The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2017-12-05 Public hearingb r--1CITY OF IOWA CITNIsa MEMORANDUM Date: November 30, 2017 To: City Council From: Mike Tharp, Airport Operations Specialist Re: REZ17-0000 South Gilbert Street and McCollister Blvd. Sandhill Preserve Introduction: During the City Council meeting on November 21, 2017 several comments were made in reference to the Iowa City Municipal Airport as it related to the proposed rezoning request by Southgate for Sandhill Preserve. This memo attempts to address those comments that were made during the meeting. History/Background: Southgate has submitted a rezoning request based on a proposed development at the Gilbert St and McCollister Blvd intersection. The proposed development would create high-density, single-family and low-density multi -family structures with between 9 and 11 units per acre on the site. The development is situated directly on the Runway 30 approach, approximately 1 mile from the runway 30 end. Runway 30 has an instrument approach published with weather minimums of 500 feet for altitude, or 1 mile visibility. These are the minimum conditions that must exist for a properly equipped aircraft to attempt to land on that runway end during poor weather conditions. The runway is a part of the secondary runway and has a landing distance of 3900 feet (limiting larger aircraft). This runway is primarily used by twin engine turbo -prop aircraft with rare use by small business jets when the winds are strong and favorable to the runway. The primary runway by comparison has a maximum landing distance of 5002 feet (Runway 7). Issue #1 Obstructions The proposed buildings and other structures (light poles, etc.) would need to submitted to the FAA for the obstruction evaluation process due to the proximity to the airport. This occurs as part of the building permit process. A building permit cannot be issued until the FAA determines that the development poses no hazards. Airport staff does not anticipate any aspect of the proposed development being given a "determination of hazard to air navigation" by the FAA because the tallest proposed structures are approximately 40-45 feet. The floor of the Runway 30 Approach Overlay zone is approximately 100 feet above ground level over the proposed development area closest to the airport, with increasing heights at a 1:34 ratio (1 foot up for every 34 feet horizontal) the further east the development area extends. Therefore, the floor exceeds the height of the tallest building by approximately 55-60 feet. Issue #2 Land use in proximity to airports FAA grant assurances (i.e., the conditions of grants) include mandates that the City "take appropriate action, including the adoption of zoning laws, to the extent reasonable, to restrict the use of land next to or near the airport to those uses that are compatible with normal airport operations." 49 U.S.C. § 47107(a)(10). The City of Iowa City has adopted and implemented an airport zoning code which does restrict development that would negatively impact airport operations near the airport. City planning staff have also taken airport considerations into account during planning development (Riverfront Crossings, Camp Plans updates as recent examples) as those plans have been developed or updated. It is expected that airport considerations will continue to be included when appropriate plans are updated. November 30, 2017 Page 2 The primary concern with this development in relation to the airport is noise generated by the regular operations of the airport. A similar situation already exists with the neighborhood to the northwest of the airport. However, unlike the northwest neighborhood, the instrument approach on Runway 30 enables continued use during poor weather conditions. Noise complaints could potentially increase as development occurs. Airport staff does not believe this proposed development would have negative impacts to airport operations given the nature of the runway (secondary) and a similar condition existing to the northwest which has existed for many years now. Issue #3 Fuel Pricing Aviation fuel is managed and sold by the Fixed Based Operator (FBO), a private company, which does business at the airport. The Airport Commission does not dictate the price of the fuel sold. There are two fuel types available at the Iowa City Airport, Jet -A and 100 -LL aviation gasoline (Avgas). Both fuels are available via a self-service kiosk (similar to gas stations), or delivered directly from a fuel truck owned and operated by the FBO. A survey of Airnay.com (a website used commonly by pilots for getting airport related information such as available fuel prices) shows that prices found at Iowa City are close to average within 50 miles of the airport. Iowa Cedar Marion Washington "Site Shown Avg. (only Citv Rapids based on fuel type) 1001 -1 -Self Service $4.70 $4.10 $4.20 $3.96 $4.77 10OLL Full Service $5.20 $6.27 $4.20 Jet -A Self Service $3.70 $3.35 $2.71 $3.94 Jet -A Full Service $4.20 $6.655 price per gallon, missing data point means option not available at location prices shown as of 11/27/2017 as reported by airnay.com 'Average price is across all airports within 50NM of IOW as shown on airnay.com 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 21st day of November 21, 2017, 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 conditionally rezoning approximately 21.79 acre of property from Interim Development Multifamily (ID -RM) zone to Low Density Multifamily Residential (RM -12) zone located north and south of the intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard. (REZ17-00001) 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. Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk c ll,�l1i� fh� �rplh ci.; h STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Sarah Walz Item: REZ17-00001 Date: October 19, 2017 Preserve at Sandhill GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Southgate Developers 775 Mormon Trek Blvd. Iowa City, IA 52246 319-339-9320 Contact: Mark Seabold Shive Hattery 2839 Northgate Drive Iowa City, IA 52245 319-354-3040 mseabold@shivehattery.com Requested Action: Rezoning from ID -RM to RM -12 Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: To allow a mix of attached housing and multi -family housing Property east of South Gilbert Street, north and south of McCollister Boulevard 21.79 acres Vacant, ID -RM North: Single -Family Residential (OPD -5) and Sand Hill Park (P-1) South: Vacant, County East: Single -Family Residential OPD -5 West: Vacant (CC -2) and City Public Works (P-1) September 14, 2017 October 30, 2019 The applicant, Southgate Developers, has requested a conditional rezoning for 21.79 acres of land from Interim Development Multi -family (ID -RM) to Low -Density Multi -family (RM -12) at the intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard. The applicant has indicated a desire develop the properties with a mix of row house and townhome-style multi -family units and small to medium size multi -family buildings—four-, eight- and twelve-plexes. The submitted concept plan shows a total of 196 dwelling units. Open space to accommodate stormwater management and a small park is located between the single-family neighborhood on McCollister Court and the new development with Preserve Way proposed as a single -loaded street north of McCollister Blvd. An extension of Covered Wagon Drive, south of McCollister Boulevard, would also be a single -loaded street with the area to the north providing stormwater detention for an existing subdivision. A pedestrian street at the center of the development provides connection between Gilbert Street and the established The applicants held an open house on October 10 to introduce their concept. Property owners within 300 feet of the proposed rezoning were invited to attend. ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Plan: The subject properties are located in the South Planning District. The Comprehensive Plan (South District Plan) designates these properties as appropriate for Low to Medium Density Mixed Residential with Multi -family housing along both the north and south side of McCollister at the intersection with South Gilbert Street. The plan describes "Low to Medium Mixed Residential' as follows: "Intended for medium- to high-density single family residential development, including small lot detached single family units, zero lot line development, duplexes and townhouses. Suitable for sites where a single loaded street is desirable to provide visibility and access to public open space or where clustering is desirable to protect sensitive environmental features. Low density multi -family structures may also be considered if buildings are designed in a manner that is compatible in scale and design to the lower scale residential buildings in the neighborhood (e.g. triplexes, four-plexes, or six-plexes). Higher density housing should be located at the edges of neighborhoods, principally in areas with good street connectivity, access to open space or parks, trails, and transit." [page 52, South District Plan] The "New Residential Development' section of the plan calls for compact and connected neighborhoods, integrating a variety of housing types to serve residents at the various stages of life, with a mix of multi -family and attached housing in areas along busier street frontages or in areas bordering open space. The additional density is, in part, intended to improve the feasibility of transit service and enhance market potential for nearby commercial areas. The plan refers to "Missing Middle" housing types that are similar in scale and character to single-family detached housing—ranging from duplexes and triplexes to smaller multi -family apartment buildings. The plan calls for blocks and buildings of exceptional design to maintain an attractive residential character along streets and provide safe and inviting living environments for residents. The plan encourages and landscaped front yards or courtyards with parking located to the rear of building to enhance the park like setting and to encourage walking and biking. The applicant has proposed a concept plan that includes a variety of attached and multi -family housing types arranged in a block pattern that is walkable in scale and integrated with adjacent streets. The concept includes a pedestrian street that connects into the neighborhood trail system and preserves open space and includes common green space within the central blocks to serve as an amenity for the residents. The concept shows transitions from lower density—a mix of townhome style units and four-plexes at its north end to eight-plexes just north of McCollister Boulevard, leading to twelve-plexes along the south property line. An east -west pedestrian street is proposed midway between where Preserve Way and McCollister Blvd. intersect with Gilbert St. The pedestrian street provides access from the existing neighborhood trail through the center of the proposed development to Gilbert Street. The pedestrian street will be treated as a public street in terms of setback and orientation of buildings, location and screening of adjacent parking areas, and required lighting and landscaping. The pedestrian street must conform to standards for pedestrian streets provided in the Riverfront Crossings Plan. Current Zoning: The purpose of the Interim Development Zone (ID) is to provide for areas of managed growth in which agricultural and other non -urban uses of land may continue until such time as the City is able to provide City services and urban development can occur. The Interim Development Zone is the default zoning district, to which all undeveloped areas should be classified until City services are provided. Upon provision of City services, the City or the property owner may initiate rezoning to zones consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended. The current ID zoning allows only limited uses, such as agricultural uses by right, so a rezoning is necessary to allow development of this property. Proposed Zoning: The purpose of the Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -12) zone is to provide for the development of high density, single-family housing and low density, multi -family housing. This zone is intended to provide a diverse variety of housing options in neighborhoods throughout the city. Careful attention to site and building design is important to ensure that the various housing types in any one location are compatible with one another. The applicant is seeking a conditional rezoning from Interim Development Multi -family (ID -RM) zone to Low Density Multi -family (RM -12) zone in order to allow for the development of a concept plan with a mix of multi -family uses, including 12-plexes, 8 plexes, 4-plexes, and townhouse style multi -family buildings. The area north of McCollister Blvd. contains 13.9 acres (12.8 acres net) with 109 units of housing (9 units/acre net). The area south of McCollister Blvd. contains 7.9 acres (6.4 acres net) with 87 dwelling units shown (11 units/acre net). The applicant has indicated a desire to limit the number of units north of McCollister Blvd to no more than 115 units. No such density restriction is proposed for area south of McCollister. More than one fifth of the units (22%) north of McCollister Blvd. are one -bedroom units with the remaining being two-bedroom units. South of McCollister Blvd. more than a quarter of the units are one -bedroom units (27%). Given the growth in the student housing market, even in locations some distance from the university campus, staff recommends limiting the development to one - and two-bedroom units, which provide more affordable housing type and adds to the diversity of housing options available in this part of the South District. The applicant has indicated that the concept plan relies on waivers of the principal building setback standards along McCollister Blvd. (reducing the 40 ft setback from arterial streets to 25 ft.) and along Preserve Way and Covered Wagon (reducing the setback for multi -family structures from 20 ft to 15 ft). Waivers will be requested through Planned Development (OPD/RM-12). Compatibility with the Neighborhood: The proposed