximately 7.98 acres of property located
east of Mormon Trek Blvd between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive.
Yapp introduced Martina Wolf an intern and graduate student at The University of Iowa.
Wolf presented the staff report. Build to Suit would like to build a medical office, pharmacy
and a warehouse they would be distributing medical equipment out of on the property.
When this property was first annexed in 2003 it was originally zoned intensive commercial
and then was zoned to commercial office in 2007. Intensive commercial zoning allows
commercial uses including outdoor storage and warehousing. Wolf showed maps and
aerial photos of the area. The South Central District Plan reflect that either intensive
commercial and/or office commercial would be appropriate for this area. Staff believes
Mormon Trek Boulevard is more than capable of handling any increase in vehicle traffic.
Staff recommends that REZ15-00021, an application to rezone 7.98 acres of land generally
located east of Mormon Trek Boulevard between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive be
approved.
Yapp added that when the applicant first came to the City with their project for a medical
clinic the majority of the uses in the medical clinic would be permitted in the existing
commercial office zoning. It is the warehouse storage and distribution of medical
equipment portion of the clinic that led to the application for rezoning to CI -1, Intensive
Commercial zoning. Warehousing and distribution of supplies to other clinic is not
permitted in the existing Commercial Office Zone.
Hensch asked if it is just the distribution of medical equipment but not any retail aspects.
Yapp said the pharmacy in the clinic would be considered an accessory retail use.
Dyer asked about what type of medical equipment would be housed there. Yapp said the
applicant could answer those specifics.
Hensch noted that Dane Road (to the east) appears to be just a chip -seal road and not in
very good repair, and asked where the retail customers would be driving to. Yapp said
access to the property would be off Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive which are both
streets improved to public standards. Hensch asked if Dane Road was on any of the City's
five or ten year plans for improvement. Yapp said it is not.
Rezoning Item
REZ15-00021:
Discussion of an application submitted by Built to
Suit for a rezoning from Community Office (CO -1)
zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for
approximately 7.98 acres of property located east of
Mormon Trek Blvd between Grace Drive and Eagle
View Drive.
-8'n ' & wo
MOM" tgM "61W C&CVZ'"6'Pi"In9Wbm-&rvnWap.pw
W M" " 1
Application for rezoning for
7.98 acres from CO -1 to CIA
9tlFr_'sw.v co-�� cm�S:?�CN�d�F10Ola �^I^gwan'ZMIngWdp_p0I
/
' J2JR8 DAVIS SFCUMD
ADDITION
m�rMII.Y f,OR /16mY
NO.rt pxnnt areNmMio'smasM
mew c4Nr rY]wa2s 4i1£
1 b,nn:
4ffiIY /�'
r nvv /
OOFnrsa`a m:csa m aer roa.
RQ NG PARCEL
arrJn DAVIS REMND CO -1 TO CH
AO®MON a 1.4`e s 22 Y
N �."� —1 'a— — N t
/.:'• 4
s�
JJRB ®AVMS R'OI
POINT OF
BEGM M
4
s
EAGLE VIEW WBME yay
Mt2NY
I I REZONING EXHIBIT
b
M V,
(00-11 TO (0.1)
`
L0 SM040F]JR0M1s9EcaN0110001u
s42vaV2' MIP /Ta�ai,)
LO S2j,N 40FJJN0AV16FOl1RTHA0 M
w>,1� o.nx
r
�*1•}•"•'
IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA
law rr]ast
T.aS2P
f
i Fl!iaAn. �vC bo �i �[ M'�wM
JMpF .wWIY EiF6N.• GRYL
aei ea�ea®mc rn m renrwN,s
'NNW
I
CCNY.ITYfr221C LP?B2M04.4M BNI0T0Y
l4M 2
1012. WIHfIPfiEF! N MJJ2�00WERF1d1IVBAE
���{{{,,,
�ry
I
IXI\Cl"T.N @10 1LR RYEImE WIE]011
NMN CRYN@IO IXYMLVll2N�11
��"-
�N[✓
OYIEN: dM9! OMI.Yl �T10R4M
i
$
1f11221W 4-]12] LfIr22yANo4-m+ JIG AnE
�
-;6"`
'�
�
2MO1'INN2lI C11LLG aV�0.MW Yl21l YNN P1i1t}T
•urrNmrlg Nu 2w
_:
2oaeac-ia wream
MNi1iMlgttML NaN21 IOYa CRYN2221p 0dVlNIONr. MIit
/.:'• 4
s�
JJRB ®AVMS R'OI
POINT OF
BEGM M
4
s
EAGLE VIEW WBME yay
Mt2NY
Nim
�r.-.rYaC
`
�inV•YNn
` i
11 JJA UMM THIRD
r
AMMON
r�P Iq'wld e
n �i
f
i Fl!iaAn. �vC bo �i �[ M'�wM
JMpF .wWIY EiF6N.• GRYL
� I
L6n1 a Yo a a 4A ww alga Y2]NOY rlu Loft ]. a Y,o 4 w J.Y ww1
.wrauni I wmu Y �svmrwsMa�alee nr nc�aenrws- 2utnlm �o w
', w�i,�', 0�Y• °o2mm�i � r nY1vw OAR ,or�an..a4mi
M/n,111 ! a» Nwq.d cd.. W Lal 2 W JA oYr rd M0.Wn b I... 2Nd
loi ti meov MI, Y. NW Mcl R�v,Y A Pq Sed, � .l � ?9 0l
2. IteY W Ne .a..a, penlY Yri'a � ,�. m1Y21^2, d.2 Y,e
' MI W 2aI��F 9W tiad,F Ysel mMe 1m b.
aM 1 Y)Yl Y ew„Id�d sdl nwdleOmd p wsq
lln m ffiGO ,mt
a IY1iM2 N 4
N1.M qv. M1el,7.
M
M
DAEPAINUM
.NORM Mm
IMONURVVW
AaaCf rICTFIEC1a
BNTaDWENGua MN"
IWa.111L W9 .
q CITY,IOWAa
(N2pa,a2e2
www.mm2 .net
N...d,
10-14 1 rmmmY -a
REZONING EXHIBIT
(c l) m (CM)
ePtxro amm�aY MOLOTe
1a. M040F.YN OM10
rOJ0.01 A0p1p1
IOWA cm
JOHNBON COUNTY
IOWA
AMS CONSULTANTS, INC.
l&-14-2015
T.a
NL 1
GY,eWdtl pf M
Mefatl Mw 1
c 7x11 W. 1
South Central District
Future Land Use Scenario Revised February 2007
a..,,,e Vrl. r n moo"
® f)T.. M1.lt•�.rtW
- ■....0 wYwYy r.,..w. W
_ I. ...... ... HILb..f l mww.r.l
- LYemn.4Mnw4nrle.
t'i1.I . l.MML'b,I1N4nY�
Otrice Park/Commercial
b.Yiuw IM..er Iln.dil
�Y �
N.n.fm lwN ll.u.urR
.Y.II yYnY.a.
��
1'LI.IrNRba upm �p.oe
N.Y..q.
® f)T.. M1.lt•�.rtW
- ■....0 wYwYy r.,..w. W
_ I. ...... ... HILb..f l mww.r.l
- LYemn.4Mnw4nrle.
t'i1.I . l.MML'b,I1N4nY�
Otrice Park/Commercial
SPECIMAN FOCUS
INFORMAL GRASSES
FORMAL HEDGE
(SPIREIUNIPERS)
5o'SFACED
HARDWOOD DRIVE
•I.olml,1 LIAR
UNDER STORY
SPEOMAN COLOR
F.aI
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00021, a
proposal to rezone approximately 7.98 acres of
property from Commercial Office (CO -1) to Intensive
Commercial (CI -1), subject to a Conditional Zoning
Agreement requiring:
General conformance with the site concept plan
No outdoor storage being permitted on the property
Exterior lights being no more than 25 feet in height
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval by a vote of 6-o
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning & Zoning Commission Prepared by: Marti Wolf, Planning Intern
Item: REZ15-00021 Mormon Trek, Grace Drive Date: November 5, 2015
and Eagle View Drive
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
Contact Person:
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
File Date:
45 Day Limitation Period:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Built to Suit
625 1 sc Ave. Suite 201 A
Coralville, IA 52241
(319) 512-2322
Kelly Beckler
1917 S. Gilbert St.
Iowa City, IA 5224
(319) 351-8282
Rezoning from CO -1 to CI -1
To allow commercial development including a
medical office, pharmacy and warehouse
Mormon Trek Blvd., Grace Dr., Eagle View Dr.
7.98 acres
Commercial Office (CO -1)
North: Municipal Airport — P-1
South: Undeveloped - CI -1
East: Residential and agricultural —
County R20 and A
West: Car dealership - CI -1
South Central District Plan
October 19, 2015
December 3, 2015
The applicant, Built to Suit, has requested that the subject property located east of Mormon Trek
Blvd between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive be rezoned from Commercial Office (CO -1) to
Intensive Commercial (CI -1). The applicant intends to build a medical clinic including treatment
rooms, pharmacy, mother's milk bank, home care office, warehousing for storage and
distribution of medical equipment, and related functions.
The subject property was annexed into Iowa City in 2003. At that time, the City determined
appropriate zoning for the area was to support the City's goal of enabling future development of
new areas for commercial office, intensive commercial and industrial uses near to the airport.
The subject property was initially zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1) and then rezoned to
2
Commercial Office (CO -1) in 2007. The applicant is now requested the property be rezoned
back to CI -1.
The applicant has indicated that they have chosen not to use the "Good Neighbor Policy."
ANALYSIS
Current and proposed zoning:
The purpose of the Commercial Office Zone (CO -1) is to provide specific areas where office
functions, compatible businesses, apartments and certain public and semipublic uses my be
developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The CO -1 zone can serve as a
suitable transition between residential and more intensive commercial or industrial areas.
The Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone is designed to provide areas for businesses that are
land -intensive or light industrial in nature. These businesses characteristically require space for
outdoor storage and display of merchandise. Typical uses in the CI -1 zone include vehicle
sales and repair; small scale manufacturing operations; warehousing and industrial service
uses. CI -1 zone uses are generally not compatible with residential and less -intensive zones.
Consequently, CI -1 zones are typically located within major commercial areas to provide
adequate vehicular access, but are ideally shielded visually, geographically, or topographically
from less -intensive zones. Staff has determined that because the proposed medical clinic
would include warehousing and storage of medical equipment, which would be distributed to
other medical clinics in the area, the Intensive Commercial Zone is the appropriate zone for the
use. Staff notes that the property was zoned Intensive Commercial when first annexed in 2003.
Compliance with Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan supports either Commercial Office or Intensive Commercial
development for the subject property. Both -CO -1 and CI -1 are appropriate for the South Central
District's future land use scenario and will provide a suitable transition to airport. The South
Central District Plan states that the subject area provides opportunities for large lot development
and is suitable for intensive commercial uses. The property is well -situated for commercial and
office land uses with access to Mormon Trek Boulevard and easy access to Highway 1.
Compatibility with neighborhood:
Surrounding properties are zoned CI -1 to the south and west, CO -1 zoning to the north, and
County Residential (R-20) to the northeast, which allows one dwelling per twenty acres of land,
and County Agricultural (A) to the southeast. According to the South Central District Future
Land Use Scenario map, the property immediately east of the subject property is intended for
future office or intensive commercial development.
Traffic implications: Mormon Trek Boulevard is an arterial street with sufficient capacity to
serve uses that may develop within the CIA zone.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that REZ15-00021, an application to rezone 7.98 acres of land generally
located east of Mormon Trek Boulevard between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive be approved.
Attachment:
Location Map
Approved by: -7.114 %/
7r ---
John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
4 'i'ai nisi 1 �
\
Ike' +j � ' `�, r• �'� � �`
IN `
�=
6
SS7ii4
TN -'
30p0 oumo
m
G
�`
O -D IN OO
C �
�
J
r
----------------
379 Sfi sww,5e.
;3;e .��3 Q3s�=� 8a So���mge3 RNbg9
e'i•�V
3v. B3s�n"i3 �g 3:.m,3•,•yg �xue:..e �����
dd-°a
ku,g3"a z$u3n 5yy $- e�-yyi�n;-4 Esq Ngsg
e_x
I
0,
3
myu y
NS.g�
a�i�59
^ GvSB'v
S \ k
-------------------------
AIM I;A
mId a 4^�ov
p �Fzm
my N
z s. AGAO T
OZ R~ Oq*pOti m
z AO o9 < 1'1
_.. N
O �^ 0->
Z o05w A�ooO
g Z
9 52 zg T _o0Z0� n—
Lo-Z
Z$ a O«°U/
o - $ �oo0m
O OpDVX
0 z�b �\
rg�00
v�3 m3m FNSNN�OOD W_
O 2Oy �DOz Czz
A =cD �Dm y< 0
N
NC� m Z
5 ! R m
$ ii< S
S
ON
TN -'
30p0 oumo
m
NMgo
�`
O -D IN OO
3
\N, �?
mp
—'m
m
Z�
6-n
379 Sfi sww,5e.
;3;e .��3 Q3s�=� 8a So���mge3 RNbg9
e'i•�V
3v. B3s�n"i3 �g 3:.m,3•,•yg �xue:..e �����
dd-°a
ku,g3"a z$u3n 5yy $- e�-yyi�n;-4 Esq Ngsg
e_x
I
0,
3
myu y
NS.g�
a�i�59
^ GvSB'v
S \ k
-------------------------
AIM I;A
mId a 4^�ov
p �Fzm
my N
z s. AGAO T
OZ R~ Oq*pOti m
z AO o9 < 1'1
_.. N
O �^ 0->
Z o05w A�ooO
g Z
9 52 zg T _o0Z0� n—
Lo-Z
Z$ a O«°U/
o - $ �oo0m
O OpDVX
0 z�b �\
rg�00
v�3 m3m FNSNN�OOD W_
O 2Oy �DOz Czz
A =cD �Dm y< 0
N
NC� m Z
5 ! R m
$ ii< S
�€
_ 2 AM Jul?�
Hyo�3
$b� T
O2
S
$
TN -'
30p0 oumo
m
�`
3
0
nD>ZD Agiw
Q
EF
3
po
-y
N Ivo
y
O
N
w
m
s
f
T. -
m
p� �oOo
Z�
y Z
y
n-4
N
O
O OAO*
i
N
O
CCy
S
Z p zpDz
T X
yi
I.I
m
m�d
_
y0
A
y C �P�
S
5
NNA
1
-
N
0
0 N
�€
_ 2 AM Jul?�
Hyo�3
$b� T
O2
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 15, 2015
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator
Re: REZ15-00021: An application submitted by Build to Suit for a rezoning from Community
Office (CO -1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for approximately 7.98 acres of
property located east of Mormon Trek Boulevard between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive
Introduction
On Friday November 13, Staff attended a meeting with the applicant of REZ15-00021 and neighbors /
interested parties. The applicant presented their concept plans for the project, which consists of a
medical clinic, pharmacy, mother's milk bank, a warehousing / distribution component, and ancillary
uses. The concept plans are attached.
At the Commission's November 5 meeting, the Commission heard concerns regarding the CI -1 zone,
the types of uses it could allow, and the potential impact development would have on the George Dane
Trust property to the south east of the subject property. According to a letter submitted by the Iowa
Natural Heritage Foundation, the George Dane Trust property is bequeathed to the Heritage
Foundation with a life estate for Mr. Dane's children and grandchildren.
Discussion of Solutions
Because the CI -1 Zone normally would allow outdoor storage of materials and associated outdoor
activity associated with said materials, staff recommends a condition that no outdoor storage of
materials be permitted. Regarding lighting, normally exterior lighting is permitted to be as tall as 35'
above grade if they are more than 300' from a residential zone. For this property, given the concerns
which were expressed regarding lighting, staff recommends exterior lights be permitted to be no more
than 25' above grade (other normal lighting requirements, including parking lot lights being required to
be downcast and shielded, will also apply).
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of REZ15-00021, an application submitted by Build to Suit for a rezoning
from Community Office (CO -1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for approximately 7.98 acres
of property located east of Mormon Trek Boulevard between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive, subject
to:
• General conformance with the conceptual site plan
• No outdoor sto Agg_beirA permitted on the property
no'jti1bre than 25' (feet) in height above grade
Approved
Departme of Neighborhood and D velopment Services
Attachment
0�
alyaO�y
a
z
C
0
>
0
00
m
m
on
>
zA
O am
z xI
m
z
I
R
m
m
m w
w
0
C�
t1Yi
�
LS
gAg
8
QS
7Z7
� r�
Ih
p
N y
F
z
0
drD-
,� m
r
-I"-4 CITY O F IOWA C[TY
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 13, 2015
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: John Yapp, Development Services Coor. 71K7)o—
Re: REZ15-00021: An application from Build to Suit for a rezoning from Community
Office (CO -1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for approximately 7.98 acres
of property located east of Mormon Trek Blvd between Grace Drive and Eagle View
Drive.
I will be meeting with the applicant and interested neighbors/parties on this proposed rezoning
on Friday, November 13.
We will distribute an updated staff recommendation and a proposed concept site plan of the
proposed project early the week of November 16, for the November 19 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting.
John Yapp
Subject: FW: REZ15-00020
From: Tim Weitzel [mailto:tweitzel.email@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 8:32 AM
To: Bob Miklo; Freerks, Ann M; John Yapp
Subject: REZ15-00021
I wanted to comment on this rezoning. Based on pedestrian review of the site and its surroundings, it seems
imperative that garage doors be required in additional to the usual security lighting required. Large scale
residential buildings in this area that have open garages below the buildings are full of trash and seem prone to
unintended uses of these structures. Additionally, much of the area is still largely unattended at night and there
are a number of issues, such as graffiti and so on. Not sure what the best course of action is, but possibly
security cameras actually being installed and code accessed doors, not just stickers on unlocked doors, would be
a wise move.
Tim Weitzel
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 16
locations that better meet their business goals". Eastham noted he feels that is an obligation on
part of the City and Staff has not addressed that. It is a lack of infrastructure support in this and
other rezoning applications. He would be much more comfortable if the Staff could address
those tools and strategies before construction begins or current leases expire. Since this
language is in the Master Plan, the City does have some obligation to develop assistance for
such situations. He hopes Council notices that when this application comes before them.
Dyer noted this is the first project in Riverfront Crossings to deal with this situation but it will
come up again in future developments in the area.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-1 (Eastham dissenting).
REZONING ITEM (REZ16-00021):
Discussion of an application submitted by Built to Suit for a rezoning from Community Office (CO -
1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for approximately 7.98 acres of property located
east of Mormon Trek Blvd between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive.
Yapp introduced Martina Wolf an intern and graduate student at The University of Iowa.
Wolf presented the staff report. Build to Suit would like to build a medical office, pharmacy
and a warehouse they would be distributing medical equipment out of on the property.
When this property was first annexed in 2003 it was originally zoned intensive commercial
and then was zoned to commercial office in 2007. Intensive commercial zoning allows
commercial uses including outdoor storage and warehousing. Wolf showed maps and
aerial photos of the area. The South Central District Plan reflect that either intensive
commercial and/or office commercial would be appropriate for this area. Staff believes
Mormon Trek Boulevard is more than capable of handling any increase in vehicle traffic.
Staff recommends that REZ15-00021, an application to rezone 7.98 acres of land generally
located east of Mormon Trek Boulevard between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive be
approved.
Yapp added that when the applicant first came to the City with their project for a medical
clinic the majority of the uses in the medical clinic would be permitted in the existing
commercial office zoning. It is the warehouse storage and distribution of medical
equipment portion of the clinic that led to the application for rezoning to CI -1, Intensive
Commercial zoning. Warehousing and distribution of supplies to other clinic is not
permitted in the existing Commercial Office Zone.
Hensch asked if it is just the distribution of medical equipment but not any retail aspects.
Yapp said the pharmacy in the clinic would be considered an accessory retail use.
Dyer asked about what type of medical equipment would be housed there. Yapp said the
applicant could answer those specifics.
Hensch noted that Dane Road (to the east) appears to be just a chip -seal road and not in
very good repair, and asked where the retail customers would be driving to. Yapp said
access to the property would be off Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive which are both
streets improved to public standards. Hensch asked if Dane Road was on any of the City's
five or ten year plans for improvement. Yapp said it is not.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 8 of 16
Parsons noted there was a section of Dane Road that is separate from the main Dane
Road and wondered if the two were ever to be connected. Yapp said there are no plans to
extend it to the north or south but it does provide access to the properties to the east that
are currently outside of City limits.
Eastham asked if there would be sidewalk requirements when this parcel is subdivided.
Yapp said that yes, sidewalks will be required.
Eastham asked if the staff cared to comment on the letter received Lisa Hine from the Iowa
National Heritage Foundation. Yapp said the letter indicated that land held by the George
Dane Trust is bequeathed to the Iowa National Heritage Foundation and that property is to
the southeast of this property and have asked land use zoning and transportation plans
when they are amended take this bequeathment into account. That property is currently in
Johnson County and not Iowa City but the next time they amend their land use map they
will reflect this bequest. Eastham asked how the Commission was supposed to consider
the letter amongst their deliberations. Hetkeon said it is just a letter for information
purposes it does not prevent the Commission from considering or approving the rezoning
application. Hensch asked Yapp to show on the map exactly where the parcel of land was
located.
Eastham opened the public hearing
Ben Logsdon (Build to Suit) said the original project was a medical office for the University
to bring several different practices to the building. Part of what evolved was need for retail
of some medical equipment, wheelchairs and such, and to also store more medical
supplies in bulk. The lot slopes so the building will have a walkout basement and storage
will be on the lower level east side of the building. There will be a family practice use in the
building, a dialysis area, a pharmacy and Mothers Milk Bank. The reason for the rezoning
is to allow all the different users to fit within the building. Although outdoor storage is
allowed in commercial intensive zones, they do not plan for any outdoor storage. Logsdon
also noted that they are not planning to access the property off Dane Road, most the traffic
will come off Grace Drive with a staff parking lot off Eagle View Drive.
Dyer asked if they had building elevation drawings to show. Logsdon said they have
started elevation renderings but with the various different users in the building it's taken
time to put all the pieces together.
Eastham asked what the height limits are for CI -1 buildings. Yapp replied they are 35 feet.
Logsdon said they are planning on 2 story buildings with a walkout basement so they will
be well below the 35 foot limit.
Hensch asked if it was going to be a distribution center for durable medical equipment for
UIHC. Logsdon said that is part of it, mostly it will be clinics but with the ability to have that
lower level walkout they will utilize that space for durable medical storage for items there is
not enough room to store at the hospital.
Hensch asked about the clinic uses and if there was any concern about mixing the
chronically ill with a wholesale warehouse site. Logsdon said they are working on the site
plan with all parties involved and entrances will be separated as will driveways to each
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 9 of 16
entrance. Due to the grade difference in the lot the far east parking lot will be at a lower
grade than the other parking lot and separated by a retaining wall. Hensch asked if the
main clinics would be more to the east, easier to see from Mormon Trek Boulevard.
Logsdon said they were still working out all those details.
Theobald asked about all the cars that are currently parked on one of those streets during
the day. Logsdon said that Billion Auto is currently parking employee cars over there since
those roads aren't currently used. Yapp said 'no parking' has been designated on one side
of those streets and with a development on this site they will revisit the no parking
designation and decide if it needs to be posted on both sides of the street.
Hensch agreed that was one of his concerns, traffic implications, with family practice and
chronically ill dialysis patients there needs to be safety concerns.
Jane Driscoll presented the Commission with a handout of her talking points. She is
speaking on behalf of her grandfather, George Dane, who owns the property immediately to
the east of the application property. Her parents currently reside in the home her
grandparents built in 1948. Her grandfather wants to keep in close contact with this topic
but is not physically able to attend meetings. In addition to the family residence there is an
apple orchard, grape vineyard, flowers, trees, and bushes, walnut and oak trees, farming
crops, livestock and other amenities. The hilltop is approximately 100 feet above the airport
so it allows for magnificent views in all directions. Where the house sits, at the peak, one
can see to the northeast downtown Iowa City, City High School, the airport, east over the
Iowa River valley to Lone Tree, West Liberty, south to Hills, to the west is the rolling hills of
the Iowa prairie, and you can see fireworks from four different communities. There are
beautiful sunrises and sunsets. This is the last sizeable open area close to Iowa City that is
unencumbered by trees or buildings. Her grandfather believes they are tenders of this land
for a very short time, the land is a gift to us and we need to be mindful of its care. These
views are unique and they belong to everyone not just a few people. With foresights of
generations to come about 15 years ago the property was designated to become a park so
there can continue to be sledding in the wintertime and views for all the world to enjoy. The
gift of the 16 acre park to the citizens of Iowa City and Johnson County is in an effort to
preserve the beautiful views on this open hilltop area with the envision that the park will be
used for picnics, flying kites, band concerts, playing Frisbee, and those type of activities
that all ages can enjoy. The City has been aware of this designation, it has been
documented to reflect these plans, and discussed with both the City Staff and the City
Council. This topic needs conscious planning for the adjacent property uses that need to
be compatible with a park. However as you know the future park designation is not yet
reflected in the Comprehensive Plan and that needs to be updated. As the letter from the
Iowa Heritage Trust Foundation stated that is what is going to happen to her grandfather's
property. With a future park in mind across the road from the property that is being
discussed tonight they realize something will need to go there but hope the Commission
can consider what the best use for the property is. They understand the proposal is to build
an outreach medical facility for the community and while they are not opposed to that use,
the zoning designation of CI -1 could be for a lot of uses that are not compatible with a park
like outside storage displays, warehouse and industrial services. Those types of uses can
include larger truck traffic and deliveries at all hours which is not conducive to residential
areas. Those type of uses need to be in typical commercial areas that provide easy truck
access and ideally shielded visually from less intensive zones. The current zone of CO -1
offers a transition between the higher intensive commercial uses to the residential or less
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 10 of 16
intensive uses. Driscoll noted she understands the Commission can recommend limitations
or define specific features beyond use as a condition to a zoning assignment, so wouldn't it
be possible to maintain the commercial office zone and for a specific targeted use allow a
small warehouse or distribution center perhaps based on limited square footage or a
maximum number of truck docks. Or the reverse could happen, rezone the property to CI -1
with conditions that include features you see in the commercial office zone and to allow that
transition from a high intensity to a low intensity to happen within that property. That would
create a potential buffer between the park -and more intensive issues. Driscoll's concerns
can be more specifically stated CI -1 and residential uses just don't mix and she is not
aware of any other parks that boarder such intensive uses in our community, it is simply not
compatible. Fast forwarding to the future when her hilltop becomes a park folks will likely
ask what the City was thinking back in 2015 when they allowed intensive commercial use
buildings next to a park. We can assume the University will have this clinic for some time,
but there are no guarantees and no one knows what the next use of this property will be.
Other parks in Iowa City are not burden with this potential neighbor. City Park has the
Levitt Center and Hancher across the street, it does not have a warehouse or auto
dealership right across from it. The CI -1 brings more intensive traffic, delivery vehicles,
they tend to be customer driven and they attract more customers and more traffic in order
to be sustainable. Attracting customers requires visibility, large signs, lighting, high profile
store fronts, and other activities that call attention to the business which is also not
compatible to residential or park areas. Outside storage requires intensive lighting for safety
and security and even with shielding it does create light noise. It will be difficult to star gaze
or use your telescope in the park when there is the glare of security lighting in the sky.
They have already had direct experience with some of these issues with the existing car
dealership on the corner of Highway 1 and Mormon Trek Boulevard extending east and
south to Dane road. They utilize outside speakers for paging services, light radiates from
the lighting towers that are necessary for security, deliveries are made with large car
carriers that are sometimes unloaded on Eagle View Drive, and employee vehicles line
Eagle View Drive down to Dane Road and also on Grace Drive which makes snow plows
and mail delivery access restricted. While these are both public streets and allow parking
on one side they are not intended to be used for street storage or for servicing vehicles.
Deliveries or shipments moving in an out of warehouses often use a truck docks with
forklifts that require audible backup warnings definitely interrupting a quiet afternoon
reading at a park. Driscoll asks that zoning conditions be placed on lighting issues, hours
of operation, square footage of a warehouse, limit the number of truck docks, the location
and number of accesses off the side streets, and screening. Preserving this future park as
a community asset and hopefully a place future recruits for The University of Iowa or other
businesses will visit that will make them want to come to Iowa City. The park may also be a
great location for picnics between appointments at the medical clinic but only if we protect it
from adjacent uses that could spill over and diminish its significance. Commissions,
Council, Staff, and property owners change over time therefore including conditional zoning
requirements are reasonable limitations and the preplanning during the rezoning process
will document the agreements and the intentions for the future. Driscoll invited the
Commissioners to come visit the future park area and see the spectacular views.
Parsons asked if there was a time table of when the property would actually become a
park. Driscoll said the plan is once the immediate family is done using the property as their
residence it would become a park.