development is set at a slightly lower elevation than existing single-family homes on McCollister Court. The concept plan shows a single loaded street that, in combination with the open space area set aside for stormwater detention, provides more than 100 feet of separation between the existing single-family development the proposed development. South of McCollister Blvd., a stormwater basin to the east of Covered Wagon provides additional separation between single-family and multi -family uses. Townhome and row house style multi -family buildings along with three four-plex buildings line Preserve Way, facing toward the existing single-family housing on McCollister Court. Higher density multi -family units are placed near the intersection of Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard, and at the interior of the development, along the pedestrian street. Row house type multi -family buildings line both sides of McCollister Blvd. transitioning to eight- and twelve- plexes to the south. The proposed row house style units have detached garages located immediately to the rear. Surface parking for the townhomes and other apartment buildings is located at the center of the each block and must be set behind the front face of the buildings and screened from view of the public street or pedestrian street. The concept plan shows compliance with these requirements except for two small areas of parking on lots 1 and 2, where parking areas do not appear screened from Gilbert Street. These areas would need to be screened from view, a low wall or fence is recommended in order to define the private space. The proposed concept shows some detached garages within each parking area, however these are not immediately adjacent to the dwelling units. The applicant has indicated that the concept focuses on the property's location close to Trueblood Recreation Area, access to the regional bike trail system along with the ample open space within and surrounding the development to attract residents who, perhaps, are less reliant on cars or for whom open space is a higher priority than sheltered or attached parking. Both the RM -12 zone and the South District Plan call for careful attention to site and building design. In order to achieve higher density development and acceptance of higher density housing types, the plan calls for "exceptional building design." This is emphasized in areas that provide the entrance to the central neighborhoods along McCollister Blvd. and in areas adjacent to Trueblood Recreation Area. The plan notes the substantial public investment in the surrounding trail system, parks, and the new south elementary, which have set the stage for higher quality development in this area of the South District. While the applicant has proposed a "modern farmhouse" style, neighbors have expressed concern with the design of the buildings in terms of their lack of variation and articulation across so many buildings and blocks. The uniformity in design of the various buildings types across the 5 -block development area reduces the sense of diversity of housing envisioned in the concept and does not, in the view of staff, complement the character and diversity of housing styles in the adjacent neighborhood. Staff has not reviewed detailed plans for the buildings as part of, however concepts are shown with the application and were presented at the neighborhood open house. All buildings are required to meet the multi -family design standards. Staff recommends the following additional standards to ensure that the proposed multi -family housing types are similar in character to single-family detached housing and provide a thoughtful transition to the existing single-family neighborhood. • Building entrances: Buildings must be oriented to the street (including the pedestrian street) with the street facing fagades featuring a main entrance. The multi -family standards recommend that the main entrance be designed a with a canopy, pilasters and pediments, or transom windows. Staff recommends that all building entrances include awnings or other protection from weather as the concept plan does not provide attached or covered parking for all units. This will also provide additional articulation to the buildings (see below). • Building articulation: In the RM -12 zone, street facing walls that are greater than 50 feet in length must be articulated with bays, recesses, or projections. For attached single- family housing, the code stipulates that when 4 or more units are attached, the units must be articulated through various changes in building material (brick, stone or other masonry material) and/or by distinguishing each unit architecturally through a change in street facing wall -plane with a corresponding job in the roofline. Given the number of multi -family buildings proposed for the site, greater articulation seems appropriate to mimic or complement the diverse character of nearby single-family housing. Staff recommends that townhome and row house -style units meet the design feature standards in the zoning code. Building design: The design standards for attached single-family units require eaves of no less than 12 inches. This articulation would complement the adjacent single-family 5 neighborhood and reduce long-term maintenance for roofs and siding material in our climate. Staff recommends that all buildings follow the standards for eaves as well as the Central Planning District guidelines with regard to trim elements. These elements in combination with the requirements for entrance awnings can help to provide additional articulation and are not inconsistent with the agrarian vernacular that is inspiration for the development. • Building designs to be approved through design review. • Buildings should be constructed of durable, high quality building materials. The standards in table 2G-8 of the Riverfront Crossings Form -based Code will serve as a reference. • Given the location of the property, adjacent to Sand Prairie Park and Trueblood Recreation Area, staff recommends that landscape screening be designed to complement the prairie landscape that characterizes these open spaces. The applicant should rely on guidelines provided by the Johnson County Recommended Plant List provided by the Bur Oak Land Trust. We have relied on this standard in other areas adjacent to permanent natural open space. Traffic Implications: South Gilbert Street is a north -south arterial street, designed to accommodate high traffic volumes across the city, providing a connection to the Downtown and University campus. McCollister Boulevard is also designated as an arterial, providing connections to Mormon Trek Blvd. and Old Highway 218/Riverside Drive to the west. A planned eastward extension of McCollister Blvd. to S. Sycamore Street is schedule in the 2018-2019 Capital Improvement Program, with construction in 2019. Most vehicle traffic from the proposed development will likely travel on Gilbert to and from the Downtown/campus area and commercial areas on Highways 6 and 1 or west on McCollister to 218 or Riverside Drive. Until such time as the McCollister Blvd. extension is completed, some portion of east -west vehicle traffic will rely on Langenberg Avenue, a residential street for which traffic calming measures (speed humps) have been installed. Transit service is not currently available to this location, though the extension of McCollister may increase the opportunity for service. A 2016 traffic study determined that a traffic signal or roundabout is warranted at the intersection of South Gilbert St. and McCollister Blvd. due to crash history and peak hour delays. The City has also received numerous complaints from regarding pedestrians having difficulty crossing the intersection to access Trueblood Recreation Area. An improved intersection will be included in the McCollister extension project. An ongoing study of the Gilbert Street corridor also indicates that the portion of the roadway, south of Highway 6, may be appropriate for a road diet. A four- to three- lane conversion could improve the overall safety of the roadway and provide opportunity for pedestrian refuge islands making it easier for pedestrians to cross. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of REZ17-00001, to conditionally rezone from Interim Development Multi -family (ID -RM) to Low Density Single-family (RM -12) for 21.79 acres of property located adjacent to the intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard, subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with the concept plan submitted with regard to street and block layout (including pedestrian street), building types, building locations, location of surface parking areas and covered parking, location and size of open spaces, and sidewalk and trail connections. 0 The proposed pedestrian street must meet the standards for pedestrian streets provided in 11 the Riverfront Crossings Plan. • Townhouse and row house style multi -family buildings must comply with the attached single- family housing standards for entrances and design in the zoning code. • Eaves and window and doorway trim will be required on all buildings according to the attached -single family housing standards. • Building designs to be approved through design review. • Buildings shall be constructed of durable, high quality building materials. • Landscaping must comply with recommended plant list provided by the Johnson County Recommended Plant List provided by the Bur Oak Land Trust. • Overall density of the development should not exceed • 115 units north of McCollister Blvd., 20% of which should be one -bedroom units—the remainder being 2 -bedroom units. • 90 units south of McCollister Blvd., 25% of which should be one -bedroom units—the remainder being 2 -bedroom units. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Concept Plan 3. Correspondence Approved by: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services P1 „V 6 OPOIRS12 P1 P1 Pi An application submitted by Southgate Developers for a rezoning of 21.88 acres located west of Gilbert St. along McCollister Blvd from Interim Development -Multifamily Residential (ID -RM) to Low Density Multi -family Residential zone with a Planned Development overlay (OPD -12). t r � Jim wr®�er� P7 Rs5- Pi RSS P1 P1 — RS8 N�O��oa .o•se♦1 M ` OPD5 R&8 al Sj • - ' SEA WPN ti IDfiM � .,ear s„tea".ai.r..'-'t..rt "� �' MO M T. ....M GENGERG-- . IDRM 1, 1 � �pp y l4 P1 i I South District Plan Map Clmmnly Zgned lmm�n, oe.eaon�.lxnesryloron _�.. lfkrMedlom DeeMRy ShWamily Restledal ,n4 asen W.'M m ere Sano DMMJ FImbEernwenedllw Dedlry MMeE ReelJerMlel. InwMedkrm DensRy Mhed Resklaltlel 1Te [pns. W GIMn eM Mcfglllele.le InEIdIM 11 Me SOum DIa1M1 Flan ro Ice M:ddF.may ftwomRy ■ �IIIffIBllBI W Cey'e Ca m dent goal e me npralle —T,M rs Mixed Vse/NeWorhood mmmerclel menage a m 9n by enwlne W9 � aM mnneeled cfthbmnonds- Meed me Cormrorehll O Sogm Dlabl t pbn hn defined mle area IN en aa,ommly br 1. to madam deneM boueing, •..OPpodunHlen lar bwnbomee, d.Plexee. and ■ schoolamesery epadmenls, es well m mM4/amly bulldinge m aver ro Saye resleenn mmngl+am md. mmlme:- Pbbk Park /Open space �, is prlr.eeopanspaye/semnlveAree 011ier Poblk Prop" Rbtork Roperly /N\ SOUTH DISTRICT PIAN MAI' PRESERVE SANDHILL COMPANIES te IUwnr nr. one. SHVEHATTERY GENERAL CONCEPT SITE PLAN - PARKING .ANALYSIS PRESERVE SANDHILL row>CrrY, KIWA µ --• Ttall Pedestrian Sheet � elghtWrtohbothoad park Protected Trail Crosah� Tre w '��' Prolrle.Bufler Exlsang Landsnzping Buffer on>cnonen- R, n qn inn Mnq grwgmanlq gggnmm�ooee.wuy.N Mre eM n n". niem�moem v�>:en<®s.mnm se.Xeropeae e 1 i ninpmG nmrewwnele, kmNen.nN amgy neeM>Imnnp 1 M 1 >Iln. mmm ertltlerX ep.mL •,. a mgvenee muX�Igm�N nunar,q as>gw el»wker>.emer. ne.luy '+//37laPe n>mnnM c�nlnn. rnn ngXenm>ro.rt on mee++.ge a�ne>Men.vwn.ne sulwm veMlgR emq> nqn n,om vmm amen emnq, TM mmo�owmn¢ Inlnrnd vdn Ipa sue Tragn w9e ^+�� b lMi Ew Me preMe � M nmenl,l� a �nner�ea neYjnlMwve. Rep ry nne Wner peserv.n Pe n.nnelp( mmemoq � cmron ..11 ,ry �Xm s'—' 11 1 s -d wa saem wyweeeee.mwnu. ��` e4nngpe pn>u of mMemnmh wmea mm�m lwgre Yanp m.M p.q.Ang M waM eoeegm. Ic hMXb�.I lw,e rq,m>Wneiw> Tne.Fnge 4 rwcogeomimmm ne.e enn, o. sea eer�me.rona Mgq.p>�ee to nreintnnm m,.lyebe. a 'b rrW-60-1] .••yti.`I. qnw 4 b . +u�.w - Preserve Way from 20' to 15' ' w.•wr.ew Covered Wagon Drive from 20' to 15' \\\ salnr�.rre qtr ralwrru. ' e xae�.rrW� from RM -12 allowed 200 units `'•� �Q , .MRerr.. i.a t ^t • '.aP,y.. " los'• _ ' � ✓ a � rrarrr )MV 4w. �• "€ r- GENERAL CONCEPT SITE PLAN - PARKING .ANALYSIS PRESERVE SANDHILL row>CrrY, KIWA µ --• Ttall Pedestrian Sheet � elghtWrtohbothoad park Protected Trail Crosah� Tre w '��' Prolrle.Bufler Exlsang Landsnzping Buffer on>cnonen- R, n qn inn Mnq grwgmanlq gggnmm�ooee.wuy.N Mre eM n n". niem�moem v�>:en<®s.mnm se.Xeropeae e 1 i ninpmG nmrewwnele, kmNen.nN amgy neeM>Imnnp 1 M 1 >Iln. mmm ertltlerX ep.mL •,. a mgvenee muX�Igm�N nunar,q as>gw el»wker>.emer. ne.luy '+//37laPe n>mnnM c�nlnn. rnn ngXenm>ro.rt on mee++.ge a�ne>Men.vwn.ne sulwm veMlgR emq> nqn n,om vmm amen emnq, TM mmo�owmn¢ Inlnrnd vdn Ipa sue Tragn w9e ^+�� b lMi Ew Me preMe � M nmenl,l� a �nner�ea neYjnlMwve. Rep ry nne Wner peserv.n Pe n.nnelp( mmemoq � cmron ..11 ,ry �Xm s'—' 11 1 s -d wa saem wyweeeee.mwnu. ��` e4nngpe pn>u of mMemnmh wmea mm�m lwgre Yanp m.M p.q.Ang M waM eoeegm. Ic hMXb�.I lw,e rq,m>Wneiw> Tne.Fnge 4 rwcogeomimmm ne.e enn, o. sea eer�me.rona Mgq.p>�ee to nreintnnm m,.lyebe. a 'b K8111019 11* from RM -12 ZRIADQ reamrements 4 b 1 - Revise building setback along McCollister Boulevard from 40' to 25- 5'2- 2-Revise building setback along - Preserve Way from 20' to 15' ' 3- Revise building setback along Covered Wagon Drive from 20' to 15' \\\ 4 - Restrict density on north site to 115 units from RM -12 allowed 200 units va.rr IY1f.LW .Mir rs�.rr.r.r.. rr.arrrr•rrryr� w OSGUthGate co HsAares SHIVEHATTC—RY t - - 'Rall gxtenalan/ Pedestrian Street l Nqhtlp Park Prootested Poll hall Cray.9Mg/Traffic`xCgl Pralft By ter r >: -. ' Ezisting Landscaping Buller ryv,rMww«e ' wrr.a.Yrs rr e YMz. zeYYr-maw` i'_ •..'