Eastham asked about the size of the property. Driscoll said it is just shy of 20 acres.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 11 of 16
Eastham asked since it's been bequeathed will it become parkland legally at what point.
Hetkeon said she would have to review the bequest documents to know the details and
make a legal determination.
Dan Tiedt (PIP Printing) questioned that if this parcel does get rezoned does that mean the
University will build the clinic or could it possibly be something else. Hektoen said there is
nothing that the Commission can do that would limit the University from reselling the
property, the zoning is not tied to the University's purchase of the property.
Logsdon reiterated that the project does not plan for any outdoor storage, it will be a small
warehouse use for medical products, so there would not be anything outside or no forklifts
outside, it would all be contained within the building. Logsdon said they envision two docks
at most and likely vehicles will be brought inside the building to load. The warehouse
portion is really more of an accessory to the rest of the clinic use.
Dyer asked if they don't plan outside storage then why is there a need for the rezoning.
Yapp replied that due to the warehouse portion a rezoning is required. If it was
warehousing just for this medical clinic it would not require a rezoning but because it is
warehousing for other medical clinics and a distribution function that requires a rezoning
request.
Hensch noted this sounds like it will be more of a central stores configuration in a hospital
rather than a wholesale distribution center. Logsdon confirmed that was the case. Hensch
asked what type of vehicles would be used for the medical equipment transfers. Logsdon
said there would be semi -trucks to get the product to the facility but most deliveries out of
the building will be in vans or small cargo trucks (similar to what a UPS truck size is). The
vehicles will be loaded inside the facility because they do not want medical products to be
outside. It will be durable medical equipment (gauze, gloves, etc).
Eastham stated that is the case for this particular use, but if rezoned the zoning would allow
for future uses that may include outside warehouse storage. Logsdon said while that is
true, this project is a pretty significant investment, over a $20 million project, and the
warehouse component is a very small portion of the whole project.
Hensch asked if this building would be the only structure on the parcel. Logsdon replied
that yes it will all be one building. The warehouse portion is basically the basement of the
clinic building.
Dyer asked if the access to the structure would be off Grace Drive. Logsdon confirmed that
they would like to have three access points off Grace Drive and two off Eagle View Drive.
Dyer asked which access point the trucks would use. Logsdon said trucks would only
access the property from the east side of Grace Drive.
Hensch stated that since Dane Road is unimproved he wanted confirmation that none of
the distribution traffic would access Dane Road. Logsdon confirmed that none of the traffic
would be on Dane Road.
Eastham asked if Logsdon knew what type of nighttime lighting will be used. Logsdon said
not at this time but certainly they would follow the City ordinance. Yapp confirmed the City
has lighting standards within 300 feet of a residential zone, parking lot lights can be no
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 - Formal Meeting
Page 12 of 16
more than 25 feet high, and further than 300 feet parking lot lights can be 35 feet high but
must be downcast and shielded. Yapp noted the question for the Commission is whether to
discuss higher standards than what is the current City ordinance. Eastham asked if that
was the same for sound. Yapp stated that sound is very difficult to regulate, but can be
controlled by hours of operation. If the Commission would like to open that conversation
Yapp would need to discuss such standard options with the applicant. Eastham agreed
and asked then if they would be setting a conditional zoning that would persist over time.
Yapp confirmed that would be the case.
Hensch asked if they would then have to have the same discussion for any rezoning
application on any of the contiguous properties to be fair. Eastham noted that was a
question and the Commission would need to discuss if that was a reasonable provision for
the areas surrounding due to the potential future park land use. Dyer noted there is a
current residential use of that property.
Eastham closed the public hearing.
Theobald moved to defer this item REZ15-00021 until the next meeting
Hensch seconded the motion.
Dyer asked if possible the Commission would like to see building elevations as well at the
next meeting. She noted this project seems similar to the clinic they rezoned property for
on North Dodge Street and items like berming and lighting need to be discussed.
Eastham noted that any restrictions on the rezoning of this parcel should be taken in light of
the proposed future park use in the area.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer carried 5-0.
VACATION ITEM (VAC15-00005):
Discussion of an application submitted by MidWestOne Bank for a vacation of air rights 25'
above pavement grade over public right-of-way in the north -south alleyway between East
Harrison Street and East Prentiss Street to allow a pedestrian walkway.
Wolf stated that MidWestOne Bank is requesting vacation of air rights 25' above to 46'
above pavement grade to install an enclosed pedestrian walkway between their new
MidWestOne Bank building on the corner of Harrison Street and a parking facility that is
planned for the corner of Dubuque Street and Harrison Street. There are four adjacent
properties the utilize the alley, mostly for parking, so vacating these air rights Staff does not
believe will affect those uses. This walkway will allow for pedestrians to avoid having to
cross traffic in the alley. When reviewing vacation requests pedestrian and vehicular traffic
is the most important factor Staff looks at. Because this vacation is 25' above grade all the
circulation will remain the same, emergency and utility vehicles don't normally require more
than 14' of clearance. Wolf showed an image of the proposed walkway, it will be 20' long,
10' wide and 10' high.
Staff recommends approval of VAC15-00005 , a vacation of approximately 4,200 cubic feet
MINUTES APPROVED
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 19, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
MEETING ROOM A, IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Jodie Theobald, Mike Hensch, Charlie Eastham,
Carolyn Dyer, Phoebe Martin
MEMERS ABSENT: Max Parsons
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Martina Wolf
OTHERS PRESNT: Jane Driscoll, Ben Logsdon
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote if 6-0, the Commission recommends approval of REZ15-00021, a proposal to rezone
approximately 7.98 acres of property located east of Mormon Trek Blvd. between Grace Drive
and Eagle View Drive from Community Office (CO -1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone,
subject to the condition as stated in the staff report.
By a vote of 6-0, the Commission recommends approval of VAC15-00006, a vacation of
approximately 390 square feet of alley right of way running north and south between 124 West
Benton and 731 South Riverside.
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There were none.
REZONING ITEM (REZ15-00021):
Discussion of an application submitted by Build to Suit for rezoning from Community Office (CO -
1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for approximately 7.98 acres of property located
east of Mormon Trek Blvd. between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive.
Miklo said staff attended a neighborhood meeting with the developer and neighbors to address
concerns expressed at the November 5, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Concerns
regarding site design lighting and outdoor storage were discussed. A new concept plan has
been submitted with the truck docks reoriented so the lights at the loading docks would be
facing away from the residential zone to the east. The Conditional Zoning Agreement created
for this application addresses potential outdoor storage, lighting, and buffering to the residential
area east of Dane Road. Staff is recommending approval of this rezoning subject to a
Conditional Zoning Agreement that prohibits outdoor storage and exterior lights more than 25
feet above grade.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 19, 2015 — 7:00 pm — Formal
Page 2 of 6
Freerks would like to know how parking needs for the development were calculated. Miklo
explained that each use contained within the building has a different parking requirement, so the
square footage of each use is calculated and leads to the total parking need. He noted that the
applicant is proposing more parking than required by the zoning code.
Eastham wants to know if staff/developer considered turning the building 1800; he thinks it
would be more compatible with adjoining uses and keep the trucks away from the residential
uses. Miklo said that staff did not consider that. The applicant may want to speak to that
question. Miklo added that there is likely to be less activity on the side near the residential end
if the building remains as proposed.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Ben Logsdon (Build to Suit) shared that they met with the Driscoll family and PIP Printing
owners last week. The site plan has been modified to allow trucks to enter off Eagle View Drive,
versus the previous plan that only had truck access of Grace Drive. They are attempting to meet
all needs while minimizing paved surfaces on the property. He said they plan to plant hardwood
trees along the east end of the property to allow for a transition to the future park off Dane Road
and soften the edges of the building and property. They plan to add natural grasses to help with
storm water drainage off northeast corner and ease the transition between the property and
adjoining uses.
Logsdon addressed Eastham's concerns about switching the uses on each end of the building
by explaining that the grade of the property favors putting a loading dock on the lower east end
of the site and actually allows for better screening of the truck docks. He added that he will be
working to be transparent with all stakeholders throughout the development and construction
process.
Theobald was concerned that the concept plan shows the use of privet hedge, which is an
invasive species and suggests that something else be used for landscaping. Logsdon said that
the landscape plan was conceptual. It was done by the architect to show the desire for a buffer.
Before the plan is finalized he will work with a landscape architect to choose appropriate plants.
Hensch had concerns about stormwater management with the topography of the site. He said
there is a lot of concrete surface area on the property and wants to know how they will decrease
runoff. Logsdon said that this property has a storm sewer; they will be rerouting the sewer but
utilizing the existing sewer hook-up that drains to the regional basin. He said that long-term
maintenance of pervious pavement is difficult but they are being considered. They do not feel
comfortable picking a product that can perform long-term yet but are definitely considering it.
Hensch wanted to know about retaining more water on the parcel through landscaping instead
of just running it all off. Logsdon said it's a possibility in the northeast corner but wants to
consult with the stormwater engineer. Miklo added that the stormwater basin for this
development was designed for the entire subdivision and can handle the capacity of runoff
expected for this property. Hensch said that one -site water management should be addressed
on the front-end and thinks it is an increasingly important aspect to consider with all
applications. Dyer said that reducing the amount of parking and paved areas would result in less
runoff.
Eastham wanted to know how many parking spaces this will accommodate. Logsdon said it is a
two-story footprint, about 100,000 square feet, and will require a fair amount of parking due to
its internal uses. They are considering adding underground parking.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 19, 2015 — 7:00 pm — Formal
Page 3 of 6
Hektoen asked that if any commissioners had an ex parte communication, they should disclose
it.
Eastham commented about putting in islands on the south side might help with the appearance
of the site, considering the future park abutting it. Logsdon says the ordinance may require more
islands and that the plan is very preliminary. Pedestrian connections will be added as well.
Freerks inquired about outdoor areas for eating. She said given the amount of office space that
would be a good amenity for employees, especially since there are not many restaurants in that
part of town. Logsdon said that is a good idea that he would explore.
Hensch noted that there is only one sidewalk. Logsdon said that sidewalks are required for the
building permit and there will be sidewalks on Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive.
Freerks wants to know if there will be a connection across Dane Road to/from the park. Miklo
said that when the plan for the subdivision was laid out there was a thought that Dane Road
may be abandoned in the future. It may not be necessary depending at what develops to the
east.
Eastham wanted to know the elevation difference between the east and west. Logsdon said it is
about 15-20 feet difference across the property.
Jane Driscoll shared that she spoke last meeting and was speaking on behalf of her
grandfather, George Dane, who owns the abutting residential property to the east. Her parents
are also in attendance in live on that property. She said that the hilltop on the property is
approximately 100 feet above the airport and presents a unique vantage point; it is one of the
last undeveloped hilltops in the city. Her grandfather wants to preserve the 16 acres and it has
been designated to go to the Iowa Heritage Trust and will be managed by them. Mr. Dane wants
the property to be available for public use and family-oriented activities. Driscoll knows that the
property requesting a rezoning will be developed and just wants to make sure it can be
compatible with a park use.
Driscoll commended Mr. Logsdon for being transparent and accommodating. She thought the
neighborhood meeting last week was constructive in addressing her family's concerns; there
was good dialogue about lighting and ways to provide lighting to the property that don't impede
the stargazing ability from the park. Driscoll noted that the materials being considered by the
developer are generally flat, which bounces sound and creates a less -than -desirable
environment for a park and hopes the developer takes that into consideration. She appreciated
the developer's adjustment to put the truck docks in at an angle. She would like to see
vegetation on the property that has foliage year-round. She also thought that impervious
pavement may impact runoff or having some detention measure to keep water on site to drain at
a reasonable pace. Driscoll said that she hopes communication continues as site plans change
and continued mindfulness of the future park, but in general, her family is in favor of this type of
use. She encouraged commissioners to visit the future park property, which is residential and
agricultural use now.
Hensch inquired if the proposed 25 foot lighting limit would impact the view from the hilltop.
Driscoll said 25 feet is reasonable. She suggested that lights on the property point at the
building to illuminate it, versus having the lights shine away from the building.
Freerks asked Miklo if the property is rezoned with conditions if they will stay with the property.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 19, 2015 — 7:00 pm — Formal
Page 4 of 6
Hektoen said the Conditional Zoning Agreement will not expire unless the property is rezoned
again.
Theobald asked that a Quick Care Clinic is included in the building's plan. Logsdon said there
will be a family practice clinic, pharmacy, dialysis treatment, etc. and the building will have
regular office operation hours.
Public discussion closed.
Hensch moved to approve REZ15-00021, a proposal to rezone approximately 7.98 acres
of property located east of Mormon Trek Blvd. between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive
from Community Office (CO -1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone, subject to the
condition as stated in the staff report.
Theobald seconded the motion.
Freerks thanked all stakeholders for open communication and community engagement. She
thinks this will be a nice addition to the area and that multi -use within one site is better than
multiple buildings and accompanying parking. She will be in favor.
Eastham appreciates the cooperation and support of both parties. He thinks it is clear that
landscaping will be crucial to this parcels' development and that this rezoning may actually help
the park use if transitions are done properly. He added that he wants the commission to look at
adding the park to the Comprehensive Plan. Freerks agrees.
Hensch asked Miklo about how the decision is made of when to involve stormwater engineers.
Miklo said that all preliminary plat submissions involve stormwater management review where
engineers review the plat and site plan to ensure that stormwater is adequately handled.
Theobald expressed that she would like to see a diversity of hardwood trees for landscaping.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
VACATION ITEM (VAC15-00006):
Discussion of an application submitted by Kum & Go L.C. for a vacation of a remnant portion of
alley right of way running north and south between 124 W. Benton Street and 731 S. Riverside
Drive.
Martina Wolf, planning intern, said that the alley right of way between 124 West Benton and 731
South Riverside has been entirely vacated except for this last remaining portion, which had
been omitted from previous vacations. The alley is not open to public or vehicular circulation, so
this vacation will not affect traffic. Service, emergency, and utility vehicles will not be impacted.
Mediacom, MidAmerican, and Centurylink were all sent letters and to date, no utilities are
present on this property. She shared that vacation of this right-of-way will allow for Kum & Go's
recently rezoned property to be redeveloped in its entirety. The city recommends approval of
this vacation.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Michael Lee (Kum & Go) shared that he was the surveyor of this project and it had been
realized that for some reason, this portion of the alley was not in the deeds Kum & Go received.