.) i s�lar� �•a�� T�� } `3�1 I 'YarllWb�LwI. YVaayw>• - Tl +iwWPaMe/mw.w+ ` a 2;. N r m _ _ t .F • r gyp, /[ r^..i.ibrtYlVeblood , A4y' N r; f.NERALCONCf CT SITZULAN OCTORCR Z�I: NFIGHit(IIt FiOL)1� Mtt PRESERVE SANDHILL " Variations from RM -12 zomna reau'rements ' 1 - Revise building setback along ,* McCollister Boulevard from 40' to 25' .. 2- Revise building oalong Preserve Way fromne 20' 20'to 15' w1 3 - Revise building setback along .r Covered Wagon Drive from 20'to 15' ' 4- Restrict density on north site to 115 units from RM -12 allowed 200 units _ .I YewMm-on-u r!w-ala A IWY-e.MMPUY•Yr,e aYIl+yr..wnavee.wr YYR/eY�.w.. _ Iw+l•YeY�Pe iewlY.iw�PeY�`Y_ 0��+rY�aPa melalgia plrola Maw an eNe.ene.h x-� IDSouthGate c e M PIAN IEi SHIVE ATTGRY oe.crlptlen - Planned arevne IM idea of w Naele oa000r pnaa murtyacl"add ,a. -.lash, MI&Wm al falese1ad$.ble a-ka In pmvMa c.—bnddn, In young la Wa dneh fdn,fta and amp"esters la&" Ie Me In emaAer mOR dW dd p a vaned mNl4hmly WWI, d Iq are o.. for a amaWr. diary makl nnnal Canto me Wlen ftont nN e M1 a ddan slmele and urmune pe.,.rt and n 1 q 11.1— of The oonaominluma nl cl. Ih. ',I. d1ron,1 I - eowa 1. Imm m. ane.l and-.... vara, a--tal ai,11W,,Ma. de ,I.MaMnq m pla Wot — HN aMeTn pa—tae -1-1 n,—Norof One. 1 _ImTmr bt MRac W, C,1.1 nod p—W.a. Wn.df.n "In Groan Staot In m sand Nn Eamlaa Nal,bbomnnd bayma { ' � A.l pl v W. I WIM. roam MaN aklng ma.IaWA.g f -nn mbnlc lneilblbllTafNme NnWe a—.1 •tw .- and Wes. d,./euna, emWndl MaMla.lea, Iwa—dI bead I..ddnfm.d. Woo C,Ind.rnluma naveeterbr strata and Newaro MmalMnq e{amala T!3"F lna lmeanr �mrame " Variations from RM -12 zomna reau'rements ' 1 - Revise building setback along ,* McCollister Boulevard from 40' to 25' .. 2- Revise building oalong Preserve Way fromne 20' 20'to 15' w1 3 - Revise building setback along .r Covered Wagon Drive from 20'to 15' ' 4- Restrict density on north site to 115 units from RM -12 allowed 200 units _ .I YewMm-on-u r!w-ala A IWY-e.MMPUY•Yr,e aYIl+yr..wnavee.wr YYR/eY�.w.. _ Iw+l•YeY�Pe iewlY.iw�PeY�`Y_ 0��+rY�aPa melalgia plrola Maw an eNe.ene.h x-� IDSouthGate c e M PIAN IEi SHIVE ATTGRY View 1 looking east down Presence Way View 3 • looking west down PedesMan Walkway Vhw a -kinking east.,long wUln stela nl pmnodp GENERAL CONCEPT BUILDING IMAUES - OCI'OBt..R ZOi7•NEI6HBORIIOOn MEETING SouthGate PRESERVE SANDHILL °°M°•aIE= �uwa cnv. mw'n SHIVC-FIATTEFZY Vint• S Radar snnfnmacl d�nnr 6•.. 1, i onf n prean space c]I."FRN.I. CONICEN BUILDING IMAGO UCTUBER ?00 NER.HKIrf-KN IP N;! -. PRESERVE SANDHILL . •,. is .. .p... a,. r SoLdhGate COMPANIES SHIVCHATTERY mwtem !urrn house demnc 9 commmmmum infer(m neighborhood park I � j�Ago .:. - •� ` sG DESIGN IMAGERY PRESERVE SANDHILL OCOMP Gale urwncnY. KIM SHIVC-FM=---RY t 4 �A ArRIAI VIEW- CKa0liEit2017 \Pit!iGURHVUU "!.I.TIM" ®Sm iGate COMPANIES P R F r,E RV F S A N D H 1 L L SHIVCFIATTC--RY ,!� pl�Nllllllll�ll�u yp 6. ll I t �ifdd� ■ h _ 'I' I •si I I I — � I —�� y�I�p�' ur � ull 01 V I �4r1� 1II�IIrIlWomlll4ll�1� Ymud I I�NgIg�p0u.�l� �- m in n SII_ al,krl -1- ..... L i � ppm I) I�Illlo� III 1 III �I T �,rY 1p 'I�� n u � I— lllrmnunn (VIIII �I � riillll rlilll III. 1 Illi n0lllll d�lp�l�lll illl II Illlllnmmumrm• L`J� I 14II�I ,' _ IIIIIII 'll II n rra mr IIVIIII Gj wll nn m m II inn mi mnmi — n Illlllrlopo im• ;;'r�l�llII illllrlll -� _ - _ - IIII Sarah Walz From: glennlynn2006@yahoo.com Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 5:53 PM To: Sarah Walz Cc: kalpal2@brentopalmer.com; ahachtman3@yahoo.com;joleah-show@uiowa.edu Subject: Re; Sandhill Estates Rezoning Hi Sarah. The "Good Neighbor" meeting will be our 3rd or 4th that has been held. I can speak forthe neighborhood because we have had so many meetings already. We were told by Southgate after the first round of meetings that they would entertain duplex/zero lot style housing which was well received by the neighborhood. At the last meeting, an entirely different concept was proposed. Not well received. I was told by Southgate that the city is pushing this development style. No one here wants this type of development. No one. Not sure what the meetings accomplish other than to tell us what you plan to do. it will negatively Impact our property values. The townhouse concept will be cheap homesthat attract neighbors we don't want. And when they don't sell, they will be rented attracting the same, I will certainly he at the meeting and will he front and center in fighting this development any way I can. Glenn Sarah Walz From: Shaw, Joleah A <joleah-shaw@uiowa.edu> Sent: Friday, October 06, 201710:00 AM To: Sarah Walz Cc kalpal2@brentopalmer.com; ahachtman3@yahoo.com; glennlynn2006@yahoo.com Subject: RE: [Extemall Re: Sandhill Estates Rezoning Hello Sarah.... My name is Joleah Shaw .... and I am the secretary of the Sandhill Estates Homeowners Association. I was unable to attend the re -zoning meeting. However, I can assure you that Glenn is speaking for our entire neighborhood. The last presentation of condos/townhouses did not go over well at the last "good neighbor" meeting and that Is to put it quite mildly. The residents have been even more vocal about their opposition during HOA meetings and general conversations between the residents/neighbors of Sandhill Estates. It's to our understanding that all of the other "parts" of Sandhill Estates will be single family homes and we were all originally presented with the idea that the newest additions to Sandhill Estates near Gilbert Street would be the same or would be zero lot/duplex units. The most recent plans of condos/townhouses/apartment buildings seems to be a very "UN -INVITING" entrance to our neighborhood with large parking lots, large garages, and garbage dumpsters. As you can Imagine we are having a difficult time in figuring out how these multi -unit buildings would fit into our homeowner's association. Clearly our HOA rules and covenants would not "fit" these new additions.... especially if they are multi -unit buildings and eventually become rental property. I am confident in saying that I speak for most of our HOA that we are wanting the new development near Gilbert Street/McCollister Blvd to remain uniform with the rest of our neighborhood as single family homes ... or at the very least zero lot/duplexes. I too will make every effort to attend the "good neighbor" meetings. Thank you I -Joleah Shaw 785 McCollister[t Iowa City, IA 52240 319-321-9025 Sarah Walz From: Sue Gnewuch <Isgnewuch@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 9;25 AM To: Sarah Walz Subject: Preserve@Sandhill Hi, Sarah. Thanks for the Information you were able to provide at our neighborhood meeting last night. We realize that this project will go forward in the near future, but were wondering if we have any input in the asethetics of the design of the buildings. We think that in order to preserve our property values, that is a concern for us. The pictures appear to show very inexpensive units and don't seem to us to represent the neighborhood look. Any recommendations about what to do with our concerns? Thanks in advance! Sincerely, Sue and Loren Gnewuch 720 McCollister Ct Iowa City, IA 52240 Bob Miklo From: Richard Stapleton <rich.stapleton73@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 7:34 PM To: Bob Miklo Subject: Zoning Meeting 10/19 Dear Mr. Milklo, I am writing to you as my wife and I are unable to attend the Zoning meeting on 10/19/2017. We are strongly opposed to the rezoning proposal by SouthGate. We do not wish any new homes, especially multi -family homes to be built in the proposed area until the city provides us along with our neighbors with a solution to the traffic concerns in our neighborhood. As it is, it is nearly impossible to cross Gilbert from McCollister Blvd during morning and evening rush hour. The traffic cutting through on Langenberg is horrible. There have been several times when I have nearly been hit by cars crossing the road or stopping to get the mail. We believe this issue should be resolved and home should be built on the current empty lots before any rezoning is considered. Sincerely, Richard Stapleton and PooraniSekar 1153 Langenberg Ave. Iowa City, IA 52556 (641)233-8959 MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 19, 2017 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Jodie Theobald MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo, Jann Ream, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Seabold, Jerry Waddilove, Glenn Lynn, Joleah Shaw, Heidi Zahner, Robert Domsic, Kevin Engleberg, Richard Arthur, David A. Morales, Doug Brown, Pat McAllister RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 3-3 (Signs recused; Freerks, Dyer, Martin voting against approval) the Commission failed to recommend approval of REZ17-00001, to conditionally rezone from Interim Development Multi -family (ID -RM) to Low Density Single-family (RM -12) for 21.79 acres of property located adjacent to the intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard, subject to the conditions listed in the Staff Report. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of amendments to City Code Sections 14 -5B -4E, Illumination Requirements, City Code Section 14-5B-8A&B, Signs permitted in Interim Development, Overlay Planned Development, and Residential zones. CALL TO ORDER: Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. ---,' REZONING ITEM (REZ17-00001) Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Developers for a rezoning of approximately 21.79 acres from Interim Development -Multi -family (ID -RM) zone to Low Density Multi -family (RM -12) zone located north and south of the intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard. Signs recused himself from this item to avoid conflict of interest. Walz began the staff report showing an aerial view of the location. She also showed a map of the surrounding zoning. The current zoning of the location is ID -RM, which is a default zone; once the required utilities and roads have reached a location it is then considered Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 21 appropriate for rezoning. Across the street there is a small CC -2 zone for future commercial use; along the river is mostly publicly zoned property (parkland property, streets department, parks and recreation department, and the Sandhill Prairie Park preserve area). There is a developed portion of Sandhill Estates to the east however the only connection east/west from Gilbert Street to Sycamore Street is Langenberg Avenue (until McCollister Boulevard is completed) which led to more traffic on Langenberg Avenue than was anticipated and planned for. McCollister Boulevard will be extended in the near future and that will provide the east/west arterial street that is needed. The Applicant has requested a conditional rezoning for the 21.79 acres to RM -12 zone (Low -Density Multi -family) intended to provide for high density, single-family housing or low density multi -family housing. It is intended to provide diverse housing options in neighborhoods throughout the City. The description in the Code mentions that careful attention to site and building design is important to ensure that various housing types in any one location are compatible to on another. The Applicant would like to build a mix of multi- family uses which include a variety of more traditional multi -family buildings (4-plexes, 8- plexes, and 12-plexes), and also townhome or row house style housing. The area north of McCollister Boulevard has 13.9 acres of land with 109 units proposed on that portion. The area south of McCollister Boulevard is 7.9 acres with 87 dwelling units for a total of 196 units as shown in the concept plan. Walz noted that more than one-fifth of the units (about 22% north of McCollister Boulevard) are proposed as one -bedroom units and south of McCollister Boulevard the number of one -bedroom units is 27% and the remaining are two- bedroom units. This information is relevant given that the current student housing market extends well beyond what is thought of as traditional student housing area. One- and two- bedroom units are typically desirable by a more diverse population, including empty - nesters, retirees, or young working professionals. Walz also pointed out that the concept plan shows preserved open space on the property between the existing single-family neighborhood along McCollister Court and also open space retained within the new development for the enjoyment of the new development as well. A proposed road, Preserve Way, would provide a 26- or 28- foot wide single -loaded street, north of McCollister. Open space is preserved between the single-family housing and the proposed development. Walz noted there would also be an extension of Covered Wagon Drive and Preserve Way also extends south. Additionally the concept features a pedestrian street, which helps break the subdivision into five walkable areas keeping the vehicle parking for each area in the center of each area. A pedestrian streets is appropriate in this area because along an arterial street the block lengths are longer. A pedestrian street is treated like a roadway in regard to building setbacks, lighting, street trees, etc. Walz stated the South District Plan shows the area at the intersection of McCollister Boulevard and Gilbert Street as appropriate for multi -family housing on either side of the street surrounded by low to medium mixed residential. Low to medium mixed residential means a variety of residential including small lot detached single-family units, zero lot line development, duplexes and townhouses. Higher density housing should be located at the edges of neighborhoods, principally in areas with good street connectivity, access to open space or parks, trails, and transit. The "New Residential Development' section of the plan calls for compact and connected neighborhoods, integrating a variety of housing types to serve residents at the various stages of life, with a mix of multi -family and attached housing in areas along busier street frontages or in areas bordering open space. The additional density is, in part, intended to improve the feasibility of transit service and enhance market potential for Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017—Formal Meeting Page 3 of 21 nearby commercial areas. The plan refers to "Missing Middle" housing types that are similar in scale and character to single-family detached housing -ranging from duplexes and triplexes to smaller multi -family apartment buildings. The plan calls for blocks and buildings of exceptional design to maintain an attractive residential character along streets and provide safe and inviting living environments for residents. Walz acknowledged that she has answered an number of phone calls over the past few days about "Missing Middle" housing types and the City is in the process of going through a "Missing Middle" plan process. Currently is no form -based code to govern missing middle development and it is not anticipated to be complete for a few years. The "Missing Middle" provides a variety of housing that is not being seen in newer neighborhoods. What the Applicant has provided are examples of the "Missing Middle" housing concepts, smaller block sizes, framing the streets with houses, having the parking to the rear, and very pedestrian oriented. How this proposal differs from what would be included with the form - based code is the "Missing Middle" housing types would be on their own individual lots with their own parking provided on each, whereas in this case the housing is all on one property with centralized the parking within block. Freerks commented that "Missing Middle" should also include single-family homes. Walz said that is sometimes correct, however in this case the parcel of land is somewhat uniquely shaped and the row homes or townhouses fill in the area. In the larger picture, this concept is intended to transition the single-family area to the east. Walz stated that in terms of compatibility with the neighborhood the adjacent single-family development is at somewhat of a higher elevation. The Applicant has tried to create a transition between the neighboring houses with the open area and with the single loaded street fronting the housings on the street. The Applicant has also designed buildings with a smaller footprint trying to stay similar in the scale to the larger single-family homes in the neighborhood and breaking up the roof lines to not make the buildings not so out of character with the single-family homes. Walz reiterated that the South District Plan does call for "exceptional building design" and the Applicant has proposed a "modern farmhouse" style about which staff did have some concerns. The designs will need to meet the multi -family standards because these are all multi -family buildings and also Staff believes the row house and townhouse buildings should meet the standards the City would use for the true single-family attached housing in order to make them more compatible with the single-family housing nearby. Staff therefore has included conditions in their recommendations to address those things. Walz noted that in conversations she has had with neighbors who have called into the City part of the concern is the uniformity of the proposed housing across the site that doesn't seem to reflect the variety of housing designs in the existing neighborhood. Staff believes it can work with the developer to create a better transition through design and the multi -family design standards should help with that. The additional standards Staff recommends are listed in the Staff report. Lastly, Walz addressed the traffic implications and acknowledged the Commission has received a few letters regarding traffic in the area. Traffic concerns also came up at the open house that the applicant hosted. South Gilbert Street is a north -south arterial street, designed to accommodate high traffic volumes across the city, providing a connection to the Downtown and University campus. McCollister Boulevard is also designated as an arterial, providing connections to Mormon Trek Boulevard and Old Highway 218/Riverside Drive to the west. A Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 21 planned eastward extension of McCollister Boulevard to South Sycamore Street is schedule in the 2018-2019 Capital Improvement Program, with construction in 2019. A 2016 traffic study determined that a traffic signal or roundabout is already warranted at the intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard due to crash history and peak hour delays. The City has also received numerous complaints from pedestrians having difficulty crossing the intersection to access Trueblood Recreation Area. An improved intersection will be included in the McCollister Boulevard extension project. Staff believes most vehicle traffic from the proposed development will likely travel on Gilbert to and from the Downtown/campus area and commercial areas on Highways 6 and 1 or west on McCollister Boulevard to 218 or Riverside Drive. However, until such time as the McCollister Boulevard extension is completed, some portion of east -west vehicle traffic will rely on Langenberg Avenue, a residential street for which traffic calming measures (speed humps) have already been installed. Staff recommends approval of REZ17-00001, to conditionally rezone from Interim Development Multi -family (ID -RM) to Low Density Single-family (RM -12) for 21.79 acres of property located adjacent to the intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard, subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with the concept plan submitted with regard to street and block layout (including pedestrian street), building types, building locations, location of surface parking areas and covered parking, location and size of open spaces, and sidewalk and trail connections. • The proposed pedestrian street must meet the standards for pedestrian streets provided in the Riverfront Crossings Plan. • Townhouse and row house style multi -family buildings must comply with the attached single family housing standards for entrances and design in the zoning code. • Eaves and window and doorway trim will be required on all buildings according to the attached -single family housing standards. • Building designs to be approved through design review. • Buildings shall be constructed of durable, high quality building materials. • Landscaping must comply with recommended plant list provided by the Bur Oak Land Trust. • Overall density of the development should not exceed 0 115 units north of McCollister Boulevard, at least 20% of which should be one - bedroom units -the remainder being 2 -bedroom units. 0 90 units south of McCollister Boulevard, at least 25% of which should be one - bedroom units -the remainder being 2 -bedroom units. Freerks asked if the density would be about 9.3 if all space were used, Walz confirmed that is correct. Freerks asked how long Preserve Way would be. Walz said it fits the standard along an arterial street and the pedestrian street breaks up the long block and is treated as if it were a vehicle street. Freerks asked if all 196 units are housed in multi -family structures and Walz confirmed that is correct. Walz explained they meet the classification for multi -family because although they are townhouse style or appearance they are not on individual lots. Planning and Zoning,Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 5 of 21 Hensch asked about road widths on Preserve Way and the parking implications of each. Walz stated that the City Code Standard denotes the parking allowances based on road width. He supported some parking on the street for visitors. Hensch stated he would then be in favor of stating the road width should only be 26 feet wide therefore allowing only parking on one side and to slow traffic down. Hensch also noted that pictures don't show clearly if all the structures are unique or if there are repeating patterns. He feels it would have more acceptability to the surrounding neighborhood if the buildings had some uniqueness to them and yet still stay with that "farmhouse design". He was concerned that all of the buildings would end up looking the same, like the Keokuk Street apartments or Pheasant Ridge. Ann agreed, stating that she did not feel the designs even met the basic code. Hensch stated that he would be ok with all of the buildings having the same footprint, but that different materials and colors should be used to distinguish the buildings from one another. Ann suggested that they may want to give the developer more time to provide that type of information and that they may want to defer voting on this application tonight. Walz stated that the applicant would be able to address the design questions. Parsons asked if the McCollister Boulevard extension were to be delayed would the City be willing to put a temporary traffic signal at the Gilbert Street intersection. Walz said it is possible to separate out the project but that would be decided by Council with recommendations from the City Engineer. Freerks opened the public hearing Mark Seabold (Shive Hattery) walked through the process they have gone through for this project. They have been working on this project for over a year with Southgate Development and hosted a neighborhood meeting about ten months ago where they received some review comments from the neighborhood and that led them to then go work with Opticos and City Staff. Working with City Staff has been about a nine month process. He began by showing the Commission the original design they started with and how it changed through the process from the input they received. The original intention was to provide a smaller scale of connected residences that were consistent with the growing market of young professionals, empty nesters, and other people looking for smaller scale homes. He attended a tiny -house meeting that Johnson County held and over 100 people were present listening and were very interested in a smaller scale of living and how to accomplish it. Therefore they feel that there is a viable market for homes with a smaller footprint. The other goal of this development was to capitalize on the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area, it is a great amenity in the area with lots of natural features, as well as capitalize on the development at Gilbert and Highway 6. Seabold showed the Commission the original concept plan they presented last winter at the neighborhood meeting. It was comprised of row house units with parking located in-between them, what they were trying to do was have an open front and back of the building, so there would be green views out both sides, public and private green space behind each building. All the homes were two bedroom units and all in the 1000 square foot range with open floor plans on the first floor and two bedrooms on the second floor. In the original plan they also included some more traditional apartments 8-plex and 12-plex buildings to be located south of McCollister Boulevard. With the two-bedroom units there were 344 bedrooms in the concept. Additionally in the original plan they were using the stormwater detention area between the existing neighborhood and this new neighborhood as the buffer zone with the back of their Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 21 homes backing up to the back of these new units. There would still be a minimum of 150 feet between the neighborhoods. Some of the feedback at the original neighborhood meeting Seabold heard was it looked too much like an apartment complex, they didn't like the large parking lots, and the concerns about visibility and traffic. When Seabold then met with City Staff, he heard a lot of the same concerns so they went back to the drawing board. At the same time, the City had hired Opticos to review the Northside and Southside District Plans and Seabold was able to consult with them to get a rough concept of how to incorporate a "Missing Middle" concept for this site, knowing there is a lot of single-family residential adjacent to the area. They then went back and created a plan with a variety of buildings, pushed closer to the streets, and having parking in-between creating the blocks that were shown on the plan. They are still multi -family buildings but at a smaller scale and reflect the residential scale of the neighborhood. So between neighborhood comments, City Staff input, and working with Opticos they came up with a new concept plan (the one currently before the Commission). There are four different styles of units, fronting streets in different ways, and pushed the single loaded street all the way to the east. Seabold addressed Hensch's question about the street width and stated the intention is for it to be a 26 foot wide street with parking only on one side and to control traffic on that street. They then designed the prairie buffer very similar as Opticos suggested as a linear area that is a lush green space reflecting the area and incorporates a public park as an in-between zone. The minimum dimension is now 230 feet from the new buildings to the backs of the existing single- family homes. There is a pedestrian street running down the center of the site to have a more walkable area for not only this development but the extended neighborhoods. There should not be any need for guests to park on McCollister Court, as there will be plenty of parking along the Preserve Way in this development. Seabold noted the plan is five areas, everything is a two-story height except for the four buildings on the south side of McCollister Boulevard, which are three -stories. All the one - bedroom units are located on a second story, there is a larger footprint for the two-bedroom units so the second story can be stepped back to accommodate one -bedroom units. That will minimize the scale of the of the apartment buildings. The four -unit types are two-bedroom townhomes with garages. There are two-bedroom two-story row houses at either end of the pedestrian street as well the north side. There are also two-bedroom flats which are ADA accessible, and the one -bedroom flats are typically located on the second levels. So in the new plan, instead of 344 bedrooms the number of apartments increased but the number of bedrooms decreased. So really the area is less dense than the original plan. Seabold also stated they have no intention of doing any three-bedroom units. Seabold noted that contained within the parking areas are some building forms buried in there and those are single story