Vacation Item
0
VAC15-00005:
Discussion of an application submitted by
MidwestOne Bank for a vacation of air rights 25'
above pavement grade over public right-of-way in
the north -south alleyway between East Harrison
Street and East Prentiss Street to allow a pedestrian
walkway.
i
E PF
— a 0 -- "--- E HARRISON ST E HA"
11Mf
4M
gel
to
■ U,
Cy
Co 4
(n
Application for vacation of air rights
Application
over right-of-way for enclosed
v
elevated walkway
nup.�rwwc9m orgUeCLtSV2rFliepu Nnguban�Zmuq"-pdr
iS ST
own
E HARRISON ST
&, I , -*-
;.
w w
W
z MEMO
cn
. � ■ cn
Z' 0
AAA
Application for vacation of air rights
;t over right-of-way for enclosed
■ �elevated walkway
Igip" ha"xgmyubaoCWSvZlF1BpiammngutX rZonngAap.p01
-MBPARM BY AND ItI M
KMA CfIZ DM 52240 (3121
FAST HARRISON STREET
PONT OF COLwBCw
(E COMB+LCrr B) -,
] E 15 30 45 fO LOr P SIO �J
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
I%W Aur a caner p TRw'e vr)
n PORTA LF u.arAc D ,.'V Jnr ro Tr
PLA' thNX 'A. PA}( 1A1, N TFT R!LG1tF`-
L Tit J2145ON CaNTY FWCI R'5 MME
TVA
I I I PTQ�Sd''jy
Lar ;
I I 0(
I
LNRPLGRD® PLAT DY
RLiERT D AA(.R 66N
WA P RP.E6F W) on61-qA
DAT® 9/�/196j I
LOf ` 4�� J I LO<
ry. .
A PQtTILH GF LOf A
I 50.0�"q [. LGT 5 I TRACT CF Lxo�
1/1 ROY �y , 20.00' Q9[ACm N A
..' 1VARRMITY 0®
Maw
PXK A7n
/ADCs WN lm
EAST PRENTISS STREET
I
W
0
J L2
J :L4 �.:�
� 1 r
-AP
M7fIB 1
`
AIlA •ODO
I
(200
I I I PTQ�Sd''jy
Lar ;
I I 0(
I
LNRPLGRD® PLAT DY
RLiERT D AA(.R 66N
WA P RP.E6F W) on61-qA
DAT® 9/�/196j I
LOf ` 4�� J I LO<
ry. .
A PQtTILH GF LOf A
I 50.0�"q [. LGT 5 I TRACT CF Lxo�
1/1 ROY �y , 20.00' Q9[ACm N A
..' 1VARRMITY 0®
Maw
PXK A7n
/ADCs WN lm
EAST PRENTISS STREET
I
W
0
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of VAC15-00005, a
vacation of approximately 4,200 cubic feet of
airspace (from 25 feet above pavement grade to 46
feet above said grade) above the alley running north -
south between East Harrison and East Prentiss
Streets to allow for the installation of an enclosed
pedestrian walkway connected MidwestOne Bank
and a municipal parking facility.
The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval by a vote of 5-0
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Item: VAC15-00005 North south alley
between Harrison and Pretiss
GENERAL INFORMATION:
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Martina Wolf, Planning Intern
Date: November 5, 2015
Applicant: MidWestOne Bank
201 South Clinton Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5832
Contact Person: Thomas H. Gelman
Phelan Tucker Mullen Walker Tucker Gelman LLP
P.O. Box 2150
Iowa City, Iowa, 52244
(319) 354-1104
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
Comprehensive Plan:
File Date:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Vacation of air rights from 25' to 46' above
pavement grade over public right-of-way
Installation of an enclosed pedestrian walkway over
an alley
Above alley running north and south between East
Harrison Street and East Prentiss Street
4,200 cubic feet of airspace or .005 acre
Public Right of Way RFC -CC
North: Federal building — P2
South: Commercial and residential - PRM
East: Parking facility and residential under
construction - RFC
West: MidWestOne Bank building -RFC
Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan
October 8, 2015
The applicant, MidWestOne Bank, is requesting vacation of air rights from 25 feet above
pavement grade to 46 feet above said grade over the alley running north and south between East
Harrison and East Prentiss Streets. The vacation is to allow the applicant's installation and use of
an enclosed pedestrian walkway to cross over the existing alley, connecting the applicant's new
building (west of the alley) to the municipal parking facility being constructed (east of the alley).
The walkway is proposed to permit more safe and convenient access to and from the parking
facility for the bank's customers, employees, visitors, as well as the general public who choose to
E
use the walkway.
The area to be vacated is 4,200 cubic feet, or .005 acre, starting 25 feet above the pavement
grade. The walkway will be 20' long, 10' wide, and 21' high (ending at 46' above pavement grade).
In addition to the MidWestOne Bank building and the parking facility there are four properties
that have access to the alley. Most of these properties use the alley for access to parking
spaces.
ANALYSIS:
The following factors are to be considered in evaluating a vacation request:
a) Impact on pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation;
b) Impact on emergency and utility vehicle access and circulation;
c) Impact on access of adjacent private properties;
d) Desirability of right-of-way for access or circulation needs;
e) Location of utilities and other easements or restrictions on the property;
f) Any other relevant factors pertaining to the specific requested vacation.
a) Vehicular and pedestrian circulation and access to private property:
Because the air rights to be vacated are 25 feet above grade, the street level portion of the
alley will remain available for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The addition of the above
grade walkway will provide a secure pedestrian connection between the new parking facility
and the MidWestOne Building.
b) Emergency and utility and service access:
Emergency, utility, and service vehicles require 13'6" of vertical clearance, so the 25 feet
provided by the skywalk is sufficient and will not restrict access.
c) Impact on access of adjacent private properties
All properties on this block will continue to have street level access to the alley.
d) Desirability of right of way for access or circulation needs
The alley will remain open to allow midblock vehicular and pedestrian circulation.
e) Location of utilities and other easements or restrictions on the property
The alley will remain available for utilities.
f) Any other relevant factors pertaining to the specific requested vacation
There do not appear to be other factors that warrant the retention of this portion (air rights) of
the right-of-way.
3
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of VAC15-00005, a vacation of
approximately 4,200 cubic feet of airspace (from 25 feet above pavement grade to 46 feet
above said grade) above the alley running north -south between East Harrison and East
Prentiss Streets to allow for the installation of a pedestrian walkway connecting MidWestOne
Bank and a municipal parking facility.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location map
Approved by: / v / —
John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
-PREPARED BY AND RETURN
Ron Mm
0 6 15 30 45 60
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
1"=60'
MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA
IOWA 52240 (319):
EAST HARRISON STREET
LI1T S X10
PLAT OF SURVEY (RETIRMBVII59) J
A PORTION OF BLOCK S, C LINTY SEAT ADDITION
PLAT $OOK 56, PAGE 267, IN THE REGORP5
OF THE JOHNSON COLNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
20.00'
ALLEY
m L6rFI
Am Rom VACATM AFEA
AFEA-�SOL FT)
��P�(�� 6c'
F" (9
zue"�(
LOT' 2
Lor 7A
I I "I � I
CORDED PLAT
D. MIGKEI.SON
5 T NO. 0,551-014TR�orf_RT
MMS
PROF=G 3I I
I
LOT b LOT10
3
a
IA �' I A PORTION OF LOT 4
I
LOT 5 I TRACT OF LAND � 50.00 20.00' DESCRIMP IN A
1/2 ROW I
ALLEY WARRANTY DPEEP80 0'
(� FZC6RDEP IN
- - - COOK 4799,
— — — PA6E5 TOO-IOI � I
I
EAST PRENTISS STREET CD
0
6L0(,K IL GOw_T TSFATTADDITION — — Lir
Lf)T 5 DEED f5Oq( I & 2, PAGE 253, IN THE WYORDr
OF THE JOHNSON -a wy RF/dJRDFR'S OFF]/,F '
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 12 of 16
more than 25 feet high, and further than 300 feet parking lot lights can be 35 feet high but
must be downcast and shielded. Yapp noted the question for the Commission is whether to
discuss higher standards than what is the current City ordinance. Eastham asked if that
was the same for sound. Yapp stated that sound is very difficult to regulate, but can be
controlled by hours of operation. If the Commission would like to open that conversation
Yapp would need to discuss such standard options with the applicant. Eastham agreed
and asked then if they would be setting a conditional zoning that would persist over time.
Yapp confirmed that would be the case.
Hensch asked if they would then have to have the same discussion for any rezoning
application on any of the contiguous properties to be fair. Eastham noted that was a
question and the Commission would need to discuss if that was a reasonable provision for
the areas surrounding due to the potential future park land use. Dyer noted there is a
current residential use of that property.
Eastham closed the public hearing.
Theobald moved to defer this item REZ15-00021 until the next meeting.
Hensch seconded the motion.
Dyer asked if possible the Commission would like to see building elevations as well at the
next meeting. She noted this project seems similar to the clinic they rezoned property for
on North Dodge Street and items like berming and lighting need to be discussed.
Eastham noted that any restrictions on the rezoning of this parcel should be taken in light of
the proposed future park use in the area.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer carried 5-0.
VACATION ITEM (VAC15-00005):
Discussion of an application submitted by MidWestOne Bank for a vacation of air rights 25'
above pavement grade over public right-of-way in the north -south alleyway between East
Harrison Street and East Prentiss Street to allow a pedestrian walkway.
Wolf stated that MidWestOne Bank is requesting vacation of air rights 25' above to 46'
above pavement grade to install an enclosed pedestrian walkway between their new
MidWestOne Bank building on the corner of Harrison Street and a parking facility that is
planned for the corner of Dubuque Street and Harrison Street. There are four adjacent
properties the utilize the alley, mostly for parking, so vacating these air rights Staff does not
believe will affect those uses. This walkway will allow for pedestrians to avoid having to
cross traffic in the alley. When reviewing vacation requests pedestrian and vehicular traffic
is the most important factor Staff looks at. Because this vacation is 25' above grade all the
circulation will remain the same, emergency and utility vehicles don't normally require more
than 14' of clearance. Wolf showed an image of the proposed walkway, it will be 20' long,
10' wide and 10' high.
Staff recommends approval of VAC1 5-00005, a vacation of approximately 4,200 cubic feet
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 13 of 16
of airspace (from 25 feet above pavement grade to 46 feet above said grade) above the alley
running north -south between East Harrison and East Prentiss Streets to allow for the
installation of a pedestrian walkway connecting MidWestOne Bank and a municipal parking
facility.
Hensch asked what are some typical issues associated with these particular types of
requests. Wolf replied that when looking at vacating the pedestrian and vehicular traffic
circulation is important, emergency vehicle access, impact to adjacent private properties,
and location of utilities. Hensch asked if there was any opposition to this vacation item from
neighbors. Yapp replied that they have heard no opposition. He added that Wolf
summarized what they review with vacation applications, he added that for air rights such
as this there do not appear to be any conflicts that are created for a skywalk. He noted
there are some concerns with skywalks in general in retail situations because it can take
away from pedestrian traffic at the street level. In this case however it is a connection
between an office building and a parking ramp to facilitate people who are parked in the
parking ramp to get into the office building.
Dyer noted this is similar to the walkway between the Senior Center and the parking ramp
on Iowa Avenue. Eastham asked if that one had to have a vacation of airway and Yapp
replied no because it is owned by the City.
Eastham asked if there was any other permitting process to allow this walkway to be built
besides in addition to vacating the rights to the airspace. Yapp said they will need a
building permit. Hetkeon said doing the vacation is necessary because this is an integral
part of the building this is the course of action the City feels is necessary.
Eastham opened the public hearing.
Carolyn Wallace (MidWestOne Bank) and Nick Lindslev (Neumann Monson Architects)
came forward to answer any questions the Commission may have.
Hearing no questions or other public comments Eastham closed the public hearing.
Hensch moved to approve VAC15-00005 , a vacation of approximately 4,200 cubic feet
of airspace (from 25 feet above pavement grade to 46 feet above said grade) above the
alley running north -south between East Harrison and East Prentiss Streets to allow for
the installation of a pedestrian walkway connecting WdWestOne Bank and a municipal
parking facility.
Theobald seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 15 2015
Dyer moved to approve the meeting minutes of October 15, 2015.
Hensch seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
Vacation Item
VAC15-00006:
Discussion of an application submitted by Kum & Go
for a vacation of remnant portion of alley right-of-
way running north -south between 124 W. Benton
and 731 S. Riverside Dr.
Application for vacation of portion
of alley between124 W Benton St-
and 731 S. Riverside Dr
40
r♦�
}
.'
tow
IMP
LMr"desIqn&wamaHabieonWeat
nV,Mv .kgowvm
INp.-A~cgov agesWCMm'FWplamYg'mD ,:!o,.'.. _.._
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of VAC15-0000, a
vacation of approximately 390 square feet of right-
of-way running north -south between 124 Benton St.
and 731 S. Riverside Dr.
The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval by a vote of 6-o
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will
be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at
7:00 p.m. on the 15th day of December, 2015, in
Emma J. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street,
Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at
the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider:
An ordinance for a vacation of
approximately 390 square feet of right of
way running north -south between 124
Benton Street and 731 Riverside Drive
(VAC15-00006).
Copies of the proposed ordinances and
resolutions are on file for public examination in the
office of the City Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa.
Persons wishing to make their views known for
Council consideration are encouraged to appear
at the above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Item: VAC15-00006, Kum & Go Alley
GENERAL INFORMATION:
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Martina Wolf, Planning Intern
Date: November 19, 2015
Applicant: Kum & Go, L.C.
6400 Westown Parkway
West Des Moines, IA 50266
(515) 457-6290
Contact Person: Michael Lee
3405 SE Crossroads Drive, Suite E
Grimes, Iowa, 50111
(515) 369-440
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
Comprehensive Plan:
File Date:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Vacation of portion of alley
Combine surrounding parcels for redevelopment
Between 124 Benton St. and 731 Riverside Dr.
Approx. 390 SF
CC -2 and West Riverfront Subdistrict (RFC -WR)
North:
South:
East:
West:
Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan
October 29, 2015
The applicant, Kum & Go, is requesting vacation of a remnant piece of alley right of way running north and
south between 124 W Benton Street and 731 S Riverside Drive. All neighboring portions of the right of way
have previously been vacated, and it appears as though this particular portion was omitted from previous
vacations. The vacation is requested to allow the applicant to combine the surrounding parcels into one
parcel under common ownership for redevelopment.
ANALYSIS:
The following factors are to be considered in evaluating a vacation request:
a) Impact on pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation;
b) Impact on emergency and utility vehicle access and circulation;
c) Impact on access of adjacent private properties;
d) Desirability of right-of-way for access or circulation needs;
2
e) Location of utilities and other easements or restrictions on the property;
f) Any other relevant factors pertaining to the specific requested vacation.
a) Vehicular and pedestrian circulation and access to private property:
This right of way is not used for pedestrian or vehicular traffic circulation. The right of way is a
remnant parcel, and due to its small size does not function to provide traffic circulation. The owner of
surrounding property, Kum and Go, plans to incorporate the right of way into their property. While
unrelated to the specific vacation request, as a condition of the recent rezoning for the Kum and Go
property, Kum and Go is required to dedicate 10 -feet of right of way along the frontages of their
property.
b) Emergency and utility and service access:
Emergency, utility, and service access to surrounding property will not be impacted by the vacation.
c) Impact on access of adjacent private properties
Kum & Go owns all properties adjacent to the right of way and with this vacation, can unify the
surrounding parcels into one.
d) Desirability of right of way for access or circulation needs
The right of way is not needed for access or circulation. It is a remnant parcel that became known to
staff during the evaluation of the Kum and Go project.
e) Location of utilities and other easements or restrictions on the property
Letters were sent to MidAmerican, Centurylink, and Mediacom to see if utilities are present
along the alley. To date, no utilities have been identified.
f) Any other relevant factors pertaining to the specific requested vacation
There do not appear to be other factors that warrant the retention of this portion of this right of way.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of VAC15-00006, a vacation of
approximately 390 square feet of right of way running north -south between 124 Benton Street and 731
Riverside Drive.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location map
Approved by
John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
E
022
l
842 1y
we L
ORCHARD CTI.
... - �. _r
_
226 'u4
ssn{
711
224220
W 8ENTON ST
21S2 21 215 2l3 205 ` eOB
m
pil
CJ
( ns
( SITE LOCATION
- OF ALLEY
124 VACATION
]31.
$32
121
Nt
814
804
-)
^ 3405 SE CROSSROADS DRIVE, SURE G
1 Kum & Go `V — GRIMES, IOWA 50111
/1 I LOCATION MAP PN (515)3694400 FAX:(515)369-4410
11410514 iOWACIv,IDWA CIVIL DESIGN ADVANTAGE ENGINEER: I TECH:
-)
SCALE (FEET-),,
0
150
c:
^ 3405 SE CROSSROADS DRIVE, SURE G
1 Kum & Go `V — GRIMES, IOWA 50111
/1 I LOCATION MAP PN (515)3694400 FAX:(515)369-4410
11410514 iOWACIv,IDWA CIVIL DESIGN ADVANTAGE ENGINEER: I TECH:
VACIS-00006• Aerial View / Location of remnant right of way proposed for vacation
p
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 19, 2015 - 7:00 pm - Formal
Page 4 of 6
Hektoen said the Conditional Zoning Agreement will not expire unless the property is rezoned
again.
Theobald asked that a Quick Care Clinic is included in the building's plan. Logsdon said there
will be a family practice clinic, pharmacy, dialysis treatment, etc. and the building will have
regular office operation hours.
Public discussion closed.
Hensch moved to approve REZ15-00021, a proposal to rezone approximately 7.98 acres
of property located east of Mormon Trek Blvd. between Grace Drive and Eagle View Drive
from Community Office (CO -1) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone, subject to the
condition as stated in the staff report.
Theobald seconded the motion.
Freerks thanked all stakeholders for open communication and community engagement. She
thinks this will be a nice addition to the area and that multi -use within one site is better than
multiple buildings and accompanying parking. She will be in favor.
Eastham appreciates the cooperation and support of both parties. He thinks it is clear that
landscaping will be crucial to this parcels' development and that this rezoning may actually help
the park use if transitions are done properly. He added that he wants the commission to look at
adding the park to the Comprehensive Plan. Freerks agrees.
Hensch asked Miklo about how the decision is made of when to involve stormwater engineers.
Miklo said that all preliminary plat submissions involve stormwater management review where
engineers review the plat and site plan to ensure that stormwater is adequately handled.
Theobald expressed that she would like to see a diversity of hardwood trees for landscaping.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
VACATION ITEM (VAC15-00008)•
Discussion of an application submitted by Kum & Go L.C. for a vacation of a remnant portion of
alley right of way running north and south between 124 W. Benton Street and 731 S. Riverside
Drive.
Martina Wolf, planning intern, said that the alley right of way between 124 West Benton and 731
South Riverside has been entirely vacated except for this last remaining portion, which had
been omitted from previous vacations. The alley is not open to public or vehicular circulation, so
this vacation will not affect traffic. Service, emergency, and utility vehicles will not be impacted.
Mediacom, MidAmerican, and Centurylink were all sent letters and to date, no utilities are
present on this property. She shared that vacation of this right-of-way will allow for Kum & Go's
recently rezoned property to be redeveloped in its entirety. The city recommends approval of
this vacation.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Michael Lee (Kum & Go) shared that he was the surveyor of this project and it had been
realized that for some reason, this portion of the alley was not in the deeds Kum & Go received.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 19, 2015 - 7:00 pm - Formal
Page 5 of 6
Hensch asked if this alley has ever been fully functioning in the past 50 years. Lee said the old
Sinclair station used to be there and they had the northern portion of the alley added to their
property.
Public discussion closed.
Theobald moved to approve VAC15-00006, a proposal to vacate alley right of way
running north and south between 124 West Benton and 731 South Riverside.
Eastham seconded the motion.
Freerks said the necessary factors have been analyzed and it should not be an issue and that
this vacation will help unify the property.
Martin wanted to ensure that no utilities are present.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: NOVEMBERS, 2015
Eastham moved to approve the meeting minutes of November 5, 2015
Theobald seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Hensch requested future discussion to address runoff and on-site stormwater
management; he thinks with redevelopment, these should be addressed on the front-
end. Miklo shared that the current ordinance and how it operates and reasons for why
we may not be ready to universally utilize pervious pavers. Theobald said that West
Union uses pervious pavers. Eastham wanted to know if there are any federal
requirements for managing stormwater runoff/water quality. Miklo said there are. He
suggested that the commission invite the City Engineer to workshop to present the
stormwater management ordinance and practices. He said staff would schedule this
when there is a short agenda.
Theobald was concerned about the prevalence of concrete at the new Dodge Truck
dealership on Ruppert Road. She observed that there was very little landscaping or
green space on the property, it was mostly paved. Miklo said that the current parking lot
landscape standards do not apply to car dealerships because they are considered
merchandise display areas and not parking lots. The Commission requested that staff
consider amendments to the code to require landscaping and tree requirements for
vehicle sales lots.
ADJOURNMENT:
Martin moved to adjourn.
Theobald seconded.
A vote was taken and motion carried 6-0.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the City Council
of Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 15th
day of December, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the
Emma J. Harvat Hall of the Iowa City City Hall,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if
said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of
the City Council thereafter as posted by the City
Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider
a Resolution Authorizing Conveyance of 1316
Muscatine Avenue, also described as part of Lot
1 in WC Motts Subdivision of Blocks 5 and 7 in
Clark & Borlands Addition, Iowa City, Iowa, to an
income -eligible family.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on
file for public examination in the office of the City
Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing
to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
{ `t
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the City Council
of Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 15th
day of December, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the
Emma J. Harvat Hall of the Iowa City City Hall,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if
said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of
the City Council thereafter as posted by the City
Clerk; at which hearing the Council will consider
a Resolution Authorizing Conveyance of 628
North Johnson Street, also described as part of
Lot 4 in Block 31, Iowa City, Iowa, to an income -
eligible family.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on
file for public examination in the office of the City
Clerk, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing
to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF THE IOWA CITY CITY COUNCIL ON THE MATTER
OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
AND CASL HOLDINGS, LLC., FOR TRANSFER AND DEVELOPMENT OF CITY -
OWNED PROPERTY AT THE CORNER OF COURT AND LINN STREETS AND THE
DEVELOPMENT THEREOF
PUBLIC NOTICE is hereby given that the Iowa City City Council will hold a public
hearing on December 15, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in Emma Harvat Hall, at City Hall, 410 E.
Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or, if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the
City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk, at which meeting the Council proposes to
take action on the proposal to enter into the First Amendment (the "Amendment") to the
Development Agreement dated July 27, 2015 (the "Agreement") with CASL Holdings, L.L.C.
(the "Developer").
The First Amendment extends the deadlines for closing, start of construction and final
completion of the Agreement which obligates the Developer to invest $74,000,000 in
development costs toward the construction of certain Minimum Improvements as defined in the
Agreement on certain real property located within the City -University Urban Renewal Area as
defined and legally described in the Agreement and Amendment. Said land is currently owned
by the City of Iowa City and will be conveyed to CASL Holdings, L.L.C. pursuant to said
Development Agreement. The project is expected to consist of the construction of two mixed-use
buildings with Class A office space, retail and residential units, together with related site
improvements; make a contribution to the City for affordable housing in the amount of $1 million;
and dedicate 10% of the residential units to affordable housing, all designed and constructed to
LEED Gold standards, and a hotel constructed to at least LEED Silver standards, as detailed in
the proposed Development Agreement. In exchange for construction of the Minimum
Improvements, the City proposes to convey land to the Developer for the fair market value of
$5,500,000.
A copy of the Amendment is on file for public inspection during regular business hours
in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, City of Iowa City, Iowa.
At the above meeting the Council shall receive oral or written comments from any
resident or property owner of said City, to the proposal to enter into the Agreement with the
Developer. After all comments have been received and considered, the Council will at this
meeting or at any adjournment thereof, take additional action on the proposal or will abandon the
proposal to authorize said Amendment.
This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, as
provided by Section 364.6 of the City Code of Iowa.
Dated this 30t' day of November, 2015.
Marian K. Karr
City Clerk, City of Iowa City, Iowa
W "-
^� ®4 CITY OF
';a�
� U.�MEMORANDU9
M
Date: December 10, 2015
To: City Council
From: Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney
Re: Amendment to Development Agreement with CASL Holdings, LLC for Court/Linn site
On your agenda for December 15, 2016 is a public hearing and resolution to approve an
amendment to the Development Agreement with CASL Holdings, LLC (CA Ventures) for sale
and development of the Court/Linn site. The proposed amendment simply extends the
deadlines for closing on the sale and commencement of construction by 6 months and extends
other dates as necessary due to these extensions. Final completion of construction is now
scheduled for August 31, 2019, although CASL is aiming for substantial completion and initial
occupancy by the Fall of 2018. As noted in the resolution city staff recommends approval of the
amendment. CASL has been working closely with city staff on this project and the initial
deadlines proposed by CASL were quite ambitious given the complexities of the project.
Cc: Tom Markus, City Manager
Geoff Fruin, Assistant City Manager
Marian Karr, City Clerk
FIRST AMENDMENT
AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE
THIS FIRST AMENDME T TO AGREEMENT FOR PRIVA
(this "First Amendment") is made of , 2015 ("Fir
Date"), by and between THE CI 0 AIOWA CITY, IOWA, a
CASL HOLDINGS, LLC, a Det awar li�ted liability company ("Ryk
WHEREAS, City and Redeveloper parties to
Redevelopment dated effective as of July 27, 015 (the 'V
sale to and redevelopment by Redeveloper of a property
bounded by Court Street on the North, Linn Str t on the
South and a North/South alley on the West in Io a CityT
attached hereto (the "Redevelopment Property"); d /
WHEREAS, the parties desire and agree to
NOW, THEREFORE, in consider
agreements contained herein, and other
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledg
ent Effective
("City"), and
rhe (ain Agreement For Private
e ent") in connection with the
rally located on the half block
Harrison Street (vacated) on the
, legally described on Exhibit A
the Agreement as set forth herein.
E theWemises and the mutual covenants and
and i4tiable consideration, the receipt and
partieA Aereto agree as follows:
1. Incorporation of Recitals. The fore;
set forth in their entirety. The capitalizo terms used
them in the Agreement.
2. Extension of D
Agreement are hereby extended
(a) Closing Date.
Redeveloper of the Redevel
has been extended by agr
for all purposes of the A n
The following time
1--.,.
The closing for the sale
ent Property which is curre
to December 15, 2015 is 1
it including, without limits
ecitals are incorporated herein as if
shall have the meanings ascribed to
and/or dates set forth in the
bya City and purchase by the
ly i entified as October 1, 2015 and
eby ended to be March 31, 2016
,S tion 3(h) of the Agreement.
(b) Submis i n ot initial construction rians.
shall submit its ini ' 1 Construction Plans to the City pars
without limitation, ection 4(a) of the Agreement are hereby ,
calendar days aft the First Amendment Effective Date for site
(2) 120 calendar days after the First Amendment Effective Dal
180 calendar lays after the First Amendment Effective Date
drawings. J
urk within which Redeveloper
it t the Agreement including,
ien4d to be as follows: (1) 90
yep ion and foundation work;
for s aural and shell; and (3)
V the al full building permit
(c)/ Construction Commencement Date. The date fo Red veloper to commence
constructio of the Project and the Minimum Improvements whi h is urrently identified as
November 1, 2015 is hereby amended to be June 1, 2016 for allurpo es of the Agreement
including, without limitation, Section 5 of the Agreement.
51611405.3
(d) Completion of Mmlrr
Compliance. The date for Redeveloper
Improvements which is currently idents
December 31, 2017 in Exhibit E) is he
the Agreement including, without lim
Agreement and Exhibits E and F of the
complete construction of the Project and the Minimum
d as August 31, 2018 (and as mistakenly identified
y amended to be August 31, 2019 for all purposes f
on, Section 3(a), Section 3(b) and Section 5 o the
.
(e) Minimum Actual Value.1
Minimum Actual Value which is currently id
January 1, 2020, and the termination date o
the Minimum Assessment Agreement which
hereby amended to be December 31, 2023,
including, without limitation, as applicable,
402 of the Agreement and Exhibit E and Exhi
commencement date for the applic ion of the
Ified as January 1, 20YDmber
ended to be
le application of the al Value and
currently identified t 31, 2022 is
n each case, for all Agreement
6tion 7(c), Section 7(and Section
tV of the Agreement.
(f) Office Component Leasin Eff The perio�during which Redeveloper is
required to use commercially reasonable efforts t obtain tenapts for the office space included in
the Minimum Improvements in accordance wi Section 404 of the Agreement is hereby
amended to be fourteen (14) months from the First enent Effective Date.
3. Extensions. None of the foreg
Agreement shall be construed to limit or
contemplated or permitted pursuant to the terms
4. Miscellaneous.
rnendments to the dazes set forth in the
ie any other extensions of such dates
Agreement.
(a) Except as hereinabove modified d amended, the Agreement shall remain
in full force and effect in accordance Nyith its terms and s hereby ratified and confirmed.