garages that can be used for resident use. Also attached to all those garages will be garbage and recycling centers so it won't be a stand -along dumpster enclosure, it will be incorporated into the design. Seabold stated they will be asking for waivers when they go forward with the zoning request. At this time they are just asking for a conditional zoning tonight to pursue this concept plan. When they move forward they will work with City Staff on architecture design for multi -family as Walz noted in the Staff report. So far, the development team has really just done massing studies, with 2 -story buildings, multiple roof lines, and porches jutting out. The waivers requested would be to reduce the setbacks along McCollister Boulevard, Preserve Way, and Covered Wagon Drive from 40 feet to 25 feet to create a more walkable neighborhood scale. Seabold reiterated Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 21 they want to limit the density, with a RM -12 zoning the north site could have around 200 units on it and they are only asking for 115, though they currently have 109 units shown. Seabold next showed the Commission some conceptual imagery, they are looking at simple forms for the architecture, simple interiors with a lot of open space, smaller livable units, and natural outdoor areas. He noted a concern from the neighborhood meeting was the plan looked to modern, Seabold stated that there will be different materials on each building, different colors, and roof line shifts, etc. to show five different unique designs. The next step would be for them to pursue more design details. Seabold said the process has been great, they have learned a lot through their work with Opticos and the City. He understands the neighbors' concerns and they feel they have addressed the concerns by providing a smaller scale multi -family residential option. Freerks asked if Opticos recommended all multi -family buildings and Seabold confirmed they did. The design team was trying to find some areas for duplexes, but Opticos sees the existing single family as part of the whole thing and they are trying to blend from Gilbert up to the single- family neighborhood. He stated that it's not a true "Missing Middle". Freerks stated that she didn't see this as the "Missing Middle', and cautioned that they have to be careful if they are going to try to sell this concept to the community and are creating a huge neighborhood of all multi -family. She is concerned about this advice from Opticos. Seabold noted that Opticos looked at the whole area, not just their development, as an area, and even recommended extending McCollister Court to connect the new development to the existing single-family neighborhood but that did not work into the developments plans. They knew the reaction they would get, and they didn't want it anyway. They did agree on the pedestrian connection though. Hensch reiterated that the concept of "Missing Middle" is critical and the first one the City does needs to be done right so the public accepts the concept and sees the benefits. Hensch asked about stormwater and where the detention would be for this development. Seabold showed on the map the area, it is a bit wild and overgrown now and they would manicure it a bit better. The stormwater basin will also accommodate the runoff water from the neighborhood to the east. Hensch asked about the three-story buildings south of McCollister Boulevard and if the third story would be stepped back. Seabold confirmed it would be and showed a rough diagram of the building. Hensch reiterated how important it is to him that there be the unique exterior finishes to keep the area from looking like one large apartment complex. Seabold agreed and said there will be five distinct building types and would be placed appropriately through the development to make it look unique. He agreed with the conditions in the staff recommendation, and would move forward with design accordingly, noting that the Keokuk Street apartments were a perfect example of what they did not want to do. Martin asked who Seabold envisions as the target occupant of these units. Seabold said it would be young professionals are just starting out and can't afford the bigger houses, or others that just want a smaller home. They may not all be rentals, some may be condos and sold. Martin noted that if there are no three-bedroom units then they are specifically ruling out families with more than one child. Seabold said they are avoiding three-bedroom units to rule out college student living but the two-bedroom units would be ideal for a small family starting out. Martin asked if the upper level one -bedroom units would have elevator access. Seabold said they would not, ADA units would be accommodated on the lower levels. Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page S of 21 Freerks asked staff to explain the current ID -RM zoning and the South District map that denotes it as low to medium density mixed residential with multi -family just at the corner intersections. She stated that while the Comprehensive Plan is conceptual and not always followed exactly, the zone should not be taken as an indication that that this whole area would become RM -12 or multi -family. Hektoen stated that the ID designation doesn't guarantee that the entire area will be multi -family. Freerks didn't think so and wanted to make sure everyone understood that what the Commission must decide tonight is what the density in this area should be. Walz noted that is where the Comprehensive Plan focuses to see what is really contemplated for an area. Typically along arterial streets, specifically at major intersections, there is normally higher density (examples are intersections of Rochester and First Avenues, Court Street and Scott Boulevard). Then as you move away from the intersection the density should step down into lower density and eventually single-family housing. Hektoen stated that any rezoning has to comply with the comprehensive plan. And so sometimes there is an ID designation made when land has been annexed and then the comprehensive plan changes over time. Freerks stated that the ID designation is a placeholder. Walz said that sometimes land doesn't get developed for 20-30 years, and in the meantime the goals of the City change, and so current ID designation may or may not be appropriate when the land is ready for development. But here the comprehensive plan does articulate that some multi -family is appropriate at this intersection. Theobald asked to hear more about the parking and garages. Seabold showed on the concept plan the locations. Theobald asked how many spaces are provided per each unit. Seabold stated per zoning regulations, two bedroom units get two parking spaces and one -bedroom units get one space. As for garage spaces, they are working towards having enough garage spaces to accommodate about half of the required parking spaces. They are hoping a lot of the tenants will be cyclists and outdoor enthusiasts (due to the location) and are not reliant on vehicular transportation and hoping to get public transportation down there. Theobald expressed some doubt about attractive the parking situation will be to people who are older or people who are used to having a garage close to their unit. Martin added that this is Iowa and we do have to deal with winter weather. Jerry Waddilove (Southgate Companies) added that in the townhome style units there are two - car detached garages about 10 feet behind each unit, so several units will have very close garages. Waddilove stated that Southgate Companies has been in business in Iowa City since 1952. They have provided quality homes and workplaces for Iowa City since that time. Real estate development requires being sensitive to market dynamics. While Southgate initially considered duplexes and zero -lot lines for these outlots the local real estate market has experienced change, which has lead them to the concept plan that is presented this evening. Southgate is looking to provide a variety of housing types with The Preserve at Sandhill to provide an opportunity a diversity of socially economic status while allowing residents the opportunity to start and age all in the South District of Iowa City. What they offer at The Preserve at Sandhill meets the Comprehensive Plan and South District Plan that was approved in 2015. As noted on the South District Plan map The Preserve at Sandhill fits within the density noted of approximately 184 to 308 dwelling units. The subdivision is located close to the trails that lead to downtown so their hope is that residents will be able to walk or bike to downtown as well as to restaurants, grocery and retail. The additional density has the potential to make feasible district wide desirable amenities such as mass transit loop, retirement housing, Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 9 of 21 and healthcare facilities. One of the other things that has been mentioned is the housing that is provided in Sandhill Estates, The Preserve at Sandhill is part of the larger Southgate development of Sandhill Estates, which includes a total of approximately 160 acres. Taking a wider lens view Southgate will project to develop this land into approximately 12 % mixed - housing multi -family (the project applied for this evening). 22% of that is 35 acres of The Sandhill Prairie part, and 65% of it will be single family detached housing. Southgate is vested in the neighborhood, Southgate paid for and provided a connection to the multi -use trail from McCollister Court cul-de-sac (which wasn't required). Southgate has also begun internal discussions to collaborate with the City and the neighbors to review trail stormwater issues southwest of McCollister Court. Lastly, their Navigate Homes is building and selling up to $325,000 homes in Sandhill Estates Part Three. Southgate would like to be a part of making housing relatively affordable in Iowa City, the smaller homes in The Preserve at Sandhill contribute to this goal. The objective is to target young professionals, empty nesters, bankers, nurses, retired professors, UI personnel as well as PhD and other graduate students. The Preserve at Sandhill is sensitive to the neighborhood by providing a single loaded street closest to the residential neighborhood and providing clustered density as opposed to duplexes backing up to the neighbors. There is also approximately 200 to 230 feet distance between buildings with this concept. Their hope is property values would not be impacted, it has been studied quite a bit as people have brought true low-income housing plans in front of the Commission and Council. There is research in Younkers, New York that shows property values did not decline when low-income housing was provided in the community. Glenn Lynn (725 McCollister Court) is the founding homeowner on McCollister Court and is totally against this whole development. He is not naive enough to think this area will not get developed. The good neighbor meetings started about five or six years ago, they discussed development with Southgate, acknowledged they were receptive to duplexes or zero -lot lines to keep the roof line low so they could still see the park. Lynn felt everyone was on board with that concept and can't believe this is where they are at today. He is not sure who is driving this concept but it is not what the neighborhood discussed and were on board with. Lynn has numerous concerns. The architect keeps talking about simple and all he sees in this design is cheap. Most of the people in Lynn's neighborhood built custom homes and to see the cement board siding on these proposed buildings painted reeks of cheap. Lynn believes it will have an impact on the property values and it won't be positive. Lynn also is unsure where the market for these units will come from, they are building $350,000 homes on Langenberg Avenue and they sell like hotcakes so the story about cheap and small doesn't make sense. Lynn noted that his home has a walkout basement and no sump pump but has never had an issue with water. He is concerned that a development of this size behind him could impact his home. If his basement floods he will be the first one to the City to say he told you so. Lynn feels the planning approach appears to be backwards. They first build a subdivision with custom homes and then decide to build this type of development next to it, it is backwards. If they were to build the townhomes first, they would not be able to sell the custom home lots. Lynn noted he would like to file a protest and will pick up paperwork for that. Hektoen noted that they can file a protest with the City Council. If 20% or more of the land within 200 feet sign the protest then it will require a super majority at the City Council. It needs to be filed with the City Clerk before the close of the public hearing on the rezoning. Contact the City Clerk's office for details and information on the filing of the protest. He can guarantee that nobody in that neighborhood wants this. He looks out his backyard and has an open field and now all of the sudden he is faced with this. Joleah Shaw (785 McCollister Court) is the co-director of Sandhill Estates Homeowners Association with Lynn and reiterated that all the neighbors share the concerns Lynn voiced. Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 21 They are worried about the apartment complex feel of the proposed neighborhood. They were told originally it would be duplexes and zero -lots to be a buffer between a higher traffic street such as Gilbert Street and their street McCollister Court. Her backyard will face these buildings, right now she can see the lake at Terry Trueblood and soon could be looking at the roofs of apartment buildings. Shaw worries that the drawings are very deceiving. They have presented a park area or open space between the backyards and this complex but the space isn't really that big. Currently she allows her kids to play on the trail/sidewalk but there is no way she will allow that once the new apartment complex goes up. Shaw also mentioned the parking. Everyone knows with parking in apartment complexes there is always some issue with parking overflow into into more single-family home areas. There is a walking path that goes right by her house to McCollister Court and she knows people will park in front of her house on McCollister Court and walk down the hill to the apartment complex. _That will bring a lot of traffic to her dead-end cul-de-sac street. Shaw notes that 196 units presented as row or townhouse buildings but in reality a row or townhouse is like the ones on Mormon Trek or Scott Boulevard which are two or three bedroom units and sell for $250,000. That is a totally different buyer versus a $90,000 one -bedroom condo in an apartment looking building. So the look of the row houses or townhomes on Scott Boulevard are much different looking than the apartment style homes that are proposed here. It just simply doesn't fit in with the single family homes that are right next door. Homes on her street are over $300,000 in assessed value and in the backyard they want to put a $90,000 one -bedroom unit. She doesn't see how that fits in. Shaw also asked about the Homeowners Association. They are all Sandhill Estates, so where does this development fit in. How do the apartment building owners or tenant renters fit in with the single- family homeowners when they have a $300,000 house and this person has a one -bedroom, $90,000 apartment. Southgate suggested they break off into a separate homeowners association but then they would have no control over what goes on in their backyards. They have covenants, rules, regulations for fences, backyards, siding on shed, etc. There are even some neighbors that are a little upset about all the rules they have as homeowners. Shaw also mentioned with the 2019 McCollister Boulevard extension, Alexander Elementary is right there in the backyard, and their homes are within the two mile distance so all of the children in the neighborhood would have to walk to school. Adding 196 units will add a lot of traffic and make it unsafe for children to walk to school. With regards to stormwater, even though there are areas set up for stormwater she can personally say her backyard is a lake if there is a large downpour. The walking path closer to Gilbert Street also floods where there is a lot of rain. Shaw reiterated her concern about a $90,000 unit in the backyard of a $300,000 house and stormwater concerns. She noted that lots of neighbors have the same concern and she would be signing the protest as well. Heidi Zahner (894 McCollister Court) and her husband and three children purchased their home a year ago in August, moving here from another community. From the good neighbor meetings she has attended she has learned they have some very passionate neighbors. They have a very diverse neighborhood unlike anywhere else in Iowa City. She is excited about the possibilities for development but she just doesn't think this plan is going to meet the needs of the area. She also thinks that in 20 years if this development is not done right it can really hurt their neighborhood and that side of town. When she was looking to move into Iowa City her husband did not want to move anywhere south of Highway 6. But they discovered this gem of a neighborhood and amazingly found a home in the low $200,000's. That could not be found anywhere else in Iowa City that would give her the diversity and amazing neighborhood that McCollister Court could. Her youngest child goes to Alexander Elementary which is less than two miles away. She is in fourth grade so Zahner does not allow her daughter to walk by herself because of the traffic on Langenberg Avenue. Adding all these additional units to the area could Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017— Formal Meeting Page 11 of 21 really hurt the neighborhood. Zahner's biggest concern is that her family invested in this neighborhood with the belief that this whole area of town is changing, and becoming rejuvenated. She would like it to be accessible to all income levels, but the "Missing Middle" is supposed to have the single-family homes in it so it is a community. This development feels too huge. Zahner said she and her husband are opposed to this plan and are pleased to hear the Commission raise some of the same concerns as the neighbors have. Robert Domsic (860 McCollister Court) began by stating he is also opposed to this development. When he purchased his house in 2009, the realtor, who is still the acting realtor for Southgate, told them this land would never be developed. Even not believing that and knowing that the land would someday be developed, he would expect the density of the land reduced much like all the other neighbors discussed before him. Domsic doesn't believe the proposal will be appealing to the masses or the intended populations. When he looks at was is being proposed here, he sees 192 additional units going into this area. He also looks at the other development that is happening in the neighborhood. Southgate is also developing phase two and phase three that will increase dramatically the traffic on Langenberg Avenue. Everyone knows the connection through Langenberg Avenue is an infrastructure issue that cannot support additional traffic. Domsic said it is hard to describe to people how bad the situation on that street is, throughout Langenberg Avenue people park on both sides of the street and the street is very narrow. Speed humps had to be installed because people were driving through too quickly. Even when Domsic is just trying to get to his mailbox people pull out in front of him almost causing an accident about once per week. Additionally the intersection between McCollister Boulevard and Gilbert Street is also a very unsafe intersection. In the last year he has seen school buses get in accidents there, cars being t -boned in the intersection, and it is not safe. With 192 added units and 330+ bedrooms there would be an active population of 500- 600 people living in this area. Additionally Southgate has a 260 more single-family home subdivision planned and adding that density to this area without the infrastructure it will be a disaster. Yes there are future intentions to put a stop light there, there are future intentions to extend McCollister Boulevard but there are also potential future delays. Domsic hopes the Commission can see it would not be wise to develop this neighborhood like this without the proper infrastructure in place first. Another issue to think about is the potential school density. If families with children come to this area there could be an issue with capacity at the school. Alexander Elementary has a capacity for 500 students and in 2016 they had roughly 406 students enrolled. This level of development may push that way above capacity. Domsic also noted that this area is the habitat for a threatened species, the ornate box turtle which has lived here much longer than any of us have. It would be sad to see the habitat destroyed. Urban development is the biggest threat and losing this area could be instrumental in their extinction. Additionally the developer is requesting easements for the frontages and that is an indication that the square footage of the acreage is not large enough for what their intended proposal is. Domsic urges the Commission to think about why those distances were put in place to begin with along such a busy intersection. If an easement of this level is granted, you would be setting the precedent of what would happen for all of the multi -family housing that will be developed in the surrounding area. In the South District Plan, the area north of McCollister Boulevard by the McCollister Farm is also noted as multi -family, and south of McCollister where the quarry used to be is also noted as multi -family. If the easement is allowed for this development, the easement would have to be allowed for the future developments as well and it would impact the safety of all those areas in the South District Plan. Miklo clarified that the easement Domsic was referring to is the 40 foot setback normally required from an arterial street. Miklo also said the area to the north by McCollister Farm would Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 12 of 21 require rezoning to become multi -family zoning Kevin Englebercl (172 Hawkeye Court) lives in the Aspire Apartments and just moved to Iowa City as a graduate student. He supports this type of development. When he moved to town as a graduate student he was looking for places to live and knew he didn't want to live downtown with the undergraduates and the higher cost of living and was looking for a place like is described in tonight's concept plan. What he is hearing for others in the room tonight is they don't want any multi -family housing next to where they live. Admittedly Engleberg said he came to the meeting tonight for a class project, not this agenda issue, but now feels like Iowa City community doesn't want graduate students next to them. As far as diversity, what has been said tonight is that everyone wants $250,000 and $300,000 homes next to them, single-family homes, and for someone in graduate school he cannot afford a $250,000 home. With concerns about access to the water, sight lines, etc. this land is not owned by the homeowner's association, the people that own it are the developers and this is what they want to do with the land. Engleberg noted that given his position in life this development would be beneficial for him and for the community. He encourages the Commission to support this project and to see it move forward. The Comprehensive Plan denotes multi -family. Engleberg acknowledged the building design could be changed, the amount of units could change, but it should be a multi- family area. The area is close to downtown, arterial streets, and it convenient for people like him and he would probably live somewhere like this. Richard Arthur (893 McCollister Court) and his home is on the corner of McCollister Court and Covered Wagon where they bought the lot and built a custom home. They were told, like others, that the area in discussion tonight would never be developed. He understands that perhaps he shouldn't have believed what a realtor would tell him, but there was a sign on the corner of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard for years that said "live where the bass are jumping". If a sign has been put up that said "live where you can see multi -family housing" his family would not have bought that lot and they wouldn't have built their custom home. Arthur respects the opinion of the last speaker, but students are transient. Arthur and his wife have lived in their home for nine years and hope to live there another 30 but this development changes their neighborhood. He wants to be surrounded by single-family homes, single story zero -lot lines, duplexes, etc. Homes that will blend with the feel of the neighborhood. He really feels he was deceived by Southgate, the neighborhood has been going to meetings with Southgate and repeating for six or seven years to look to developing single family. Southgate has said the market for zero -lot and duplexes won't sell, they said they were bankrupt and if the neighborhood didn't deal with them, they would have to deal with another developer. Arthur reiterated he feels deceived from the moment he bought his lot and built his home. David A. Morales (301 Hawk Ridge Drive) also came to this meeting as part of an assignment for a class at The University of Iowa College of Law and based on what he has heard today he would agree with many of the homeowners today that this multi -complex project is not good for the neighborhood. Not just because there are many issues with the concern of the easements and nearby structures that would be developed, but also because of the nature of what the project would build. It would bring in a majority of empty nesters, graduate students, etc. Morales stated that graduate students are not a quiet bunch, they are busy with all sorts of things going on in their lives, and the lifestyle would not mesh well with the neighboring neighborhoods. It would not only create a nuisance in not only what their activities would produce but also create nuisances on what types of people that would be invited to the property. It would create situations that would be very unsafe for neighboring families and children. Morales strongly suggests that the Council vote against this multi -family complex. Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 13 of 21 Freerks closed the public hearing, noting that there were several topics to discussion and suggesting that a motion to defer may be appropriate. . Hensch moved to recommend approval of REZ17-00001, to conditionally rezone from Interim Development Multi -family (ID -RM) to Low Density Single-family (RM -12) for 21.79 acres of property located adjacent to the intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard, subject to the conditions listed in the Staff Report. Theobald seconded the motion. Hensch noted that this item is just for conditional rezoning it doesn't seem like the time to be in the weeds discussing specific designs. He has lived south of Highway 6 on Pepper Drive since 1993 and understands the south side of Iowa City. His backyard has been a soybean and corn field every year since 1993 but he is fully aware that someday it will be developed. He has been lucky and appreciativeit hasn't happened yet, but will not be surprised when it does. Everyone in Iowa City wants to live in a residential neighborhood of only single-family homes, that is understandable, but one of the key focuses of the Commission has always been the "Missing Middle" and the need to have homes for people of varying incomes in nice safe accommodations and areas that everyone else lives in. There are lots of blue collar people who work hard in Iowa City and deserve to live in Iowa City as well and not have to drive from adjacent counties to be able to work in Iowa City. Hensch supports this concept. Freerks wants to address the issue of single-family. The discussion is not whether this has to be single-family, but what about this piece of property as a whole and does it really do what we want it to do density wise completely. Freerks does not feel like she has enough information to be ready to make a decision in favor of something like this right now. Freerks does not believe this concept is a "Missing Middle" and to state that would be false and would be selling something that, as a whole, is not accurate. Every single unit in the plan is in a multi -family structure. Even looking at the area in a larger picture, yes, there are single-family structures around, but in the Comprehensive Plan she doesn't believe it was the intention to have all multi- family in this area. Yes, the design details could be worked out later, but what the Comprehensive Plan asks for is "exceptional design quality." If that does not happen, then there needs to be a Comprehensive Plan change. This doesn't meet the minimum standards. Freerks is also concerned about the traffic. She feels there needs to be a controlled intersection at Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard before this whole area is developed and the City needs to commit to that. This is a very serious issue, especially with a school nearby. Martin stated that when she hears the "Missing Middle" and she is looking at overhead view of the land that is in this concept plan is larger than the single-family neighborhood next to it. Therefore it doesn't appear to have the flow necessary to transition from multi -family to single- family. Martin noted that this is a parcel of land owned by somebody else and they can do with it what they want to do with it. Freerks interjected what they can do what thecommunity allows them to do with it. Martin agreed, but nevertheless in some format it will be developed. However, how that happens should be very thoughtful. Martin's initial reaction to the concept was "wow — that is a lot in a small space". It is very dense. In the bigger picture it is not a flow, it is just dense and bigger than the single-family area. She cannot support this concept as it stands right now. Freerks also has concerns that in order to make this concept happen there needs to be waivers Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 14 of 21 She noted that it appears so many times lately that people don't even want to meet the minimum requirements for developing and in this case to have the setback reduced to 25 feet in order to squeeze things in is a concern. Freerks does not feel there should be 12-plexes in this area. It could be reduced to 8-plexes and with a little bit of redesign, the density could be brought down a little bit. It could then still be a development for entry level housing. Freerks doesn't have a concern with $90,000 units in this area; doesn't have a problem with a mix of housing types, but rather reiterated her concern is the size and density of this concept so close to the single-family homes. She doesn't think this current concept is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The details will be where it becomes palatable for everyone and beneficial for everyone. Freerks stated that she does have a 12-plex in her own backyard and she has no issue with it. If there were multiple 12-plexes in her backyard, she might think twice about wanting to live there. It is all about balance between long-term and short-term residents. She thinks there are lots of potentially beautiful green space here, but this concept is just not quite right. Theobald disagrees. One thing that has always concerned her about the Terry Trueblood area is the City has a beautiful park with a lot of money put into it but there are no affordable neighborhoods around it with access to the park. This development allows opportunities to make that happen. Theobald stated that she also lived in a similar situation, although it was all zero -lot lines. The zero -lot lines all quickly became rental properties and they had no access to single-family and were completely isolated. She sees this development as having potential, if it is handled correctly, to be able to integrate with the single-family and to provide housing for a diverse group of people and access to the park. She admits she was concerned when she looked at the concept plan, it did remind her of Pheasant Ridge Apartments. Theobald noted that she lives in a cement board house between Pheasant Ridge and the Finkbine Apartments and she gets along just fine. With the right design guidelines followed there is a chance for this development to be very attractive with staffs recommended conditions, and at this time does not have concerns and will support this. Freerks commented that she wanted to make sure the missing middle is done right, and this is not the missing middle to her. Hensch agrees, and reiterated that this is a conditional rezoning and all the details are not worked out. He feels the developers need to be held accountable during the design phase to make sure they do follow all guidelines but wants to see this move forward. He added that this development will not be built in a year, so hopefully the build -out will happen at the same time as the road and intersection improvements. . Freerks just doesn't want to rush this and feels the Commission should take two meetings to discuss. Dyer would like to also see some changes and lower density. She is concerned about the traffic and lack of signals or even stop signs at that intersection. She visits Terry Trueblood a lot and coming out of McCollister onto Gilbert Street is frightening at times. She would like to see McCollister Boulevard extended before this development happens and to also see this development go up in phases perhaps. Dyer stated she actually likes the design of the buildings and don't look like every other apartment building in Iowa City and actually do look like farmhouses. The thought of requiring eaves and trim around the windows makes her think this will look like every other apartment complex in Iowa City. Dyer also is not quite ready to approve this item as presented today but is in favor of expanding the number of moderately- priced Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2017 — Formal Meeting Page 15 of 21 homes in Iowa City. There just are not enough. Huge numbers of people who work at The University of Iowa live far away which makes for long commutes and excessive use of cars. Iowa City really does need housing like this that is affordable. She is prepared to vote for deferral, but is not opposed to the concept. Parsons also agrees with the concept, but his one concern might be the flow from multi -family to single-family. Overall this is a great concept and just needs a little more detail. He is leaning toward voting for this rezoning, but if they did decide to defer, he is open to discuss some more of those ideas to work out the kinks. Parsons stated he also thinks the intersection at Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard should be improved before any development happens because it is a busy intersection. Parsons noted that the P&Z review limitation period expires before their next meeting and asked how that would affect things if they deferred consideration of the rezoning.. Freerks said the applicant could waive the limitation period. She reminded the commission that a three/three vote would be a denial. Hektoen confirmed that four votes in favor of a rezoning is required for approval. Freerks noted that the motion was to approve, but it could be withdrawn. Theobald said she supports the application, but knows good things often come with further scrutiny, so she could go along with deferral. Freerks said she didn't want the application to languish, but that it warranted further examination to make sure it was consistent with the comprehensive plan. She asked if Hensch wanted to withdraw his motion and allow another meeting to allow more time for the developer to address some of the concerns. Hensch indicated that he would not withdraw his motion. A vote was taken and the motion failed with a 3-3 vote. (Freerks, Martin, Dyer opposed). Signs rejoined the meeting. CODE AMENDMENT. Discussion of amendments to City Code Sections 14-513-4E, Illumination Requirements, City Code Section 14-5B-BA&B, Signs permitted in Interim Development, Overlay Planned Development, and Residential zones and 14 -5B -8E to increase the size and type of signs for institutional uses and to allow internal illumination in the Planned High Density Multifamily zone; and Sign Standards in the Central Business zones, and the South Downtown, University, Central Crossings, Park, South Gilbert and East Side Mixed Use subdistricts to allow plastic trim cap letters for signs above the fifth story. Ream noted that the application is a long description for some very simple concepts they wish to change in the Code. Most of the requests have been from religious institutions, both existing and new churches, that brought to light some inadequacies in the Sign Code. As explained in the memo a facia sign in most residential zones was limited to four square feet and only one sign was allowed. Most of the churches in Iowa City do not comply with the Sign Code, and not that permits were issued in error, permits were just never issued. However with the construction of some new churches and inquiries on what signage could be done it was apparent to Ream that adjustment needed to be made to the Sign Code. The proposed change is not great, 12 square feet is not a large sign but having a 12 square foot sign on the wall of the church and a monument sign out closer to the roadway seems to be reasonable. The second major change is due to having a couple of institutional uses in a PRM zone, which Dear Mayor Throgmorton and Iowa City Councilmembers, Thank you so much for listening to our concerns about the proposal Southgate has made regarding the property located near Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard. Our take -away from the planning and zoning meeting, as well as the recent council meeting, was that our city leaders care about the south side and our neighborhood, as well as the rest of the city. It was a wonderful feeling to see that you heard what we were saying! My husband and I are unable to attend the council meeting on December 51h, so are taking this opportunity to express our thoughts to you. We have serious concerns about the goals of a builder who is pushing to start this project very soon, before addressing the problems regarding the safety of pedestrians and drivers in this area. They have been a constant presence in our neighborhood for the past two years as they developed many lots on Langenberg Street, so they had to have experienced the many traffic problems first hand. The density of this proposal is concerning. There appears to be little "phase in" between these apartments and the homes on McCollister Court. The missing middle concept includes single homes and duplexes in the mix of housing configurations, and several neighbors have expressed that they have family members who would be interested in some of these smaller units. One was interested in having parents move nearby so they could assist them when needed, and another was speaking of a married child and his family being able to move closer to their work here in Iowa City. Southgate seems to have no idea what percentage of this area would be rentals and what part would be owner occupied. If a significant part of this area contains rental units, we have concerns about the long-term maintenance of the project. Southgate owns and manages an apartment complex on Keokuk Street (built in 1995) near our home. If the condition of those apartment buildings is any indication of what the proposed project will look like in 20 years, our property values will definitely be substantially lower than they are today. People moving to the area and looking for homes will have a diminished desire to live in our neighborhood. As you look at this project, we hope you will consider adding "green" features to these dwellings, as discussed in the long-term South Iowa City plan. Geo -thermal heating and solar panels would enhance the long-term affordability of these units to potential buyers, would be environmentally friendly, and would be in keeping with some of the homes in the area. Thanks again for the time and attention you are giving this matter. Sincerely, 2'-4 h-< I r =�n Sue & Loren Gnewuch rn m 720 McCollister Ct Iowa City, IA 52240 �- Late Handouts Distributed ov Kellie Fruehlina From: Geoff Fruin Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 12:42 PM (Date) To: Kellie Fruehling Cc: Eleanor M. Dilkes; Ashley Monroe Subject: FW: Written Comments for December 5, 2017 Iowa City, City Council Work Session Importance: High Kellie — Can you make copies for the work session? Thanks — Geoff From: Jerry Waddilove[mailto:jwaddilove@SouthGateCo.