(b) This First ,Amendment supers(
negotiations or understandings between the parties with
(c) This First Amendment may be
shall be binding as if signed together. Facsimile or ele
shall be deemed to be aulhentic and valid as an original
[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS IP
SIGNATURE PAGES
51611405.3
any prior representations, offers,
pct to the subject matter hereof
by the Parties in counterpart and
: copies of the signed counterparts
First Amendment.
:]
LEFT BLANK;
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
COUNTY OF COOK )
This instrument was acknowledged
M. Scott as Chief Executive Officer of CA
member of CASL Holdings, LLC.
OFFICIAL SEAL
ROBERT PARIZEK
NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF I
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:1
REDEVELOPER:
CASL HOLDINGS, LLC, a Delaware 1' ted
liability company
By: CA Student Living O rating
Company, LLC, a Dela a limited liability
company, its sole me er
to ias M. Scott
Chief.Executive Officer
eforp''me on this IWday of November, by Thomas
Ott dent Living Opera g Company, LLC as the sole
P
Notary Public in and for the 5 to of Illinois
First Amendment to Agreement for Private Redevelopment — Signature Page
REDEVELOPER: /
CASL HOLDINGS, LLC, a Dglaware limited
liability company
By: CA Student/Living Operating
Company, LLQ, a Delaware limited liability
company, its•*e member
somas M. Scott
Chief Executive Officer
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
COUNTY OF COOK )
This instrument was acknowledgAmeday of November, by Thomas
M. Scott as Chief Executive Officer of ating Company, LLC as the sole
member of CASL Holdings, LLC.
OFFICIAL SEAL
ROBERT PARIZEK
NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF ILLINOIS
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:1IM18
Notary Public ' and for a State of Illinois
First Amendment to Agreement for Private Redevelopment — Signature Page
EXHIBIT A
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 1, County Seat AdWtion to Iowa City, Iq'a, according to the
recorded plat thereof recorded in Book 1 and\P�age 253, Deed,fecords of Johnson County,
Iowa and the vacated eastern 150 -feet of the wide H ison Street right-of-way located
west of the Linn Street right -of --way and sout4 in ock 1, subject to a public access
easement, in said County Seat Addition to Io, Iowa.
51611405.3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this FirstAmendment as of the First
Amendment Effective Date set forth above.
CITY:
CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, a municipality
STATE OF IOWA
COUNTY OF JOHNSON
By:
Matthew J. Hayek, Mayor
ATTEST:
B
Marian K. Karr, City Cleat
On this day of Peccmber, 201 me a Notary Public in and for said County,
�w
personally appeared Matthew J. Hayek and Karr, to me personally known, who being
Wk
duly sworn, did say that t#cy are the Mayor City Cd4 respectively of the City of Iowa City,
Iowa, a Municipal C040fabM acated and existing the laws of do State of Iowa, and that
-Mmg
0 M that
the seal affixed to the igiegoing instrumentis the )seal said Municipal Corporation, and
said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said 'cipal Corporation by authority and
of its City/Comcil and said Mayor and City ,e& acknowledged said ftftment to
resolutions
be the fro -ad and died of said Municipal Corporation by voluntarily executed.
Notary Public �in
51611405
for the State of Iowa
First AmmAnast to Agreement for Private Redevelopment - S*012M PAP
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the Iowa City City
Council will hold a public hearing on the 15th day
of December, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in Emma J.
Harvat Hall in City Hall, 410 E. Washington, Iowa
City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the
next meeting of the Iowa City City Council
thereafter as posted by the City Clerk; at which
hearing the Commission will consider a resolution
authorizing an agreement to lease approximately
12,930 square feet of commercial space within
the Iowa City Public Library, located at 130 and
136 S. Dubuque St., Iowa City, Iowa to the Iowa
City Area Development Group, Inc.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF
IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER
INTERESTED PERSONS:
Public notice is hereby given that the
City Council of the City of Iowa City,
Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on
plans, specifications, forms of contract
and estimated costs for the construction
of the: Iowa City Gateway Project [HDP -
3715(652) --71-52] in said city at 7:00
p.m. on the 15th day of December, 2015.
Said meeting to be held in the Emma J.
Harvat Hall in the City Hall, 410 E.
Washington Street in said city, or if said
meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting
of the City Council thereafter as posted
by the City Clerk.
Said plans, specifications, forms of
contract and estimated costs are now on
file in the office of the City Clerk in the
City Hall in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be
inspected by any interested persons.
Any interested persons may appear at
said meeting of the City Council for the
purpose of making objections to and
comments concerning said plans,
specifications, contracts or the costs of
making said improvements.
This notice is given by order of the City
Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and
as provided by law.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
Publish 12/4
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF THE IOWA CITY CITY COUNCIL ON THE MATTER
OF AN AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE CHAUNCEY, LLC., FOR TRANSFER AND
DEVELOPMENT OF CITY -OWNED PROPERTY AT THE CORNER OF COLLEGE AND
GILBERT STREETS AND THE DEVELOPMENT THEREOF.
PUBLIC NOTICE is hereby given that the Iowa City City Council will hold a public
hearing on December 15, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in Emma Harvat Hall, at City Hall, 410 E.
Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or, if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the
City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk, at which meeting the Council proposes to
take action on the proposal to enter into the First Amendment (the "Amendment") to the
Development Agreement dated June 8, 2015 (the "Agreement") with The Chauncey, L.L.C. (the
"Developer").
The First Amendment extends the contract deadlines, including the dates for closing, start
of construction and final completion of the Agreement which obligates the Developer to invest
$49,000,000 in development costs toward the construction of certain Minimum Improvements as
defined in the Agreement on certain real property located within the City -University Urban
Renewal Area as defined and legally described in the Agreement and Amendment. Said land is
currently owned by the City of Iowa City and will be conveyed to The Chauncey, L.L.C.
pursuant to said Development Agreement. The project is expected to consist of a 15 -story mixed
use building with Class A office space, a hotel, a bowling alley, two movie theatres, residential
condominiums, and upgrades to the Chauncey Swan Park, together with related site
improvements, all designed and constructed to at least LEED Silver standards, as detailed in the
proposed Development Agreement. Once the construction is complete, the building will have a
$30,128,234 minimum property tax assessment. In exchange for construction of this project, the
agreement contemplates that the City will convey land to the Developer for the appraised value
of $1,870,000, as well as any easement rights necessary to accommodate the project at the
appraised value. The agreement also contemplates that the City will make a $14,187,250
economic development construction grant, paid through the use of tax increment financing and
reinvestment of the proceeds from the sale of the property and easement rights. The City also
intends to acquire five one -bedroom condominium units from the Developer for $1,000,000 once
the project is complete, which the City will own and maintain for affordable housing.
A copy of the Amendment is on file for public inspection during regular business hours
in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, City of Iowa City, Iowa.
At the above meeting the Council shall receive oral or written comments from any
resident or property owner of said City, to the proposal to enter into the Agreement with the
Developer. After all comments have been received and considered, the Council will at this
meeting or at any adjournment thereof, take additional action on the proposal or will abandon the
proposal to authorize said Amendment.
This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, as
provided by Section 364.6 of the City Code of Iowa.
Dated this 4th day of December, 2015.
Marian K. Karr
City Clerk, City of Iowa City, Iowa
� t I CITY OF IOWA CITY
..ui�1r.�
�--� -� MEMORANDUM
Date: November 25, 2015
To: City Council
From: Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attomey
��,
Re: Amendment to Chauncey Development Agreement
12
Previously distributed 11-30-15 #3
As has been reported in the press, Trinity Episcopal Church has appealed the decision of the
Johnson County District Court rejecting Trinity's challenge to the City Council's rezoning of the
property at the comer of College and Gilbert streets to CB -10. Attached is a letter from the
Developer's attorney requesting an amendment to the agreement to extend the various
deadlines, including the sale of the property, start of construction and completion of
construction, due to the delays caused by Trinity's lawsuit. Approval of the proposed
Amendment will take two council meetings. The Developer has asked that the setting of the
public hearing take place at the Council meeting on November 30.
The proposed Amendment has the deadlines running from the date of the resolution of the
litigation, rather than the date of the Agreement. For example, the current agreement requires
construction to commence within one year from the date of the Agreement. The proposed
Amendment would require commencement of construction within one year of the "trigger date'
which is defined to be "the date on which a final appellate decision is issued in' the Trinity
lawsuit. Because the delays have not been caused by the Developer, staff concurs with the
proposed Amendment and has placed a resolution setting a public hearing on the proposed
Amendment for December 15, 2015 on your agenda for November 30. While the setting of a
public hearing is normally on the consent agenda, this will be a separate item due to Council
member Throgmorton's recusal based on conflict of interest.
Please give me a call if you have questions.
Cc: Tom Markus, City Manager
Geoff Fruin, Ass't City Manager
Marian Karr, City Clerk
Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Ass't City Attorney
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE RED VELOPMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
(this "First Amendment") is made as of ';{"First Amendment
Trigger Date"), by and betwpen THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, a municipality
("City"), and THE CHAUNC Y, L.L.C., an Iowa limited liability company ("Redeveloper").
RF.f 1TAT,C
WHEREAS, City and R developer are parties to that,`certain Agreement For Private
Redevelopment dated Trigger as f May 27, 2015 (the "Agreement") in connection with the sale
to and redevelopment by Redevel er of the property generally located at the northeast corner of
South Gilbert Street and East Coll a Street in Iowa City,' Iowa, legally described on Exhibit A
attached hereto (the "Redevelopme t Property"); and
WHEREAS, the parties
NOW, THEREFORE, in cc
agreements contained herein, and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknc
agree to a*nd the Agreement as set forth herein.
VW1
4' of the premises and the mutual covenants and
od and valuable consideration, the receipt and
the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Incorporation of Recitals. �' The foregoing recitals are incorporated herein as if
set forth in their entirety. The capitalized to s used herein shall have the meanings ascribed to
them in the Agreement. /
2. Trigger Date Defined: A newS tion 0.5 shall be added to Part I the Agreement,
which Section shall read as follow/sl: "The parti agree that the phrase "the Trigger Date of this
Agreement", as used herein, shill be the date o which a final appellate decision is issued in
Iowa Appellate Case Number 1,6-1946 (captioned `Trinity Episcopal Church v. City Council of
Iowa City")."
3. Extension of'Dates. The following time frames and/or dates set forth in the
Agreement are hereby extended as follows:
(a) Financing Contingency Section 2(j) of Part I of the Agreement is
amended to read as follows (with additions indicated by nderline, and deletions indicated by
striledffeugh):
The Redeveloper shall proceed with due dilig ce to obtain construction
financing commitments, which commitments sh 1 be sufficient to enable
the Redeveloper to successfully complete the Mi 'mum Improvements as
coptemplated in this Agreement. Redeveloper wi obtain all financing
cimmitments necessary for the construction of the Minimum
Improvements prior to the issuance of a foundation rmit or the City's
issuance of bonds, whichever is earlier, but in no event Mer than one year
from the date -Trigger Date of this Agreement, and provide a copy of such
commitments to the City by such date. This agreement is contingent upon
Redeveloper obtaining financing upon terms and conditions satisfactory to
Redeveloper and City, and shall be a condition precede to the City's
conveyance of the Property t -Redeveloper in accordanc with Section 6
herein. In the event such ancing is not obtained by R#developer within
one year from the date -Tri er Date of this Agreement,�edeveloper or the
City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement.
(b) Abstract of Title. e first two sentences of Section 3(d) of Part I of the
Agreement are amended to read as follows with additions indic ed by underline, and deletions
indicated by st�etkough):
The City, at its expense, shall
property continued through tf
examination by the Redevelop
Redeveloper within 30 calen
Agreement, after which the P
examine same and issue a vrel
rovide an Abs#act of Title on the subject
deTrier ate of this Agreement, for
r. The City hall deliver said Abstract to
days of he fie -Trigger Date of this
I
veloper shall have 30 calendar days to
ii a y title opinion.
(c) Time for Commencement 1
Section 4 of Part I of the Agreement is amended t
underline, and deletions indicated by strip
The construction of the Proji
commence not later than one (I
Agreement, and shall be subst V
mpletion of Minimum Improvements.
as follows (with additions indicated by
I Minimum Improvements shall
from the die -Trigger Date of this
completed on or before Deeember
(d) Progress Reports and Time for Submission of Construction Plans. Section
5(a) of Part I of the Agreement is amended to read a follows (with additions indicated by
underline, and deletions indicated by st4e gk):
Redeveloper will keep.' the City informed regarding the status of the
project by responding,'to inquiries from rep esentatives of the City and
furnishing progress reports as reasonably r uested, but not less than
quarterly during construction. Redeveloper a ees to provide to the City
schematic design development drawings showi preliminary floor plans,
elevations and related information, particularly th regard to the bowling
alley and movie theatres, no later than 180 cale ar days after the date
Trigger Date of this Agreement. No formal respons will be required from
the City to these design development drawings. Th City, however, will
alert Redeveloper to any known code violations or oth r design issues that
would impact /lie acceptance of the Construction Plan The time within
which the Rgdeveloper shall submit its initial Construc 'on Plans to the
City in any event, pursuant to Part II, Article III hereof, s 11 be not later
than 270 calendar days from the Trigger Date of this eement for
the site preparation and foundation plans; 365 calendar days from the date
Trigger Date of this Agreement for the structural and shell construction
plans; and 480 calendar days from the date-Trie Date of this Agreement
for the finish construe ' n plans. Within 30 calendar days of each
submittal, the City hall review and appro a or rej ect and make
recommendations fo corrections to said Con ruction Plans. The City's
review of said Cons ction Plans shall be b ed on the Urban Renewal
Plan, all applicable co es and any additional equirements imposed on the
Redeveloper under this greement.
(e) Time for Submi ion of Evidence hf Financing Ability. Section 5(e) of
Part I of the Agreement is amended to r d as foll/imum
h additions indicated by underline, and
deletions indicated by str�il��):
Prior to conveyance of the Properteveloper or issuance of bonds,
whichever is earlier, but i no evr than one year from the date
Trigger Date of this Agree ent, theloper shall submit to the City
evidence satisfactory to th City Redeveloper has the financial
ability and commitments ,for cion and mortgage financing
necessary for construction o� the MImprovements, as provided in
Sections 301 and 20) hereof. }
(f) Time and Place for C16siVg and Delivga of Deed. Section 5(f) of Part I of
the Agreement is amended to read as foll s (with additions indicated by underline, and
deletions indicated by stfikethfo g ):
If the conditions precedent//to losing set forth in Section 6 have been
satisfied, the City shall," deli Or Deed and possession of the
Development Property to'the Re eveloper on or before one (1) year from
the d�Trigger Date of this Agr menteseted, or on such other date
as the parties hereto may mutuall agree in writing (the "Closing Date");
provided, however, that in the ev t the conditions precedent to closing
have not been satisfied, either the 'ty or Redeveloper may terminate this
Agreement or waive or extend the ti e for satisfaction of such conditions
precedent. Conveyance of the Deed s 11 be made at the principal office of
the City on the Closing Date and t e Redeveloper shall accept such
conveyance and pay to the City at such ime and place the Purchase Price
in immediately available funds.
(g) Conditions Precedent to Convey
the Agreement is an
deletions indicated by
to read as follows (with
TORO):
,f Property. Section 6(b) of Part I of
itions indicated by underline, and
The Redeveloper shall have submitted to the CitX those Construction Plans
due within 270 calendar days from the Trigger Date of this
Agr ement pursuant to Part I, Section 5(a), and s 11 have been approved
by he City Part II, Article III of this Agreement. a Redeveloper shall
have submitted to the City a certification that the plans are in compliance
with the Urban Renewal Plan.
(h) Minimum Assessment Agreements.
i. The in oductory paragraph o Section 7(c) of Part I of the
Agreement is amended to read as fol ows (with additions in icated by underline, and deletions
indicated by stfikedffetigh):
it will not cause adc
property taxes are paid
multi -use structure gener
and Uses shown on Exhi
taking into consideration
reduce the taxable value o
of January of the year in
amount of $30,128,234 of
"roll -backs" which would
the Completion Date ("
on in the taxa a valuation upon which real
th respect
to
Project, which consists of a
y consistent with the Minimum Improvements
it D, below e amount of $16,345,771 after
ny factors ch as "roll -backs" which would
the Prope as of J 1, 1419Lhe first day
hich the om letion Date falls, and below the
taking into consideration any factors such as
duce a taxable value of the Property as of
of Ja uary of the vear immediatelv following
imum Actual Value") through:
ii. Paragraph 1 oA Yxhibit H attached to the Agreement (the Minimum
Assessment Agreement) is amended to readVas follows (with additions indicated by underline,
and deletions indicated by str-ikedifeugh):
As of jafmafy 1, thdfirst day of Januga of the year in which the
Completion Date falls, p al assessment shall be made fixing the
minimum actual taxabl value or assessment purposes for the land and
Minimum Improvemeq s to be nstructed thereon by the Redeveloper at
not less than $16,345 ('771 after t ing into consideration any factors such
as "roll backs" whi h would re uce the taxable value of the property
("Minimum Actual slue").
iii. Paragraph 2 of Exhibit H attached to the Agreement (the Minimum
Assessment Agreement) is amended to read as folws (with additions indicated by underline,
and deletions indicated by ):
As of jaffuafy 1, N49the first day of ai
following 9IL6 Completion Date, a full ass
minimum actual taxable value for assess
Minimum ihnprovements to be constructed
not less than $30,128,234 after taking into
as "roll backs" which would reduce the
("Minimum Actual Value"). The parties I
that construction of the Minimum Impro
completed on or before Deeember- 3 1-; z -m
✓ of the year immediate)
tit shall be made fixing the
purposes for the land and
eon by the Redeveloper at
>ideration any factors such
ble value of the property
acknowledge and agree
en will be substantially
iv. Schedule Y, which is attached to Exhibit H of the Agreement (the
Minimum Assessment Agreement), is amended by adding the following paragraph immediately
following the payment table:
The payment dates set forth on this Schedule Y sha be adjusted according
to date on which constru on of the Project is su tantially completed. By
way of clarification, the on
date for parti 1 assessment (based on a
valuation of $16,345,77 shall be the first da of January of the year in
which construction of t e Project is subst tially completed, and the
beginning date for full asssment (based o a valuation of $30,128,234)
shall be the first day of January of the year immediately following
substantial completion of co struction of t Project.
V. The introductoportion paragraph 1 of Exhibit I attached to the
Agreement (the Minimum Assessment Agr ment fo the Park@201 property) is amended to
read as follows (with additions indicated by derline and deletions indicated by strike#ffeugh):
As of
first
in the Chauncey Agre/d2
a
minimum actual taxabfo
703 and 1302 at 201 as in
501, 502, 601, 701, 70 2 cIowa, according to thetionBook 519, Page 481, s of ttogether with said unitst inDeclaration, at theingconsideration any fach astaxable value of the pr"Mir.
vi. Para aph 1 of
Memorandum of Agreement for Yrivate Rede
additions indicated by underline,,And deletions i
onstruction of the Project, as set forth
assessment shall be made fixing the
>essment of Units 501, 502, 601, 701,
Dn Street, legally described as Units
Park@201 Condominium, Iowa City,
,ereof recorded December 23, 2013 in
Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa,
common elements as defined by the
essed values, after taking into
r11 backs" which would reduce the
Actual Value"):
J attached to the Agreement (the
.) is amended to read as follows (with
)y stfilegl}):
That the recor ing of this Memorand
Redevelopme shall serve as notice tot e
contains pr isions restricting Red eve
Redevelop nt Property and the improvem
such Rede elopment Property, and further
Property a Minimum Assessment Agreer
authority of Iowa Code Chapter 403, in
Redeve per (and any successors or assigns)
8th first day of January of the vear ir.
of Agreement for Private
public that the Agreement
)ment and use of the
its located and operated on
bj ects the Redevelopment
nt entered into under the
hich the City and the
a ee that, as of jaffuar-y 1,
which construction of the
Project{ is substantially completed, a partial asse sment shall be made
fixing the minimum actual value of the Redevelop,
edevelop ent Property and all
improvements located thereof for calculation of real operty taxes at not
less than $16,345,771 after taking into consideration factors such as
"roll -backs" which would reduce the taxable
that, as of januafy 1, 29Wthe first day of Janu
Ara tion of the Project, a full
ni imam actual value of the
ements located thereof for
s than $30,128,234 after taking
-backs" which would reduce the
tain condominium units located
icated to particular uses.
assessment shall be
Redevelopment Prol
calculation of real pro
into consideration an
taxable value of the
within The Chauncev
made fixing the
ierty and all im.
iXrty taxes at not
factors such as "rc
roperty; and that
Development be
4. Extensions. None o the
Agreement shall be construed to Jimi
contemplated or permitted pursuant to the
5. Miscellaneous.
(a) Except as here
in full force and effect in accordance
(b) This First Ame
negotiations or understandings between
ue of the property, and
foregoin amendments to the dates set forth in the
t or pr Jude any other extensions of such dates
terms of the Agreement.
ified and amended, the Agreement shall remain
s and is hereby ratified and confirmed.
supersedes any prior representations, offers,
;s with respect to the subject matter hereof.
(c) This First Amendment may be signed by the Parties in counterpart and
shall be binding as if signed together. , Fac le or electronic copies of the signed counterparts
shall be deemed to be authentic and valid as an riginal of this First Amendment.
[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE g INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK;
SIGNATURE PAS FOLLOW.]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this First Amendment as of the First
Amendment Effective Date set forth above.
Approved by:
STATE OF IOWA )
COUNTY OF JOHNSON )
On this day of
County, personally appeared Matthew J
who being duly sworn, did say that they
Iowa City, Iowa, a Municipal Corporati
Iowa, and that the seal affixed to the
Corporation, and that said instrumen
Corporation by authority and resolu 'or
acknowledged said instrument to b the
voluntarily executed.
CITY:
CITY OF IOWA CITY,/IOWA, a municipality
By:
Matthew J.
ATTEST:
By:
K. Karr, City Clerk
the
fore
Mayor
2015, before me a Notary Public in and for said
and Marian K. Karr, to me personally known,
ayor and City Clerk, respectively of the City of
ed and existing under the laws of the State of
o g instrument is the seal of said Municipal
was sig d and sealed on behalf of said Municipal
s of its 'ty Council and said Mayor and City Clerk
free act deed of said Municipal Corporation by it
Notary PubXc in and for the State of Iowa
First Amendment to Agreement for Private Redevelopment — Signature Page
STATE OF IOWA
COUNTY OF JOHNSOT
This instrument
by Marc B. Moen, as Me
REDEVELOPER:
First Amendment to Agreement for Private Redevelopment — Signature Page
Lots 5, 6, and
Iowa.
EXHIBIT A
Iowa City,
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
(this "First Amendment") is made as of , ("First Amendment
Trigger Date"), by and between THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, a municipality
("City"), and THE CHAUNCEY, L.L.C., an Iowa limited liabiliti company ("Redeveloper").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, City and Redeveloper are parties to tha certain Agreement For Private
Redevelopment date Trigger as of May 27, 2015 (the "Agree ent") in connection with the sale
to and redevelopment y Redeveloper of the property genera y located at the northeast corner of
South Gilbert Street an East College Street in Iowa City, wa, legally described on Exhibit A
attached hereto (the "Re velopment Property"); and
WHEREAS, the parti\ando
ee to amen the Agreement as set forth herein.
EEME
NOW, THEREFOREon of a premises and the mutual covenants and
agreements contained hereiood d valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereb, the arties hereto agree as follows:
1. Incorporation of Recitals.
set forth in their entirety. The capitalized
them in the Agreement.
foregoing recitals are incorporated herein as if
ised herein shall have the meanings ascribed to
2. Trigger Date Defined. A n# Section .5 shall be added to Part I the Agreement,
which Section shall read as follows: "T parties agre that the phrase "the Trigger Date of this
Agreement", as used herein, shall bete date on whin a final appellate decision is issued in
Iowa Appellate Case Number 15-194 (captioned "Trinit Episcopal Church v. City Council of
Iowa City")."
3. Extension of Dz
Agreement are hereby extended
(a) Finan(
amended to read as follows
strikedifough):
( The following time
follows:
ontingencY Section 20)
additions indicated by unc
and/or dates set forth in the
art I of the Agreement is
, and deletions indicated by
The Redev oper shall proceed with due diligence to o tain construction
financing ommitments, which commitments shall be su tient to enable
the Red eloper to successfully complete the Minimum rovements as
cont plated in this Agreement. Redeveloper will obtain all financing
co itments necessary for the construction of the Minimum
'l t' 2015 I provements prior to the issuance of a foundation permit or e City's
issuance of bonds, whichever is earlier, but in no event later than one year
from the Trigger Date of this Agreement, and provide a copy of such
commitments to the City by such date. This agreement is contingent upon
Redeveloper obtaining financing upon terms and conditions satisfactory to
Redeveloper and City, and shall be a condition precedent to the City's
conveyance of the Property to Redeveloper in accordance with Section 6
herein. In he event such financing is not obtained by Redeveloper within
one year fr the �e Trigger Date of this Agreement, Redeveloper or the
City shall hive he right to terminate this Agreement.
(b) Abstract o Title. The first two sentences of ection 3(d) of Part I of the
Agreement are amended to read as ollows (with additions indicated/by underline, and deletions
indicated by strip):
The City, at its expense, shall provide an Abse
property continued throuNi the dateTrigger I
examination by the Redev Loper. The City A
Redeveloper within 30 cal dar days of the
Agreement, after which the 4developer shal,
examine same and issue a ureli inary title ordr
(c) Time for Commencement
Section 4 of Part I of the Agreement is amended t
underline, and deletions indicated by stFikedwough):
act of Title on the subject
ttV of this Agreement, for
I deliver said Abstract to
Trigger Date of this
have 30 calendar days to
follows (with additions indicated by
The construction of the Project Minimum Improvements shall
commence not later than one (1) ye fr m the date -Trigger Date of this
Agreement, and shall be substantia y cAsfter
eted on or before Deeemb
3',�the date which is three ethe Trigger Date of this
Agreement(hereinafter referred t as "the CoVpletion Date").
(d) Progress Rgports and Tie for Submissi n of Construction Plans. Section
5(a) of Part I of the Agreement is amend to read as follo s (with additions indicated by
underline, and deletions indicated by ):
Redeveloper will keep t City informed regardNg the status of the
project by responding to inquiries from representat es of the City and
furnishing progress rep rts as reasonably requested, but not less than
quarterly during cons ction. Redeveloper agrees to ovide to the City
schematic design dev opment drawings showing preli 'nary floor plans,
elevations and relate information, particularly with reg d to the bowling
alley and movie the fres, no later than 180 calendar da s after the date
Trigger Date of this greement. No formal response will required from
the City to these sign development drawings. The City, however, will
alert Redeveloper o any known code violations or other design issues that
would impact th acceptance of the Construction Plans. The time within
which the Rede eloper shall submit its initial Construction Plans to the
City in any ev t, pursuant to Part II, Article III hereof, shall be not later
than 270 cal. dar days from the date -Trigger Date of this Agreement for
the site preparation and foundation plans; 365 calendar days from the date
Trigger Date of this Agreement for the structural and shell construction
plans; and 480 calendar days from the date-Trigger Date of this Agreement
for the finish construction plans. Within 30 calendar days of each
sub 'ttal, the City shall review and approve or reject and make
reco endations for corrections to said Construction Plans. The City's
review o said Construction Plans shall be based on the Urban Renewal
Plan, all a licable codes and any additional requirements imposed on the
Redevelope under this Agreement. ,
(e) Time for Submission of Evidence of Financing Abilit . Section 5(e) of
Part I of the Agreement is ame ed to read as follows (wi additions indicated by underline, and
deletions indicated by ):
Prior to conveyance of the Property to
whichever is earlier, ut in no even
Trigger Date of this A Bement, the
evidence satisfactory to the City t
ability and commitme s for c nsi
necessary for construction f the inii
Sections 301 and 20) hereo
Redeveloper or issuance of bonds,
later than one year from the date
developer shall submit to the City
the Redeveloper has the financial
ruction and mortgage financing
num Improvements, as provided in
(f) Time and Place for ClAsihg and DelivM of Deed. Section 5(f) of Part I of
the Agreement is amended to read as foil ws (with additions indicated by underline, and
deletions indicated by str�e�):
If the conditions precedent to cl sing set forth in Section 6 have been
satisfied, the City shall deliver the Deed and possession of the
Development Property to a Redev loper on or before one (1) year from
the date Tri er Date of is Agreem tis-exes�rted, or on such other date
as the parties he/eh
mutually a e in writing (the "Closing Date");
` provided, howevin the event t conditions precedent to closing
have not been saither the City o Redeveloper may terminate this
Agreement or wxtend the time fo satisfaction of such conditions
ji C' w+ precedent. Convf the Deed shall b ade at the principal office of
the City on the Date and the R eveloper shall accept such
conveyance ande City at such time d place the Purchase Price
in immediately afunds.