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 12:16 PM To: Sarah Walz <Sarah-Walz@iowa-city.org> Cc: mseabold@shive-hattery.com; Josh Entler <jentler@SouthGateCo.com>; Joe Hughes <jhughes@SouthGateCo.com>; Chris J. Ciccariello (cciccariello@shive-hattery.com) <cciccariello@shive-hattery.com>; Geoff Fruin <Geoff-Fruin@iowa- city.org> Subject: Written Comments for December 5, 2017 Iowa City, City Council Work Session Importance: High Preserve@Sandhill — SouthGate Companies Written Comments for December 5, 2017 Iowa City, City Council Work Session Since October 2016, SouthGate Companies and Shive-Hattery have been working with City of Iowa City Planning Staff reviewing multiple concepts and development opportunities for quality -designed, entry-level priced housing for Outlots A & B which was designated for future development within Sandhill Estates Subdivision when it began in 2004. We have taken the input from City Staff and consistently modified the development plan for this area to reflect the City's goals for development, expanding the existing neighborhood, and reflecting on the future residential expansion of Sandhill Estates. After all of this work, Staff has now conditionally recommended our project for approval at this stage of the development process, which is still preliminary and visionary. We have brought this Conditional Zoning Application before City Council after the 3-3 vote from Planning and Zoning Commission to have an opportunity for further dialogue. We hope the work session on December 5, 2017, begins this dialogue and identifies specific items which can move the design of this development forward for mutual benefit. In this Conditional Zoning Application, we are open to input on density and housing types yet are looking for detailed guidance as we believe the current vision of this project meets the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, we will still need to submit for final PUD (Rezoning) approval which will include final building designs, elevations, and materials palates. Many rules are in place for the overall architectural character of the project. As part of this Conditional Zoning Application, we have agreed to utilize the Riverfront Crossings material standards and will need to comply with the attached Multi - Family design standards that are part of the Zoning Code. The buildings are meant to have multiple roof forms and utilize varying materials and colors to both create a sense of place for this area as well as expand on the existing neighborhood character. No two buildings will be exactly alike. These are initial architectural concepts. We are flexible from an architectural design standpoint and encourage your comments to incorporate into final PUD (Rezoning) documents for approval. As an example, shallow front yard setbacks are not required for our plan but are being requested. We want to include them because, combined with narrower street pavement widths, they offer an opportunity to create a more intimate pedestrian -scale public space along the street which encourages walking and social interaction. This is reflected in the South District plan (page 5) and was part of our discussions with City Staff and Opticos Design. If you agree the density and conceptual layout of this project is appropriate for this site, we can continue to design the architecture with your input then submit for approval through the final PUD (Rezoning) process. If you do not feel this design and density is appropriate, your comments are important to us so we can continue to modify the design and move this project forward to provide more entry-level priced housing for Iowa City. This site has a unique opportunity for development. At the intersection of two arterial roads, adjacent to a beautiful natural resource, connected to trails and walking paths, within a blossoming residential neighborhood and a short walk away from a new elementary school, grocery stores and restaurants; we see it as an opportunity to contribute to the mix of housing types that will be incorporated in the final build out of Sandhill Estates and the South District. As publicly noted, even with Preserve@Sandhill at full buildout, Sandhill Estates will include approximately 160 acres — about 65% of which will be Single -Family Detached housing, 22% public park space, and 13% mixed housing Multi -Family. The intersection of McCollister and Gilbert Street is recognized as an intersection in need of traffic control. Preserve@Sandhill's project schedule can be roughly the same as the McCollister Boulevard expansion project and intersection improvements. We will work with City Staff to coordinate the proiect's schedules to minimize traffic impact. At this time we are requesting a Conditional Zoning of this property. Approving the Conditional Zoning of Preserve@Sandhill allows us to continue to work with City Planning staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and Iowa City's City Council on the final design. The final design for this development will need to be approved by both Planning and Zoning and City Council through PUD Approval (Rezoning). Thank you for your consideration. We remain flexible and are eager to hear your comments to move this project forward Sincerely, Jerry Waddilove and the Preserve@Sandhill Design Team Jerry Waddilove President & CEO SouthGate C OMPA N r E 5 755 Mormon Trek Blvd P.O. Box 1907 Iowa City, IA 52244-1907 Mobile: 319.621.0412 Office: 319.337.4195 JWadd ilove(o)SouthGateCo.com SouthGateCo.com Qt Confidentiality Notice This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipients(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact me by reply email, delete and destroy all copies of the original message. Confidentiality Notice: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipients(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact me by reply email, delete and destroy all copies of the original message. r�.'l?tiJ Kellie Fruehling Late Handouts Distributed From: Sarah Walz 2 Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 3:18 PM To: Geoff Fruin; Kellie Fruehling (Date) Subject: FW: Iowa City Council Meeting Tonight -----Original Message ----- From: Kim and Lula Palmer[mailto:kalpal2@brentopalmer.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 2:51 PM To: Sarah Walz <Sarah-Walz@iowa-city.org> Subject: Iowa City Council Meeting Tonight Hello Sarah, Please provide this information to the City Council and Zoning Commission for the working meeting and City Council meeting tonight, The Directors of the Sandhill Estates Homeowners Association realize and acknowledge that Southgate Development Companies' property at the comer of South Gilbert and McCollister Blvd. will be developed. BUT, we first request that it not be approved and rezoned until Southgate provides a more reasonable plan that truly uses the "Missing Middle" housing concept with Duplexes or Zero -lot homes, some nice townhouses and homeowner condos on the north side of McCollister Blvd. Apartments and / or commercial space could be placed on the south side of McCollister Blvd. On July 11, 2012, Southgate Developers with Mr. Glenn Siders held a Good Neighbor Meeting with Sandhill Estates Homeowners. Southgate provided the Homeowners with just such a plan as described above that was widely accepted. We anticipated this type of development. Second: SAFETY - please do not approve development until the intersection at South Gilbert and McCollister Blvd is improved. Along with the existing Terry Trueblood Recreation Area plus Napoleon Park Softball Complex, the new Kum and Go service station and convenience store is going in on the northwest comer. Approving the proposed 196 Southgate units will add hundreds more cars to this intersection. This area cannot withstand this load until the infrastructure is improved and completed. More wrecks will continue and surely increase. Third: Langenberg Avenue has already become a thoroughfare for people going over to Sycamore St. and to the southeast side of town. As many cars now continue straight across S. Gilbert on McCollister Blvd. and onto Langenberg as tum onto Gilbert. Please do not approve and rezone this property until McCollister Blvd. continues over to Sycamore St. This will provide a much safer neighborhood with completed sidewalks over to Sycamore and also Alexander School. There is also the situation with the overcrowding of Alexander School. Sandhill Estates has a very diverse neighborhood, with young families and many more children, retired people, Housing Grant homes, and folks of varied cultural backgrounds. In no way are we opposed to diversity in our neighborhood nor in any additional development. Sincerely, Kim W. Palmer, President, Sandhill Estates Homeowners Association Kellie Fruehling From: Sarah Walz Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 3:17 PM To: Geoff Fruin; Eleanor M. Dilkes; Kellie Fruehling Subject: Council and P&Z Comments Attachments: Notes for work session.docx Attached, please find a list of comments from P&Z and Council summarized from the minutes of P&Z mtg. and the video of Council mtg. This was requested to help guide the work session discussion this evening. Sarah Sarah Walz CITY OF IOWA CITY and METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION OF JOHNSON COUNTY 410 East Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319-356-5239 Planning and Zoning Commission Concerns (summarized from P&Z minutes): Infrastructure: • Without the improved intersection and extension of McCollister, the development seems premature. Building Design: • Buildings look too much alike—too repetitive. Not reflective/complementary to the surrounding Single -Family neighborhood. • Comprehensive plan calls for "exceptional design" for multi -family adjacent to Terry Trueblood in order to allow higher density. • Does not appear to meet the minimum standards for design or setbacks. • Lack of variety—all buildings are multi -family. Plan does not include smaller single-family or duplexes. Concerns regarding long-term residency or owner occupants. Missing Middle: • This does not appear to be missing middle housing and may create a misperception of what that term means. The first missing middle development needs to be done right. • Concerns over the balance of long and short-term residents. Lack of garages or parking directly adjacent to units diminishes the likelihood of long term or older renters. Unlikely "ownership" prospects. • All multi -family buildings—no "likely" opportunity for homeownership or condo ownership. • Density: overall density may be too high. Does not present an appropriate transition between high density at the intersection and the single-family neighborhood to the east—seems like an apartment complex. City Council Concerns: Infrastructure: • improvement of the McCollister -Gilbert intersection and the extension of McCollister should be complete. • Need to slow traffic along Gilbert. • Traffic through Lagenberg is problematic. • Safety of pedestrians and bikes crossing Gilbert to Trueblood Recreation Area Missing Middle: • This does not appear to be "missing middle" housing -not diverse enough or appropriate scale. • Most indicated a desire for a more variety of housing types. The repetition of town -house and row -house housing types down Gilbert and McCollister was noted. • Better transition/integration from higher density at the intersection to lower density and the north and east. • More complementary design —reflective of the adjacent single-family neighborhood. Neighborhood: • Parking areas should be no more than the minimum requirement. The amount of off-street parking (surface parking) takes away from the neighborhood feel. • The intersection of McCollister and Gilbert as component of the neighborhood—make the corner memorable. "A gateway/entryway announcing the character of the neighborhood announcing to the to the public that this is an entryway to a terrific neighborhood that people will love for generations to come." • What will happen south of McCollister Blvd as this development transitions to the next? How will the street layout continue into the next property? How will this street layout support other higher density housing along Gilbert. Questions from the Council: • How will the neighborhood design facilitate bus transit? • Potential for working collaboratively with the neighborhood to create a better concept. • Clarification: this is entry level housing not affordable housing by the City's definition. Other questions from the public discussion: • Should the reduced setback allow for a higher density? • Some questions about owner vs. renter and how/whether this concept supports that. • Timeline of development. • References to other areas of the community where higher density housing has blended successfully with single-family. Corner of Scott and Rochester being one such area. Some reference to Mormon Trek and Peninsula. 7 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT AND ESTIMATED COST FOR MERCER AQUATIC CENTER BOILER AND HVAC REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY. IOWA TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS: Public notice is hereby given to that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on plans, specifications, form on contract and estimated cost for the construction of the Mercer Aquatic Center Boiler and HVAC Replacement Project in said City at 7:00 p.m. on the 5w day of December, 2017, said meeting to be held in the Emma J. Harvat Hall in City Hall in said City, or If said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council therafter as posted by the City Clerk. Said plans, specifications, form of contract and the estimated cost are now on file in the office of the city clerk in City Hall in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any interested persons. Any interested person may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making objections to and comments concerning said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improvement. This notice is given by order of the City - Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and as provided by law. KELLIE FRUEHLING, CITY CLERK NPH -1 �r CITY OF IOWA C o COUNCIL ACTION REP= November 21, 2017 Resolution setting a public hearing on December 5, 2017 on plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate of cost for the construction of the Mercer Aquatic Center Boiler and HVAC Replacement Project, directing City Clerk to publish notice of said hearing, and directing the City Engineer to place said plans on file for public inspection. Prepared By: Brett Zimmerman - Civil Engineer Reviewed By: Kumi Morris - Facilities Manager, Jason Havel - City Engineer Ron Knoche - Public Works Director, Juli Seydell Johnson - Parks and Recreation Director, Geoff Fruin - City Manager Fiscal Impact: The estimated cost for this project is $680,000 and will be funded by Account # R4331 Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Resolution Executive Summary: This agenda item begins the bidding process for the Mercer Aquatic Center Boiler and HVAC Replacement Project. This project includes replacement of the existing boiler and HVAC systems in the Mercer Aquatic Center and Scanlon Gymnasium. Background / Analysis: The existing boilers at the Mercer Aquatic Center and Scanlon Gymnasium have been in operation since 1988 and are approaching the end of their useful life. Additionally, the current HVAC system provides inconsistent heating and cooling, resulting in numerous patron complaints regarding water and air temperatures in the facility. Project Timeline: Set Public Hearing — November 21, 2017 Hold Public Hearing — December 5, 2017 Bid Letting —January 11, 2018 Award Date — January 16, 2018 Substantial Completion — June 15, 2018 Final Completion — July 13, 2018