(g) Condit' ns Precedent to Conveyance of Apperty. Section 6(b) of Part I of
the Agreement is amended to read as follows (with addition indicated by underline, and
deletions indicated by ):
The Re/devoper shall have submitted to the City tho Construction Plans
due w270 calendar days from the date—Trigger Date of this
Agreemrsuant to Part I, Section 5(a), and shall have been approved
by theart II, Article III of this Agreement. The Redeveloper shall
have submitted to the City a certification that the plans are in compliance
with the Urban Renewal Plan.
(h) Minimum Assessment Agreements.
i. The introductory paragraph of Section 7(c) of Part I of the
Agreement is ame ded to read as follows (with additions indicated by underline, and deletions
indicated by ):
it will n t cause a reduction in the taxable valuation upon which real
property t es are paid with respect to t Project, which consists of a
multi -use st cture generally consistent w' the Minimum Improvements
and Uses sho n on Exhibit D, below t e amount of $16,345,771 after
taking into con ideration any factors s ch as "roll -backs" which would
reduce the taxabl value of the Propert as of the first day
of Janu of the ar in which the C m letion Date falls, and below the
amount of $30,128, 4 after taking ' to consideration any factors such as
"roll -backs" which w uld reduce t e taxable value of the Property as of
iaiivar-y 1, the firs day of J ary of the year immediately followin
the Completion Date ("A\sessorYMinimum Actual Value") through:
ii. Paragraph 1 f FAhibit H attached to the Agreement (the Minimum
Assessment Agreement) is amended to rea s follows (with additions indicated by underline,
and deletions indicated by str-iledifeiagh):
As of the first day of Jar
Completion Date falls, partial assessm
minimum actual taxable alue for ssessn
Minimum Improvement to be const cted
not less than $16,345,7 1 after taking ted as "roll backs" whic would reduce e
q ' ("Minimum Actual V lue").
iii. Para aph 2 of Exhibit H att
Assessment Agreement) is amen ed to read as follows
and deletions indicated by ):
um or the year in wmcn the
ent shall be made fixing the
lent purposes for the land and
thereon by the Redeveloper at
consideration any factors such
taxable value of the property
I to the Agreement (the Minimum
additions indicated by underline,
As of the first da of Januar of the year immediate)
followin the C m letion Date, a full assessmen shall be made fixing the
minimum actu taxable value for assessment pu oses for the land and
Minimum Imp vements to be constructed thereon y the Redeveloper at
not less than 0,128,234 after taking into considera on any factors such
as "roll back "which would reduce the taxable va ue of the property
("Minimum ctual Value"). The parties hereto ackn wledge and agree
that const tion of the Minimum Improvements wil be substantially
completed n or before Deee-z8the date which is three years
after the rigger Date of the Agreement for Private Redevelonment.
iv. Schedule Y, which is attached to Exhibit H of the Agreement (the
Minimum Assessment Agreement), is amended by adding the following paragraph immediately
following the payment table:
The payment dates set forth on this Schedule Y shall be adjusted according
to to on which construction of the Project is substantially completed. By
way f clarification, the beginning date for partial assessment (based on a
valuate n of $16,345,771) shall be the first day of January of the year in
which c nstruction of the Project is substantially completed, and the
beginning ate for full assessment (based on valuation of $30,128,234)
shall be th first day of January of the ear immediately following
substantial co pletion of construction of th Proiect.
V. e introductory portion of paragraph I of Exhibit I attached to the
Agreement (the Minimum Asses ment Agreement fo the Park@201 property) is amended to
read as follows (with additions indi ated by underline and deletions indicated by stfikethfough):
As of afiva"` • 1, 24 Othe first day /of January of
in the Chauncey A eem t, a fu assessment shall be made fixing the
minimum actual taxable va a for ssessment of Units 501, 502, 601, 701,
703 and 1302 at 201 East sh gton Street, legally described as Units
501, 502, 601, 701, 703 and 1 of Park@201 Condominium, Iowa City,
Iowa, according to the Declarat n thereof recorded December 23, 2013 in
Book 519 Page 481, Records o the Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa,
together with said unit's inter st in he common elements as defined by the
Declaration, at the follo ing sessed values, after taking into
consideration any factors uch as " 11 backs" which would reduce the
taxable value of the prope ("Minim Actual Value"):
vi. Paragrap 1 of Exhibi J attached to the Agreement (the
Memorandum of Agreement for to Redevelopmen is amended to read as follows (with
additions indicated by underline, andeletions indicated bX st6kefl eugh):
That the recordin of this Memorandum of Agreement for Private
Redevelopments 11 serve as notice to the ublic that the Agreement
contains proves' ns restricting Redevelop ent and use of the
Redevelopment roperty and the improvements ocated and operated on
such Redevelo ment Property, and further subj is the Redevelopment
Property to a inimum Assessment Agreement tered into under the
authority of Iowa Code Chapter 403, in whic the City and the
Redeveloper (and any successors or assigns) agree t t, as of �;
20.1$the fir t da of Janu of the year in which nstruction of the
Project is substantially complete , a partial assessme t shall be made
fixing th minimum actual value of the Redevelopment roperty and all
improv ents located thereof for calculation of real property taxes at not
less than $16,345,771 after taking into consideration any factors such as
"roll -backs" which would reduce the taxable value of the property, and
that, as of the first day of January of the year immediately
following substantial completion of construction of the Project, a full
assessment shall be made fixing the minimum actual value of the
Redevelopment Property and all improvements located thereof for
c ulation of real property taxes at not less than $30,128,234 after taking
into onsideration any factors such as "roll -backs" which would reduce the
taxabl value of the property; and that certain condominium units located
within Chauncey Development be dgdicated to particular uses.
4. Extensions\None of the foregoing endments to the dates set forth in the
Agreement shall be cons d to limit or precl de any other extensions of such dates
contemplated or permitted purs ant to the terms of t e Agreement.
5. Miscellaneous.
(a) Except as herei above mo ified and amended, the Agreement shall remain
in full force and effect in accordance w h its t s and is hereby ratified and confirmed.
(b) This First Amend a supersedes any prior representations, offers,
negotiations or understandings between the b&ties with respect to the subject matter hereof.
(c) This First Amendm t ay be signed by the Parties in counterpart and
shall be binding as if signed together. Fa simil or electronic copies of the signed counterparts
shall be deemed to be authentic and valid s an ori 'nal of this First Amendment.
[THE REMAINDER OF TH PAGE IS I TENTIONALLYLEFT BLANK,
SIGN URE PAGES OLLOW.]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this First Amendment as of the First
Amendment Trigger Date set forth above.
BY CITY:
CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, a municipality
'C�
By:
Ma ew J. Hayek, Mayor
Approved by:
ATTEST:
Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
STATE OF IOWA )
COUNTY OF JOHNSON )
On this/instrument
of , 2015, before me a Notary Public in and for said
County, personaare Matthew J. Hayek and\dd
Karr, to me personally known,
who being duly d ay that they are the Mayorlerk, respectively of the City of
Iowa City, Iow' ipal Corporation, created under the laws of the State of
Iowa, and thataffixed to the foregoing iis the seal of said Municipal
Corporation, anaid instrument was signed on behalf of said Municipal
Corporation by andresolutions of its Cityd said Mayor and City Clerk
acknowledged sment to be the free act andi Municipal Corporation by it
voluntarily exec
Notary Public in and for the tate of Iowa
First Amendment to Agreement for Private Redevelopment — Signature Page
STATE
COUN'
by Mar
REDEVELOPER:
THE CHAUNCEY, L.L.C., an Iowa limited
liability company
tuber
)f , 2015,
e State of Iowa
First Amendment to Agreement for Private Redevelopment — Signature Page
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY
Lots 5, 6, and the West 160' of the 20' wide alley, all in Block 43, Original Town, Iowa Citv.
Iowa.
Publish 11/12
NOTICE OF PUBLICATION ON ARESOLUTION 1) APPROVING THE COMPETITIVE
CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR DISPOSITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED
WITHIN THE CITY -UNIVERSITY PROJECT I URBAN RENEWAL AREA; 2)
DETERMINING THAT THE OFFER SUBMITTED BY HSI, L.L.C. SATISFIES THE
OFFERING REQUIREMENTS AND DECLARING THE INTENT OF THE CITY TO ENTER
INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR THE SALE OF LAND FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
WITH HSI, L.L.C. IN THE EVENT THAT NO COMPETING PROPOSALS ARE
SUBMITTED; 3) SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED CONVEYANCE;
AND 4) SOLICITING COMPETING PROPOSALS.
WHEREAS, the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, has heretofore adopted and amended the City -
University Project I Urban Renewal Plan (the "Plan") for the Urban Renewal Project Area
described therein (the "Project Area"); and
WHEREAS, such Plan, as amended, provides for the disposition of properties, among other
things, for the purpose of improvement and sale of publicly -owned property for private
redevelopment as a proposed renewal action; and
WHEREAS, HSI, L.L.C., an Iowa limited liability company, has submitted to the City an offer
for the acquisition of certain property located within the Project Area (the "Property") for
redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, in order to establish reasonably competitive bidding procedures for the disposition
of the Property in accordance with the statutory requirements of Iowa Code Chapter 403,
particularly Section 403.8 (2015), and to assure that the City extends a full and fair opportunity
to all potential redevelopers interested in submitting a proposal, the City has established
Competitive Criteria for the Property offering, as set forth herein; and
WHEREAS, HSI, L.L.C. has executed and tendered to the City a purchase agreement titled
"Purchase Agreement by and between the City of Iowa City and HSI, L.L.C.", attached hereto as
Exhibit B, contingent upon the execution of a Developer's Agreement for the redevelopment of
the subject property and the adjacent "Mod Pod" property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
IOWA CITY, IOWA:
1. The following described property, subject to survey prior to conveyance, shall be offered
for disposition for redevelopment in accordance with this Resolution and the Plan, as
amended:
The N 60' of Lot 1, Block 102, Original Town, Iowa City, Iowa, except the N 37'
of the E 55' of Lot 1.
2. It is hereby determined that the disposition price of the Property, for outright purchase of
the same, shall not be less than its fair market value for use in accordance with the Plan.
This Council has previously retained a qualified independent appraisal firm to determine
the fair market value of the Property. If any additional work needs to be performed to
finalize such value, the City Manager is directed to obtain such final appraisal or review
appraisal.
3. It is hereby determined that in order to qualify for consideration for selection, each
Redeveloper must submit a proposal that conforms with the following Competitive
Criteria:
a. Include and provide for the purchase of the Property at not less than the amount of
the fair value thereof for use in accordance with the Plan;
b. Include a statement of intent to enter into an Developer's Agreement for the
redevelopment of the Property and the property locally known as 301 S. Dubuque
Street, Iowa City, Iowa, (the N 37' of the E 55' of Lot 1, Block 102, Original
Town, Iowa City) as a cohesive project in conformance with the Plan;
c. Include a written commitment for permanent financing or provide through other
means acceptable to the City similar demonstrative evidence of the financial
capacity of the redeveloper to timely commence and complete the proposed
redevelopment activities;
d. Set forth the nature and extent of the experience in carrying out projects of similar
scale and character had by the principals and key staff who will be directly
engaged in the performance of the contract.
4. Each proposal submitted that satisfies the Competitive Criteria established herein, as
determined by the City, shall be reviewed on the basis of the strength of such proposal.
5. The proposed Purchase Agreement (Exhibit B) be and the same is hereby approved as to
form for the purpose of defining an acceptable offering of the Property for redevelopment
and shall be deemed illustrative of the minimum proposal acceptable to the City.
6. It is hereby determined that the Purchase Agreement satisfies the requirements of the
offering and, in the event that no other qualified proposals are timely submitted, the City
intends to enter into said Agreement.
7. It is hereby determined that HSI, L.L.C. possesses the qualifications, financial resources
and legal ability necessary to acquire and redevelop the Property in the manner proposed
by this Resolution and in accordance with the Plan.
8. It is hereby determined that the price for the Property offered by HSI, L.L.C. is not less
than the fair value thereof for uses in accordance with the Plan and is hereby approved.
9. The City Clerk shall receive and retain for public examination the Purchase Agreement
and, in the event no other qualified proposals are timely submitted, shall resubmit the
same to this Council for final approval and execution upon expiration of the notice period
hereinafter prescribed.
10. Passage of this resolution be considered to be and does hereby constitute notice to all
concerned of the intention of this Council, in the event that no other qualified proposals
are timely submitted, to accept the proposal of the Redeveloper to acquire and develop
the Property and to enter into said Agreement.
11. The Official Notice of this offering, the City's intention to enter into this Agreement in
the event that no other qualified proposal is timely submitted, and public hearing shall be
a true copy of this Resolution, but without the attachments referred to herein. All of said
attachments shall be on file for public inspection at the office of the City Clerk, 410 E.
Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826.
12. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to secure immediate publication of said
Official Notice in the Iowa City Press -Citizen, a newspaper having general circulation in
the community, not less than 30 days prior to the deadline for submission of proposals
pursuant to this Resolution.
13. Written proposals for the sale and redevelopment of the Property will be received by the
City Clerk before 9:00 a.m. on December 14, 2015. Said proposals shall be submitted to
the City Clerk's office at 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826. Each
proposal will then be publicly opened at 10:00 a.m. on that same date. Said proposals will
then be presented to the City Council at a regularly scheduled meeting not less than 30
days after the publication of the notice described in Paragraph 12 above.
14. A public hearing on said proposals, including that submitted by HSI, L.L.C., should be and
is hereby set for December 15, 2015, at 7 p.m. in Emma J. Harvat Hall at City Hall, 410 E.
Washington St., Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the
City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk.
15. The Property shall be competitively offered for sale on the terms and conditions set for
the herein and such offering shall be in substantial conformance with the provisions of
Iowa Code Section 403.8(2)(2015), requiring "reasonable competitive bidding
procedures" as the same are herein prescribed, which method is hereby determined to be
the appropriate method for making the Property available for redevelopment.
16. The City Clerk is hereby nominated and appointed as the agent of the City to receive
proposals for the sale of the Property according to the deadlines and procedures herein
specified and to proceed at such time to formally acknowledge receipt of any such
proposals. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to make a preliminary
analysis of each proposal timely submitted for compliance with this the competitive
criteria established herein and Iowa Code Chapter 403, and to advise the Council with
respect thereto. The Council shall judge the strength of the proposals and shall make the
final evaluation and selection of a proposal.
17. In the event another qualified proposal is timely submitted and deemed in the public
interest and in furtherance of the purpose of Iowa Code Chapter 403, another and further
notice shall be published expressing the City's intention to enter into the resulting
successful contract, as required by law.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK