Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2018-09-04 Ordinance
Item Number: 10.a. I r , CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE September 4, 2018 Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning related to required retail storefronts in the Riverfront Crossings Central Crossings Subdistrict. (ZCA18-00001) (First Consideration) ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report P&Z 08.06.18 draft minutes Ordinance IDa' Prepared by: Anne Russett,Senior Planner,410 E.Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240;319-356-5251 ORDINANCE NO. Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning related to required retail storefronts in the Riverfront Crossings Central Crossings Subdistrict (ZCA18-00001). Whereas, the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan identifies areas of the district for ground floor retail with the intention of creating a vibrant, active, and pedestrian- friendly environment; and Whereas, the Riverfront Crossing Form Based Development Standards implement the vision of the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan; and Whereas, the Riverfront Crossing Form Based Development Standards includes a regulating plan that identifies locations where ground floor retail is required and provides no flexibility for other land uses in areas identified as "required retail storefront"; and Whereas, the Riverfront Crossings Form Based Development Standards also includes an affordable housing obligation, which requires projects of at least 10 dwelling units to provide affordable housing in an amount equal to or greater than 10 percent of the total number of dwellings units in the project; and Whereas, the proposed amendment allows ground floor residential uses within the Central Crossings subdistrict in areas identified as required retail storefront when they are part of an affordable housing project; and Whereas, the proposed amendment provides market flexibility to support the goals of affordable housing in the district; and Whereas, the proposed amendment is limited to the Central Crossings subdistrict in order to preserve the retail requirement along key commercial corridors in the South Downtown, South Gilbert, and West Riverfront subdistricts and the small retail node within the Park subdistrict; and Whereas, the proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and supports the following housing goal and strategy: Housing Goal: Encourage a diversity of housing options in all neighborhoods Housing Strategy: Ensure a mix of housing types within each neighborhood, to provide options for households of all types (singles, families, retirees, etc.) and people of all incomes; and Whereas, the proposed amendment supports the vision of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, which recognizes the need for flexibility to allow residential uses within areas identified as required retail storefronts; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public meeting on August 16, 2018 and recommended approval of the aforementioned zoning code amendments; and 1 Whereas, it is in the City's best interest to adopt this ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: Section 1. Title 14 of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa is hereby amended by adding the following underlined text: _ Amend 14-2G-3B-2d Central Crossings and Orchard Subdistricts And Eastside Mixed Use District, as follows: Residential uses are not allowed within required retail storefronts, as specified in the riverfront crossings regulating plan, except in the Central Crossings subdistrict for housing subsidized by a federal or state program that requires at least 60 percent of the units to be rent restricted and income restricted. Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of , 2018. Mayor Ap oved b Attest: , ft4±*ems City Clerk City Attorney's Office g/3.3he 2 Ordinance No. Page It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Vacancy—Botchway seat Cole Mims Salih Taylor Thomas Throgmorton First Consideration 09/04/2018 Vote for passage: AYES: Mims, Salih, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton, Cole. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vacancy - Botchway seat Second Consideration Vote for passage: Date published Ir _Mw_ -4 I[[�1 4 CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: August 16, 2018 To: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Anne Russett, AICP, Senior Planner, Neighborhood and Development Services Department Re: Amendment to Title 14, Zoning Code of the Iowa City Municipal Code related to Required Retail Storefronts in the Riverfront Crossings Central Crossings Subdistrict (ZCA18-00001) Introduction The proposed amendment amends the zoning code (Title 14 of the Iowa City Municipal Code), to allow residential uses within areas identified as required retail storefronts on the Riverfront Crossings regulating plan [Attachment 1] within the Central Crossings subdistrict when they are part of an affordable housing project. Background The City adopted the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan in 2014. The master plan identifies areas of the district for ground floor retail with the intention of creating a vibrant, active, and pedestrian - friendly environment [Attachment 2]. The areas in the plan identified for ground floor retail were conservatively selected to not impact the downtown retail market. These key retail nodes were selected due to existing or future conditions that would enhance the streetscape. Furthermore, the plan recognizes that the ground floor in these areas would initially be utilized for residential uses until the market demand for retail increases. Subsequent to the adoption of the master plan the City adopted the Riverfront Crossings Form Based Development Standards to implement the vision and goals of the master plan. This form - based code includes a regulating plan that identifies locations where ground floor retail is required. Where the master plan provides the flexibility for residential, the regulating plan of the form -based code requires ground floor retail in the areas identified as "required retail storefront". Affordable Housing Requirement The Riverfront Crossings' form -based code includes an affordable housing obligation. Projects that contain at least 10 dwelling units must provide affordable housing units in an amount equal to or greater than 10% of the total number of dwelling units in the project. The form -based code provides options for satisfying this requirement, including providing the affordable units on-site, off-site, and paying fees in -lieu of providing the affordable units. In 2017 the City executed an affordable housing agreement with Dubuque and Prentiss Investments regarding their project at 620 S. Dubuque Street. The project includes 36 residential units and received a height bonus to five stories due to the owner's commitment to providing 15% of the units as affordable housing. The agreement outlines that the owner will provide the affordable housing units on-site, but may wish to transfer the affordable obligation to the property at 628 S. Dubuque Street. Ultimately, the developer of 620 S. Dubuque Street and a future project planned for 225 E. Prentiss Street would like to transfer the affordable housing obligation of these two sites to the property at 628 S. Dubuque Street (see Figure 1). The developer is coordinating with the Housing Fellowship, a non-profit organization that focuses on providing affordable rental August 10, 2018 Page 2 housing in Johnson County, who would manage the affordable housing project at 628 S. Dubuque Street. Del Ray Ridge, L.P. has a purchase agreement for 628 S. Dubuque Street. In October 2017, the City Council passed a resolution committing $330,000 in City funds to Del Ray Ridge, L.P. for the affordable housing project at 628 S. Dubuque Street. The Iowa Finance Authority also awarded the project Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) funds in March 2018. On August 7, the City Council entered into an agreement with Del Ray Ridge, L.P. for a $330,000 loan for this project. Here is a summary of the Del Ray Ridge project: - 33 units total; 17 1 -bedroom and 16 2 -bedroom units - 4 units affordable to households at or below 30% area median income (AMI) - 5 units affordable to households at or below 40% AMI - 20 units affordable to households at or below 60% AMI - 4 units with no income requirements - Affordability period of 30 years In an August 7, 2018 memo to City Council regarding the Del Ray Ridge project, City staff noted that the Riverfront Crossings' form -based code required ground floor retail at this site, but that the City would be initiating a code amendment to allow ground floor residential. Figure 1. Location Map Fro e I iia , is 9 620 S. Dubuque Street, 36 units 225 E. Prentiss Street, future development 628 S. Dubuque Street, Del Flay Ridge August 10, 2018 Page 3 Proposed Amendment Staff proposes an amendment to the Riverfront Crossings' form -based code to allow ground floor residential uses within the Central Crossings Subdistrict in areas identified as required retail storefront when they are part of an affordable housing project. More specifically, to qualify for this exemption projects must be subsidized by a federal or state program that requires at least 60 percent of the units to be rent and income restricted [Attachment 3]. Staff proposes to limit the exemption to affordable housing and further limit it to the Central Crossings Subdistrict for the following reasons: • Providing market flexibility to support the goals of affordable housing in the district. • The South Downtown, South Gilbert, and West Riverfront subdistricts have key commercial corridors (e.g. Burlington Street, Riverside Drive, Gilbert Street) where maintaining existing and requiring new retail is critical to enhancing the vibrancy of these corridors. The Park subdistrict has one small node of required retail that is important to maintain for the convenience of future residents. There are no required retail storefront requirements in the University, Orchard, and Gilbert Subdistricts or the East Side Mixed - Use District. Comprehensive Plan Consistency The proposed amendment supports the following housing goal and strategy from the comprehensive plan: • Encourage a diversity of housing options in all neighborhoods. o Ensure a mix of housing types within each neighborhood, to provide options for households of all types (singles, families, retirees, etc.) and people of all incomes. The proposed amendment also supports the vision of the Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. The master plan recognizes the need for flexibility to allow residential uses within areas identified as required retail storefronts. The proposed amendment will allow some flexibility by providing an exemption for affordable housing projects within the Central Crossings Subdistrict. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend adoption of the following proposed amendment to 14 -2G -3B -2d of the Iowa City Municipal Code by the Iowa City City Council: d. Residential uses are not allowed within required retail storefronts, as specified in the riverfront crossings regulating plan, except in the Central Crossings subdistrict for housing subsidized by a federal or state program that requires at least 60 percent of the units to be rent and income restricted. Attachments: 1. Riverfront Crossings Regulating Plan 2. Excerpt from Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan related to Primary Streets and Required Retail Storefronts 3. Proposed Amendment to 14 -2G -3B -2d Approved by: 1 , SrH ..___---- Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services ATT CHMENT 1 77 �-1 _-_ ___--- -_ rT4 T� i-� FTS -T---` , �i ff ff ; f jjjt 1 - , �]----_ - -- 1 4 -i r 1 y 1 1 f a� 1 � k Legend South Downtown Subdistrict University Subdistrict Central Crossings Subdistrict Gilbert Subdistrict Park Subdistrict South Gilbert Subdistrict West Riverfront Subdistrict Orchard Subdistrict - �-- _ -7 '• Public Parks and Open Space / t_ Green Space Primary Street �..� Required Retail Storefront Required Ralston Creek Frontage �JL-L Riverfront Crossings Boundary 71 -- University of Iowa Campus �rrr Pedestrian Street - f6- __1 }� f � I•� T) ATTACHMENT 2 primary streets and required retail storefronts Every great city has great streets. Great streets are not streets that just move vehicular traffic. Instead, they are known for their pedestrian activity, retail vitality, connectivity, and desirability as L_J J ,I a'ought-after address. In other words, they become destinations 1 1� intheir own right. The downtown blocks of Iowa Avenue, Ir I L _41 primary streets & storefronts Washington Street, College Street, Clinton Street, and Dubuque u w1+t+eeY�1 - Street best fit this definition. 1 1"'�', — Primary Street As the plan for Downtown and Riverfront Crossings comes to- - ' - L -I Required Retail Storefront fruition, additional street corridors will be added to this list. -- Outside of downtown, future primary streets should include key - I P J� Existing Waterways east -west streets such as Burlington and Court, and north -south J L ! 'I Study Area Boundaries streets such as Gilbert, Linn, Dubuque, Clinton, Capitol, and �j Riverside Drive. I o Irl Over time,these streets will transform into special 'places'. �+ - Streetscapeenhancementswillimprovepedestriancomfort, buildings - many with active street -level uses - wiII address the street, and sidewalks will teem with life. In order to encourage } the amount of street -level activity desired by participants in the planning process, retail storefronts will be required at key locations. These storefronts will have minimum floor to ceiling I: I ,' height requirements, as well as opacity requirements. Initially, r+ these storefronts can be utilized for residential uses. As more f! "rooftops'are added, this market will transition and residential / - useswillmigratetoretailuses.These storefronts, and the stores they represent, will draw activity to key nodes within the Study Area (Clinton Plaza, Rock Island Train Depot TOD, etc.). Care has _ 99 r Y been taken to minimizethe amount and location of required retail storefront so as to not negatively impact the existing Downtown retail market. _ °"_�,,,__� si J�L Rrghe PrrmaryStree6 and Required Reta rl Storefronts Diagram _ " I F _ I 0' 400' 800' 1600' ® �l 29 ATTACHMENT 3 Proposed Amendment to 14 -2G -3B -2d Title 14 — Zoning Code Article G. Riverfront Crossings and Eastside Mixed Use Districts Form Based Development Standards 14-2G-3: SUBDISTRICT STANDARDS: B. Central Crossings And Orchard Subdistricts And Eastside Mixed Use District: 2. Uses: The principal uses allowed in the Central Crossings Subdistrict, Orchard Subdistrict and Eastside Mixed Use District are the same as allowed in the CB -5 Zone, as specified in section 14-2C-2, table 2C-1 of this chapter, except as noted below. Provisions and special exception approval criteria that apply in the CB -5 Zone also apply in these districts as set forth in chapter 4, article B of this title, except as noted below. In addition, the following restrictions and allowances shall apply: a. In the Orchard Subdistrict, commercial and industrial uses are not allowed, except in live -work townhouses, which may contain commercial uses allowed in the CB -5 Zone, provided the building is constructed to accommodate such uses and provided the use is not prohibited in the list below. Quick vehicle service uses are not allowed. (Ord. 17-4705, 5-16-2017) b. In the Central Crossings Subdistrict, quick vehicle servicing uses are not allowed on any frontage designated as primary street or Ralston Creek frontage, as specified in the Riverfront Crossings regulating plan. In the Eastside Mixed Use District, quick vehicle servicing uses are not allowed, except by special exception on property at the corner of Burlington and Van Buren Streets. (Ord. 16-4675, 9-20-2016; amd. Ord. 17-4705, 5-16-2017) c. Household living uses shall be allowed within permitted building types as specified in section 14-2G-5 of this article. For multi -family uses, the provisions in section 14- 46-4 of this title are superseded by the standards in this article and, therefore, do not apply. Residential occupancy is limited to one "household" per dwelling unit, as this term is defined in chapter 9, article A, "General Definitions", of this title. The residential occupancy of a household living use is constrained by the provisions of title 17, chapter 5, "Housing Code", of this title. The maximum number of bedrooms per dwelling unit is three (3). Residential density (units per acre): no maximum. However, in the Central Crossings Subdistrict for apartment buildings, multi -dwelling buildings and mixed use buildings the number of three-bedroom units per lot may not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the total number of units on the lot, except for south of the Iowa -Interstate Rail Line, where the number of three- bedroom units for these building types may not exceed twenty percent (20%). In the Eastside Mixed Use District and Orchard Subdistrict, the number of three-bedroom units for these building types may not exceed twenty percent (20%). d. Residential uses are not allowed within required retail storefronts, as specified in the riverfront crossings regulating plan, except in the Central Crossings subdistrict for housing subsidized by a federal or state program that requires at least 60 percent of the units to be rent and income restricted. e. Assisted group living uses shall be allowed within permitted building types as specified in section 14-2G-5 of this article. Residential occupancy is limited to one roomer per three hundred (300) square feet of floor area, not including floor area within a garage or structured parking area. f. Drinking establishments are not allowed. g. Animal related commercial, repair oriented retail, and alcohol sales oriented retail uses are not allowed in the Eastside Mixed Use District and Orchard Subdistrict. h. In the Eastside Mixed Use District and Orchard Subdistrict, commercial recreational uses, eating establishments, sales oriented retail, and personal service oriented retail uses shall not be open to the public between the hours of eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. and six o'clock (6:00) A.M., except if located in a storefront with frontage on Van Buren Street or Burlington Street. MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 16,2018-7:OOPM—FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Carolyn Dyer STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: Mary Ann Dennis, Sara Barron RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommend adoption of the following proposed amendment to 14 -2G -3B -2d of the Iowa City Municipal Code by the Iowa City Council: d. Residential uses are not allowed within required retail storefronts, as specified in the riverfront crossings regulating plan, except in the Central Crossings subdistrict for housing subsidized by a federal or state program that requires at least 60 percent of the units to be rent and income restricted. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ITEM (ZCA18-00001): Discussion of Amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Municipal Code related to Required Retail Storefronts in the Riverfront Crossings Central Crossings Subdistrict. Russett noted this is specifically an amendment to the Riverfront Crossings Form Based Code to allow affordable housing in areas identified as required retail storefronts on the Riverfront Crossings regulating plan within the Central Crossings subdistrict. The City adopted the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan in 2014. The master plan identifies areas of the district for ground floor retail with the intention of creating a vibrant, active, and pedestrian- friendly environment. These key retail nodes were selected due to existing or future conditions that would enhance the streetscape. Furthermore, the plan recognizes that the ground floor in these areas would initially be utilized for residential uses until the market demand for retail increases. Riverfront Crossings Form Based Plan includes a regulating plan that identifies locations where ground floor retail is required. Russett noted that unlike the Master Plan there is no flexibility in the Form Based Code for residential uses in these areas. Planning and Zoning Commission August 16 2018 Page 2 of 6 The Riverfront Crossings' form -based code includes an affordable housing obligation. Projects that contain at least 10 dwelling units must provide affordable housing units in an amount equal to or greater than 10% of the total number of dwelling units in the project. Currently there is a City -supported housing project that is located within one of these areas where ground floor retail is required. Russett highlighted several properties in the area, the first is 620 South Dubuque Street. The project includes 36 residential units and received a height bonus to five stories due to the owner's commitment to providing 15% of the units as affordable housing. The same developer is proposing a future project at 225 East Prentiss Street and 10% of those units will be required to be affordable. The developer would like to would like to transfer the affordable housing obligation of these two sites to the property at 628 South Dubuque Street, the site of the future Del Ray Ridge Affordable housing project. The developer is working with The Housing Fellowship who will manage the affordable housing project. 620 and 628 South Dubuque Street are both in the required ground floor store front retail area. Russett gave some background on the Del Ray Ridge project. They are proposing 33 units total, 29 of which would be affordable. 4 units affordable to households at or below 30% area median income (AMI), 5 units affordable to households at or below 40% AMI and 20 units affordable to households at or below 60% AMI. The affordability period would be for a minimum of 30 years. The City has committed $330,000 to this project and the project was also awarded low-income housing tax credits from the Iowa Finance Authority. Staff is proposing an amendment to the Riverfront Crossings' form -based code to allow ground floor residential uses within the Central Crossings Subdistrict in areas identified as required retail storefront when they are part of an affordable housing project. More specifically, to qualify for this exemption projects must be subsidized by a federal or state program that requires at least 60 percent of the units to be rent and income restricted. Russett stated this amendment would provide market flexibility for affordable housing projects and Staff is proposing it is only limited to the Central Crossings Subdistrict. The South Downtown Subdistrict, the West Riverfront and South Gilbert subdistricts have key commercial corridors and this flexibility may not be appropriate as those corridor areas need to have a vibrant commercial presence and streetscape. The Park subdistrict has one small node of required retail that is important to maintain for the convenience of future residents. There are no required retail storefront requirements in the University, Orchard, and Gilbert Subdistricts or the East Side Mixed -Use District. Russett noted this proposal aligns with the Master Plan's vision of these areas originally being residential and perhaps transitioning to retail in the future. Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend adoption of the following proposed amendment to 14 -2G -3B -2d of the Iowa City Municipal Code by the Iowa City Council: d. Residential uses are not allowed within required retail storefronts, as specified in the riverfront crossings regulating plan, except in the Central Crossings subdistrict for housing subsidized by a federal or state program that requires at least 60 percent of the units to be rent and income restricted. Parsons asked how Staff came to the 60% requirement. Russett replied that was discussed with the affordable housing experts on staff and all projects that are State or Federal funded require at least 60%. Hensch asked about the number of units that will be at 225 East Prentiss Street. Russett noted that project is currently in a preliminary stage but the developer is proposing 45 units on that site. Planning and Zoning Commission August 16 2018 Page 3 of 6 Townsend inquired what would happen to the tenants that may be in the ground floor residential spaces that may transition to retail space in the future. Russett noted the market is always fluctuating and while there might be a demand for residential at one point and then for retail in the future. The idea is not to convert the area into retail if there are residential needs. Baker noted that all of the affordable housing obligations from three buildings are being transferred to one site where units will have a 30 -year guarantee to stay affordable. Russett confirmed if the affordable housing is transferred to 628 South Dubuque Street. Baker asked then if those units could not convert to retail space then for 30 years. Russett confirmed that would be correct. Hensch opened the public hearing Mary Ann Dennis (Executive Director, The Housing Fellowship) wanted to comment on the 30 year guarantee for affordable housing. Dennis noted The Housing Fellowship is a non-profit and they enter into these types of partnerships and try to get the low-income housing tax credits is because the investors get the tax credits for 10 years, they are required to stay with the project for 15 years, but the units are required to be affordable for 30 years. This is based on the IRS low-income housing tax credit, which also states a qualifying non-profit has the right of first refusal to buy the project (for the cost of $1 per unit plus any debt) from the investor at the end of the investors 15 year requirement. Once The Housing Fellowship is the sole owner of the building their intention is to keep the units as affordable for the life of the building. Dennis noted if this amendment doesn't pass this project will not move forward. Townsend asked if this has been done with other projects. Dennis stated this is the fifth such project The Housing Fellowship has been part of, they now own or manage 174 affordable housing units (houses, duplexes, condos or apartments) in Johnson County. They have been in business for 28 years. Sara Barron (Affordable Housing Coalition) noted this amendment change is another step in the City's process of facilitating the building of this project. This project will create 20 new affordable housing units and contribute to the overall quality of the neighborhood. The City has already informally acknowledged its willingness to participate in this project with the proposed residential top to bottom, and therefore the Affordable Housing Coalition strongly supports the Planning & Zoning Commission passage of this amendment. Hensch closed the public hearing. Parson moved to recommend adoption of the following proposed amendment to 14 -2G - 3B -2d of the Iowa City Municipal Code by the Iowa City Council: d. Residential uses are not allowed within required retail storefronts, as specified in the riverfront crossings regulating plan, except in the Central Crossings subdistrict for housing subsidized by a federal or state program that requires at least 60 percent of the units to be rent and income restricted. Martin seconded the motion. Baker noted this is a very specific amendment for a very specific small zone, is there any chance this will ever be applicable anywhere else in the district. Russett noted there are some areas elsewhere in the subdistrict where it could be used if the need was presented. Planning and Zoning Commission August 16 2018 Page 4 of 6 Signs agrees with the proposed change, he noted the reality is there is a lot of vacant retail space on the ground floor of some of the developments. Adding this flexibility is nice especially since it is tied to affordable housing which is needed. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JULY 5, 2018 Signs moved to approve the meeting minutes of July 5, 2018. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett gave two updates. She spoke with the chair and they discussed amending the bylaws so that will be coming before the Commission in the next few months. Also there is an implicit bias training coming up and Russett distributed a flyer for the event. Hensch noted the bylaws were last amended in 2004 so it is a good time for a review Signs noted there is a question regarding the impact of the decisions of zoning and code on the affordability of constructing housing. He would like at some point for the Commission to have a deeper conversation about that and perhaps establish some guidelines or expectations. Signs stated the reality is there are things the Code requires or that Planning & Zoning require that do directly impact the cost of construction. He has heard that anywhere from 25% to 30% of the cost of a new home is due to Federal, State and Local regulations. Hensch agreed. Martin noted it is not the purview of the Commission to worry about costs. Baker suggested having the Building Association present to the Commission regarding costs. Signs presented an example of a recent Commission decision, a project proposed off Camp Cardinal Road. Because of the Commission requests and requirements the developer/applicant had to redesign their plans three times which is thousands of dollars of work that will be added into the total cost of the project. The developer works with Staff to meet City guidelines. Martin noted in that case the applicant was asking for variances and therefore were not meeting the zone or code guidelines. Hensch stated this item should be tabled until set as an agenda item. Adjournment: Signs moved to adjourn. Townsend seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. Item Number: 10.b. i r , CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE September 4, 2018 Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 3.41 acres from High Density Multifamily Residential (RM -44) zone to Riverfront Crossings - South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC -SD) zone located at 12 E. Court Street. (REZ18-00014) (Second Consideration) ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from City Manager with revised CZA Mayor Throgmorton - Proposed conditions 12 Court St Rezoning Axiom -12 E Court St Staff Report P&Z Minutes Ordinance and CZA 1st Reading Sonia Ettinger - Correspondence Gene Chrischilles - Correspondence Prepared by: Sylvia Bochner, Planning Intern,410 E.Washington Street, Iowa City,IA 52240;319-356-5240 (REZ18-00014) Ordinance No. 18-4765 An ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 3.41 acres from High Density Multifamily Residential (RM-44) zone to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC-SD) zone located at 12 E. Court Street. (REZ18-00014) Whereas, the applicant, 100-500 LLC, has requested a rezoning of property located at 12 E. Court Street from High Density Multifamily Residential (RM-44) to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC-SD); and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that this property is appropriate for redevelopment of high density multifamily housing that contributes to a pedestrian friendly streetscape;and Whereas, the requested rezoning will result in a significant increase in residential density, necessitating street improvements for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and Whereas, the large scale of the development (equivalent to a square block) necessitates careful consideration of design, and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has the reviewed the proposed rezoning and determined that it complies with the Comprehensive Plan provided that it meets conditions addressing the need for compliance with the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan including dedication of right of way and construction of Capitol Street;and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the owner and applicant has agreed that the property shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto to ensure appropriate development in this area of the city. Now,therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I Approval. Subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is hereby reclassified from its current zoning designation of High Density Multifamily Residential (RM-44)to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown Subdistrict(RFC-SD): ALL OF LOT 5,ALL OF LOT 6, LOT 7 EXCEPT THE NORTH 50 FEET OF THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, LOT 8 EXCEPT THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, IN BLOCK 101, IOWA CITY,JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA,ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF.ALSO INCLUDING THE CAPITOL STREET RIGHT OF WAY BETWEEN BLOCK 93 AND BLOCK 101 FROM THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BURLINGTON STREET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COURT STREET, IN IOWA CITY,JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA,ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF.ALSO INCLUDING LOTS 1,2, 3,4 BLOCK 93, IOWA CITY,ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. Section II.Zoning Map. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. Section III. Conditional Zoning Agreement. The mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the property owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. Section IV. Certification And Recording. Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance, and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. Section V. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Ordinance No. 18-4765 Page 2 Section VI. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section VII. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication,as provided by law. Passed and approved this 4th day of September 2018. M OR ATTEST: Al ii' C TY CLERK A de / /j J fi {' /D !0 City Attorneys Office Ordinance No. 18-4765 Page 3 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Thomas that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Vacant—Botchway seat X Cole X Mims X Salih X Taylor X Thomas X Throgmorton First Consideration 08/21/2018 Voteforpassage: AYES: Cole, Mims, Salih, Taylor, Thomas,Throgmorton. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vacant-Botchway seat. Second Consideration Vote for passage: Date published 09/13/2018 Moved by Mims, seconded by Salih, that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. Prepared by:Sylvia Bochner,Planning Intern,410 E.Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240(319)356-5240(REZ18-00014) Conditional Zoning Agreement This agreement is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter"City")and 100-500, L.L.C. (hereinafter"Owner"). Whereas, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 3.41 acres of property located at 12 E. Court Street; and Whereas, the Owner has requested the rezoning of said property from High Density Multifamily Residential (RM-44) to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC- SD); and Whereas, the requested rezoning will result in a significant increase in residential density, necessitating street improvements for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and Whereas, the large scale of the development (equivalent to a square block) necessitates careful consideration of design, and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding compliance with the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, including dedication of right of way and the construction of Capitol Street and streetscape enhancements on Burlington Street, the requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the Owner acknowledges that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to ensure the development of the property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the need for dedication of right of way and construction of Capitol Street and streetscape improvements on Burlington Street; and Whereas, the Owner agrees to develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement. Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. 100-500 LLC is the legal title holder of the property legally described as ALL OF LOT 5,ALL OF LOT 6, LOT 7 EXCEPT THE NORTH 50 FEET OF THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, LOT 8 EXCEPT THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, IN BLOCK 101, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. ALSO INCLUDING THE CAPITOL STREET RIGHT OF WAY BETWEEN BLOCK 93 AND BLOCK 101 FROM THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BURLINGTON STREET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COURT STREET, IN IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT ppdadntlagt/rezl8-000D14 cm pentacrest gardens81818.doe 1 THEREOF. ALSO INCLUDING LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4 BLOCK 93, IOWA CITY, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. 2. The Owner acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan and the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owner agrees that development of the subject property will conform to all other requirements of the zoning chapter, as well as the following conditions: a. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any new development of the subject property, Owner shall; Submit and obtain the City's Manager's written approval of a phasing plan for the development. The plan shall include dates by which Owner shall dedicate right of way to the City of sufficient width, as determined by the City, to facilitate the reestablishment of Capitol Street. In no event shall dedication of the Capitol Street Right of Way occur more than 36 months after issuance of the initial building permit, and in no event shall completion of the Capitol Street improvements occur more than 24 months after dedication of the right of way. ii. Obtain approval of the exterior design elevations from the Planning and Zoning Commission. If Level II design review is required for bonus height, the Planning and Zoning Commission will review the proposed development plan and make a recommendation to the City Council. b. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Manager in said phasing plan or an amendment thereto, Owner shall dedicate the Capitol Street Right of Way to the City and build the Capitol Street right-of-way to specifications approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the subject property. c. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the subject property, Owner shall install streetscape improvements to enhance the pedestrian environment on Burlington Street and Court Street, as described in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. d. Owner shall satisfy the affordable housing obligations imposed pursuant to Iowa City Code of Ordinances 14-2G-8 through the provision of on-site owner-occupied dwelling units, on-site rental dwelling units, and/or the payment of a fee in lieu of the remaining dwelling units not provided on-site or as otherwise agreed to between Owner and the City in an affordable housing agreement entered into prior to issuance of a building permit for development of any portion of the above-described property. e. Development of the subject property must substantially conform to the building footprints shown in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (page 61). Any significant deviation in the building footprint, as reasonably determined by the City, must be approved by the City Council in a Level II design review process. f. Development of the subject property must include a landscaped interior courtyard between the two easternmost buildings. Access to the University of Iowa's Voxman Music Building from the interior courtyard may be restricted or limited for safety reasons if deemed appropriate by the City Council in a level II design review process. ppdadrragt/rez18-000014 cza pentacrest gardens81618.doc 2 g. The owner's architect team must have demonstrated experience to the City's reasonable satisfaction with both: 1) high-quality urban design; and, 2) large-scale student housing and/or residence halls (exterior and interior). The owner shall submit the qualifications of the architect team to the City Manager prior to the design review process to ensure this condition is met. The City Manager must confirm compliance with this condition in writing prior to the commencement of the design review process. h. In accordance with the Riverfront Crossing Form-Based Code, any request for bonus height shall "demonstrate excellence in building and site design, use high quality building materials, and be designed in a manner that contributes to the quality and character of the neighborhood". 4. The Owner and City acknowledge that the conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2017), and that said conditions satisfy public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. The Owner and City acknowledge that in the event the subject property is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will conform with the terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. 6. The parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full force and effect as a covenant with title to the land, unless or until released of record by the City of Iowa City. 7. The parties further acknowledge that this agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties. 8. The Owner acknowledges that nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owner or Applicant from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 9. The parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Applicant's expense. Dated this 4th day of September , 2018. City of Iowa City J' Throgmorton, ayor By: Attest: a r otr- / Waft/act/mile-000014 cza pentacrest gardens81618.doc 3 Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk By: A roved by: Li a. )1/42- Tull llol ityAttorney's Office � City of Iowa City Acknowledgement: STATE OF IOWA ) )ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on l�..r 9 , 2042, by Jim Throgmorton and Kellie Fruehling as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City. Lb O 5 Notary Public i nd for the Stawa ri VV S.MAYER (Stamp or Seal) co My cornritur&Wes Title (and Rank) Lia.¢✓"Se Speci- 1 / 100-500, L.L.C. Acknowledgment: State of ),,;.zL County of /-„)Scr1 This record was acknowledged before me on 8 116, ) K (Date) by Sarntes A.0Ice r1C (Name(s) of individual(5) as 0 u:ne r (type of authority, such as member)of 100-500, L.L.C. Notary Public in and f the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) erwi KELl1E K.FRUE� ,ow�lCm'respt E> 19 Title (and Rank) S a My commission expires: ppdaddagtrez18-000014 czs pentacrest gardens81818.doc 4 r � `.p CITY OF IOWA CITY � � MEMORANDUM Date: August 16, 2018 To: Mayor and City Council From: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Re: 12 Court Street Conditional Zoning Agreement At the August 7th meeting, the 12 Court Street rezoning was deferred in order to provide staff and the applicant an opportunity to discuss the addition of four conditions that were previously offered by Mayor Throgmorton in the June 28th Information Packet (specifically conditions 1-3 and the first sentence of 4). For reference, that June 28th proposal from the Mayor is attached to this memo. Through subsequent discussions with the applicant, staff has negotiated amended language to the conditional zoning agreement. The revised conditional zoning agreement is attached. This memo describes the changes to the conditional zoning agreement, which the applicant has agreed to and signed. Four New Conditions e. Development of the subject property must substantially conform to the building footprints shown in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (page 61). Any significant deviation in the building footprint, as reasonably determined by the City, must be approved by the City Council in a Level Il design review process. This language maintains the requirement to substantially conform to the master plan image on page 61. It does not reference the early conceptual massing submittal from the applicant and further allows significant deviations in the footprint to be approved by the City Council in the Level II design review process. Staff feels this language sufficiently maintains the connection to the image in the master plan, but also gives the City Council the ability to deviate from that footprint if they determine it to be in the City's best interest. f. Development of the subject property must include a landscaped interior courtyard between the two easternmost buildings. Access to the University of Iowa's Voxman Music Building from the interior courtyard may be restricted or limited for safety reasons if deemed appropriate by the City Council in a level Il design review process. This language focuses on the desire for an interior courtyard between the easternmost buildings. It removes the reference to a 'walkway' in the Mayor's proposed conditions and provides an opportunity to restrict or limit access between the courtyard and the Voxman Building if there are safety reasons for doing so. That determination will be made by the City Council during the Level II design review process. The applicant is concerned about directing pedestrians to a service alley that was not designed to accommodate pedestrian traffic. This will be explored more in the design phase. Staff feels this language maintains a focus on the open courtyard amenity and allows for further study of a pedestrian walkway before a final decision is made by the City Council. August 16, 2018 Page 2 g. The owner's architect team must have demonstrated experience to the City's reasonable satisfaction with both: 1) high-quality urban design; and, 2) large-scale student housing and/or residence halls (exterior and interior). The owner shall submit the qualifications of the architect team to the City Manager prior to the design review process to ensure this condition is met. The City Manager must confirm compliance with this condition in writing prior to the commencement of the design review process. The revised language makes it clear that the City will not be selecting the architect team, but rather ensuring that the owner's team has the desired experienced with similar projects. The language also removes the City Council from making that determination and places that responsibility with the City Manager. Staff feels the revised language still meets the intent of the proposed condition. h. In accordance with the Riverfront Crossing Form -Based Code, any request for bonus height shall "demonstrate excellence in building and site design, use high quality building materials, and be designed in a manner that contributes to the quality and character of the neighborhood" This language is unchanged from the Mayor's initial proposal and accurately reflects the requirement in the City Code. Revised Condition While discussing the above four new conditions, the applicant requested revised language regarding the dedication and improvement of the Capitol Street right-of-way. Previously, the conditional zoning agreement required the dedication of the Capitol Street right-of-way prior to any building permits being issued. It further required the improvement of Capitol Street before a certificate of occupancy could be granted. The applicant expressed concern that a project of this size is likely to be phased over several years. During the early phases of the project the Capitol Street right-of-way may be needed to maintain occupancy of current buildings and/or serve as construction staging space. Staff found this to be a reasonable concern and negotiated language that would give the City flexibility in the timing of the actual dedication and improvement of Capitol Street. The revised language requires the applicant to submit a phasing plan to the City Manager prior to any building permits being issued. The phasing plan would include the timing of the dedication and improvements and must be satisfactory to the City Manager. However, the condition states that in no event shall dedication of the Capitol Street Right of Way occur more than 36 months after issuance of the initial building permit, and in no event shall completion of the Capitol Street improvements occur more than 24 months after dedication of the right of way. Staff feels this revised language is reasonable for a project of this size and provides flexibility to adapt to a phasing plan that the City finds reasonable. It also places a hard limit on the amount of time before the right-of-way would be dedicated and improved. Further, it maintains the ability of the city to withhold permits if agreed upon deadlines are not met. Staff supports the changes made to the Conditional Zoning Agreement and recommends Council approval. Furthermore, we recommend the City Council consider collapsing the second and third readings of the rezoning at the September 4th City Council meeting. Prepared by: Sylvia Bochner, Planning Intern, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5240 (REZ18-00014) Conditional Zoning Agreement This agreement is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and 100-500, L.L.C. (hereinafter "Owner'). Whereas, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 3.41 acres of property located at 12 E. Court Street; and Whereas, the Owner has requested the rezoning of said property from High Density Multifamily Residential (RM -44) to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC - SD); and Whereas, the requested rezoning will result in a significant increase in residential density, necessitating street improvements for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and Whereas, the large scale of the development (equivalent to a square block) necessitates careful consideration of design, and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding compliance with the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, including dedication of right of way and the construction of Capitol Street and streetscape enhancements on Burlington Street, the requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the Owner acknowledges that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to ensure the development of the property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the need for dedication of right of way and construction of Capitol Street and streetscape improvements on Burlington Street; and Whereas, the Owner agrees to develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement. Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. 100-500 LLC is the legal title holder of the property legally described as ALL OF LOT 5, ALL OF LOT 6, LOT 7 EXCEPT THE NORTH 50 FEET OF THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, LOT 8 EXCEPT THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, IN BLOCK 101, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. ALSO INCLUDING THE CAPITOL STREET RIGHT OF WAY BETWEEN BLOCK 93 AND BLOCK 101 FROM THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BURLINGTON STREET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COURT STREET, IN IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT ppdadmlagt/rez18-000014 cza pentacrestgardens81618.doc THEREOF. ALSO INCLUDING LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4 BLOCK 93, IOWA CITY, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. 2. The Owner acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan and the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owner agrees that development of the subject property will conform to all other requirements of the zoning chapter, as well as the following conditions: a. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any new development of the subject property, Owner shall; i. Submit and obtain the City's Manager's written approval of a phasing plan for the development. The plan shall include dates by which Owner shall dedicate right of way to the City of sufficient width, as determined by the City, to facilitate the reestablishment of Capitol Street. In no event shall dedication of the Capitol Street Right of Way occur more than 36 months after issuance of the initial building permit, and in no event shall completion of the Capitol Street improvements occur more than 24 months after dedication of the right of way. ii. Obtain approval of the exterior design elevations from the Planning and Zoning Commission. If Level II design review is required for bonus height, the Planning and Zoning Commission will review the proposed development plan and make a recommendation to the City Council. b. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Manager in said phasing plan or an amendment thereto, Owner shall dedicate the Capitol Street Right of Way to the City and build the Capitol Street right-of-way to specifications approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the subject property. c. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the subject property, Owner shall install streetscape improvements to enhance the pedestrian environment on Burlington Street and Court Street, as described in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. d. Owner shall satisfy the affordable housing obligations imposed pursuant to Iowa City Code of Ordinances 14-2G-8 through the provision of on-site owner -occupied dwelling units, on-site rental dwelling units, and/or the payment of a fee in lieu of the remaining dwelling units not provided on-site or as otherwise agreed to between Owner and the City in an affordable housing agreement entered into prior to issuance of a building permit for development of any portion of the above-described property. e. Development of the subject property must substantially conform to the building footprints shown in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (page 61). Any significant deviation in the building footprint, as reasonably determined by the City, must be approved by the City Council in a Level II design review process. f. Development of the subject property must include a landscaped interior courtyard between the two easternmost buildings. Access to the University of Iowa's Voxman Music Building from the interior courtyard may be restricted or limited for safety reasons if deemed appropriate by the City Council in a level II design review process. ppdadm/agt/rez18-000014 cza pentacrest gardens81618.doc 2 g. The owner's architect team must have demonstrated experience to the City's reasonable satisfaction with both: 1) high-quality urban design; and, 2) large-scale student housing and/or residence halls (exterior and interior). The owner shall submit the qualifications of the architect team to the City Manager prior to the design review process to ensure this condition is met. The City Manager must confirm compliance with this condition in writing prior to the commencement of the design review process. h. In accordance with the Riverfront Crossing Form -Based Code, any request for bonus height shall "demonstrate excellence in building and site design, use high quality building materials, and be designed in a manner that contributes to the quality and character of the neighborhood". 4. The Owner and City acknowledge that the conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2017), and that said conditions satisfy public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. The Owner and City acknowledge that in the event the subject property is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will conform with the terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. 6. The parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full force and effect as a covenant with title to the land, unless or until released of record by the City of Iowa City. 7. The parties further acknowledge that this agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties. 8. The Owner acknowledges that nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owner or Applicant from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 9. The parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Applicant's expense. Dated this day of , 20 City of Iowa City Jim Throgmorton, Mayor Attest: ppdadrT/agtlrez18-000014 cza pentacrest gardens81618.doc 3 In Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk By: Approved by: City Attorney's Office City of Iowa City Acknowledgement: STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 20_ by Jim Throgmorton and Kellie Fruehling as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) 100-500, L.L.C. Acknowledgment: State of _ County of This record was acknowledged before me on (Date) by (Name(s) of individual(s) as (type of authority, such as member) of 100-500, L.L.C. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) Title (and Rank) My commission expires: ppdadm/agt/rez18-000014 cza pentacrest gardens81618.doc 4 Previously distributed in 6/28 Information Packet as IP4. Late Handouts Dist ibuted To: City Council From: Mayor Jim Throgrnorton __7/5 Subject: Proposed Conditions for 12 Court Street Rezoning " Date: June 28, 2018 (Date) G t\ Our agenda for Tuesday night's formal meeting includes the proposal to rezone 12 Court Street from RM -44 to RFC -SD. Approval of this rezoning could result in construction of what might be the largest residential development ever proposed in Iowa City. As such, it requires careful thought and discussion on our part. I generally support the proposed rezoning with the conditions recommended by the P&Z Commission. I do so primarily because the rezoning is largely consistent with the 2013 "Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan." This Master Plan is an excellent piece of work, which was developed with a great deal of public participation. Moreover, the property at 12 Court Street is an ideal location for higher density, well-managed student -oriented housing; rezoning with conditions recommended by the staff and the P&Z Commission would open up Capitol Street; and the rezoning would require any new residential structures on the site to include a substantial number of affordable units. It is also possible, but not certain, that the additional residential units would put more downward pressure on rents in general throughout the city. However, I also think it is necessary to attach additional conditions in order for the ultimate development to be more consistent with the Riverfront Crossings District Master Plan, as well as to address satisfactorily other concerns that have arisen during our past two meetings. Background When we opened the May 15 public hearing on the proposed rezoning, the Council had very little information about what the developer envisioned building on the site. All we had was a two-dimensional map showing the footprint of two rectangular buildings stretching from Burlington to Court, along with the Capitol Street right-of-way being dedicated to the City. I had heard that the developer expected to receive density/height bonuses that would maximize potential density. From this I inferred, but did not know for sure, that the developer envisioned building two elongated 15 -story structures. The proposed use was consistent with the Master Plan, but the intensity of the development appeared likely- to be much greater than the 4-6 stories plus a possible height bonus recommended in that Plan. The discrepancy led me to say that I tentatively did not agree with the P&Z Commission's recommendation. As I indicate during the meeting, I did not necessarily oppose what the developer wanted to build; I simply did not know what he wanted to build. After considerable discussion, we continued the public hearing to May 29 so the developer could clarify his intentions. The developer agreed to do this. Upon opening the continued public hearing on May 29, we learned the developer envisioned building four 15 -story buildings, which would contain 800-1,000 residential units (primarily or perhaps exclusively for students) plus first floor retail. Except for the heights of the buildings, the birds -eye view image the developer provided appeared to be very similar to what was recommended in the Master Plan. If we rezoned the property as recommended without any new conditions, the developer could deviate from the Master Plan in important ways, subject to subsequent review by the P&Z Commission and subject to final approval by the City staff and council through the Form Based Code design review process. At least one Council member argued that there was no reason to delay the rezoning and that details would be resolved during the Form Based Code design review process. However, I strongly believed the council should propose conditions for the rezoning as a way of signaling clearly what it expects from the developer rather have the developer spend a lot of money designing the buildings only to risk having the council deny the bonuses. Likewise, I thought council members would find it very difficult to reject the bonuses once the developer had spent a substantial amount of money on design and going through staff review processes. Consequently, I argued we needed more time to identify and discuss possible conditions, which the council has a legal right to do. I also wanted to learn from P&Z Commissioners why they voted unanimously to support the proposed rezoning. When I asked Council members during the May 29 meeting whether they were inclined to agree with the commission's recommendation, 3 said they were and 3 said they were not. This meant we were required offer to consult with the commission and continue our public hearing to July 3. This continuation would not and did not delay the developer's project because the developer is not far enough along in his planning for the project. Moreover, if the rezoning is approved, the developer will still need to gain staff and council approval for any height bonuses he requests. When thinking about height bonuses, it is important to keep in mind that the developer has no legal "right" to the bonuses. Whether or not they would be granted is solely up to the council's discretion. In the days after our May 29 meeting, I learned that perhaps as many as 2,000 residents, almost all of whom would be undergraduates, would be housed in the proposed development. Accompanied by the City Manager, I subsequently spoke with key officials at the University of Iowa to learn what the University's interests are and about exploratory conversations it had held with the developer over the preceding 6+ months. This process has led me to conclude that the most important things we need to do are: (1) to ensure that any residential structures designed to house as many as 2,000 students be designed and managed in a way that will enable those students to thrive academically; (2) to ensure that the overall ensemble of buildings achieves a high standard of urban design and therefore enhances the quality and character of the neighborhood; (3) to ensure that the Capitol St. right- of-way and green spaces within the development are opened up, well -furnished, and well- landscaped; and (4) to enable the developer to transfer density earned by his preservation of Tate Arms. Recommended Conditions With these factors in mind, I propose that we amend the motion by adding the following conditions to the proposed rezoning: 1. The development must substantially conform with the footprint of the buildings shown on p. 61 of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan ("Master PIan") and with the bird's eye view presented to the Council on May 29, 2018 ("Bird's Eye View"), copies of which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 2. The development must include a landscaped and well -furnished pedestrian walkway running east -west between the buildings and an interior courtyard between the Voxman Music Building and the two easternmost buildings, as suggested in the Master Plan and shown in the Bird's Eye View. 3. The Owner shall retain an architect team to design both the exterior and interior components of the development. The architect team must have experience with both high quality urban design and large scale urban student housing and/or residence halls. The architect team shall be approved by the City Manager after consultation with the City Council. 4. In accordance with the Riverfront Crossing Form -Based Code (FBC), any request for bonus height shall "demonstrate excellence in building and site design, use high quality building materials, and be designed in a manner that contributes to the quality and character of the neighborhood." The development shall be eligible for height bonuses based only on public right-of-way dedication, historic preservation density transfer, and high-quality student housing. To assure that such quality and character is achieved, the following conditions shall apply to any bonus height; A. The average height of the four major buildings may not exceed 8 stories, and the maximum heights of those four buildings must vary harmoniously. For example, the buildings could be between 6 and 10 stories with any height in excess of 8 stories to be approved by Council in accordance with the provisions of City Code Section 14 -2G -7(G). B. If the Owner seeks to transfer development rights from Tate Arms, said transfer shall be allowable as a replacement for the E -W pedestrian walkway between the two westernmost buildings with a structure not exceeding 4 stories in lieu of additional height on the four major buildings. [Bob Miklo is checking to see how many square feet could be achieved in a 4 -story structure between the two westernmost buildings.] C. Condition 4A notwithstanding, an average of one additional story may be permitted for the four major buildings in return for the developer dedicating the former Capitol Street right-of-way back to the City. The additional stories shall be used such that the maximum heights of the four major buildings continue to vary harmoniously. D. Condition 4A notwithstanding, an average of one additional story may be permitted for the four major buildings for high quality student housing if the student -housing -related requirements in Section 14 -2G -7(G)($) of the FBC are met. The additional stories shall be used such that the maximum heights of the four major buildings continue to vary harmoniously. E. In addition to the story indicated in Condition 4D, an average of two more stories may be permitted for the four major buildings if the interiors of the buildings are designed, maintained, and operated according to standards used by The University of Iowa in its newest residence halls. The additional stories shall be used such that the maximum heights of the four major buildings continue to vary harmoniously. sa+ capital street Srudew Houri V Bird's eye viers presented to the Council on May 29, 2018 Kellie Fruehling From: Rob Decker <rdecker@axiom-con.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2018 2:17 PM To: Kellie Fruehling Cc: Geoff Fruin Subject: Supplemental Packet Attachments: 180003 - Supplemental Council Info - 12 E Court - 2018_08.01.pdf For inclusion into the packet for our item and for Council -member review. Thanks! Role Decker MSE, CPG, CMI PRINCIPAL m 319.333.9322 d 319.519,6221 e rdecker@uiom-Con.com w www,axiom-c]on.com a 60 E Court Street • Unit 03 Iowa City, IA 5324+0 (81 8 0 On6 IYOV cc+ 1 SUPPLEMENTAL COUNCIL INFORMATION 12 East Court Street X 1om August 7, 2018 Council A,0N,ULTANT. Project Manager: Rob Decker - presenting Plans Beyond Rezoning: The intent of this packet it to provide the City of Iowa City Council members, as well as City staff, additional information about the overall project intentions for 12 East Court Street. It is in the intention of this team to construct a high quality, multifamily housing development on this piece of land and request the additional height (15 stories) allowed in the code by the following means.- 3. eans. 3. Historic Preservation: Transfer of the Tate -Arms preservation SF 4. Public ROW Transfer: Dedication of the Capitol Street ROW to the City 8. Student Housing: Ideally located project to provide high quality living for college students (up to 5 floors.) 10. Workforce Housing: POSSIBILITY to provide additional 5% of Units for Workforce/Affordable Housing (up to 5 floors.) Per section G of the Form -Based Code (adopted/revised in 2016), the South Downtown Subdistrict allows for a maximum of 15 stories in scale (with height bonuses granted above the 8 story base.) Densely based student housing in this area is a desirable per the Master Plan and the area of this project can support a high number of rooms. Daas'ntawn Distrin r 1 15JI1rG1h as M Y1 i 1 C,anual Crosdnys �� � �� � l # 1XIOMCONSULTANTS South Downtown District Summary Vas-er Fllan Obiiectives: } Extension of Downtown to the south } Bridge the Burlington Street divide } Provide a mix of residential, officer retail, and civic, uses } Leverage the Clinton Street mobility spine } Create new civic spaces as focal paints - Clinton Plaza and Ralston Creek Meadow } Similar intensity to downtown } Improved Clinton and Court Street streetscapes } Build on the ori -going efforts to improve quality residential design } Multiple housing option typologies } Student housing in areas with good access to campus } Office } Convenience retail limited to key corners and Transit Oriented Development (TO D) area } Potential entertainment uses , fir - Capitol Street Student Housing - As the superblork bounded by Burlington Street, Court Street, Clinton Street, and Madison Street redevelops, Capitol Street should be extended to ,connect Burlington Street and Court Street, This mould reconnect the nrigina I street grid in this location, and make two development blocks with prime street frontage. Cue to its close prex.imity to campus and the student recreation center, this site would be ideal for student housing. In particular, un iversity-sponsored, Dff- rampusr privately developed (owned and operated) efficiency or suite style apartments would be appropriate on this site. Situated internally, this site could accommodate up to 6 buildings (urban frontage surrounding internal courtyards), and yield well over 700 rooms. Additional building height and density may be possible if parking demand is accommodated underground or off-site. # 1XIOMCONSULTANTS Additional Items of Note ■ Met with the University a second time. They are not in opposition of the project and expressed the desire to have a high quality project in this location with improved access to campus via Capitol. They also expressed no concern with the proposed scale/layout. ■ Met with the Iowa City Downtown Association to go through the project. They seemed in favor. ■ UI Student Government is in favor of the project and spoke at previous meetings. ■ City staff/planning have been extremely supportive of this project. ■ Overall taxable addition to Iowa City could be in excess of 3 million annually. ■ UI and City staff have both expressed interest in future possibilities for safely crossing Burlington to the Pentacrest/Engineering campus. ■ Building will be designed with possibility for skywalk connection and safe access connection points later (similar to Voxman-City parking ramp.) ■ Pentacrest Garden apartments have been over 99% occupied for over 40 years. ■ Most years demand for these apartments fills them in February or March and only the age/dated nature of the apartments "holds them back." ■ Project provides opportunity to provide more housing to meet demand, provide highly unique project, improve area to meet more of the RFC plan, and open up Capitol Street at the same time. ■ No projects exist (outside of dormitories) that can provide this type of "on campus" living with high quality amenities, professionally managed/secure environment, and quality of student life. Supplemental Information STUDENT HOUSING ■ Student housing demand in this superblock is very high. We know this because of the historic demand at this property, waiting lists, student housing study document and City master plan. ■ Very specific and unique property provides an opportunity to do something special here. ■ Proximity to the Pentacrest, Wellness Center, School of Music, Art Museum, Library and downtown make this an ideal spot for high density adjacent student housing. Neve privately -owned student housing should meet the fcllo-wing locational considerations: ) Locutions within the University, South Downtown, or the north portion of the West Riverfront Districts; Location should not adversely impact adjacent residential neig hborhoods,; ) Directly adjacent to or withi n a S to 1 0 -minute wal k to ca mpus; ) Easy access to the trail network, usable open space, and recreational amenities; including the University Recreation Center,; Proximity to existing and proposed transit lines. ■ University supportive # 1XIOMCONSULTANTS HEIGHT ■ 15 story structure is allowed under City Code with height bonus. ■ 15 stories were approved for the 316 Madison project (adjacent) with little question. ■ 14-15 stories were planned in the Master Plan for Clinton/Burlington as well as the Hilton site. a.k.a. because Capitol shows a lower set of renderings doesn't mean they should be limited when they meet code — other surrounding properties have varied higher and lower overall. The plan should be a guideline, not a gospel. Many projects have/will vary from this. That doesn't mean that a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity should be passed up because it varies slightly from the plan. ■ Height of adjacent properties not overshadowed by this structure and topography offsets the height of this by approximately 2 stories as well. i.e. because this is on a hill, it's more ideally suited for 15 stories and helps to offset the scale of it. ■ Additional height fits the area and can be used to provide a once in a lifetime opportunity to open the South axial view of the Capitol, per the Master Plan, and provide an incredible project for the area providing great amenities for students. JC Courthouse - 815.15 Peak of Roof JC Courthouse - 837.67 Top of Flag The Vue - 850.67 Top of Roof UI Music - 789.95 Top of Elevator 316 Madison - 753.70 Top of Elevator EXPECTED 15 STORY HEIGHT: FIFE of approximately 670 -> approximately 170'= 840' #�XIOMCONSULTANTS PROXIMITY TO JCCH Around 200' away from JCCH at it's closest point. Views of JCCH aren't impacted much more than current. Pictorial survey and view -study were done showing the most areas where you can view the JCCH are unaffected and most areas where you WILL be blocked from JCCH are areas where you are already unable to see the JCCH. #�XIOMCONSULTANTS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ■ Minimum 10% as required by City code. ■ Willing to consider additional 5% for additional height bonus transfer per the FBC. ■ Market rate for rents has been driven up by incredibly (effectively 0% at one time) lowvacancy rates. Additional housing provided with this and other facilities will satisfy demand for high quality downtown living for students and provide relief for neighborhoods. CONSTRUCTION QUALITY and BUILDING PLANS ■ 15 story concrete, glass and steel construction. ■ Full architectural, engineering, and general contractor teams will provide design including full time construction administration and management. All teams will be experienced with this type of project. ■ Values of construction planned upwards of 180 million dollars — this SF price and overall project value is indicative of high level construction (similar to buildings of similar scope in town.) ■ Materials concrete, steel, glass. This WILL require level 2 design committee so it's construction can't be of lesser quality. ■ Professionally managed by full-time staff on-site with professional security available in the evening. ■ More amenities, better safety, higher quality of living for students in this South Downtown area. 24/7 professional management and security. # 1XIOMCONSULTANTS 9 qk CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOOD ■ Burlington street beautification and streetscaping per Master Plan. ■ Streetscape will provide green spaces along the Capitol Street corridor for students and the public to gather safely and collaboratively. ■ Open courtyard suggested between the West buildings to tie into University Buildings along Madison including the wellness center. Will require alley amendments for safe crossing. East side courtyard suggested to be contained and not THROUGH as this would create an access into what is effectively a street and/or University maintenance access drive creating possible unsafe conditions. XIOMCONSULTANTS ii n V f � \ 9 qk CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOOD ■ Burlington street beautification and streetscaping per Master Plan. ■ Streetscape will provide green spaces along the Capitol Street corridor for students and the public to gather safely and collaboratively. ■ Open courtyard suggested between the West buildings to tie into University Buildings along Madison including the wellness center. Will require alley amendments for safe crossing. East side courtyard suggested to be contained and not THROUGH as this would create an access into what is effectively a street and/or University maintenance access drive creating possible unsafe conditions. XIOMCONSULTANTS CAPITOL STREET ■ Axial views opened up per Master Plan When the superblock bordered by Burlington Street, Court Street, Madison Street, and Clinton Street redevelops, Capitol Street should be extended through the site in order to reconnect the grid. This new street segment will increase connectivity between Downtown and the remainder of the district, and re-establish the Griew corridor north to the Old Capitol. � L— { �, ,. • �' usys�:n`w it --IF L # 1XIOMCONSULT,AN` S 7:, ■ Opens bus route for Cambus and City Transit through heavily trafficked area transit Bus Routes Proposed Bus Routes "III"L Regional Pa=.,ot-gor P, ,i:'Srn; ir.,NJIN 1...1. Pritontial I hjh- R,. H.'4tn • (`unir,=i Fxisti7r. V,ziTPruaar; 5[ucyArc:; cnind.ai s #�XIOMCONSULTANTS GREEN SPACE — PHYSICAL CONDITIONS ■ Intent to transfer ROW to City of Iowa City for height bonus ■ Intent to ask for non-standard setbacks to: ➢ Increase character of Capitol Street corridor ➢ Allow for increased sunlight/daylight into corridor/axial path to Old Capitol ➢ Create green spaces and courtyards per the Master Plan ➢ Create spaces for student gathering — lack of which is noted in MasterPlan Additional green spaces planned for setback areas and rooftops #�XIOMCONSULTANTS View from East Harrison Street/South Capitol Street View from West Prentiss Street/South Madison Street Building Location #�XIOMC©NSULTANTS View from East Prentiss Street/South Capitol Street View from East Prentiss Street/South Clinton Street , XIOMCONSULTANTS View from South Dubuque Street/East Court Street View from South Dubuque Street/East Burlington Street , XIOMCONSULTANTS View from Mid— East Burlington Street between South Dubuque Street and South Clinton Street View from East Burlington Street/South Clinton Street M #�XIOMCONSULTANTS S 77", 77jjj Fpw iko 0 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ18-00014 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Contact: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: Neighborhood Open Space District: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: STAFF REPORT .Prepared by: Bob Miklo and Sylvia Bochner Date: April 19, 2018 100-500 LLC PO Box 3047 Iowa City, IA 52244 Jeff Clark 355 S. Gilbert Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-631-1867 jeffmc@yahoo.com Rezone to Riverfront Crossings - South Downtown Subdistrict To allow for redevelopment of multi -family housing 12 E. Court Street 3.41 acres Multi -family residential, RM -44 North: University building and Public parking ramp (P-1 and P-2) South: Johnson County Courthouse and parking (P-1 and P-2) East: Voxman Music Building and Multi- family residential (P-2 and RFC -SD) West: University building and Multi -family residential (P-2 and RFC -SD) M05-29-18 6a Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan C7 - Near Southside March 22, 2018 May 6, 2018 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicant, 100-500 LLC, is requesting rezoning from High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44) to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown District (RFC -SD) for 3.41 acres of property, located at 12 E. Court Street. The property currently contains the Pentecrest Garden apartment complex. The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan was adopted in 2013 as an element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. One of the goals of the Master Plan was to adopt a form -based zoning code for the Riverfront Crossings District that would facilitate the redevelopment of properties according to the adopted vision. In 2014, a form -based zoning code for Riverfront Crossings was adopted. The subject property is located between Burlington Street and Court Street. As part of the proposed rezoning, the applicant plans to dedicate right-of-way for Capitol Street to reopen this street, which was closed as an urban renewal project. The applicant has indicated that they have chosen not to use the "Good Neighbor Policy" ANALYSIS: Current and Proposed Zoning: The subject area is currently zone High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44.), a zone intended for the development of high density, multi -family dwellings and group living quarters. The maximum height in this zone is 35 feet. The current development on the subject property is an apartment complex in four buildings, which contains 96 units. The proposed zone, Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown District, is intended for high intensity mixed use development in buildings with active ground floor uses opening onto pedestrian friendly streetscapes. Buildings in this zone must be designed with facades along public sidewalks with parking and service areas located behind buildings in rear lot and midblock locations. This zone allows a variety of uses, including commercial and multi -family residential uses. The height for buildings in the South Downtown District is 8 stories with the possibility of 7 additional floors if bonus floors are granted for features that provide public benefit or further goals and objectives of the Master Plan. In the Riverfront Crossings zone, projects with residential uses are required to provide 10 square feet of useable open space per bedroom. This open space includes any open air, outdoor space shared by residents of the building, with a minimum width of 20 feet. Indoor activity space can count for up to. 50% of the open space requirement. The submitted concept plan does not include information on the number of units or bedrooms in the proposed buildings, but it will need- to comply with this open space requirement. The applicant has indicated that the open space will be provided in rooftop areas. The Riverfront Crossings zone requires that residential developments containing more than 10 units must provide affordable housing units equal to or greater than 10% of the total units. Alternatives to providing the required affordable housing within the development include payment of a fee to an affordable housing fund, off site affordable housing, or contribution of land. A signed affordable housing agreement will be required prior to City Council approval of the rezoning. 3 Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan was adopted in January 2013 as an element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The form -based zoning code for Riverfront Crossings is intended to help implement that vision and contains standards for building and parking placement, streetscape improvements, building form and design, and landscaping and open space requirements. The Master Plan specifically addresses the superblock bounded by Burlington Street, Court Street, Clinton Street, and Madison Street, in which the subject property is located. The plan calls for the extension of Capitol Street to connect Burlington Street and Court Street. The plan also states that this area is an appropriate site for student housing, due to its proximity to campus and the student recreation center. The Master Plan envisioned this property being combined with others in the area and redevelopment of apartment buildings surrounding internal courtyards. Because properties within this block have already redeveloped, the arrangement of buildings around an internal courtyard is no longer feasible. However, the proposed apartment buildings on either side of the extended Capitol Street complies with the broader goals of the Master Pian to increase connectivity and provide student housing close to campus. Compatibility with neighborhood: The surrounding properties are all zoned either Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown District or Public (P-1 or P-2). Neighboring properties include University facilities, such as the Voxman Music Building, the Johnson County Courthouse, apartment buildings, a gas station, and mixed-use buildings with commercial on the ground floor and apartments above. In staffs view, the proposed high- density multifamily residential use will be compatible with both existing and future land uses in the surrounding neighborhood. Traffic implications: As a condition of the rezoning the applicant has agreed to dedicate right-of-way to construct Capitol Street between Burlington Street and Court Street. This will improve vehicular and pedestrian connectivity in the area and supports a goal of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan calls for streetscape enhancements along Burlington Street to make it a safe pedestrian route to and from campus. The plan calls for a 15' sidewalk and a 5' furnishing zone, which should contain pedestrian scale lighting, and landscaping such as trees, tall grasses, bollards and chain to create a buffer between the street and the pedestrian sidewalk. The landscape features -should also be designed to discourage midblock pedestrian crossing. Given the increased density and pedestrian activity that will result from this development, staff recommends that installation of these improvements be a condition of the rezoning. Concept Plan: The applicant has submitted a conceptplan and illustrations of buildings that are similar in character to what he would like to construct. It should be noted that these illustrations are not actual designs for this property. The form -based code will require that the upperfloors be stepped back. Development on this propertywill require building design approval by the Staff Design Review Committee and City Council. The applicant has indicated that he will be seeking bonus height for right-of-way dedication. The concept plans shows Capitol Street as a two-lane street with parallel parking on each side. It is anticipated that the street will include turn lanes at the intersection with Burlington Street. There is also the possibility that the street will be designed as a 4 pedestrian street with limited or no access to vehicles. The design of the street will need to be approved by the City Engineer. The concept plan illustrates a maximum development foot -print, but the applicant has indicated that specific building design has not been created. The buildings will include parking within the buildings. Parking for the western building will be accessible from the alley located on the west. side of the building. Parking for the eastern building will be accessible from Capitol Steet or possibly Court Street (because the alley to the east is at a higher elevation, it may not be usable to provide access to underground parking). The applicant has indicated that these buildings will include roof top open space for the benefit of the residents. Summary: The proposed rezoning including the reopening of Capital Street complies with the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan. A specific plan has not been prepared for the property. If the applicant is to achieve the bonus height being requested a specific plan will need to be approved by City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of REZ18-00014, a proposal to rezone approximately 3.41 acres of property located at 12 East Court Street from High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM - 44) to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown District (RFC -SD) subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will dedicate right of way to the City to reopen Capitol Street. 2. The developer will build the Capital Street to specifications approved by the City Engineer. 3. Applicant will install streetscape improvements to enhance, the pedestrian environment on Burlington Street and Court Streets, as discussed in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. An affordable housing agreement will be required prior to the close of the City Council public hearing on this rezoning. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Concept plan Approved by: Tracy Hight e, Di or, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services ppdedminlettrepWocument2 Oil ['-��;: i� •, �..., ... sYY�kt £5W �-. _+:fit-.., _ ��r,•�i� - -'� ,, ��-��� b au � y -.J "� ' � - . „ - _ � , .01 n "^111 Planning and Zoning Commission April 19, 2018 Page 23 of 25 Freerks thanked the applicant for being patient through this process and thinks the end product will be wonderful and a nice area for the residents that will rent easily. Parsons noted it is a challenging piece of property to develop on and he feels the changes that have been made in this process make this application strong. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0 REZONING ITEM (REZ18-00014): Discussion of an application submitted by 100-500 LLC, for a rezoning of approximately 3.41 acres from High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44) zone to Riverfront Crossings - South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC -SD) zone located at 12 E. Court Street. Due to the late hour of the meeting Miklo did not deliver the whole staff report, it is online for anyone that wants to read it. Staff is recommending approval with the condition that the right-of- way to reopen Capitol Street be dedicated to the City and the applicant build or install the street to the specifications of the City Engineer. The direction of the street at this time is it will be open to traffic and not limited to a pedestrian street. The applicant would install the streetscape improvements as called for in the Riverfront Crossings Plan for Burlington and Court Streets. Additionally the affordable housing requirements Riverfront Crossings must be included in the Conditional Zoning Agreement. Miklo noted the applicant has indicated they will be seeking a bonus for additional stories on the buildings, possibility 15 floors, and the Commission had indicated a desire to see that design so that could be a condition placed on this rezoning. Freerks said she is interested in seeing the design of this project given the large scale and as she feels there needs to be usable indoor and outdoor spaces. Freerks opened the public hearing. Rob Decker (HBK Engineering) stated that this application will require a level two design approval so there will be a packet of information supplied to the City and he feels it does make sense to come back before Planning and Zoning. Decker confirmed they will be applying for height credits, they will get a lot of it from the right-of-way transfer. They will work with Public Works on parking options, and also address the pedestrian access required along Burlington Street and their intent is to do a full streetscape in the area. It will all be shown in the design packet submitted. Freerks noted she does want to see Capitol Street open to traffic and not just pedestrians due to all the deliveries that will go to these new buildings and need for vehicle unloading area (not on Burlington Street). Signs noted he is hopeful to see a dynamic design of this project, it is a premier piece of property. Freerks agrees and hopes to see green spaces and areas for activities. Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to recommend approval of REZ18-00004 a n application submitted by 100- 500 LLC, for a rezoning of approximately 3.41 acres from High Density Multi -Family Planning and Zoning Commission April 19, 2018 Page 24 of 25 Residential (RM -44) zone to Riverfront Crossings - South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC - SD) zone located at 12 E. Court Street including the conditions of: • The applicant will dedicate right of way to the City to reopen Capitol Street. • The developer will build the Capital Street to specifications approved by the City Engineer. • Applicant will install streetscape improvements to enhance the pedestrian environment on Burlington Street and Court Streets, as discussed in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. • The design plan will come before Planning and Zoning for approval. Parsons seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: MARCH 12, MARCH 15 APRIL 2 & APRIL 5 2018 Miklo noted the April 5, 2018 minutes are not in the packet and will be deferred until the next meeting. Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes of March 12, March 15 & April 2, 2018. Parsons seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Miklo reminded the Commission that in a previous meeting they recommended approval of historical landmark status for seven properties, City Council approved five of the properties. With two of the properties the owners objected and therefore the State Code requires six out of seven council members to approve and that did not happen. Miklo asked if the Commission wanted to meet with Council to discuss the votes. Freerks confirmed that yes a meeting should happen. Miklo said one possible time for the meeting would be May 15 at the Council's work session. He said that the Historic Preservation Commission is also being invited, so he will confirm the meeting time once it is established. Adjournment: Hensch moved to adjourn. Parsons seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2018 — Work Session Page 5 of 9 REZONING ITEM (REZ17-00015): Discussion of an application submitted by Cardinal Pointe West, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 7.84 acres from Interim Development Research Development Park (IDRP) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily (OPD/RM-12) zone for the property located west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and east of Deer Creek Road. Miklo stated the applicant submitted a couple of concept illustrations of what the buildings could look like. They went from the 40 unit buildings with the gablelhip roof to one with flat roofs and modular changes in the building fagade. The applicant is proposing three buildings with three different stone/brick colors for distinction. Theobald asked if the siding is vinyl siding. Miklo is unsure of the material but it is some sort of manufactured masonry product. One of the goals is more sound deadening materials due to the proximity to the highway so the Commission can specify what materials are used. Miklo also stated he confirmed that fire department is open to using pervious pavers or grass creek in the fire lanes if it is engineered to support fire trucks. The applicant is also working on identifying tree species to use in the buffer that aren't susceptible to fungus or disease. He also added there would be some gazebos on the deck areas, the whole area would not be covered but some of the area would. Freerks suggested the top windows of the buildings to be taller perhaps to break up the design. Otherwise she feels this is the right direction. Signs is glad to see each building distinctive with color. Miklo stated the applicant should have plans complete for the meeting Thursday but the Commission may still want/need to place some conditions in the conditional zoning agreement that the applicant generally follow the concept plan, the landscaping plan be approved by the City Forrester, and the Fire Marshall and City Engineer approve the design of the fire lanes. --> REZONING ITEM (REZ18-00014): Discussion of an application submitted by 100-500 LLC, for a rezoning of approximately 3.41 acres from High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -44) zone to Riverfront Crossings - South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC -SD) zone located at 12 E. Court Street. Miklo stated this property is currently RM -44 which is high density multi -family, there are approximately 95-100 apartment units in the complex. The complex was built after Urban Renewal and at the time Capital Street was closed to traffic. The Riverfront Crossings Plan calls for reopening Capital Street, and also calls for high density and possibility student housing in this area. This area is identified as appropriate for student housing because it is immediately adjacent to campus and the Code provides a bonus for student housing. A concept plan was included in the Commissioner's packets showing how the street would be reopened, and a maximum foot print of what could be built there, no actual design has been drafted. The building would have stepbacks after a certain level and there would be some usable open rooftop area. Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2018 —Work Session Page 6of9 The applicant originally submitted two designs for the street, a four -lane with parking and a two- lane with parking. Staff is inclined to go with the two-lane with parking and turn lanes at Burlington Street. Staff is recommending conditioning the zoning on the street being built as part of the development. Miklo also pointed out the applicant is hoping to use the bonus provisions of the Code. Riverfront Crossings would allow 8 story buildings in this area with some stepbacks, the bonus provisions would allow up to 15 floors and vacation of the street right-of-way would be part of the bonus provision. To get the bonus provisions the design will require City Council approval, it would not come before the Planning and Zoning Commission, just the City Council. Dyer asked if it has to go before the Council, why can't it come to the Commission first. Miklo said that could be a condition of the zoning if there is a valid reason. He noted the Comprehensive Plan does show what is anticipated here. Freerks commented that the Commission usually sees more from applicants at this point and is concerned the design will only go before City Council. Hensch asked what the goals were for opening up that street, seems like a perfect opportunity to create a pedestrian area. He noted that if this development is high density student population having traffic drive down the middle of it seems unsafe as students will cross mid -block. Freerks countered that she is excited to have the road open to traffic because often when these big buildings are developed there is no place for UPS to pull in or any other service vehicle. Signs noted that in other walkways around town (such as the T. Anne Cleary walkway) service vehicles are parked there all the time. Freerks acknowledged that but said it is different when it is private and deliveries are pizza and other types. Hensch asked if they could just have service lanes established. Additionally he noted there is a significant grade change where Capital Road will go through. Miklo said they will have to bring in quite a bit of fill. Miklo also noted by opening up the road the residents of the building on the west will be able to access the underground parking. Signs noted he is excited to see the street go through but is concerned about the size of the buildings if a 15 story bonus is allowed, and no green space. Freerks noted they are proposing a roof top green space, but wants to make clear that the expectation is more than just a few planters and a couple of chairs. What is needed is something with true green space and an area that could be used year-round. Hensch questioned how much room would be available on the rooftop with all the HVAC units and other mechanical equipment up there. Miklo noted that under the Form -Based Code they cannot build a rectangle that goes all the way up, they will have to have stepbacks and some outdoor open space. One of the conceptual drawings shows and idea of the outdoor space being atop the lower floors where the stepback begins. Freerks said the Commission would like to hear details from the applicant regarding the recreation area. Dyer commented they would like to see actual concepts, not just images of other buildings. Hensch agreed and noted that for a project of this size (hundreds of units collecting rents for 75 years) the applicant should be able to spend the money to have elevation and concept designs Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 2018 — Work Session Page 7 of 9 drafted. Miklo asked Hektoen if the concerns about open space and the streetscape are valid enough reasons to impose a conditional zoning agreement so that the design would have to come back before the Commission. Hektoen acknowledged if the rational is articulated a conditional zoning agreement could be imposed. Freerks asked about the building height being an issue for flight paths for the hospital helicopters. Miklo replied it would have to be approved by Federal Aviation Administration. Adjournment: Hensch moved to adjourn. Signs seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. Mayor Throgrnorton, Council and city planners, I write fegister my extreme disappointment in the first vote of the council in even thinking about allowing a change in the Pentacrest apartments. What were you thinking about_? Currently Burlington St is overcapacity. The through traffic already deals with buses turning, students walking out of the Wellness center, students coming out of the Lindquist Center and one day the art museum visitors. Then apartments were built behind the Kum 'n 'go gas station — dealing with cars exiting the station. Then further up, there is the Voxman Music Center- with all the inherent problems of patrons crossing the road from the Old Capitol parking ramp. Then the Hilton was added- all the while knowing that the Hieronymous square hotel was going to be built, adding yet more people negotiating these tight spaces, with all the turning traffic in and out of Clinton. I believe the Apartments company owns some 6000 apartments. Do they need more? Do they do anything for this city? i think not. There is NO WAY that Burlington needs more people or cars. Has the council been "bought" - is this bribery? This city is losing trees and walking space. and now you talk of demolishing eyelevel buildings for the sake of more concrete boxes. With or without cars, these boxes will have people coming to collect tenants to do ordinary shopping. This city has already blotted its "copybook" by ignoring code compliance on Lusk Avenue. Let's think about people and let's not use developers whose only desire is to earn yet more money without community contributions. The city plans are hidden from the public. I am told they can be accessed only online because they may change. That does not bode well for the strategic pian for Iowa City. We may be getting a new Ped mall but it looks as if there is less walking space and more gardens. it doesn't look as if we can sit under the new trees. Let's think about people and safe crossings. The crossing by the Wellness center- Madison/ Court Sts is an accident waiting to happen. This should be a 4 way stop. The student crossings at Jefferson and at Market — at the Anne Cleary walkway - should have press button walk lights like the one that is at Park Rd and Ferson St corner. What are you waiting for? Students should be encouraged to be in dorms for the first 2 years as already discussed, There is no room for more people trying to shop for groceries and live in the downtown. It would be better to have better bus services and build more human sized apartments a bit further out- eg Riverfront Crossing, The council needs to listen to the people.. Sonia Ettinger Iowa City resident for 45 years - N Kellie Fruehling From: Gene Chrischilles <tgenec@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2018 5:01 PM To: Council Subject: The coming storm.... Now that it appears the 12 E. Court property will be rezoned, there will be important and long lasting decisions to be made. I'm sure you are aware of these concerns, but I am going to refresh your memories anyway. 1. Density- Four 8 story buildings are MORE than enough for this property. Problems of all sorts increase with density. don't want the downtown area to become freakish looking. Enough said. 2. If this council is serious about affordable housing, prove it. Make the developer include it in this project, not buy out of it. 3. If this project is REALLY important to the developer, make them use private financing only. They can get it, but why should they if TIF money is available? NO TIF MONEY INVOLVED! Call their bluff if they threaten to not build the project. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this multi -faceted issue. Item Number: 10.c. I r , CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE September 4, 2018 Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 18.03 acres of property located east of South Gilbert Street and west of Sandusky Drive, from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID -RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/ RS -5) zone and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD/RM-12) zone. (REZ18-00005) (Second Consideration) ATTACHMENTS: Description 05.17.2018 Staff Report 06.07.2018 Staff Memo 07.05.2018 Staff Memo Updated Elevations - Townhomes Fusion Architects - Southern Perspectives P&Z Meeting Minutes Ordinance and CZA 1st Reading MMS Consultants - Request Expedited Action 10 ,G DEFEATED Prepared by: Luke Foelsch,Planning Intern,410 E.Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240;319-356-5230(REZ18- 00005) Ordinance No. An ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 18.03 acres of property located east of South Gilbert Street and west of Sandusky Drive, from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID-RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/RS-5) zone and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD/RM-12) zone. (REZ18-00005) Whereas, the owner, Bedrock LLC, has requested a rezoning of property located east of South Gilbert Street and west of Sandusky Drive from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID-RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/RS-5) zone and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential(OPD/RM-12)zone;and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan encourages development of neighborhoods with a mix of housing types to allow for housing options and indicates the area where this current property is located, west of the Pepperwood Subdivision, as suited for clustered units through an overlay planned development; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed rezoning and determined that it complies with the Comprehensive Plan provided that it meets conditions addressing the need for tree replacement and protection, specific roof drain and gutter orientation, and archaeological consultation prior to any additional grading; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the owner has agreed that the property shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto to ensure appropriate development in this area of the city. Now,therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I Approval. Subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is hereby reclassified from its current zoning designation of Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID-RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/RS-5)zone: THAT PORTION OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2015101 IOWA CITY, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 60, AT PAGE 106, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING at the Southeast Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015101, in accordance with the Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 60, at Page 106, in the records of the Johnson County Recorder's office; Thence S89°11'58"W, along the South line of said Auditor's Parcel, 520.60 feet; Thence N36°38'18"W, 173.52 feet; Thence N23°51'00"W, 125.81 feet; Thence N00°03'58"W, 74.90 feet; Thence Northeasterly 197.34 feet along a 500.00 foot radius curve, concave Northwesterly, whose 196.06 foot chord bears N78°37'37"E; Thence Northeasterly 329.97 feet along a 504.22 foot radius curve, concave Southeasterly, whose 324.12 foot chord bears N86°04'05"E; Thence Southeasterly 27.76 feet along a 475.00 foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly, whose 27.75 foot chord bears S76°51'30"E; Thence N11°28'04"E, 33.00 feet; Thence N07°29'36"E, 135.02 feet; Thence S87°38'02"E, 96.19 feet to the Northeast Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015101; Thence S01°17'48"E, along the East line of said Auditor's Parcel, 538.89 feet to Ordinance No. Page 2 the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said Rezoning Parcel contains 5.80 Acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. And the property described below is hereby reclassified from its current zoning designation of Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID-RM)zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD/RM-12)zone: THAT PORTION OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2015101, IOWA CITY, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 60, AT PAGE 106, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDERS OFFICE AND ALL OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2015102, IOWA CITY, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 60, AT PAGE 106, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE DESCRIBED AS: BEGINNING at the Southwest Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015102, in accordance with the Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 60, at Page 106, in the records of the Johnson County Recorder's office; Thence Northwesterly, along the West line of said Auditor's Parcel, 1150.96 feet along a 5066.16 foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly, whose 1148.49 foot chord bears N22°34'09"W; Thence Northeasterly, along said West line, 21.83 feet along a 1959.38 foot radius curve, concave Northwesterly, whose 21.83 foot chord bears N34°27'47"E to the Northern most point of said Auditor's Parcel; Thence S70°22'05"E, along the North line of said Auditor's Parcel, 110.06 feet; Thence S54°46'53"E, along said North line, 62.12 feet; Thence S39°30'08"E, along said North line, 246.13 feet; Thence N80°01'51"E, along said North line, 39.16 feet; Thence S66°34'51"E, 183.05 feet to the Northwest Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015101, in accordance with the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 60, at Page 106, in the Records of the Johnson County Recorders Office; Thence S73°50'49"E, along the North line of said Auditor's Parcel, 341.55 feet; Thence S84°28'33"E, along said North line, 242.30 feet; Thence S81°39'26"E, along said North line, 98.13 feet; Thence S63°13'07"E, along said North line, 137.34 feet to the Northeast Corner of Said Auditor's Parcel 2015101; Thence N87°38'02"W, 96.19 feet; Thence S07°29'36"W, 135.02 feet; Thence S11°28'04"W, 33.00 feet; Thence Northwesterly 27.76 feet along a 475.00 foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly, whose 27.75 foot chord bears N76°51'30"W; Thence Southwesterly 329.97 feet along a 504.22 foot radius curve, concave Southeasterly, whose 324.12 foot chord bears S86°04'05"W; Thence Southwesterly 197.34 feet along a 500.00 foot radius curve, concave Northwesterly, whose 196.06 foot chord bears 578°37'37"W; Thence S00°03'58"E, 74.90 feet; Thence S23°51'00"E, 125.81 feet; Thence S36°38'18"E, 173.52 feet to a point on the South line of Said Auditor's Parcel 2015101; Thence 589°11'58"W, along the said South line, 123.08 feet; Thence 588°13'48"W, along the said South line, 161.59 feet to the Southeast Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015102; Thence S88°13'48"W, along the South line of said Auditor's Parcel 2015102, a distance of 85.14 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said Rezoning Parcel contains 12.23 Acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. Section II. Zoning Map. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. Section III. Conditional Zoning Agreement.The mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the property owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. Section IV. Certification And Recording. Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance, and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. Section V. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section VI. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section VII. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of 20_ Ordinance No. Page 3 Mayor Attest: City Clerk Approved by or City Attorneys Office -7/�a0% Ordinance No. Page It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Vacant—Botchway seat Cole Mims Salih Taylor Thomas Throgmorton First Consideration 08/21/2018 Vote for passage: AYES: Mims, Taylor, Throgmorton, Cole. NAYS: Salih, Thomas. ABSENT: Vacant—Botchway seat. Second Consideration 09/04/2018 Vote for passage: AYES: Throgmorton, Cole, Mims. NAYS: Salih, Taylor, Thomas. ABSENT: Vacancy — Botchway seat Date published Prepared by: Luke Foelsch, Planning Intern,410 E.Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240(319)356-5230(REZ18-00005) Conditional Zoning Agreement This agreement is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter"City"), and Bedrock LLC (hereinafter"Owner"). Whereas, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 18.03 acres of property located east of South Gilbert Street and west of Sandusky Drive; and Whereas, the Owner has requested the rezoning of said property from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID-RM) to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/RS-5) on approximately 5.8 acres and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD/RM-12) on approximately 12.23 acres; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding tree replacement and protection, roof drain and gutter orientation, and archaeological consultation prior to any additional grading, the requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas the conditions outlined in this agreement address several public needs, including the replacement of trees on the property; preservation and protection of sensitive environmental features, including possible archeological resources; and the mitigation of stormwater runoff onto adjacent properties; and Whereas, the Owner acknowledges that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to ensure the development of the property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the need for the protection of sensitive natural features and managing stormwater; and Whereas, the Owner agrees to develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement. Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Bedrock LLC is the legal title holder of the property legally described as THAT PORTION OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2015101 IOWA CITY, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 60, AT PAGE 106, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING at the Southeast Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015101, in accordance with the Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 60, at Page 106, in the records of the Johnson County Recorder's office; Thence S89°11'58"W, along the South line of said Auditor's Parcel, 520.60 feet; Thence N36°38'18"W, 173.52 feet; Thence N23°51'00"W, 125.81 ppdadMagVdraft-aa-07.16.18.doc 1 feet; Thence N00°03'58"W, 74.90 feet; Thence Northeasterly 197.34 feet along a 500.00 foot radius curve, concave Northwesterly, whose 196.06 foot chord bears N78°37'37"E; Thence Northeasterly 329.97 feet along a 504.22 foot radius curve, concave Southeasterly, whose 324.12 foot chord bears N86°04'05"E; Thence Southeasterly 27.76 feet along a 475.00 foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly, whose 27.75 foot chord bears S76°51'30"E; Thence N11°28'04"E, 33.00 feet; Thence N07°29'36"E, 135.02 feet; Thence S87°38'02"E, 96.19 feet to the Northeast Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015101; Thence S01°17'48"E, along the East line of said Auditor's Parcel, 538.89 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said Rezoning Parcel contains 5.80 Acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. AND THAT PORTION OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2015101, IOWA CITY, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 60, AT PAGE 106, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDERS OFFICE AND ALL OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2015102, IOWA CITY, IOWA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 60, AT PAGE 106, IN THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE DESCRIBED AS: BEGINNING at the Southwest Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015102, in accordance with the Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 60, at Page 106, in the records of the Johnson County Recorder's office; Thence Northwesterly, along the West line of said Auditor's Parcel, 1150.96 feet along a 5066.16 foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly, whose 1148.49 foot chord bears N22°34'09"W; Thence Northeasterly, along said West line, 21.83 feet along a 1959.38 foot radius curve, concave Northwesterly, whose 21.83 foot chord bears N34°27'47"E to the Northern most point of said Auditor's Parcel; Thence S70°22'05"E, along the North line of said Auditor's Parcel, 110.06 feet; Thence S54°46'53"E, along said North line, 62.12 feet; Thence S39°30'08"E, along said North line, 246.13 feet; Thence N80°01'51"E, along said North line, 39.16 feet; Thence • S66°34'51"E, 183.05 feet to the Northwest Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015101, in accordance with the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 60, at Page 106, in the Records of the Johnson County Recorders Office; Thence 573°50'49"E, along the North line of said Auditor's Parcel, 341.55 feet; Thence S84°28'33"E, along said North line, 242.30 feet; Thence S81°39'26"E, along said North line, 98.13 feet; Thence S63°13'07"E, along said North line, 137.34 feet to the Northeast Corner of Said Auditor's Parcel 2015101; Thence N87°38'02'W, 96.19 feet; Thence S07°29'36"W, 135.02 feet; Thence S11°28'04"W, 33.00 feet; Thence Northwesterly 27.76 feet along a 475.00 foot radius curve, concave Northeasterly, whose 27.75 foot chord bears N76°51'30"W; Thence Southwesterly 329.97 feet along a 504.22 foot radius curve, concave Southeasterly, whose 324.12 foot chord bears S86°04'05"W; Thence Southwesterly 197.34 feet along a 500.00 foot radius curve, concave Northwesterly, whose 196.06 foot chord bears 578°37'37'W; Thence S00°03'58"E, 74.90 feet; Thence S23°51'00"E, 125.81 feet; Thence 536°38'18"E, 173.52 feet to a point on the South line of Said Auditor's Parcel 2015101; Thence S89°11'58"W, along the said South line, 123.08 feet; Thence S88°13'48"W, along the said South line, 161.59 feet to the Southeast Corner of Auditor's Parcel 2015102; Thence S88°13'48"W, along the South line of said Auditor's Parcel 2015102, a distance of 85.14 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said Rezoning Parcel contains 12.23 Acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. ppdadm/agt/draftcza-07.16.18.doc 2 2. The Owner acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan and the South District Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owner agrees that development of the subject property will conform to all other requirements of the zoning chapter, as well as the following conditions: a. City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement and protection plan prior to final plat approval; b. Development agreement specification at the time of final plat approval that the roof drains and gutters for lots 5-16 will be required to drain toward the storm drains on Toby Circle; c. The applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the State to complete a study or excavation plan prior to any additional grading on the property and complying therewith in the course of performing any grading work. 4. The Owner and City acknowledge that the conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2017), and that said conditions satisfy public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. The Owner and City acknowledge that in the event the subject property is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will conform with the terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. 6. The parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full force and effect as a covenant with title to the land, unless or until released of record by the City of Iowa City. The parties further acknowledge that this agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties. 7. The Owner acknowledges that nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owner or Applicant from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 8. The parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Applicant's expense. Dated this day of _ , 20_ City of Iowa City Bedrock, L.L.C. ppdatlMagVdraBKza-07.16.18.tloc 3 (LI A + A Jim Throgmorton, Mayor By: Attest: Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk By: Approved by: ,/ City Attorney's Office ' //U.fig City Of Iowa City Acknowledgement: State of Iowa ss: Johnson County This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 20_ by Jim Throgmorton and Kellie Fruehling as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) My commission expires: Bedrock, L.L.C. Acknowledgment: State of '�h County of-3-1,6,,,,snA This record was acknowledged before me on A 9list zo 7ot, (Date) by A.v.rDtp.�'S'.IorXe, ,e6 (Name(s) of individual(s) as (type of aut iplity) of Bedrock, L.L.C.. Notary Public/in and for the State f Iowa (Stamp or Seal) t WENDY s.Ii A ConijuUi n Nunn 72!420 My CorissirtExpinn My commission expires ` ppdadMagVdraft-cza-07.16.18.doc 4 STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Bob Miklo Item: REZ18-00005/SUB18-00005 Date: May 17, 2018 Cherry Creek Subdivision GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Bedrock, LLC 3500 Dolphin Drive Iowa City, IA 52240 Contact: Kelly Beckler MMS Consultants 1917 S. Gilbert Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Requested Action: Rezoning from ID -RM to OPD -5 and ODP/RM-12 and preliminary sensitive areas development plan and plat approval. Purpose: To allow development of 13 single family lots, 31 townhouse style multifamily dwellings and 2 36 -unit multifamily buildings. Location: S. Gilbert Street and Cherry Street Size: 18.03 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Undeveloped Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: residential and agricultural - ID -RM South: residential — RS-5/OHD East: residential — RS -5 West: Napoleon Park — P1 Comprehensive Plan: South District Pian — residential 2- 8 dwelling units per acre Neighborhood Open Space District: S1- Wetherby File Date: May 7, 2018 45 Day Limitation Period: June 20, 2018 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This property was annexed into the city between 1960 and 1966. Since 1983 it has been zoned Intern Development — Multifamily (RM -12). The applicant has requested that the property be 2 rezoned to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5) for 4.02 acres and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (RM -12) for 14.01 acres. A Level II Sensitive Areas Review, the Planned Development Overlay zone, is required due to proposed disturbance of previously altered protected slopes, construction of stormwater management facilities with a protected slope area, removal of more than 50% of the woodlands in the proposed RS -5 area and more than 80% of the woodland in the proposed RM -12 area. The applicant is also requesting approval of Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision. The applicant recently removed trees from the property prior to approval a Sensitive Areas Plan. The proposed Sensitive Areas Plan proposes to plant replacement trees as part of this development. The applicant has indicated that they have conducted a Good Neighbor Meeting. ANALYSIS: 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. Upon provision of City services, the City or the property owner may initiate rezoning to zones consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended. General Planned Development Approval Criteria: Applications for Planned Development Rezonings are reviewed for compliance with the following standards according to Article 14-3A of the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance. 1. The density and design of the Planned Development will be compatible with and/or complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and scale, relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout. Density — RS -5: The applicant has requested that 4.02 acres located on the south and east side of the development be rezoned from ID to Low Density Single Family with a Planned Development Overlay for sensitive areas (OPD/RS-5). The Low Density Single -Family Residential Zone (RS- O) is primarily intended to provide housing opportunities for individual households. The minimum lot size in the RS -5 zone is 8,000 square feet with a minimum lot width of 60 feet. The proposed lots range in size from 8,164 square feet to 15,404 square feet. All lots meet the minimum 60 -foot lot width. The density of 3.24 acres is comparable to typical RS -5 subdivisions and is similar to the density of the Pepperwood Subdivision, which is located to the east. In staffs view, the proposed OPD/RS-5 plan is compatible with the adjacent development and provides for a transition to the higher density multifamily development proposed to the west. RM -12: For the remaining 14.01 acres, the applicant is proposing Low Density Multifamily with a Planned Development Overlay for sensitive areas (OPD/RM-12). The purpose of the Low Density Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM -12) 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. A/ithin the proposed OPD/RM-12 zone the applicant is proposing two 36 -unit multifamily buildings to the east of Gilbert Street, with driveway access to the proposed extension of Cherry Avenue. An additional 31 townhouse style multifamily dwellings are proposed to be located on 3 Cherry Avenue and Toby Circle. The proposed townhouse style dwellings provide a transition between the single-family neighborhood and the two proposed apartment buildings adjacent to Gilbert Street. The larger apartment buildings would be approximately 800 feet to the west of the existing single-family homes. After removing street right-of-way the overall density of the proposed RM -12 area is 8.35 units per acre. When combined with the RS -5 area the overall density of the proposed development is 7.5 units per acre and is within the 2-8 dwelling units per acre shown on the Comprehensive Plan for this area. As discussed below, the South District Plan element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the clustering of development on this property. Land uses proposed and general layout - The planned development process encourages a mix of housing types and allows the flexibility to locate those housing types in a manner that fits the site. The land uses proposed are single-family units, townhouse style multifamily buildings with 3 to 5 dwellings per building, and 2 larger 36 -unit multifamily buildings with lower level parking. The layout of the streets and buildings have been designed to provide a transition from the existing single-family homes in the Pepperwood Addition and the larger apartment buildings proposed near Gilbert Street. Woodlands and slopes provide a buffer between this and the adjacent properties to the north and south. Mass and Scale - The proposed single family lots are subject to the same RS -5 standards regarding setbacks, lot coverage, and building height as the existing lots in the Pepperwood Addition. The townhouse buildings include 4 design options with a variety of building materials and roof lines to prevent a monotonous streetscape. The two larger multifamily buildings have been designed to generally comply with the multifamily design standards, including faQade articulation and variation of the roof line. The stone veneer and wood siding are intended to complement the natural environment. Open space - Lots 2 and 3 will contain over 2 acres of protected open space. However, most of that area contains steep slopes and woodlands and will have limited use for active recreation. The applicant has shown two areas adjacent to the 36 -unit buildings on lots 1 and 2 for use of the residents of those buildings. Staff recommends that the plan provide details regard the square footage of those areas, and any amenities, such as outdoor dining spw-e anal nlavnrntand equipment. Traffic circulation - Cherry Avenue will provide street access for the property to Gilbert Street, an arterial street with sufficient capacity for the projected traffic. Based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Handbook (91 Edition), the development(as proposed with 116 dwelling units) will generate approximately 778 vehicle trips per weekday. In 2014, Gilbert Street had an average daily traffic count of approximately 6,700 vehicles per day (Iowa DOT). Given that the capacity of a four -lane minor arterial street is more than 30,OCO trips per day, the additional traffic generated by the development alone will not over -burden Gilbert Street. While some of the traffic generated may choose to use Sandusky Drive for access, it is anticipated that a majority of the traffic will access Cherry Avenue via Gilbert Street. Additionally, the connection of Cherry Avenue from Sandusky Drive to Gilbert Street will provide an alternative street access for the Pepperwood subdivisions and will improve access for emergency and service vehicles. As discussed below under #4. traffic calming features are being included on Cherry Avenue. Based on this information, in staff's view the density and design of the Planned Development will 4 be compatible with and complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and scale, relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout. 2. The development will not overburden existing streets and utilities. City sewer and water is available to this property. Capacity is adequate to accommodate development of these additional dwelling units. Onsite stormwater management is required. The applicant is proposing to build two stormwater basins in the ravine located along the north property line. Preliminary storm water calculations reviewed by the City Engineer indicate that the capacity of the proposed storm water basins are adequate to handle the projected run-off from the site. The ravine in which the stormwater facilities is proposed, contains protected slopes. Currently the ravine is subject to severe erosion. Construction of the stormwater facilities will be designed to correct current erosion and prevent future erosion. As noted below the sensitive areas provisions of the zoning code allow essential utilities including stormwater facilities to be constructed within with protected areas, if they are designed to protect against erosion, pollution and habitat disturbance, and result in minimal amounts of excavation and filling. After installation of the facilities, the sensitive protected areas and associated buffers must be restored by the developer. Because part of the stormwater facilities will be located on the adjacent property to the north, an off-site easement will be necessary at time of final plat approval. Gilbert Street has capacity to serve the proposed development and Cherry Avenue will improve traffic connectivity for the area. Based on this information, it is staff's view that the development will not overburden existing streets and utilities. 3. The development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values and .privacy of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development. While the proposed development will be a significant change to what has been appreciated for many years by surrounding neighbors as open space, staff finds that the proposed development is not a significant departure from what would be allowed for a conventional development with regard to views, light and air, property values, and privacy of neighboring properties. The proposed RS -5 lots (lots 4-16) will provide a transition from the existing single-family homes within the Pepperwood Addition to the townhouse style buildings and the larger apartment buildings to the west. The apartment buildings will be built down slope from the existing neighborhood and this should help ameliorate the visual effect of these larger buildings. The property to the south is the historic McCollister Farm, which contains a historic house and a recently constructed single-family dwelling. These two properties contain a significant amount of open space and woodlands that screen them from the proposed development. Because the McCollister Farm is a designated historic landmark, further development is not anticipated. The property to the north contains Friendly Farm, an organic agricultural use. The ravine on the north side of this property continues onto the Friendly Farm property. The portion of the ravine on this property contains protect slopes and will be within a conservation easement preventing further development. This will provide a wooded buffer between the proposed Cherry Creek Subdivision and the Friendly Farm property. Based on this information, in staffs view the development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values, and privacy of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development 5 4 The combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the underlying zoning requirements or from City street standards will be in the public interest in harmony with the purposes of this Title, and with other building regulations of the City. All planned developments must comply with all the applicable requirements and standards of the underlying zoning district and the subdivision regulations, unless specifically waived or modified through the planned development process. Variations to the dimensional requirements of the underlying base zone and subdivision regulations are allowed: • to facilitate the provision of desired neighborhood amenities or open space; • to preserve or protect natural, historic, or cultural features; • to achieve compatibility with surrounding development; or • to create a distinctive or innovative neighborhood environment for area residents. The application includes a request for reduction of the standard collector street width of 31 feet down to 28 feet on Cherry Avenue. Staff recommended this reduction to provide traffic calming for Cherry Avenue, which will carry traffic from Sandusky Drive to Gilbert Street. Traffic circles are also proposed on Cherry Avenue in two locations where it will intersect with Toby Circle. The intent is allow Cherry Avenue to provide neighborhood street connectivity, but to discourage its use a cut through and to calm speeds of vehicles using the street. Staff finds that the proposal to reduce the pavement width from 31 feet to 28 feet is reasonable given the goal of traffic calming for this street. Pedestrian Facilities:_ Planned developments must include pedestrian facilities to ensure that residents and visitors have access to public streets and sidewalks, building entrances, parking areas, shared open spaces, natural areas, and other amenities. In addition, providing street trees and a variety of building facades that address the street with visible doors and windows make for a more comfortable environment along the street for pedestrians. Staff finds that the sidewalks, building designs, and street trees proposed will rneet the standard described above. Public Open Space Re uirement: Based on the 4.02 acres proposed for Low Density Single - Family Residential zone and the 14.01 acres proposed for Low Density Multifamily Residential zone, the applicant would be required to dedicate 1 acre of land or pay fees in lieu of land. The Parks and Recreation Commission will review this application and make a recommendation regarding the dedication of open space or fees. However, given the steep topography of this area it is unlikely that there is land that is suitable for a public park. Staff recommends that fees be collected in lieu of the dedication of open space. The fee can be used for acquisition of new park land or improvements to existing parks within the Wetherby (S1) open space district, including Wetherby Park and Sand Prairie Park. The fee will be equal to the fair market value of the land that otherwise would have been required for dedication. The fee must be paid in full by the developer prior to the issuance of the first building permit for any lot within the development. Private Shared Open Space: Large portions of lots 2 and 3 contain protected slopes and woodlands. A smaller are of woodland is contained on the north portion of lot 4. These areas should be labeled as conservation easements. At the time of final plat approval, the applicant must submit a legally binding instrument setting forth the procedures and financing structure to be followed for maintaining the stormwater facilities and the surrounding conservation easement. The developer has indicated that a homeowner's association will be established to maintain the common areas. The details of this arrangement will need to be addressed in the legal papers submitted, when the final planned development plan is submitted. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The South District Pian encourages development of 1.1 neighborhoods with a mix of housing types to allow for housing options. Although the predominant land use in the area will remain detached single-family housing, new neighborhoods should provide opportunities for townhouses, duplexes as well as multifamily buildings to serve residents throughout their lifetimes. The South District Plan contemplated locations where opportunities for higher density housing and clustered density should be allowed, noting: "West of the Pepperwood Subdivision, wooded slopes make traditional development impractical. In this area, the 2 to 8 dwelling units per acre envisioned on the land use map on page 53 could be clustered through an overlay planned development. Such development would rely on an extension of Cherry Street, which will provide improved connectivity and circulation for the single- family neighborhood to the east by allowing residents more direct street access to South Gilbert Street." The South District Plan indicates that property along the east side of Gilbert Street, south of the railroad, may be appropriate for town -home or other small lot or duplex development. Additional density may be considered for projects that add a unique housing element or that enhance housing diversity for the South District or that otherwise contribute to the connectivity of neighborhoods or enhance visibility and street access to public parks and other open space. The extension of Cherry Avenue will provide an important east -west connection allowing neighbors more direct access to Gilbert Street and the parks and trails located to the west of Gilbert Street. Sensitive Areas Review: The applicant has applied for approval of a Sensitive Areas Development, a type of planned development. The purpose of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance is to permit and define the reasonable use of properties that contain sensitive environmental features and natural resources, and allowing reasonable development while protecting these resources from damage. The following paragraphs describe the impact this development will have on the sensitive features of this site. Steep, Critical, and Protected Slopes - The purpose of regulating development on and near steep slopes is to: 1. Promote safety in the design and construction of developments; 2. Minimize flooding, landslides and mudslides; 3. Minimize soil instability, erosion and downstream siltation; and 4. Preserve the scenic character of hillside areas, particularly wooded hillsides. The applicant is proposing to grade protected slopes to allow installation of stormwater management facilities and to grade areas that appear to be humanly altered protected slopes. Disturbance of protected slopes and or protected slope buffers trigger the requirement of this Level II Sensitive Areas Review with Planning and Zoning Commission review and City Council approval required. Development activity is not allowed on protected slopes or in the 50 -foot buffer required around protected slopes, unless the slopes were previously humanly altered. In addition, disturbance of altered protected slopes or a reduction of a protected slope buffer may only be approved if a geologist or professional engineer demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the proposed development activity can and will be designed to eliminate hazards and will not undermine the stability of the slope or the buffer area. The applicant has indicated that the protect slopes adjacent to Gilbert Street have been humanly altered and is requesting permission to encroach into protected slope and buffer areas. There is evidence that this assessment is correct. When Gilbert Street was reconstructed several years ago, it appears that grading was done for the street and to provide fill material. Staff from the City Enqineer's office visited the property and based on the angle of the slope and the pattern of trees (younger volunteer trees being present on the previously disturbed areas) concurs with this assessment. i►A The applicant is also proposing to remove trees and grade portions of protected slope and buffer areas located within the ravine on the north side of this property and on the adjacent property to allow for the installation of stormwater management facilities. As noted above under #2. the ravine is currently subject to severe erosion. Construction of the stormwater facilities will be designed to correct current erosion and prevent future erosion. The sensitive areas provisions of the zoning code allow essential utilities including stormwater facilities to be constructed within with protected areas, if they are designed to protect against erosion, pollution and habitat disturbance, and result in minimal amounts of excavation and filling. After installation of the facilities, the sensitive protected areas and associated buffers must be restored by the developer. Because part of the stormwater facilities will be located on the adjacent property to the north, an off-site easement will be necessary at time of final plat approval. Staff recommends that healthy, mature trees located in or near the ravine be preserved and protected from construction activity to the extent possible. A tree protection plan should be submitted and approved at the time of the final OPD plan. Provided all conditions are satisfied to prevent erosion, ensure long term stability of the slopes, and the structural integrity of the proposed buildings, staff finds that the proposed encroachment into what appear to be previously altered slopes is reasonable. Woodlands: The property contained approximately 13 acres of woodland (11.28 acres in the area proposed for RM -12 and 1.85 acres in the area proposed for RS -5). The applicant recently removed woodlands portions of the property prior to receiving approval of a sensitive areas plan. The applicant claims that he was unaware of the woodland retention requirements and that trees that were removed were undesirable or unhealthy. Photographs dating back as recent to 1990 show that portions of the the area was once farmed and contained few trees. However more recent photographs indicate extensive tree coverage. The applicants engineer has provided a plan estimating the extent of previous woodlands on the property. The ordinance requires that if more than 50% of a woodland in an RS -5 zone is remove, replacement trees must be planted at a ratio of 1 tree per every 200 feet of woodland disturbance. For properties zoned RM -12, 20% of the woodlands must be retained or replacement trees must be planted. The proposed Sensitive Areas Plan includes a tree replacement plan. Staff recommends that City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement plan prior to final plat approval. Archeological sites: The Sensitive Areas section of the zoning code considers the preservation archaeological sites as well as natural features. The applicant has already initiated some development activity on the site. Meanwhile, the Office of the State Archaeologist has indicated that four archaeological sites have been reported within 100 meters of the development site. Due the density of known archaeological sites in the surrounding area, there is sufficient likelihood that other undiscovered or undocumented site may be present within the development area that the OSA recommends a field investigation by a professional archaeological consultant prior to the commencement of ground disturbing activities (e.g. grading). Staff therefore recommends that as a condition of approval the applicant hire an archaeologist approved by the state to complete a study or excavation plan approved by the State. Water Service: Water mains will need to be extended to serve this development. A water main extension fee of $435.00 per acre is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends deferral of this application pending resolution of the deficiencies and discrepancies listed below. Upon resolution of deficiencies staff would recommend approval of REZ18-00005/SUB18-0005, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID -RM to OPD/RS-5 and OPDIRM-12 and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement F-: plan prior to final plat approval and applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the state to complete a study or excavation plan. DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES: 1. Side elevations are required for the all town house units. 2. Staff recommends that the plan provide details regarding the square footage of those areas, and any amenities such as outdoor dining space and playground equipment. 3. The protected areas should be label as conservation easements. 4. The percent of steep slope, protected slope and protected slope buffer proposed to be disturbed should be reported on page 4. 5. Percent of woodland to be retained needs to be clarified. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan 3. Zoning Exhibit 4. Building Elevation Drawings Approved by: Tracy Hights , Direr, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services p pd ad m Wa#repWocument2 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN + CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION IOWA CITY, IOWA PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PL4N mm LEGEND AND ARD SITE GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND SENSITIVE AREAS -ND O'EN CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION M IOWA CITY IOWA 7 =-.N INILEIIINEEIS �8 ✓/�/ m.,�ms. (D k TIN ...wa, mm mo. .EEPEUFE ,. M.,,e.mw a,»,. o t: i' o o 1ao,E1.E11ttE1 f. 2111 M. N Mlo It 0 y ® aremErrEc.SLfIPE 1 � f SITE ON ONTRO AND EROSI AND SENSIiINEAREAS -3 I 1 � � Stu =Po I� Po 7 I � � � ' • .e - SUBDIVISION t fCREEK +a are or ova 1 fir° YNNIULTANTI Ill. ,yk yra' 8bao� _. Xx 6� 1 il. {4 E A. Iia &..,�_._.$ .,'4 ........._...,.n a LANDSCAPE AND SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION IOWA CITY, IOWA -1 Lll - 1111NI 11- T- ! ng" LANDSCAPE AND SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PL4N mm a DISTRURBED AREAS EXHIBIT CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION IOWA CITY, IOWA I ��AFEA-T D STURBED AREAS I' EXHIBIT 0 ran LEGEND AND NOTES I.E.1-1 S - x..,..9 �a x>ux9��naE9 ——Thf;,�= axaa:Exo Project Location Map o r ZONING EXHIBIT CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION IOWA CITY, IOWA o 1oTOR= P oK" AT A"", NT EBE�oxo T E10 NsoN-1.11— LI EBso A�E x --ED IR PLAT PREPARED BY: OWNER/APPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. BEDROCK LLC 1917 S. GI EBERT STREET 3500 DOLPHIN DR SE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 oEswenw xezwms vnm io xx m ns 5 n, imv, ix .ccamxa .m Trc w.T TrmEar xEmmm ix w.T eaw m, 0'E 8��55 fee[ AM. iaub•E; n znmm%."i9fei m47 si m _ iY M- m e Ei m]E'EYi]5. Tbb9'E,x9E I—— .. Bl. al f ibs9 frt, �e m. vax7 w aoxxinc. sola x. 9 rex mntxn. wm uiw ma � unMe� te� xECpmmS .. c... •s. S'a In �iTE al B] -'B-- s---E. iyou9 feet In - ]s�9�fce flm — Th ie—7-E�13 f— ewt w - —1— �m7]'s.d -I ]Meg5w5 Po`.� ze'aivf"ani'axr: mmix ariSxSs.oir.�.i Th m.� 'm'oev. .ssao f.ef; Th m19Y �vm c0'ETh Y19'S91R Th i'90 nm fxCtTh YOB o]imfke rotNny, a^ ee��w.90 18.03 AC M M CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONNENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT GT. IOWA CITv.IWv52240 m -------- ---- - 2 z—uNIN(3 EXHIBIT l,Y1tKKY L�KttK SUBDIVISION IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. --- 2/08/18 w rr�xuvxq txa. JDV weyet ro IOYVA GTv 10304-001 ly- Tll nn 00 FRONT ELEVATION z f LU ILI .i � � ,i� � �■ � NNN�■x■1.�■i■D� ai�.�5: 5�!■SS�.�'Ss: ` �' 1 , i� � x iY` ii ii ■. ■. iii ii .. ii ii. ■■. �. ■■ �. mono � iii iii � ■i .� i■ �_ iii iii � iii iii � ■■ .� ■■ .� � ii ii ii .. ■■ ii ... ii ... Him on iii iii ■■ •• •• ■■ iii iii iii iii ■■ •• •• .. ' :■ S ■-7 �i xi u1i-1ii �1i-1ii :� �■i�yS�V ii■iS'yj.yii ■a■■i i�i.�iyS.�iy`sSS■ ..-Sii i�i�.�•�.�isS■ .�i.-Lyi■•iiii ■■i ■ i�i�■�iSirs.�i.-iy7r��' ���' jj1�i_;ii■_`ii:'ii� ■1i1i;`i��'�'SLL��i'�j-■■_���i,i �.� '�■�}■.A�.� ■u1i1i• i ■a1i1ii ��S'�yd.yx■.•'��ii�■! ii��■�ry.ri:�ijyir.■'��ii � L�iyi■ii ii��■ yN i Sy. ,i i" �iy5�,i ■1i1ii ii■iiiG �� L�GV�iiiyn.yL� ����Si'SS.■i' lI n i n niiiiiiiniS�i..i■. � n�it:'i�it�'y �sjs1.��'���S�1y�'���5�19 . — nn ni■.ti■iiinil�i..i■il ' ■ xx .� i ;.�.�i i i SSL SI�LSSS—...444 .L�■L i i i �^i � – , ■ .x iii iii .� ■ ■■ ■ ■■ ■ ■ .. ■ ii iii � � ii iii ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■ .. ■ ii iii .x �i :'� iii iii �'� .. i ■■ I' ■■ i .. :' iii iii � � iii iii ': .. i ■■ ". ■ .. :' iii iii �EI i _ ISI ISI — • —.._�� —■ ■ ISI � � ■ ISI — � ■ ISI �--� 9 FRONT ELEVATION RISHT ELEVATION Rear Elevation e om Front Elevation ■■ ■ i■ INnIUIITin ■■ ! ■■ uml pppp �ail� !■ ■ ■■ ■ ■■ linlnoll^I p � �ulT oleos ��ryry�� !■ � ■ ' — NNp I! IItlIIIYIItlIItlIII I�I® III 119111tl11u�N III INII. 1111 — 9 dIIINl ■ ■ ■ tptlllllllllll■IIN ■■ �' ■■ ■■ p■_gyp■I �ii I■ ■ ■■ ■■ ■p■p ■■ �■ ■ ■ i■ I; I•hihlliN �■ ■. ■■ I;I IIIIII III III. III�If IIliiii�I i■ I■ i ■■ .III IIEIIIIIIIIIf II III, ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■■ WE ■ ■i ii ■■ ■■ ■ ■■ i �■ ■■ ■ ■ i ■ ■i i■ II�Iuluodillr 9I ■■ ■ i■ I uT11��muw81111 lI INTr_IriII ■ ■ ■■ ■ I°Iumnl 81 II'aII ILII ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■' ■ ■■ ■■ ■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ! ■■ . ■■ ■■ �■ ■ ■ ; �tl� ■■ ■■ ■ ■■ III''��'"'I ■■ ■ ■■ Illo��'IIa61118 IIID®19II�IU1 ■■ '�■ ■ i■� �r� ■■ ■■ ■ ■■ s� ■■ i ■■ �■ ■■� ■■ fig ■ ■ ■■ IllllmlouuN+ll IIIILI'dh ■■ ■ ■■ ■■ ■ ■■ IIII1°IIb�IIBJI ■■ ■ ■■ IIII'Idlm'liufi 1181"���II81 ■■ ■ ■ M ■■_ ■■ ■■ ■ !■ '■ ■■ ■■ Irl■ 10 !■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■ ■ BlillullBll III ITunm I ■■ ■■ ■ ■■ IIIIi�ililll IN i !■ IIINITnuoo NTI lenN ■■ ■ FP FP !� �I 1 y ,3 kr FH I� Cherry Ave. Apts. Concept FUSION _ ARCHITECTS, INC. - scale 1116" = 1'-0" 04/25/2018 = _ Side Elevation CITY OF IOWA CITY �-, MEMORANDUM Date: June 1, 2018 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Bob Miklo, Senior Planner Re: REZ18-00005/SUB-00008 Cherry Creek Subdivision The applicant has indicated that any revisions to the Sensitive Areas Development Plan will be presented at the June 7 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. No new information is available at this time. Good Neighbor Meeting Minutes Terry Trueblood Park Lodge 7:00 PM — 8:00 PM, 11/8/2017 Attendance: Doug Beardsley Jill Beardsley Dee Kyllingstad Dave Kyllingstad Stan Vander Weide Marilyn Vander Weide Dick Droessler Patty Droessler Alex Carrillo (Representative) Kim Bockenstedt (Representative) Andy Bockenstedt (Representative) Summary Meeting began at 7:00 PM with attendees gathering around a table that included proposed drawings of the land use change that showed how the Cherry Avenue extension would be developed. Drawings included a breakdown of the proposed property lines as well as examples of what the multi -family units, townhomes, and single-family homes might look like. Discussion ensued regarding the possible single-family lot price and the projected values of those homes once built. Per Andy Bockenstedt, the expected land value for the single-family lots is expected to be in the $65k -$70k range with the ultimate home value expected to be in the $300k -$350k range. Attendee expressed concern regarding what the expected demographic would be for those living in the proposed multi family units facing Gilbert Street. A general consensus was met amongst the representatives and attendees that the expected cost -per-unit (monthly rent or condo/townhome cost) would likely result in the property being occupied by young professionals or first-time buyers. General discussion followed surrounding the proposed streets, roundabouts, and traffic control measures as well as the design and orientation of the townhomes. Attendees asked about the time -line of the proposed land use change. Per Andy Bockenstedt, the main street connecting Cherry Avenue to Gilbert Street would be developed first with the access streets following this. The first structures to be developed would likely be some single-family homes which could possibly be included in the Parade of Homes depending on the timeline. Per Andy Bockenstedt, it would be nice to begin development in the spring of 2018. General discussion followed surrounding the maintenance of the proposed subdivision. Per Andy Bockenstedt, a covenant would be in place that lays out specific landscaping and maintenance requirements. Additionally, the streets would be lined with quality LED street lights to provide ample lighting for the neighborhood. Questions and subsequent discussion between attendees and representatives ensued regarding the likely increase in value of the overall area as a result of the proposed land use change. Attendees also commented on how the access to Gilbert Street would be very nice. The meeting ended at 8:00 PM with residents expressing excitement about the proposed land use change. Attendees in unison requested that their approval be documented in the meeting minutes. Summary deport for Good Neighbor Meeting j � 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY Project Name: Cherry Avenue Extension Project Location: Between Cherry Avenue & Gilbert St Meeting Oate and Time: 1118117, 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM Meeting Location: Terry Trueblook Park Lodge Names of Applicant Representatives attending; Andy Bockenstedt, Kim Bockenstedt, and Alex Carrillo Names of City Staff Representatives attending; Number of Neighbors Attending: S Sign - In Attached? Yes X No General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) See attached meetino minutes. Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - See attached meeting minutes. Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe; None noted. Staff Representative Comments Good Neighbor Meeting Minutes Terry Trueblood Park Lodge 7:00 PM — 5:00 PIIVI, 11)6/2017 Attendance: Doug Beardsley Jill Beardsley Dee Kyllingstad Dave Kyllingstad Stan Vander Weide Marilyn Vander Welde Dick Droessler Patty Droessler Alex Carrillo (Representative) Kim Bockenstedt (Representative) Andy Bockenstedt (Representative) Summary Meeting began at 7:00 PM with attendees gathering around a table that included proposed drawings of the land use change that showed how the Cherry Avenue extension would be developed. Drawings included a breakdown of the proposed property lines as well as examples of what the multi -family units, townhomes, and single-family homes might look like. Discussion ensued regarding the possible single-family lot price and the projected values of those homes once built. Per Andy Bockenstedt, the expected land value forthe single-family lots is expected to be in the $65k-$7ok range with the ultimate home value expected to be in the $300k -$350k range. Attendee expressed concern regarding what the expected demographic would be for those living in the proposed multi- family units facing Gilbert Street, A general consensus was met amongst the representatives and attendees that the expected cast -per-unit (monthly rent or condoftownhome costa would likely result in the property being occupied by young professionals or first-time buyers. General discussion followed surrounding the proposed streets, roundabouts, and traffic control measures as well as the design and orientation of the townhomes. Attendees asked about the time -line of the proposed land use change. Per Andy Bockenstedt, the main street connecting Cherry Avenue to Gilbert Street would be developed first with the access streets following this. The first structures to be developed would likely be some single-family homes which could possibly be included in the Parade of Homes depending on the timeline. Per Andy Bockenstedt, it would be nice to begin development in the spring of 2018. General discussion followed surrounding the maintenance of the proposed subdivision. Per Andy Bockenstedt, a covenant would be in place that lays out specific landscaping and maintenance requirements. Additionally, the streets would be lined with quality LED street lights to provide ample lighting for the neighborhood. Questions and subsequent discussion between attendees and representatives ensued regarding the likely increase in value of the overall area as a result of the proposed land use change. Attendees also commented on how the access to Gilbert Street would be very nice. The meeting ended at 8:00 PM with residents expressing excitement about the proposed land use change. Attendees in unison requested that their approval be documented in the meeting minutes. GOOD NEIGHBOR MEETING NOTICE Notice of Goad Neighbor Meeting and Open House 10/3012017 Date and Time: Wednesday, November 8, 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM Location: Terry Trueblood Park Lodge To neighbors of Cherry Avenue: The Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z)/Board of Adjustment (BOA) will soon consider a land use change for a property in your area. The property is located at the end of Cherry Avenue. The proposal is to develop a subdivision containing a mixture of single-family and multi -family houses. As the representative of this request, we would like to invite you to participate in an open -house where you will have an opportunity to learn about the requested land use change, and we can gather comments you may have regarding this proposal. It is anticipated that the P&7Jl3OA will be reviewing this proposal by the end of November. A notice of a formal review by the P&Z/BGA will be sent to all property owners within 30D' of the property under review by the City. You are encouraged to attend this meeting and voice your opinions. If you have any questions or would like to summit written comments, please contact Andy Bockenstedt at (319)331-1558 or email Alex Carrillo at alex.carrillopbockex.com. Good Neighbor Meeting Mailing List 2040 Waterf runt Dr 2460 S Gilbert 5t 2530 S Gilbert St 643 Sandusky Dr 651 Sandusky Dr 657 Sandusky Dr 557 Cherry Ave 560 Cherry Ave 681 Sandusky Dr 702 Sandusky Dr 708 Sandusky Dr 714 Sandusky Dr 720 Sandusky Dr 640 Sandusky Dr 646 Sandusky Dr 652 Sandusky Dr 558 Sandusky Dr 664 Sandusky Dr 670 Sandusky Dr 607 Pepper Dr 703 Sandusky Dr 711 Sandusky Dr 719 Sandusky Dr 1� r 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY T MEMORANDUM Date: July 5, 2018 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Bob Miklo, Senior Planner Re: REZ18-00005/SUB18-00005 Cherry Creek Subdivision The applicant has submitted a revised plan in response to concerns discussed at the May 17 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. For comparison the previous plan and staff report are attached. The minutes of the May 17 meeting are also attached. Density: The Commission expressed concerns about the overall density of the proposal. The revised plan has replaced lot 17, which was previously proposed to contain 10 townhouse -style multifamily dwellings, with two single family lots (lots 17 and 18) and two corner duplex lots (lots 19 and 20). Lots 17 — 20 are now proposed to be zoned Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5), rather than the previously proposed Low Density Multifamily Residential (RM -12). This will result in a more consistent zoning pattern for the lots located on Toby Circle south of Cherry Avenue (see attached Zoning Exhibit). With the replacement of 10 multifamily units with 2 single family and 4 duplex units, the overall density has been reduced from 7.5 to 7.18 units per acre. The proposed density is within the 2-8 dwelling units per acre shown on the Comprehensive Plan for this area. 36 -unit Buildings: Concerns were expressed about the scale of the two 36 -unit buildings proposed on lots 1 and 2, and the relationship of these buildings to the nearby single family properties. The applicant has modified the grading plan and redesigned the parking and driveways to create usable open space near these buildings. On lot 1 the parking and driveways have been moved away from the south property line and additional trees are proposed between the building and the south lot line. However, the size of the two 36 -unit buildings has not changed. The applicant has indicated that he will present drawings showing how the construction of these buildings in relationship to the hillside, will help minimize their apparent scale and visibility from the existing residential properties in the neighborhood. Usable Open Space: The Commission indicated that there is a need for usable open space in close proximity to the multifamily dwellings. The revised plan includes two areas with playground equipment and outdoor dining areas featuring paved patios, pergolas, grills and picnic tables. These areas are located on Lot 1 in the southeast corner (east of the building and parking area) and on Lot 2 southwest of the building. The grading plan has been revised to provide flat areas for these features. Landscape Plan: The landscape has been revised to include additional trees along the south property line of Lot 1 and lots 8 — 13, as requested by the neighboring property owners. Street trees have been added between the sidewalk and curb within the right-of-way. As noted in the May 17 staff report, staff recommends that approval be subject to City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement and protection plan prior to final plat approval. Traffic: The Commission questioned whether traffic calming should be designed into the rear driveway for the townhouse style units on lots 1 and 3. The alley will be narrow (20 feet wide), will be lined with trees and a retaining wall on the north side, and is divided into two segments with three driveways back to Cherry Avenue. Based on these conditions staff finds that additional traffic calming devises will not likely be necessary. July 31, 2018 Page 2 The Commission asked if an additional traffic calming island would be beneficial on Cherry Avenue where it intersects with the driveways to lots 1 and 2. The City's Transportation Planner found that traffic calming islands are currently proposed at adequate distances. An additional island is not necessary. A question was raised about the site distance for the driveway on lot 2. Staff has confirmed that drivers using this driveway will have sufficient site distance. Sidewalks: The Commission asked about the condition of sidewalks on Gilbert Street and if an 8 -foot wide sidewalk would be appropriate. City inspectors found that current 4 -foot wide sidewalk is in good condition and do not recommend replacing it at this time. Any damaged locations will be repaired by the applicant. A wide side walk and trail already are located on west side of Gilbert Street. The City's Transportation Planner will investigate whether it would be appropriate to provide a pedestrian crossing from the east side of Gilbert Street to the west side. If it is determined to be a safe location, curb ramps could be added at the time Cherry Street is installed. Stormwater: Concerns were raised about stormwater runoff onto adjacent properties. At the time of final plat approval, the development agreement will specify that the roof drains and gutters for lots 5 — 16 will be required to drain toward the storm drains on Toby Circle. In addition, a conservation easement for tree protection will be located along the south lots lines of lot 8 — 13. These requirements will minimize stormwater runoff onto adjacent properties. The City Engineer has approved the preliminary stormwater management plan. Archeologic Study: The applicant has contracted with a professional archeologist, who has completed an initial survey of the site and presented a report the State Archeologist. The initial study found that much of the property was disturbed in the 1990s with grading activity associated with the adjacent Pepperwood subdivision. Because of fill on the property, parts of the site were not accessible and need further study once the fill has been removed. The applicant has agreed to have an archeological monitor present during further excavation. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of REZ18-00005/SUB18-0005, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID -RM to OPD/RS-5 (5.8 acres) and OPD/RM-12 (12.23 acres) and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to 1) City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement and protection plan prior to final plat approval, 2) at the time of final plat approve the development agreement will specify that the roof drains and gutters for lots 5 — 16 will be required to drain toward the storm drains on Toby Circle, and 3) the applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the State to complete a study or excavation plan prior to any additional grading on the property. Attachments: 1. Revised Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan 2. Revised Zoning Exhibit 3. Previous Staff Report 4. May 17 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes Approved by: Danielle Sitzman, Development Services Coordinator, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN + CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION x/7 IOWA CITY, IOWA vzmnm r £ / SITE GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND SENSITIVE AREAS CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION _ i' IOWA CITY IOWA j -P. � / o,....,.,a.. a... E= -TEEPED E v\Val /., m l A% I• f I, 1 01 SITE GRADING AND EROSION COURDL PLAN AND SENSITINEAREA"a n � j15 CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVIIsION 1fl 12 d _ e4 -V - TIE omI IINIILTANTI N1. _ a LANDSCAPE AND SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION IOWA CITY, IOWA L1111 - T- Z 2 ' LANDSCAPE AND SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PL4N u DISTRURBED AREAS EXHIBIT CHERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION IOWA CITY, IOWA 1 11 1. —1— IT111T DISTURBED AREAS EXHIBIT mm II LEGEND AN 18.03 AC M M S CIVIL ENGINEERS LANDPLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS sown17 S. GILBERT ST. CITY, ICwasszaa Iiie'3,is , LV IV IIVV EXHIBIT SUBDIVISION IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. 02/08/18 v..gva q. emk w. Iwe w ori q. u. NPB •Ya 1"=140' S �� JAM Su�xa. woycw. IO rvn GITv 10304-001 Cherry Ave Development FUS1-:51,N ARCHITECT 5, INC. 07/03/2018 n�- hG�R�r` a Cherry Ave Development FUS1-:51,N ARCHITECT 5, INC. 07/03/2018 Eli: -,I on Cherry Ave Development FUS1-:51,N ARCHITECT 5, INC. 07/03/2018 4u '! ,F� zaa Cherry Ave Development FUSION ARCHITECTS. INC. 07/03/2018 FUS1-:51,N Cherry Ave Development ARCHITECTS, INC. 07/03/2018 FUS1-:51,N Cherry Ave Development ARCHITECTS, INC. 07/03/2018 MEIN IN NINE E11lFl,'jjjj!, III, I 1111,111 11 1 ink FU --------- ------ ------------ mbjl jullml T-1 11 -TI T- C, '17 � ,\ _ . ^ & \1 - . T- �l IIITI ..... . ..... ®-1 77771 ...... 7'1 4 13 Lu W F- \F- z RIGHT FELFEVATI ........ lu v f) V L" 7- ly fy w TOI .1 I -T. f--, �T ---------- E=r =LEVATION YY i� __ ` •� ■ I�N, I= a �• �,.� - ■■■ ■■ ■■ ■ N ■■■ ■■ on ■■■ ONE ■ ■■ Monson ■■■ �I • ' , ■■■ ■■' ■■ !� ■■ ■■ ■■■ ■■ ■ �� ■■■ ■■son SEEMS ■ 1 — ■■ = 11 I1 = ■■ ■■ = ll 11 — ■■ =EI • • u MENEM "Ill Mom 1INE 1 1 1 gmi"010 pmmm�m�-g������������IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII��� ����������IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII� mm ,��� eE�/ulaJS 11 FL F- ° L _.-._: Q X y y UC o F- g- C g- C � o LEFT ELEVATION =J FZ v U �m aow z U =o z �wr _all Ell m CL RIGHT ELEVATION o s�5'�..■il' i'�.�■i�% - � '�_.�'■.�r'�.�5.�`ij'�= ' •rs� 41::5:'9. _ �_■y}'� � •- • i s -t 'i t 'i i i s -i di i s-: 'i i i i i s -i ������� • o■ �! ■itiii!iiiS�i _ i � o � ■i ii yi':i iy, ■ ■5 �SSSLS�SSSLS��6! � e■'iiie niYi3lii'ii�.iu%1 , _ 'iL'�.��•'JL� STJT=■ SiJT■ ' � a moons on momMonson momism II , 11010001 NMI 1 1 i ■■■ ■■■ �_ ■■■ ■■■ � MSmom ■■■ � ■■■ ■■■ � ■■■ ■■■ � �_ ■■■ ■■■ �_ ■■■ ■ice �_ I��IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII���������� ��`IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII������������ IM710 IIIIIIIIIII� eE�/ulaJS 1E� O � F- ° L X LU y y UC o F o LEFT ELEVATION =J F Z v T- 11 - - ,x_N 4 z U = o � Z --� all o o� off, o o AI I RIGHT ELEVATION o 71 Y - m- m W Y cJ N ru yy� V> n. � =y i ♦ � loJM1HG\etA- F I i a,� 3 : yG v t< a � FU ISN Cherry. Ave Development South Perspectives a i c ARCH ITECTS, INC. +` ♦. �� I as ,. � , • • x� F " A;r m k ' r r F r t .. .: r FU S'4--�' Cherry Ave. Development South Perspectives ARCH ITECTS, INC. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 3 of 16 curious what accountability then; will be for her new neighbors to keep the new neighborhood from turning into the same situation they are living in now. Will they be financially able to upkeep yards and homes? Swanson Dopes the Commission will take into consideration not only what is concerning to the existing neighborhoods, but also for the new neighbors and to not ask them to do something they are not able to do and not put them in a losing situation and give them a change to thrive. Swanson doesn't believe the current plan she has seen is fair to the people of Forest View. Swanson gave additional questions from neighbors to Miklo so they can become public record and addressed at that next meeting. Sara Barron (1903 Grantwood Street), director Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition, wanted to make note on a couple issues with this rezoning project. One, there are mountains of research showing affordable housing developments do not lower property values (and she will share that with Mr. Cole) and secondly she noted the current residents of Forest View have been instrumental in helping with designing what they want for themselves in the new neighborhood and have been very active in advocating for what they need in their new neighborhood. Therefore Barron said there should be no concern that the current residents of Forest View's voices are not being heard. All they need now is for the other neighborhoods to welcome them in as part of the community. Freerks closed the public dicussion. Signs moved to defer REZ18-00013/SUB18-00006 until the June 7 meeting. Parsons seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM REZ18-000051SUB18-00005 : An application submitted by Bedrock, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 18.03 acres from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID -RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/ RS -5) zone and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD -12) zone and a preliminary plat of Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision located east of S, Gilbert Street & south of Waterfront Drive. WHO noted the property is on the east side of Gilbert Street, west of Cherry Avenue and is pretty heavily wooded. The proposal is to rezone most of the property to RM -12 Low Density Multifamily Residential and a portion to be rezoned to RS -5 Low Density Single Family Residential and both are proposed to have a Planned Development Overlay Zone. The plan also includes a preliminary plat and Sensitive Areas Plan, the plat would include the extension of Cherry Avenue to Gilbert Street and a new local street, Toby Circle, which would provide access to the single family lots and townhouse lots. The Planned Development includes a variety of housing types such as single family lots in the southern and eastern portions of the property, a series of 31 townhouses towards the middle and then two 36 -unit apartment buildings on Gilbert Street. Miklo stated the property does contain critical and protected slopes and woodlands, and some of those environmentally areas will, and have been, disturbed. There will be areas of the property that will be protected through the Sensitive Areas Plan even after the grading is complete for stormwater management. Miklo showed photos of the area noting Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 4 of 16 that staff as well as the City Engineers visited this property earlier this year and do feel the erosion in the area needs to be addressed and the stormwater management facilities may be a way of doing that. Miklo stated in terms of the Planned Development Overlay there are several items that must be considered. One is density, he noted the Comprehensive Plan shows this property as appropriate for 2-8 dwellings per acre. With the amount of open space left, this plan will achieve 7-8 units per acre so within the guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan. Another item to consider is if a development will burden existing streets and utilities and it is felt by the transportation planners that most of the traffic will use Gilbert Street, which is an arterial street, with more than sufficient capacity for a development of this size. Miklo acknowledged some of the traffic will likely go to the east and use Sandusky Drive, a collector street that goes to Keokuk Street and both of those have sufficient capacity for this development. One of the goals noted in the Comprehensive Plan is the extension of Cherry Avenue from Sandusky to Gilbert Street to provide some traffic relief and an alternative street access for the Pepperwood subdivisions. This street connection also will improve access for emergency and service vehicles. Miklo noted the sanitary sewer and water service are available to this property, and the proposed stormwater facilities are believed by City Engineers to correct a serious erosion issue existing in the ravine. The next item to consider is if the development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values and privacy of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development. Miklo stated in this particular case, the single family lots will provide a transition from the existing single-family homes within the Pepperwood Addition to the townhouse style buildings and the larger apartment buildings to the west. The buildings proposed in this plan do not exceed the height limits, will comply with the multifamily building design standards and are broken down into smaller modules with balconies and different materials in order to minimize the large scale of the buildings. Next question is if a combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the underlying zoning requirements or from City street standards will be in the public interest, in harmony with the purposes of this Title (meaning the Zoning Code), and with other building regulations of the City. Miklo stated that in this case, unlike other planned developments, the applicant is not asking for any waivers (e.g. setbacks or height), there is a proposal for reduction of the standard collector street width of 31 feet down to 28 feet on Cherry Avenue. Staff recommended this reduction to provide traffic calming for Cherry Avenue, which will carry traffic from Sandusky Drive to Gilbert Street. Traffic circles are also proposed on Cherry Avenue in two locations where it will intersect with Toby Circle. The intent is allow Cherry Avenue to provide neighborhood street connectivity, but to discourage its use a cut through and to calm speeds of vehicles using the street. Staff finds that the proposal to reduce the pavement width from 31 feet to 28 feet is reasonable given the goal of traffic calming for this street. Miklo stated for Planned Developments they must also consider pedestrian networks and facilities. He stated all the buildings will have access to public sidewalks, the sidewalk on Gilbert Street may need to be reconstructed due to erosion over the years. Also public open space must be considered, a development of this size would be required to dedicate one acre of open space or pay fees in lieu of. The Parks and Recreation Commission will review this application and make a recommendation regarding the dedication of open space or fees. However, given the steep topography of this area it is unlikely that there is land that is suitable Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 5 of 16 for a public park. Staff recommends that fees be collected in lieu of the dedication of open space. Private open space is also a consideration and Miklo noted that much of the property will be in a conservation easement with a homeowner's association being responsible for maintenance (including the stormwater facilities). Legal documents addressing these responsibilities and funding for maintenance will need to be in place at time of final plat. In terms of compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Miklo reiterated this proposal is in an area noted for 2 — 8 units per acre but there is additional text in the Plan that specifically mentions this property as being possibly appropriate for well-designed multifamily and stressing the goal of the City of having Cherry Avenue connect to Gilbert Street. Therefore, Staff does find that this proposal does comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the area. As Miklo previously mentioned, this proposal is in a sensitive area and does contain protected slopes adjacent to Gilbert Street, and the applicant is proposing those protected slopes be modified as it has been determined these are altered slopes that have been graded in the past. When Gilbert Street was reconstructed several years ago, it appears that grading was done for the street and to provide fill material. The Ordinance does allow for additional alteration of previously altered slopes. Generally, ravines containing protected slopes should not be altered, however an exception can be made for stormwater management or sanitary sewer or water lines. In this case the City Engineer feels a solution to the erosion problem would be build a series of two damns within the slopes to slow the flow of water and control erosion in this area. The City Engineer with the stormwater management plan for this application. Miklo said that the other sensitive feature on the site would be the woodlands. The applicant recently removed woodlands portions of the property prior to receiving approval of a sensitive areas plan. The applicant claims that he was unaware of the woodland retention requirements and that trees that were removed were undesirable or unhealthy. Miklo showed the Commission a series of photographs to illustrate what the property looked like before the trees were removed. The City has no way to assess the quality of the trees that were removed, they do know there are a considerable number of Locust trees in this area which are not considered desirable, but in any event the Ordinance requires that if more than 50% of a woodland in an RS -5 zone is remove, replacement trees must be planted at a ratio of 1 tree per every 200 feet of woodland disturbance. So approval of this application will require approval of a tree replacement plan and Staff is recommending that plan, as well as a tree preservation plan, be approved by the City Forrester before any more development activity on this site. The applicant has indicated a desire to plant replacement trees on the perimeter of the property as well as additional trees will be planted once the houses are built. Staff also discussed having trees planted in the street right-of-way. The Sensitive Areas section of the zoning code considers the preservation archaeological sites as well as natural features. The applicant has already initiated some development activity on the site. Meanwhile, the Office of the State Archaeologist has indicated that four archaeological sites have been reported within 100 meters of the development site. Due the density of known archaeological sites in the surrounding area, there is sufficient likelihood that other undiscovered or undocumented site may be present within the development area that the OSA recommends a field investigation by a professional archaeological consultant prior to the commencement of ground disturbing activities (e.g. grading). Staff therefore recommends that as a condition of approval the applicant hire an archaeologist approved by the State Archeologist to complete a study or excavation plan approved by the State Archeologist. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 6 of 16 Miklo noted there are a variety of townhouse designs proposed along Cherry Avenue and Toby Circle. With the two multifamily buildings along Gilbert Street there would be underground parking as well as some surface parking. The applicant is proposing two outdoor activity areas, one for each apartment building, and a playground area for the townhouses. When the Staff Report was distributed there were some deficiencies in terms of the materials required, those have been satisfied. Therefore Staff is recommending approval of REZ18-000051SUB18-0005, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID -RM to OPD/RS-5 and OPDIRM-12 and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement plan prior to final plat approval and applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the state to complete a study or excavation pian. Theobald asked about the sidewalk on Gilbert Street and Miklo explained it is there however has been covered by erosion over the years and as part of this development the sidewalk will need to be repaired. Freerks asked about the sensitive areas that will not be disturbed and Miklo showed the areas as well as areas that will be disturbed for the needs of stormwater management. Martin questioned the fees in lieu of park space and if the woodlands could become park space. Miklo stated that based on past experiences and the direction of the Parks Director this area is not the type of space the City would want to maintain for parkland, the Ordinance is very specific in requiring neighborhood open space, usable open space for playground equipment, and playing fields. This area is also too steep and could be a liability for the City. There are two other parks in the area, Wetherby Park and Sand Hill Park so the fees collected from this development will be applied to those existing parks. Theobald asked about the two roundabouts or calming circles that will be placed on Cherry Avenue and who is responsible for maintaining them. Miklo replied it will be the responsibility of the homeowners association. Freerks asked about the process for determining if a site may be an archeological site. Miklo said the City will notify the State Archaeologist of the development and they will review their records and if desired could come and review the site prior to development. Freerks questioned how the City can prevent disturbance of areas before a study is conducted. Miklo stated the applicant must have permission from the City before any work on the site is started. Hensch noted the new extension of Cherry Avenue appears to be more than 1000 feet long and he likes that there will be two calming islands placed on the street however feels the third intersection to the west should have some intersection control as there are more units in that area with the two higher density buildings. Miklo noted he discussed this with the transportation planners and engineers and they felt due to the grade and the intersection traffic will naturally slow. Hensch is also concerned about the alley, it is also a long stretch of road without any control. Miklo stated if that is a concern the Commission can require some traffic calming devices to be placed in the alley. Parsons asked if the City will allow on street parking on collector streets such as Cherry Avenue. Miklo confirmed they do, on street parking will be allowed on one side. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 7 of 16 Signs questioned the topography of the area coming off of Gilbert Street and the slope, so he assumes there will need to be grading to put in the street and questions if there will be any retention landscaping in that area. Miklo said that has not been discussed by City Staff however the applicant's engineer may be able to address the concern. Dyer questioned the visibility at the intersection where the two large buildings will be for traffic coming off Gilbert Street. Miklo said the driveway is at a right angle and then turns sharply so should be okay. Freerks asked about the discrepancies listed in the Staff Report. Miklo confirmed all those discrepancies have been resolved. Hensch asked about the north boundary of these parcels and if the boundary was going through the ravine. Miklo confirmed it is, and a portion of the ravine is on a neighboring properly and a portion of the stormwater retention work would occur on the neighboring property and will require an easement and consent of the neighboring property. Freerks opened the public hearing. Andrew Bockenstedt (3500 Dolphin Drive) is the owner of Bedrock LLC (the applicant). He stated he has done excavation work on developments in Iowa City but this is the first complete development for his company in Iowa City. Freorks noted the sensitive areas of the property and the importance of maintaining the sensitive areas in the Iowa City community, and is questioning the removal of trees and beginning work on the site and ignorance regarding a sensitive areas ordinance in the City. Bockenstedt admitted he made an error in removing the trees. He stated the first house he built was at 560 Cherry Avenue and saw the whole property as a conn field in 1992. Freerks understands that, however since 1992 new rules have been created to protect sensitive areas. She asked if Bockenstedt was working with Southgate Development or MMS Consultants. Bockenstedt said he is an excavation contractor and an ambitious fellow and his ambition got the best of him as he jumped into working the area but was not aware removing trees was in the ordinance, he did not disturb the slopes. He felt that piles of dirt from developments in Pepperwood had been dumped on the property and trees and such were growing in the piles and he felt those could be removed. He doesn't feel he disturbed any of the soil within in the possible archeological areas and the native vegetation under all the mounds of dirt and trees he moved are still intact. Bockenstedt admits he made a mistake in moving the dirt and removing the trees and apologizes. Hensch asked if they harvested any of the trees removed and Bockenstedt said they did harvest the walnut trees that were of any value, they did not destroy them. Dyer asked when the trees were removed. Bockenstedt replied it was after the first of the year, maybe February. Dyer noted there is provision regarding trees that harbor Indiana Brown Bats those trees can only be harvested between October 1 and April 1. Freerks referenced the Comprehensive Plan and the density for this area which states 2-8 units per acre and the proposal is for 7-8 units per acne so very close to the maximum. Therefore Freerks feels there should be a few more amenities in the area for residents. Bockenstedt said he will entertain ideas and be willing to incorporate them if able. Freerks said just added open green space can be attractive, so children can run, kick a soccer ball, etc. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 8 of 16 Hensch asked about the three, four and five-plex buildings and if they were all three bedroom units. Bockenstedt confirmed that is correct. Hensch noted that appears to be attractive to families and because of that there needs to be open space for children to play. Although the development is close to Wetherby Park, it is still a mile or over away depending on which end of the development one lives. Dyer observed the single family lots back up to the parking area for the bigger apartment buildings and wonder if those homes will object to having an apartment building parking lot in their backyard. Freerks agreed and said there will need to be a buffer. Miklo noted the house lots will be at a considerable higher grade than the apartment buildings so there will be a natural buffer for lights and noise from the parking lots. He stated there will also be a large retaining wall there. Freerks questioned the safety issues of having a large retaining wall and there might need to be a fence. Hensch noted the issues of soil erosion and water retention in this area and the easiest way to keep the water on the property is to minimize the amount of concrete. Bockenstedt stated the townhouses are actually drive -under, the garage tucked under the house. Hensch agreed that will be helpful but still feels there needs to be an overall look at any spaces they can minimize the use of concrete. Miklo noted on the latest plan the applicant did add a little landscaping between the driveways of each townhome. Joel Kline (2460 South Gilbert Street) owns the McCollister Historic Farm House to the south of the applicant's property. It was originally the farm house for 800 acres that would have included this property. Kline noted that last time he came before this Commission was when he wanted to build a garage and had to make sure it was built in the style that was appropriate. He added they have been good stewards of the property, they have restored the inside and kept the outside consistent with the original appearance. Kline confirmed the concerns of single family residences next to apartment buildings resonates with him quite a bit. He is not opposed to development but feels it is necessary to be sensitive to the historic neighboring property. Kline raised a number of issues, first with regards to the trees, when you look back at the 1930's it was started this area was open fields but it appears there was a border on the southern edge of mature walnut trees and those trees would have provided a buffer between his properly and this development. Kline also noted he never received any invitation to a good neighbor meeting to discuss this development prior to this evening. Kline said one of the benefits is trees will absorb water and over the years Kline noted they have had significant water coming down from the north, they have put in gravel and paved the driveway in an effort to help with runoff. He is concerned with water runoff to the south with this development. The biggest concern for Kline is the 36 unit 3 -story building that will abut right up to his property, he would like to see a lower building and perhaps set back. He noted the open space those families will use will be on his property and his neighbors. Another concern is the traffic on Gilbert Street, the traffic on that street continues to increase, a stop sign has just been placed at the intersection of Gilbert and McCollister, but adding 790 additional vehicles from this development will add to the stress of roadway usage. To reiterate, his concerns are about water, trees, light and other forms of intrusion onto his property be considered, perhaps a berm could be created between his property and the development property to minimize intrusion. Freerks asked how close the 36 unit building will be to the property line. Miklo said it would be 23 feet from the property line. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 9 of 16 Parsons asked about the good neighbor meeting. Miklo said the applicant will need to address the discussion at the meeting. Don Cochran (2530 South Gilbert Street) lives on the other parcel that is just south of the proposed development. He purchased the entire 10 lot property approximately 15 years ago and has another owner that wanted the home and to renovate the historic home so they subdivided the property breaking off the house from the other outbuildings. Cochran corrected some items from the Staff Report, specifically on bullet point 3 (not adversely affecting views) and this discussion that the two McCollister Farm properties have their own built-in buffer and there wouldn't likely be any future subdividing of the property. Cochran had submitted a 7 lot subdivision to the City at one point when he first bought the property. He owns 6 acres, he is 57 years old, it is a lot to keep up, there is a lot invested in just the value of the property, and there would be intent in the future to subdivide it. Cochran is not sure he would divide it into 7 lots, maybe only 3 however the opportunity is there. If a subdivision of his property happens, the prime lots will be the ones that will border where the 36 unit building will be. Therefore Cochran would state there is an adverse effect to his property. When Cochran subdivided the property, he specifically subdivided it RS -5 because he didn't want to build a big building there and didn't want another owner to come in a build a big building there either. Cochran is concerned about how close the large 36 unit building will be to his property, however, he does think Bockenstedt has a great vision. Cochran stated he has three concerns, one is the buffer zone, which has been discussed, but would also like to see more specific examples of what plantings will be used along the property lines. He is concerned about the height of the 36 unit building and that it will be seen from all angles. Perhaps the building could be made into an L shape and therefore would be placed further away from his property line. Finally he is concerned about the traffic on Gilbert Street, and the number of people will be crossing the street as the sidewalk on the west side is not complete. Cochran has one other correction to the Staff Report, it sates the apartment building is 800 feet from any other structures, that might be true to the Sandusky area but Kline's house is actually only about 300 feet from the fence line . Miklo clarified that when the Staff Report mentions the 800 feet, it specifically is referencing the Pepperwood subdivision. Shannon Patrick (652 Sandusky Drive) is concerned with this development and not in favor. Patrick said the items wrong with this proposal are community outreach. As stated in the packet there was a good neighbor meeting however he never received notice, and he is within the 200 feet line. The second issue it the trees, he understands it is presented as a mistake, however as a neighboring homeowner you see the bulldozers going in and all the trees removed with no notice of why. Patrick added this does not help with building trust with the developer, he added there is a sense of community in his neighborhood and they should have been contacted. Patrick next discussed the concern with the density of the proposal, the surrounding neighborhood is RS -5 and this will be rows of townhomes and a 20 foot apartment building poking over the hill. This is not with keeping the character of the area, it transitions the area from a neighborhood to just housing. Having lived in Coralville next to HyVee he has seen where those areas of houses become rentals over time as no one wants to buy next to large apartment buildings. Patrick shared the concern regarding density, lack of space, does not achieve the feeling of long-term residents. He does feel housing is needed in the area, especially low-income housing, however trying to shove 400 people into a small area will create housing, not a neighborhood. This level of density does not fit the character of the area. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 10 of 16 Patrick next commented on the extension of Cherry Avenue ana witn the addition of the traffic circles it will not be any faster for residents on Sandusky to take that way to Gilbert Street than to go the current routes, the road extension is not needed. He feels the road extension will add to traffic concerns not alleviate them. Patrick's final point is regarding the school district and the fact is Iowa City is the 14th most economically segregated city, and on the school side of things the district has been trying to deal with this problem that effectively has all the high density, more affordable housing, is all in the same part of town. This development will be in the Twain district. In some areas of Iowa City the schools have a 5% reduced or free lunch percentage, which is upwards of 70% reduced or free lunch percentage. Alexander school is similar to Twain as well. Adding this much development will exasperate the situation and work against the School Board's work to try to spread out affordable housing amongst the schools. Patrick noted that Kingsley Botchway, on the City Council, is very aware of the school district concerns and adding several hundred units in this area will not help the situation. Patrick closed by saying he is not against development, he likes and wants more neighbors, the way to achieve it is to have a mixture of multifamily, such as four-plexes scattered within single family, and meet the character of the area. Alex Carrillo (373 Windmill Place) works with Bockenstedt as the director of operations for Bockenstedt Excavating and apologized to the gentleman who didn't receive the good neighbor notice. They did hold a neighborhood meeting and he hand -delivered notices to all the Sandusky mailboxes, mailed notices to the two parcels to the south and the Braverman property to the north. The meeting was held on November 8, 2017, at the Terry Trueblood Park Lodge. The Beardsley's attended, Kyllingstad, Vanderweeds, and Russells also attended and good conversation was shared. Freerks closed the public discussion. Hensch moved to defer REZ18-000051SUB18-00005 until the June 7 meeting. Martin seconded the motion. Freerks noted there has been good conversation this evening regarding concerns. Signs wanted to acknowledge the point regarding the large size of the single-family lots allows for the higher density in the multifamily areas. Freerks agrees and feels perhaps the multifamily 36 unit buildings could be smaller. Freerks also reiterated the concern about the open space and amenities. She feels they are trying to squeeze so much into this area and perhaps if it were left a bit more open it would be a better environment, and a better long-term neighborhood. Signs stated he normally is all for density but for some reason this proposal does not work for him and is concerned about the two very large buildings on top of a hill overlooking a valley and that exasperates the visual impact of the buildings. He also is very concerned about how close it is to the south property line. He noted the conservation easement disappears at the south edge of the building and that is where it is needed the most. He agrees with the comments that this development is out of character for this area. Martin said when looking at the larger area (Pepperwood, across the street, etc.) a better continuity needs to be explored. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 11 of 16 Freerks acknowledged it is a tough lot to develop and it likely why it has been undeveloped for so long. She discussed the buffers and possible berms and water flow, especially to the south, and wants to see a tree protection plan. Martin asked for more information about the state archeological findings and the implications. Freerks noted the Comprehensive Plan states for this area to be a distinctive and innovative environment for the neighborhood and a need for facilities and amenities and she is not seeing that in this proposal. Signs added sticking pergolas on the edge of a parking lot next to a retaining wall is not particularly a user friendly alternative. He would agree there is just a lack of usable open space Hensch stated his concerns are to maintain the integrity of that area, as well as the amenities issues. He added one of the focuses is to keep the neighborhoods walkable, and therefore he feels there needs to be a six foot sidewalk the entire length of Gilbert Street along this property. Within the development there is too much concrete, they need to find ways to keep the stormwater on the property as much as possible, there is a real problem with erosion on the north side and that needs to be addressed on the site as well as remediate the erosion that has occurred. Hench echoed other's concerns that there simply is not enough open space, he is a big fan of density but also feels they need to create neighborhoods and the way to accomplish that is to give people the opportunity to be outside and meet each other. He also voiced his displeasure with the harvesting of the mature trees and that there are no walnut trees specified to be replanted, and the overall landscape plan is inadequate. All the borders to the south and east should have good landscape borders, and wherever they can, even if it's just a small tree, there needs to be trees. With regards to the three, four and five-plexes he does not have an issue with the density, the issue is there is no place for children to play and not place for people to congregate to meet neighbors. Overall there needs to be less density and more open space. Theobald added with regards to trees walnut trees aren't necessarily good for gardeners as it is hard to grow other things around them, but in looking at the plants listed, there are some issues that need addressed. With the roundabouts she suggests they look at what is planted outside City Hall. Parsons added with regards to the large buildings perhaps looking at different materials or colors, just seems like a lot of brown and grey. He said the project they recently approved on Camp Cardinal Boulevard used colors to create a good design. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: A public hearing of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, Annexation Policy, to add a section pertaining to affordable housing. Miklo noted the proposed amendment text was distributed to the Commission in their agenda packets, the goal of the amendment is to address affordable housing. Miklo explained when the City annexes property it is when they have the most leverage, even more so than with a rezoning, so the thought is given the concerns about affordable housing in Iowa City this would Planning and Zoning Commission June 7, 2018 Page 2 of 7 Development Overlay I Highway Commercial (OPD/CH-1) zone for approx. 23 acres of property. The applicant is also requesting approval of the preliminary plat of Forest View, a 73.15 -acre subdivision, located north of Foster Road, south of 1-80, west of N. Dubuque Street, east of Mackinaw Drive. Miklo stated the staff is requesting this item be deferred until the June 21 meeting. He said that the traffic study had just been submitted and needed to be reviewed by staff. He noted that the stormwater management plan was also still being reviewed by the City Engineer and the wetland determination had not yet been resolved. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to defer REZ18-00013/SUB18-00006 until the .lune 21 meeting Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. REZONINGIDEVELOPMENT ITEM REZ18-000061SU1318-00006 : The application, submitted by Bedrock, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 18.03 acres from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID -RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/ RS -5) zone and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD -12) zone and a preliminary plat of Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision located east of S. Gilbert St & south of Waterfront Dr. Miklo stated the applicant is requesting this item be deferred until the June 21 meeting. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one Freerks closed the public hearing. Theobald moved to defer REZ18-00005ISUB18-00005 until the June 21 meeting. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. REZONING ITEM (REZ18-00016): Discussion of an application submitted by Allen Homes, for a rezoning of approximately 8.02 acres from Interim Development - Single Family Residential (ID -RS) zone to Low Density Multi - Family Residential (RM -12) zone (3.19 acres) and Medium Density Single -Family Residential Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 14 of 15 REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ18-00005/SUB18-00005): The application, submitted by Bedrock, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 18.03 acres from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID -RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/ RS -5) zone and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD -12) zone and a preliminary plat of Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision located east of S. Gilbert St & south of Waterfront Dr. Miklo stated the applicant is requesting this item be deferred until the July 5 meeting Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one Freerks closed the public hearing. Signs moved to defer REZ18-00005/SUB18-00005 until the July 5 meeting. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JUNE 7, 2018 Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes of June 7, 2018. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Miklo noted they have scheduled a joint meeting with the City Council for Tuesday, July 3 to discuss the rezoning on Burlington, Capitol and Court Streets. Miklo also acknowledged and thanked Freerks for her service to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Adjournment: Parsons moved to adjourn. Signs seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION J U LY 5, 2018 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry, Baker, Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: Alex Carrillo, Andrew Bockenstedt, Joel Kline, Don Cochran, Shannon Patrick, Nate Byers RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-1 (Dyer dissenting) the Commission recommends approval of REZ18-00005/SUB18- 0005, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID -RM to OPD/RS-5 (5.8 acres) and OPD/RM-12 (12.23 acres) and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to 1) City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement and protection plan prior to final plat approval, 2) at the time of final plat approve the development agreement will specify that the roof drains and gutters for lots 5 - 16 will be required to drain toward the storm drains on Toby Circle, and 3) the applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the State to complete a study or excavation plan prior to any additional grading on the property. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Parsons nominated Hensch for Commission Chair, Dyer seconded the nomination, a vote was taken and the motion passed. Hensch nominated Parsons for Vice Chair, Dyer seconded the nomination, a vote was taken and the motion passed. Hensch nominated Signs for Secretary, Martin seconded the nomination, a vote was taken and the motion passed. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ18-00005/SUB18-00005): Discussion of an application submitted by Bedrock, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 18.03 acres from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID -RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/ RS -5) zone (5.8 acres) and Planned Planning and Zoning Commission July 5, 2018 Page 2 of 12 Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD -12) zone (12.23 acres) and a preliminary plat of Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision with 93 multifamily dwellings, 2 duplex lots and 15 single family lots located east of South Gilbert Street & west of Sandusky Drive. Miklo noted this item was deferred from the May 17 meeting, since that time the applicant has submitted a revised plan and the most significant change in the plan is former lot 17 is no longer proposed to be rezoned to Low Density Multifamily but rather to be rezoned to Low Density Single Family, the same as the adjacent lots south of the proposed Cherry Avenue. Miklo stated the previous plan had included 10 multifamily units in the form of two sets of townhouses, the new proposal is to create two lots which will be suitable for either single family or corner lot duplexes, either which is allowed by the proposed RS -5 zone, and two single family lots. As a result all of the properties that will have access to Toby Circle will be single family or the possibility of two duplexes on the corner lots. Miklo highlighted other changes to the plan, one is the density of the proposal has decreased from 7.5 units per acre to 7.18 units per acre and both of those densities are within the Comprehensive Plan recommendation of 2 to 8 dwelling units per acre. Another concern that was raised by the Commission at the May 17 meeting was with the two -36 unit apartment buildings therefore the applicant has revised the plan to pull back the parking and fire access drive from the south property line and therefore creating more greenspace in that area. The building itself has not changed. In the expanded greenspace area the applicant proposes playground area and dining areas with a concrete patio, fixed in place grills, picnic tables and a pergola added. A similar feature has been added to the north building as well, and even with the addition of the playground area there is still a tree buffer between the area and Gilbert Street. Miklo added the landscape plan has also been amended with additional trees added to the southern part of the single family lots and additional trees added to the retaining walls on the south side. Also with the revised plan the retaining walls stair -step and there are two levels rather than one tall retaining wall. Miklo noted street trees have also been added between the sidewalk and the curb as well as the trees on the private property. Miklo noted this is a change in City policy, in the past the City has avoided putting trees in areas where there might be water lines or other easements but it is rare those lines break and need to be repaired so trees are now being allowed. Traffic and traffic calming questions were raised at the last meeting, one specific concern was regarding the length of the alley, the City transportation planners looked at the plans and they felt the design of the alley is such that it will not need traffic calming. There will be a retaining wall and a dense row of trees along the north side and having trees or landscaping along a roadway tend to slow traffic down, additionally the alley is broken into two segments serving a relatively small number of units (14 units served in one section and 7 in the other section) and there is a curve in the alley with three points of entry. Miklo noted the applicant has agreed if there are issues in the future they would be open to installing some traffic calming devices. The driveway access to Cherry Avenue was also a concern with the question of if it had sufficient sight distance, again the transportation planners reviewed this and confirmed there is sufficient sight distance. Another question was regarding the landscape islands that are designed into Cherry Avenue to calm or slow down traffic and if a third island would be necessary and again the transportation planner felt it isn't really necessary and the islands are spaced according to City guidelines. Planning and Zoning Commission July 5, 2018 Page 3 of 12 Miklo commented on the sidewalk along Gilbert Street and the question of whether it should be widen to 8 feet, there currently is a 4 foot sidewalk in the area and upon inspection for the most part is in good condition, any part not in good condition would need to be repaired before occupancy. There is an 8 foot sidewalk and trail system on the other side of Gilbert Street and the City standard is to generally have 8 foot sidewalks on one side of the street and a 5 foot sidewalk on the other side, in this case the 4 foot sidewalk is nonconforming and it is staff's view that the expense of removing and replacing that sidewalk is not worth it and do not recommend it. Staff is looking at introducing a street crossing with a curb cut or curb ramp to make it easier to cross Gilbert Street. Regarding stormwater management the City Engineer has indicated they will require that all the gutters, roof drains and driveways for the single family lots be directed to Toby Circle, where the street will have inter -storm drains that should help minimize any runoff to adjacent properties to the south. There is also a conservation easement along the south property line for preservation of some existing trees as well as new trees that will be planted. Therefore there will be minimal pavement in that area and therefore the City Engineer has approved the preliminary stormwater plans and feels it will actually be an improvement over the current conditions on the site. There were questions raised about the archeological study of the area, the applicant had contracted with a private archeologist who has reviewed the site and determined because of grading that happened back in the 1990's when the adjacent subdivision was built, apparently there was fill from some of the basements dumped on this site and also soils borrowed from this site to supplement Pepperwood Addition, and that work was all done before the City has a sensitive areas ordinance. Because of that disturbance they found no evidence of archeological sites but there are some areas where they would like to do further studies as the fill material that was placed there in the 1990's is removed, so the applicant has agreed to have an archeological monitor present on the site when further development occurs and that is something the City can specify in the conditional zoning agreement. Miklo next showed images of the buildings that are proposed. There are three different models of the townhomes so there will be a variety of building types along Cherry Avenue. The garage entrances onto Cherry Avenue will require a minor modification which can later be approved by staff. The reason is due to the topography it does not lend itself to an entrance from the side. Staff recommends approval of REZ18-00005/SUB18-0005, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID -RM to OPD/RS-5 (5.8 acres) and OPD/RM-12 (12.23 acres) and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to 1) City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement and protection plan prior to final plat approval, 2) at the time of final plat approve the development agreement will specify that the roof drains and gutters for lots 5 - 16 will be required to drain toward the storm drains on Toby Circle, and 3) the applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the State to complete a study or excavation plan prior to any additional grading on the property. Hensch asked about the sidewalk on the east side of South Gilbert Street and that it does not extend all the way south so how will the people from this new subdivision get across the street to the walking trail. Miklo noted that City transportation planners are investigating a possible crossing. Miklo added that sidewalks on the east side will eventually be extended to McCollister Boulevard as the McCollister Farms property is developed. Planning and Zoning Commission July 5, 2018 Page 4 of 12 Hensch shared his concern about the language of having an archaeologist monitor on site and if it was specific enough to note that means if anything is uncovered all work on the site should stop until future investigations. Miklo said that could be clarified when the conditional zoning agreement is drafted. If a burial ground is uncovered there are State Codes that will be enforced. Parsons asked what the square footage was for the open space now on lots 1 and 2. Miklo noted the applicant could address that question. He did add that there would be a payment in lieu of open space that would be used to support Wetherby Park or Sand Hill Park. Hensch opened the public hearing. Alex Carrillo (373 Windmill Place) works for Bedrock LLC as the project coordinator for the proposed Cherry Creek Subdivision. He began by thanking Staff and Miklo for all the guidance and support they provided in completing the revisions for the development project. Bedrock LLC is very excited about the plan that is before the Commission this evening. Carrillo noted his appreciation for the Commission and the neighboring community members for their feedback at that last meeting and stated since that time they have collaborated with the City, MMS and the architects (Fusion) to try to address some of the feedback that was brought up. To highlight some of the primary comments, first was density, also the size of the Lot 1 apartment building, the usable open space, and traffic and tree buffers. Miklo addressed in his staff report a bit but Carrillo had prepared a presentation to address the concerns as well. With regards to density, even though the Comprehensive Plan suggests 2 to 8 dwelling units per acre they felt they could reduce some of the units and create a better buffer from townhomes to single family homes. In an effort to maximize the open space they utilized their grading plan and were efficient as possible with the space, moving the retaining walls and creating more open space. They also reduced the parking spaces as they had more than was required, so that created more open space. They are now adding a playground, a pergola picnic area, and are reducing the height of the retaining wall. In this restructure every dwelling will have green space, the single family homes will have yards, the townhomes will have screen porches overlooking the woodland areas and the apartment buildings will have the open playground/picnic areas. Martin asked how many bedrooms would be in the two apartment building units. Carrillo said they will be one and two bedroom units. Carrillo continued with addressing the concern about the Lot 1 apartment building and if it was too close to the property line. They have complied with the height requirements, the setback requirements, and they felt it was appropriate, especially given the topography of the land. He presented some 3-D renderings so everyone could better see the plan. The digital profile is set to the grading plan. The buildings are set into the hills and therefore will not tower over the rest of the development. They also updated the coloring scheme to be less bland and add character to the buildings. Carrillo next showed pictures of the property in its current state and noted the tree buffers that will remain as well as where new trees will be planted. Signs asked about the two large retaining walls on the southern part of the property. Carrillo said they have revised the plan to terrace those retaining walls and add plantings to create the best aesthetic possible. They will be using the Rosetta's Outcropping product, which will provide a beautiful aesthetic with a natural look. Planning and Zoning Commission July 5, 2018 Page 5 of 12 Carrillo stated the pergola and picnic tables would made of timber which would add to the aesthetic of the property. Hensch asked how many tables and pergolas would be on the property. Carrillo said they are showing three tables on the plans, but could add more as there is space available. Dyer asked what the components of the play structure will be. Carrillo said it will have a couple slides and some monkey bars. Dyer noted there should be some benches added for parents or caregivers to sit and watch children play. Hensch noted that since both buildings are the same size, they should both have the same number of picnic tables and outdoor spaces. Martin questioned having 1 and 2 bedroom units in the apartment buildings and then also saying there would be play structures and open space for children. Carrillo said many young couples with one child will live in a 2 bedroom unit. Dyer asked if there was room on the ravine side for benches to be place overlooking the ravine. Carrillo didn't think there would be room for that because of the sensitive areas but they could add benches to the areas by the parking lots. Hensch asked what exterior building materials they propose to use on the three, four and five-plex buildings. Carrillo said they would use cement board, not vinyl as indicated on some of the plans. There would also be stone and shingle shakes used. Hensch stated a concern from neighbor comments regarding the 36-plex and the distance from the southern lot line. It also is an 80 foot building so that is massive along a property line. Carrillo acknowledged that was a concern and why he showed the 3-D images and how the tree line will block the sight lines. He added the first residence to the south is over 300 feet away. Martin asked what type of trees they are planting along the southern property line. Carrillo said he is unsure of the species of trees planned, however they have met with the City Forrester and is using his recommended species. Andrew Bockenstedt (3116 Lyle Drive NE) is also with the Bedrock LLC, he wanted to reiterate that they are more than willing to work with the City to install the curb ramps and crosswalk for access to the trail on the other side of Gilbert Street. Hensch noted his concern about having a crossing across Gilbert Street, it is a very busy street. Bockenstedt agrees and likes the idea of running the sidewalk on the east side further south but there is a steep slope along there and a retaining wall would need to be added. Miklo added that South Gilbert Street is being considered for a "road diet" which would reduce it from four lanes to three, slowing traffic and making it easier for pedestrians to cross. Martin asked where the closest bus stop to this development would be. Miklo is unsure, Hensch knows there is one at the corner of South Gilbert and Southgate Streets and knows there is not one on Sandusky. Hensch asked about the landscaping plan noting that typically the plans label each type of tree that is to be located in each area. This proposed plan does not indicate what types of tree and Hensch Planning and Zoning Commission July 5, 2018 Page 6 of 12 is concerned because of the early harvesting of the trees on this property they need to make sure they get quality trees introduced back into the area. Bockenstedt said he is open to having the landscape architect update the plan to show the types of trees. Miklo said they are recommending that the City Forester approve the landscaping plan before final plat approval. Joel Kline (2460 South Gilbert Street) owns the McCollister Historic Farm House to the south of the applicant's property. He wishes to point out again he has taken on this National Historic Registry house in good faith and made a strong effort to restore it. Currently they have artisan brick workers using historic mortar doing repairs on the house. They built the garage in discussion with the City and architects to keep it with the historic feel as well. Kline stated to put the largest and tallest building south of Highway 6 just 23 feet from the property line of an historic property doesn't seem to be keeping with maintaining the character of the National Historic Landmark. Kline said he raised a number of concerns at the May meeting and feels none of them have been addressed. The trees they are showing to the south side of their property are actually trees on Kline's property so he is responsible for the buffer. Those trees on his property are deciduous trees and will not provide much visual protection during five months of the year when the tree leaves are shed. Kline had asked for a consideration of a large berm being constructed along the south border to provide a visual and personnel barrier as well as an 8 foot fence on the south side of the berm. That request has not been addressed at all. Kline also noted the berm would be useful in water management since removal of the mature trees is likely to disturb the water flow in an adverse way to his property. Kline believes development is important, affordable housing is important, but he is not sure the spirit of this zoning is to require a 36-plex, the greatest density of people outside of the downtown area. He would suggest it be a two story building rather than three, but realizes that reduces the revenue of the property. Kline added something like this cannot be undone, it will significantly change the character of the land in this part of the area, this area was originally the Napoleon Trading Post, Napoleon Park named after that, and Kline's home was the major homestead in that area. Once you start building up around it, it cannot be undone, and he urges the Commission to seriously consider the ramifications and long term effect on the neighborhood and residents. Don Cochran (2530 South Gilbert Street) lives on the other parcel that is just south of the proposed development. He also spoke at the May 17 meeting to voice concerns, some of which have been captured, some he wants to address again. Runoff is a concern and it appears the City has signed off on the stormwater plan and Cochran should not get more excess water on his property (he is now, with the rain recently they had flooding with the removal of the trees). He noted the safety regarding crossing Gilbert Street has been addressed, it is a major concern, kids especially are going to want to cross the street to get to the park area. Another area where the kids would want to explore is the woodland area of his property, there used to be a cattle fence in the woodland but Cochran pulled out that fence on his property because trees were entwined, so he feels another fence needs to be built to show the property lines. Cochran pointed out in photos his property line the tree buffer the applicant is discussing and wants to make sure any landscaping they are capturing is not part of his or Kline's property, but is truly new landscaping that is being built there. Cochran also stated that property value was a concern of his as this area was a woodland area before, he can appreciate that it is going to develop but he didn't think it would be the biggest building south of Highway 6. He pointed out in pictures that there was once berms along the property line, not just woodlands, but that has now been leveled out and he feels a berm should be considered. With looking at the 3-D rendering of the large apartment building, Cochran questions the elevation of the parking lot, in the original drawings he thought it was the same elevation as Sandusky, even if it is a bit lower it will up high and the retaining walls don't seem as high. The Planning and Zoning Commission July 5, 2018 Page 7 of 12 final concern Cochran raised at the previous meeting was density, and that again has been addressed this evening, he appreciates the reduction of townhouses but the density was 7.5 out of 2 to 8 before and now is 7.18 out of 2 to 8 and while that is a reduction, it is still a higher density then one would expect in that location. There are two lots facing the development to the south, one to the north, and seven lots facing it from the side and to get this large of a density in that one small area seems excessive. Shannon Patrick (652 Sandusky Drive) also spoke at the May 17 meeting and said why he thought when this proposal got to City Council it would not go anywhere, the short reasons were the school zone conflict, fit with the neighborhood, and lack of trust in good faith. First, with the fit for the character of the neighborhood, it has been talked about to some degree and Patrick also appreciates the developer taking out the 10 multi -units to put in single family, he feels it will help on the transition, but his concern at this point is the 36 unit blocks, which at the end of the last meeting from the Commissioner's comments he felt it was agreed that those 36 unit buildings were not a good fit for the neighborhood. He maintains this will be a lot of people to add into a residential neighborhood, it is a very dense block of housing, and not in character with the single family neighborhood it is going into. With regards to the school zone conflict, this development will fall into the Twain district and Iowa City seems to like to dump all of its dense housing into the same school district which has been giving the school board a headache for years, parents will remember meeting after meeting about how to get better diversity in housing for the district and it is difficult because all of the dense housing is built in the same area. Therefore Patrick would encourage the Commission to look like they are working with other parts of the government in the plan and not build 72 more units in the form of an apartment building in the Twain neighborhood. With regards to the trust issue, Patrick agrees that good faith effort has been made to get the neighbors aware of the meetings, but he noted that some neighbors said the Good Neighbor Meeting was presented as a done deal and not as an opportunity to give feedback. He noted that an issue from the last meeting was the clearing out of the trees, the developer stated this was done before the permit but was okay because he thought it was scrub land, Patrick finds it perplexing how the developer says he thought it was scrub land, but yet sold off dozens of trees. One does not sell off truckloads of trees and call it scrub land. Patrick also notes that when looking at an old map it looks like the area was intended for some large house lots. He added this meeting is the day after a holiday, and be presented to a new board, makes him feel like perhaps there is some shady work happening and encourages the Commission to make sure to scrutinize the plans and make sure everything is ticked off nicely. The last issue Patrick is to comment on is the crossing on Gilbert Street, it will be an issue, and he thinks of the 72 units, with nationally means 2.5 people per unit so 250 people in those buildings, and the nearest playground is across Gilbert Street at the softball fields. He feels there needs to be more than just curb ramps, there needs to be lightening and other safety alerts. To reiterate Patrick stated this development is not a good fit, to have that large of buildings in this space. Nate Byers (2423 North Ridge Drive, Coralville) works with MMS Consultants, the civil engineer firm for this project, with regards to the questions on the retaining wall height at the outermost corner the wall is 25 feet above the building elevation so only 12 feet of the building will be seen over the wall. The roof line of the 36-plex is no higher then the rooflines of the single family homes looking at the development from the high point on Cherry Avenue. The 36-plex is sunk into the hill quite a bit. With regards to the tree lines to the south, there will be two rows of plantings long the whole south side and there was a discussion of putting a berm back there but the City Engineer actually recommended against it and rather to take all the roof drainage to the north and not worry about the rear yards. Planning and Zoning Commission July 5, 2018 Page 8 of 12 Hensch is concerned about the elevation of the building on lot 1 and to address the neighbor's concerns it looks like the high elevation on the property is 700 feet and it drops down to 680 at the corner of the building. It is unfortunate they don't have an elevation drawing from that point to clarify and solve the concerns. Byers explained the elevations and also noted there are some tree types explained on the landscape plan and that they have worked with the City Forrester regarding that. Martin asked about the retaining wall. On the side facing the apartment building it is a tiered wall, is the other side just a gigantic solid wall. Byers said the wall is cut into the land there so it will not just be a gigantic solid wall from that view. Baker asked for clarification on the concept of density, the two 36 -unit buildings are one and two bedroom units, is there a breakdown of how many are one versus two. Byers stated he believed there are 12 one bedroom and 24 two bedroom units in each building. Baker noted that compared to most of the apartment structures in Iowa City that is a smaller density and therefore the look of the building might be deceiving with regards to the population of the building. Miklo clarified that a two bedroom dwelling is calculated the same as a one bedroom in the sense of calculating the density. Hensch closed the public hearing Parsons moved for the approval of REZ18-00005/SUB18-0005, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID -RM to OPD/RS-5 (5.8 acres) and OPD/RM-12 (12.23 acres) and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17 -lot, 18.03 -acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to 1) City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement and protection plan prior to final plat approval, 2) at the time of final plat approve the development agreement will specify that the roof drains and gutters for lots 5 - 16 will be required to drain toward the storm drains on Toby Circle, and 3) the applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the State to complete a study or excavation plan prior to any additional grading on the property. Signs seconded the motion. Hensch acknowledged the neighbors to the south have a valid point on how this plot of land will change for them, however the applicant seems open to addressing the landscape plan to the south, even adding a berm. Signs noted there may not be room for a berm, and Hensch agreed a berm may not be the answer Hensch also noted he was surprised the revised plan did not show any reduction in the size or mass of the two 36 -unit buildings but since the applicant did decrease the density in the Toby Circle area that was a plus and overall he believes the applicant addressed everything else the Commission raised. Dyer is concerned that the 36 -unit building is only 23 feet from the property line which is the same distance that is allowed in a single family neighborhood, it seems too close for such a big building regardless of how much of the building can be seen. Townsend agreed with the concerns regarding the crossing at Gilbert Street and increased number Planning and Zoning Commission July 5, 2018 Page 9 of 12 of people on these properties, some which will be children. Miklo stated that traffic and safety is always a concern the Commission needs to review, as noted the City does have plans to narrow Gilbert Street from four lanes to three, Signs feels that if they do narrow Gilbert Street, having the crossing at Cherry Avenue will line up with the trail on the west side of the street, perhaps a pedestrian island can be added as a possible solution. Miklo said the traffic engineers would have to do a study to see if that would be appropriate. Hensch suggests adding a condition that the applicant is responsible for the costs of implementing whatever solution the City comes up with to get people across Gilbert Street. Dyer also noted it isn't just pedestrians, there will be bicyclists needing to get over to the trail along the river. Martin noted that recently the Commission just reviewed a large number of properties the Historic Society wished to designate as historical and here we are neighboring an already existing historical property and she echoes Dyer's concern of the 23 feet, it seems like to have such a big building so close to a property line infringes on a historical property. She added Gilbert Street is another entrance to Iowa City and it is the Commission's responsibility to be thoughtful about it and have a good transition. She understands looking at two 36-plex buildings, townhomes and single family there is transition within the plat, but it is important to look at what is surrounding that plat. She is struggling with the large scale of buildings so close to a historic property. Baker asked if the concern is at all mitigate by the fact that the historic property building itself is 300 feet away. Martin said it is more that such a big building is so close to a property line. Baker questions if the Commission is comfortable overall with the plan except for the immediate impact on a couple of surrounding properties and whether buffering becomes the issue that resolves their problems. He is not concerned about the density, nor does the size of the building, but understands the concern regarding the proximity to the neighbors. He wonders if there is something they could ask of the developer to mitigate the visual impact. Martin agrees and admits she doesn't have a good enough visual of what the sight line from Gilbert Street will be. The photos and renderings being shown are from within the development not from the Gilbert Street view. Parsons said there will be trees plus a 20 foot high retaining wall, what else can be added. Miklo thinks adding anything else would be difficult. Parson added the developer is using the topography to their advantage to minimize the view. Signs agrees and feels with the topography the neighbor to the south may not actually see anything, especially if evergreens are planted on top of the retaining wall, it will block any view of the building from the south. He is not concerned with the distance of the building to the property line but understands others are and can empathize. He is appreciative to see his concerns regarding the visual impact from Gilbert Street addressed from the last meeting. Hensch suggested adding two conditions, one regarding the applicant covering the costs to improve the crossing across Gilbert Street, and the other one to enhance the landscaping plan to the south border to increase the trees or brush plantings to create a better separation. Miklo noted Planning and Zoning Commission July 5, 2018 Page 10 of 12 in terms of additional landscaping, it is already pretty full up if trees are planted too close together it will not be a healthy environment. Parsons asked how long a traffic study would take to determine if and where a cross walk is appropriate. Miklo is unsure, he just knew they were not able to complete the study before tonight's meeting. Miklo added that staff did discuss with the applicant the possibility of making the building shorter or showing an image from the south. The Commission does have the option to defer this item until the traffic study is done. Hektoen is concerned about the open -natured aspect of the condition placed regarding the sidewalk crossing because it could be very expensive or not, the information is not available at this time. Baker feels if Cherry Street is opened, this development will not create the demand for crossing Gilbert Street so he is reluctant to say this developer should pay for the work to provide that crossing when everything east of the development will be using that access as well. He doesn't think that should hold up this decision. Signs noted another concern of the neighbors to the south was people coming onto their properties and he agrees there is potentially some issue there so wonders if the Commission wants to add a requirement that the developer install a fence along the south wall. Hensch feels that is perpetual problem for any development and he is not sure that is a precedent they want to set. If a homeowner doesn't want people on their property isn't it incumbent for them to put up the fence. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1 (Dyer dissenting). CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JUNE 21, 2018 Parsons moved to approve the meeting minutes of June 21, 2018. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: None. Hensch announced he will be on vacation at the end of July. Martin will also be gone but can phone in for the next meeting. Kellie Fruehling From: Sent: To: Subject: Good Morning Kellie, Danielle Sitzman Thursday, August 23, 2018 8:53 AM Kellie Fruehling FW: Cherry Creek Subd Staff received this request for City Council to combine readings on Case # REZ18-05. Please process as appropriate. Best, Danielle L. Sitzman, AICP Development Services Coordinator City of Iowa City (319) 356-5252 Da n iel I e-sitzma n @ iowa-citv.ora From: Gina Landau [mailto:G.landau@mmsconsultants.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 12:52 PM To: Anne Russett <Anne-Russett@iowa-city.org> Cc: Danielle Sitzman <Danielle-Sitzman@iowa-city.org> Subject: Cherry Creek Subd Anne, Our client would like to request condensing the second and third rezoning votes for Cherry Creek. Please let me know if this would work for the City Council. -Gina M MMS Consultants, Inc. evert h Pt mft and D&e ft rnwt5hce IW5 Gina Landau Project Manager Office: (319) 351-8282 G. landau(aD-mmsconsultants.net www.mmsconsultants.net This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(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 the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. /C. C., Kellie Fruehling From: Kelcey Patrick-Ferree <kelcey.patrickferree@gmail.corfte Handouts Distributed Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 11:42 AM To: Council Subject: Cherry Creek Subdivision Rezoning /'g' (Date) 9/111// ( , Dear City Council Members, I spoke at the last City Council meeting regarding the Cherry Creek Subdivision rezoning. I realize that the public hearing has been closed, but I did not realize that there was only one public hearing (that there would not be public hearings at subsequent readings of the ordinance)or that the neighbors could no longer turn in petitions on this. I have more neighbors who oppose this rezoning and have asked me to turn in petitions on their behalf. I would also like to speak tonight to address both that and some of the issues that were discussed at the last meeting. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to be heard. Sincerely, Kelcey 1 o. C Late Handouts Distributed PROTEST OF REZONING +,--.• , 1 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL q -40`. IOWA CITY, IOWA F I ! E to) " 1 L.... AU- CITY OF IOWA CITY We, the undersigned, being the owners of property included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior bot&6$o€1$heIotkr or which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property: J' CITY CLERK Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17-lot, 110. tCrhTrYsikilkithl subdivision located east of S. Gilbert St. and south of Waterfront Drive. This protest is signed and acknowledged with the intention that such rezoning shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the members of the council, all in accordance with Section 414.5 of the Code of Iowa. Property Address: (� - S/9Nn '1 c 2 Property Owner(s): EL��Q�/ �-4 c( By: By: UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER(S): STATE OF IOWA ) JOHNSON COUNTY ) ss: This instrument was acknowledged before me on epkm 6€r `Ik-he 2-01 8 (Date)by Va Keri PIA 011-N and (name(s)of individual property owner(s)). • CLAIRE ARABIN • ' common Number Ci f AA+ My CommlMbn�,�s ZeUg-21' Arc.6a4 •w Z-I2-tI Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SIGNING FOR PROPERTY OWNER(S): STATE OF IOWA ) JOHNSON COUNTY) ss: This instrument was acknowledged before me on (Date)by (name(s)of person(s))as (type of authority, such as officer,trustee)of (name of property owner) . Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa Orig:Subd Folder 02/2013 Cc: CA—PCD- Council-Media File c-- N-N 1 --7.. % FILED .. e 2 I8 SEP -4 PM 2; 0 CITY CLERK � '� IOWA CITY. io<<,r-` 6' \ , .._ \.k , \ ‘c , Ali c • N \N \Q,___ ‘ , k \ `- ,. . Item Number: 14. I r I, CITY OF IOWA CITY �n- COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 4, 2018 Ordinance amending Title 17, entitled "Building and Housing," Section 5, entitled "Housing Code," to require properties with new rental permits to be leased promptly. (Second Consideration) Prepared By: Stan Laverman, Senior Housing Inspector Reviewed By: Tracy Hightshoe, Neighborhood & Development Services Director Fiscal Impact: No impact. Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Ordinance Executive Summary: City Council established a rental permit cap and strengthened the minimum requirements for rental housing in December 2017. Staff is aware of homeowners within these areas obtaining rental permits as a speculative measure. The proposed ordinance addresses this by requiring properties receiving a rental permit to be leased promptly. Background /Analysis: During the 2017 session, the state legislature adopted HF 134 amending Iowa Code Section 414.1 to prohibit municipalities, after January 1, 2018, from adopting or enforcing any regulation or restriction related to occupancy of residential rental property that is based upon the existence of familial or nonfamilial relationships between the occupants of such rental property. In response to this action, the City Council adopted multiple housing and zoning code changes to mitigate the destabilizing effects of the state legislation. One of the larger code changes was the implementation of a rental permit cap for single-family and duplex properties located in neighborhoods encompassed in the University Impact Area. When the cap was implemented, six out of the thirteen neighborhoods were over the 30% cap: Northside/Goosetown (53.6%), College Green (53.4%), Bowery (76.1 %), Riverfront Crossings East (65.1 %), Riverfront Crossings West (64%), and Brookland/Roosevelt (54.9%). The Miller Orchard and Longfellow neighborhoods started out below the 30% cap, but have now reached the 30% cap for rental permits for single-family and duplex units in their respective neighborhoods. The Mark Twain neighborhood currently has four available rental permit applications available before it will reach the 30% cap. Since the rental permit moratorium ended on January 3, 2018, Iowa City has seen 84 properties obtain rental permits. 40 of those permits are in the Miller Orchard, Longfellow, and Mark Twain neighborhoods. Staff has become aware of various strategies investors and homeowners are using to get around the rental permit cap. We are monitoring the use of properties purchased by investors to ensure they are not being rented without a permit. Creative legal maneuvers have also been used to negate the intention of the rental permit cap. By bringing those legal actions to the attention of our community banking partners, we feel that they will not be a large issue for us in the future. Staff is also aware of homeowners obtaining a rental permit as a speculative measure due to the rental permit cap. The proposed ordinance change stipulates that the City shall not issue a rental permit for any single-family dwelling or duplex to an owner -occupant unless the owner has provided documentation showing bona fide intent to vacate and offer the unit for lease. This fine- tuning of the housing code changes originally adopted in December 2017 will assist staff in their efforts to foster healthy neighborhoods throughout the City and carry out the original intent of the single-family and duplex rental permit cap. Staff recommends passage of this ordinance. ATTACHMENTS: Description Ordinance 1st Reading )4. Prepared by: Susan Dulek,Asst.City Attorney,410 E.Washington Street,Iowa City, IA 52240;319-356-5030 ORDINANCE NO. Ordinance amending Title 17, entitled "Building and Housing," Section 5, entitled "Housing Code," to require properties with new rental permits to be leased promptly. Whereas, in Ordinance No. 17-4734, City Council established a rental permit cap and strengthened the minimum requirements for rental housing; Whereas, staff is aware of homeowners obtaining a rental permit as a speculative measure due to the rental permit cap; Whereas, properties that receive rental permits should be leased promptly; and Whereas, it is in the City's best interest to adopt this ordinance. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I. Amendments. 1. Title 17, entitled "Building and Housing," Chapter 5, entitled "Housing Code,"Section 16, entitled "Certificate of Structure Compliance and Rental Permit," Subsection C3 is amended by numbering the unnumbered paragraph as paragraph a and adding the following new paragraph b: b. Notwithstanding any other provision in this chapter, (1) The City shall not issue a rental permit for any single-family dwelling or duplex to an owner occupant unless said owner has provided written documentation showing a bona fide intent, as reasonably determined by the Director, to vacate the dwelling for a minimum period of 180 consecutive days. (2) Such documentation shall include, but is not limited to: transfer of employment, acceptance of new employment, military orders, acceptance to an educational institution, executed purchase agreement for a single-family or other residential unit, executed lease for a single- family or other residential unit, and marriage license. (3) The rental permit shall be revoked if the owner fails to vacate the dwelling within 180 days of its issuance. (4) No rental permit issued to an owner occupant between January 1, 2018 and the effective date of this ordinance shall be renewed unless the owner occupant meets the requirements set forth herein. (5) With respect to this provision, the Board of Appeals does not have authority to hear an appeal of a decision to deny or revoke a rental permit, grant a variance, or grant any other relief. Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of , 2018. 1 Mayor Attest: Appr6� es) City Clerk City Attorney's Office 2 Ordinance No. Page It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Vacant—Botchway seat Cole Mims Salih Taylor Thomas Throgmorton First Consideration 08/21/2018 Voteforpassage: AYES: Cole, Mims, Salih, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vacant - Botchway seat. Second Consideration 09/04/2018 Voteforpassage: AYES: Salih, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton, Cole, Mims. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vacancy - Botchway seat Date published Item Number: 15. r CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL A REPORT September 4, 2018 Ordinance amending Title 5, entitled "Business and License Regulations," to add a new Chapter 3, entitled "Massage Business Information Requirement ." (Pass and Adopt) Prepared By: Sue Dulek, Ass't. City Attorney Reviewed By: Simon Andrew, Assistant to the City Manager Jann Ream, Code Enforcement Specialist Jody Matherly, Police Chief Jorey Bailey, Sgt. Police Dept. Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Ordinance Executive Summary: Until last year state law prohibited local governments from regulating massage therapy businesses. Unfortunately there are businesses that advertise and hold themselves out to the public that they provide massage therapy but actually engage in illegal activities including human trafficking and prostitution. The ordinance does not require massage businesses to be licensed but rather the business must provide certain information to staff upon request, such as, the name of the local manager. In recommending this ordinance, staff is not intending to discourage legitimate massage businesses from providing their health and well-being services to the community. Background /Analysis: The State of Iowa licenses individual massage therapists, and in order to become a Licensed Massage Therapist (LMT) in Iowa, practitioners must complete a state required curriculum and pass a state approved examination. LMTs perform important services in addressing the health and well-being of the City's residents. The State of Iowa does not regulate massage therapy businesses. Staff believe there are businesses in Iowa City that advertise and hold themselves out to the public that they provide massage therapy but actually engage in illegal activities. Polaris, a national advocacy organization dedicated to preventing and disrupting human trafficking, recently published a report entitled "Human Trafficking in Illicit Massage Businesses) that includes both a description of the business model and strategies to confront these illicit businesses (see https:Hpolarisproject.org/sites/default/files/Full_Report_Human_Trafficking_in_I llicit_Massage_Businesses.pdf). Polaris recommends that local governments approach the problem from both a civil code enforcement angle as well as law enforcement. The Iowa legislature in 2017 repealed the state law preventing local regulation of massage businesses. Other cities in Iowa have adopted ordinances and others are considerinq adopting ordinances requlatinq massage therapy businesses. These ordinances can be divided into two models. One model (e.g., Johnston and Newton) is to require massage businesses to obtain a license to operate, and the second model (e.g., Urbandale) does not establish a licensing system but establishes requirements to operate and allows the City to placard the business. City staff found the second model preferable because it is less onerous both LMTs and their businesses as well as to staff. Staff contacted LMTs and massage business in Iowa City and invited them to an "open house" to talk about this issue and these two models. After these two open houses, staff sent out a draft ordinance based on the second model to the attendees and urged them to forward the draft ordinance to their colleagues and welcomed comments and suggestions. After receiving comments and suggestions, staff revised the ordinance. The final version of the ordinance is also being emailed to the attendees. The ordinance requires massage therapy businesses to provide basic information to City staff upon request. Staff believes this requirement will be an effective tool to disrupt and shutter these illicit businesses. The information must be on a form provided by the City and includes the names of all LMTs, the name(s) of the business owners, the name of the commercial tenant, and the name and telephone number of the manager who must be a resident of Iowa. If the form is not accurate and complete, City staff may placard the business. The ordinance further provides that it is illegal for anyone to remove the placard or to enter into a business premises that is placarded. The business premises is to remain placarded until correct and accurate information is provided to City staff. ATTACHMENTS: Description Ordinance 2nd Reading 15 Prepared by: Susan Dulek,Asst.City Attorney,410 E.Washington Street,Iowa City, IA 52240;319-356-5030 ORDINANCE NO. 18-4766 Ordinance amending Title 5, entitled "Business and License Regulations," to add a new Chapter 3, entitled "Massage Business Information Requirement." Whereas, the State of Iowa licenses individual massage therapists; Whereas, in order to become a Licensed Massage Therapist (LMT) in Iowa, practitioners must complete a state required curriculum and pass a state approved examination; Whereas, LMTs perform important services in addressing the health and well-being of the City's residents; Whereas, the State of Iowa does not regulate massage therapy businesses; Whereas, unfortunately there are businesses that advertise and hold themselves out to the public that they provide massage therapy but actually engage in illegal activities including human trafficking and prostitution; Whereas, City staff believe that these illicit businesses are currently operating in the City; Whereas, Polaris, a national advocacy organization dedicated to preventing and disrupting human trafficking, recently published a report entitled "Human Trafficking in Illicit Massage Businesses" that includes both a description of the business model and strategies to confront these illicit businesses (see https://polarisproject.org/sites/default/files/Full_Report_H umanTrafficking_in_I llicit_Massage_B usinesses.pdf); Whereas, Polaris recommends that local governments approach the problem from both a civil code enforcement angle as well as law enforcement; Whereas, the Iowa legislature in 2017 repealed the state law preventing local regulation of massage businesses; Whereas, the City should adopt civil code regulations that will allow City staff to disrupt and shutter illicit massage businesses; Whereas, after meeting with LMTs, City staff believe that requiring massage therapy businesses to provide basic information to City staff upon request will be an effective tool to disrupt and shutter these illicit businesses; Whereas, in adopting this ordinance, City Council is not intending to discourage legitimate massage businesses and LMTs from providing their health and well-being services to the community; and Whereas, it is in the best interest of the City to adopt massage business regulations. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of City, Iowa: Section I. Amendments. Title 5, entitled "Business and License Regulations," is amended by adding the following new Chapter 3, entitled "Massage Business Information Requirement": 1. Definitions. "Licensed Massage Therapist' (or"LMT") means an individual who has a license issued by the State of Iowa to perform massage therapy. "Massage therapy' means the same as it does in the massage therapy licensing provision in the state code found at Section 152C.1 of the Code of Iowa: performance for compensation of massage, myotherapy, massotherapy, bodywork, bodywork therapy, or therapeutic massage including hydrotherapy, superficial hot and cold applications, vibration and topical applications, or other therapy which involves manipulation of the muscle and connective tissue of the body, excluding osseous tissue, to treat the muscle tonus system for the purpose of enhancing health, muscle relaxation, increasing range of motion, reducing stress, relieving pain, or improving circulation. "Reflexology," as defined in Section 152C.1 of the Code of Iowa, is not massage therapy. "Massage therapy business" means a place of business where "massage therapy" is practiced or administered. 2. State License Required. No massage business shall employ or contract with a person to perform massage therapy unless the person is a LMT. No person shall perform massage therapy unless the person is a LMT, unless exempted from Chapter 152C of the Code of Iowa. No business shall engage in or offer to engage in the practice of massage therapy, or use the initials "L. M. T." or the words "licensed massage therapist", "massage therapist", "masseur", "masseuse", or any other word or title that implies or represents that a person practices massage therapy at the business, unless the person is a LMT. 3. Information Required. a) A massage business shall immediately produce upon request by City staff certain information on a form provided by the City entitled "Business Information Form." The "Business Information Fomi" form shall be available from the City Clerk and on the City's web site. b) The "Business Information Form" form shall include the following information: 1) Name of the business; 2) Names of all LMTs employed or contracted by the business and their state license numbers; 3) Names and addresses of all other persons who work on the business premises whether employees or independent contractors of the business along with a description of the work performed; 4) Name(s) of the business owner; 5) Name(s) and mailing address(es) of all individuals who have an ownership interest in the business; 6) Name, email address, telephone number, and residential address of the manager of the business who must be an Iowa resident; and 7) Name of the commercial tenant leasing the business premises. c) To confirm the identity of the LMT on the Business Information Form, a government issued photo identification card of the LMT shall be provided upon request of City staff. 4. Placarding. a) If the "Business Information Form" form containing all the required information is not immediately produced to City staff upon request, the business premises may be placarded. If the "Business Information Form" that is produced is either inaccurate or incomplete, the business may be placarded. b) If a business premises is placarded, no person shall enter the business premises. c) No person shall remove the placard. d) The business premises shall remain placarded until the "Business Information Form" containing the information is provided to City staff and is complete and accurate. 5. Exceptions. This chapter shall not apply to: a) A massage therapy business that has a permit for a home occupation. b) A business that employs or contracts with a person who is exempt from Chapter 152C of the Code.of Iowa. 6. Violation. Any violation of this chapter shall be considered a municipal infraction as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4 of this Code or a simple misdemeanor. Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. • Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this 4th day of September , 2018. 1\111‘-• • Attest:_i , i / Ci Clerk / Approved by -v V-a City Attorney's Office Ordinance No. 18-4766 Page 4 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Thomas that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Vacant—Botchway seat X Cole X Mims x Salih x Taylor x Thomas x Throgmorton First Consideration 08/07/2108 Vote for passage: AYES: Cole, Mims, Salih, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vacant - Botchway seat. Second Consideration 08/21/2018 Vote for passage: AYES: Cole, Mims, Salih, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vacant - Botchway seat. Date published 09/13/2018 Item Number: 16. 'r I, CITY OF IOWA CITY ` S-'°`�� COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 4, 2018 Ordinance amending Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations," Chapter 3, entitled "General Animal Regulations," and Chapter 4, entitled "Animal Control" to provide for animal services. (Pass and Adopt) Prepared By: Liz Ford, Animal Services Supervisor Reviewed By: Simon Andrew, Assistant to the City Manager Bill Campbell, Commander of Support Services Jody Matherly, Police Chief Sue Dulek, Ass't. City Attorney Fiscal Impact: Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: Ordinance Executive Summary: The objective of this revision of the City Code is to bring the City of Iowa City's animal services ordinance up to date including combining two chapters, eliminating duplicative provisions, clarifying certain provisions, and adding new provisions on tethering and irresponsible owners. It also aligns the civil penalties with other City Code violations. Background /Analysis: Following is a review of the proposed changes to the City's animal ordinances: Overall updates: 1. Combining chapter 3 "General Animal Regulations" and Chapter 4 "Animal Control" so that all animal ordinances are under Title 8, Chapter 4, "Animal Services." 2. Increasing civil penalties for municipal infractions. Items of note: 8-4-6 Prohibitions and Requirements: G. Adding measurable parameters for outdoor confinement to ensure adequate space is provided for 1 or more dogs. J. Additional language on tethering including limiting unattended tethering to 30 minutes within a three-hour period. This allows time for appropriate house training opportunities and fresh air but does not allow owners to tie a dog outside unattended for extended periods of time. Much research in the animal welfare field over the last several years has shown that statistically dogs are more likely to become defensive, aggressive, and bite when tethered. Other points added under tethering include: • Animals must not be tethered using a choke chain or slip type leash (to prevent strangling) • Tether must beat least 10' long (long enough to allow for freedom of movement) • Tether cannot be made of chain • No access to public sidewalk/street • No tethering in an unsafe place (where dog may hang itself) • No tethering that would allow animal to become tangled with another tethered animal L. Circuses, animal acts, exhibitions, and animal performances in which wild, non- domestic, or exotic animals are used for entertainment are prohibited. These animals have already been and continue to be prohibited in the City. Given the amount of space and zoning requirements for a circus to come into the City of Iowa City, it is unlikely the City would even be asked to permit a circus. Additionally, there is rising public opposition for keeping wild animals in captivity for the purposes of using them for entertainment. This does not include performances in which domestic animals are used (examples include a dog obedience show or dock diving dog show). 8-4-9 Animal Neglect and Cruelty A. 1. (b) Adding a provision under neglect that no animal be left unattended in a motor vehicle, trailer, or other conditions for a period that may endanger the health or well- being of the animals due to extreme temperature, lack of food/water, or any circumstances which cause suffering, disability, or death. This specifically addresses the animals left in cars problem. This year to date Animal Services and the Police responded to 47 calls for animals left in vehicles on days where the temperatures inside the vehicle (which can be up to 40 degrees hotter than outside) could result in serious illness or death after only a few minutes. Also note that "windows cracked" makes no difference in the interior temperature of a vehicle. 8-4-10 Prohibited Acts and Conditions G. Adding a provision that no animal may be left in or transported in the open back of a pickup truck bed without a topper or other enclosure that would prevent the animal from being thrown from the vehicle or falling orjumping from the vehicle. 8-4-11 Irresponsible Owner A — C. This is defined as an owner who has been found by the court to have violated this chapter 4 or more times in a 12 -month time period. This will allow the City to remove animals (if needed) from people who consistently violate the animal ordinances thereby putting both the animals and the public at risk. To give some perspective to this, in 2017 Animal Services addressed 1387 calls for service and issued 15 citations. Education, prevention, and assistance remain staff's primary approaches and frequently this solves the issues. When people fail repeatedly, staff needs additional tools. 8-4-12 Permits Clarifying definitions of permits by designating residential animal owners who require a permit for owning 4 or more dogs or 6 or more cats as a "Dog Group" or "Cat Group" rather than a kennel. This multi -animal household situation is very different than a privately owned commercial kennel business. The permit definitions needed to be updated to fit each situation and distinguish pet owning residents from those that are a commercial (in exchange for fee) kennel boarding animals. Pet Shops were further defined into Minor Pet Shop- those that sell animals but not dogs and cats (the small-time fish stores and seasonal small mammal stores) and Major Pet Shop- those that sell multiple species including dogs and cats and require more staff time and resources for the permit process. 8-4-15 Penalties Because the civil penalty in a municipal infraction for violating an animal code provision currently is $10 for first offense (with the exception of the provision on urban chickens) and is a minimum of $100 for all other City Code violations, the civil penalty for violating an animal code provision is increased to $100 for first offense. ATTACHMENTS: Description Ordinance 2nd Reading l(0 Prepared by: Susan Dulek,Asst. City Attorney,410 E.Washington Street,Iowa City, IA 52240;319-356-5030 Ordinance No. 18-4767 Ordinance amending Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations," Chapter 3, entitled "General Animal Regulations," and Chapter 4, entitled "Animal Control"to provide for animal services. Whereas, Sections 8-3 and 8-4 of the City Code govern animal services including licensing, permitting, and neglect; Whereas, staff recommends combining the two chapters, eliminating duplicative provisions, clarifying certain provisions, and adding new provisions on tethering and irresponsible owners; Whereas, because the civil penalty in a municipal infraction for violating an animal code provision is $10 for first offense (with the exception of the provision on urban chickens) and either $100 or $250 for all other City Code violations, the civil penalty for violating an animal code provision should be increased to $100 for first offense; and Whereas, it is in the best interest of the City to adopt this ordinance. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I. Amendments. 1. Title 8, Chapter 3, entitled "General Animal Regulations," and Chapter 4, entitled "Animal Control" are deleted in their entirety and the following new Chapter 4, entitled "Animal Services" is substituted in lieu thereof: 84-1: Definitions As used in this chapter, the following definitions shall apply: Abandon: Failure to provide adequate care on-site for a period of seventeen (17) hours or failure to provide control over and shelter, food and water for an animal without having made satisfactory arrangements for care, custody and physical control of such animal. Adequate Food: Providing, at suitable intervals of not more than twenty-four(24) hours, unless the dietary requirements of the animal so require, a quantity and quality of wholesome foodstuff, suitable for the physical condition and age of the animal, served in a clean receptacle or container, sufficient to maintain an adequate level of nutrition for such animal. Adequate Indoor Shelter: A properly ventilated and illuminated facility, sufficiently regulated by heating or cooling to protect the animal from extremes of temperature and sufficient to provide for the animal's health and comfort. Adequate Outdoor Shelter: A structurally sound and weatherproof shelter made up of three (3) solid sides, a roof and a floor off the ground, which provides adequate protection from exposure to weather conditions and is placed in an area free of debris, feces and standing water. An adequate outdoor shelter must meet the requirements of adequate space. An animal crate is not an adequate outdoor shelter. Adequate Sanitation: Cleaning or sanitizing of enclosures and housing facilities to remove excreta and other waste materials and dirt so as to minimize health hazards, flies or odors. Adequate Space: Primary enclosures and housing facilities constructed and maintained so as to provide sufficient space to allow each animal to make normal postural and social adjustments 1 with adequate freedom of movement to maintain physical condition. The minimum confinement area set forth in Section 8-4-6 of this Code is an adequate space. Inadequate space may be indicated by evidence of malnutrition, poor condition, debility, stress or abnormal behavior patterns. Adequate Veterinary Care: Prompt and reasonable care provided to a sick, diseased or injured animal by a licensed veterinarian, euthanized in a manner deemed appropriate by the city, or turned over to the City with approval of the Chief or Police, or designee. Adequate Water: Reasonable access to a supply of clean, fresh, potable water, provided in a sanitary manner. Animal: Any living creature, domestic or wild, except a human being. Animal Acts Or Exhibitions: Any act, exhibit, or display containing one or more live animals which are exposed to public view for entertainment or advertisement regardless of whether there is a fee or consideration. Permit is required. Animal Crate: A plastic or metal cage used for the temporary and short term containment of animals inside a building, vehicle, or other enclosed space. Animal Performance: Any place or performance where one or more animals are used in the production of any motion picture, television, radio, internet, digital, or theatrical performance, whether for entertainment, instruction, or advertising. Permit is required Animal Services Officer: City employee whose duties and responsibilities are to enforce this chapter. Animal Shelter: The pound owned and operated by the City of Iowa City. The animal shelter is a pound as defined in Chapter 162 of the Code of Iowa, as amended. Animal Shelter Staff: A City employee who works at the animal shelter, including animal services officers. Animal Show: Any place where animals are being exhibited and/or judged. Permit is required Breeder: Any person who causes the breeding of a male or female dog or cat, or makes or allows a dog or cat to be available for breeding, or a person who offers to sell a puppy or kitten that is a direct offspring of their adult dog or cat. Permit is required. Cat Kennel: Any lot, building, structure, enclosure or premises where six(6) or more cats over the age of four(4) months are kept or maintained for consideration. Permit is required. Cat Group: Any lot, building, structure, enclosure or premises where six (6) or more cats over the age of four(4) months are kept or maintained by the owner for no consideration. Permit is required. Circus: An event or performance which charges members of the public an admission fee to watch trained lions, tigers, elephants, or other animals perform under the whip or command of a ringmaster, trainer, or handler. Defilement: To foul, dirty, pollute or make filthy, either by the animal's body or wastes or by the 2 animal carrying or dragging any foul material. Dog Group: Any lot, building, structure, enclosure, or premises where four (4) or more dogs over the age of four(4) months are kept or maintained by the owner for no consideration. Permit is required. Dog Kennel. Any lot, building, structure, enclosure or premises where four(4) or more dogs over the age of four (4) months are kept or maintained for consideration. Permit is required. Educational Animal Act Or Exhibition: Any act, exhibit, or display containing one or more live animals which are exposed to public view for education or instruction for no fee or consideration. Permit is required. Fence: A physical barrier intended to prevent escape or intrusion, entry or exit, made of posts and wire, boards, stone, brick, or similar material. Invisible fencing systems using underground wire or electronic collar devices are not considered fencing for the purposes of this chapter. Groomer: Any person who cuts the hair of, trims the toenails of, brushes the hair of, and/or bathes dogs or cats for consideration or any commercial establishment that engages in cutting the hair of, trimming the nails of, brushing the hair of and/or bathing dogs or cats. Permit is required. Guard/Attack Dog: A dog trained to attack persons upon the command of its master or custodian or upon the actions of an individual, with the exception of a dog owned by a law enforcement agency. Leash: A rope, line, thong, chain or other similar restraint, not more than ten feet (10') in length, of sufficient strength to hold the animal in check. A restraint that is designed to extend beyond 10 feet(10') and retract is a leash if: a) it cannot be extended more than twenty-five feet(25') and b) it may be manually locked such that it does not extend more than ten feet (10'). License: A permit issued by the City to possess an animal as required by this chapter. Livestock: An animal belonging to the bovine, caprine, equine, ovine, or porcine species; ostriches, rheas, emus; farm deer, as defined in section 481A.1, code of Iowa, as amended; or poultry. Microchip: An encapsulated biocompatible computer chip, programmed with a unique identification number, injected under the skin of an animal to provide permanent identification. Molest: Includes not only biting and scratching a human or other animal, but also any annoyance, interference with or meddling with any such human or animal. Owner: In addition to its ordinary meaning, includes any person who owns, keeps, maintains, possesses, fosters, or harbors an animal or who knowingly permits an animal to remain on any premises occupied by that person. Major Pet Shop: Any commercial establishment where animals, including dogs and cats, are bought sold, exchanged or offered for sale. Permit is required. Minor Pet Shop: Any commercial establishment where animals, except for dogs and cats, are bought, sold, exchanged, or offered for sale. Permit is required. 3 Person: Any natural or corporate person, business association, partnership or any other legal entity. Pigeon Or Dove Loft: Any cage, loft, or enclosure where five (5) or more pigeons or doves are kept or maintained. Private Property: All buildings and other property owned by a private person, including buildings, yards and service and parking areas. Prohibited Animals: The following genus/species of animals are hereby declared to be prohibited and a permit is required in order for said animal to be within the City: A. Canidae within the order Carnivora (e.g., wolves, wolf-dog hybrids which are at least 50 percent wolf, coyotes, coyote-dog hybrids which are at least 50 percent coyote, foxes, jackals), but excluding Canis familiaris, the domestic dog. B. Felidae within the order Carnivora (e.g., lions, tigers,jaguars, leopards, cougars, lynx, ocelots, bobcats,jungle cats), but excluding Felis domestica, the domestic cat. C. Procyonidae within the order Carnivora (e.g., coatis, pandas, raccoons, procynonids). D. Ursidae of the order Carnivora (e.g., black bears, brown bears, grizzly bears, polar bears). E. Chiroptera (e.g., bats). F. Cetacea (e.g., whales, dolphins, porpoises). G. Pinnipedia (e.g., seals, sea lions, walrus). H. Sirenia (e.g., sea cows, manatees). I. Primates, including all families (e.g., Cebidae, Cercopithecidae, Callithricedae, Lemuridae, Lorisidae, Tarsiidae, Colobinae, Hylobatidae, Pongidae; [e.g., monkeys, baboons, marmosets, tamarins, capuchin, chimpanzees, orangutan, gorillas, apes]). J. Formicidae within the order Hymenoptera (e.g., fire ants). K. Apidae; specifically Africanized strains of the Apis Mellifera honey bee. L. Proboscidea, Hyracoidea, Tubulidentata (e.g., elephants, hyraxes, aardvarks). M. Edentata, Pholidota (e.g., anteaters, sloths, armadillos). N. Marsupialia (e.g., kangaroos, wallabies, koala), except for sugar gliders. O. Crocodylidae of the order Squamata (e.g., crocodiles, alligators, caimans, gavials). 4 P. Helodermatidae of the order Squamata (e.g., gila monsters, beeded lizards). Q. Lizards of the species komodoensis, salvadorii, salvator, niloticus, albigularis, and indicus. R. Crotalidae, Viperidae, Elapidae, Opisthoglyphous Colubridae, and all other orders which include poisonous or venomous reptiles (e.g., rattlesnakes, vipers, corals, copperheads, cottonmouths, moccasins, sea snakes, puff adders, malagasy hognoses). S. Eunectes of the order Squamata (e.g., green anaconda). T. Python sebae, Python reticulatus, Python molorus, Morelia amethystina of the order Squamata. U. Venomous spiders of the families Teridiiae and Loxoscelidae respectively, and scorpions of the order Scorpiones, excluding Pandinus imperator(emperor scorpion). V. Sugar gliders. W. Camelus dromedaries (camels). X. Ratite (e.g., ostrich, moa, kiwi). Y. Emus. Z. All wild animals indigenous to the state of Iowa, as defined in chapter 481A, code of Iowa, as amended. Public Property: Buildings, right of way or other public property owned or dedicated to the use of the city and other governmental entities. Rescue: The action as that term is used in Chapter 717B of the Iowa Code, as amended, that allows a local authority to take temporary possession of a threatened animal. Restricted Animals: The following genus/species of animals are hereby declared to be restricted: A. Iguana, lizards of the order of Chamaeleontidae, and lizards of the genus Varanus, but excluding the species komodoensis, salvadorii, salvator, niloticus, albigularis, and indicus. B. Rheas and peafowls (also subject to zoning requirements). C. Other small livestock type animals (also subject to zoning requirements). Rodeo: A contest, exhibition or competition which charges members of the public an admission fee to watch the skill of contestants or entrants in horseridership where lassoing is performed involving cattle, horses, bulls, goats, pigs, and wild bovine and/or where contestants ride wild bulls or wild horses for public entertainment. Permit is required. 5 Veterinarian: A person duly licensed by the state of Iowa to practice veterinary medicine. Veterinary Hospital: An establishment regularly maintained and operated by a veterinarian for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases and injuries to animals and which may board animals. 84-2: Responsibility Of Owners The owner of an animal shall be responsible for obtaining licenses, permits, and vaccinations, and for the care and control of any such animal as defined in this chapter. The owner shall be prima facie responsible for any violation of this chapter by any animal owned by said owner. 84-3: Licensing And Vaccination Requirements A. Every owner of a dog, cat, or ferret over the age of four(4) months shall have the animal vaccinated against rabies virus. B. Every owner of a dog, cat, or ferret over the age of four(4) months shall apply for a license. C. 1. At the time of making application for a license, the owner shall furnish to the city a veterinarian's certificate showing that the dog, cat, or ferret for which the license is sought has been vaccinated against rabies virus. 2. Upon payment of the license fee, the city shall issue to the owner a license. D. The owner of a dog, cat, or ferret under the age of four(4) months may apply for a juvenile tag that shall automatically expire at four (4) months from the date of birth of the animal. E. Every animal shall wear the license tag provided whenever such animal is off the property of its owner or not within a motor vehicle. F.When the ownership of an animal is transferred, the new owner shall, within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of change of ownership, make application for a new license as provided in this section regardless of whether or not the animal was previously licensed. G. The licensing provisions of this chapter do not apply if the owner brings the animal into the City for less than thirty (30) continuous days. 8-44: Rabies And Disease Control A. Isolation And Quarantine Of Suspect Animals: 1. It shall be the duty of the city animal services personnel authorized to impound animals in the city to cause to be placed in isolation and under quarantine for observation for a minimum period of ten (10) calendar days any animal that animal services personnel suspect of being infected with rabies or other diseases communicable to humans and also any animal that is known to have bitten or caused a skin abrasion upon any human in the city. 2. Such isolation and quarantine shall be either at the animal shelter or in a veterinary hospital, except if such animal is properly licensed and is currently vaccinated against rabies, 6 the animal may be placed in the custody of the owner on the owner's premises during the isolation and quarantine period if the owner resides in the city. When isolation and quarantine is authorized on the owner's premises, it will be at the discretion of and under the direct supervision of the city. 3. The expense of isolation and quarantine at a veterinary hospital will be borne by the owner. If the animal is placed in isolation and under quarantine in an animal shelter authorized by the city, a fee shall be charged to the owner. Every owner or person having possession, custody or control of an animal known to be rabid or which has been bitten by an animal infected with rabies shall immediately report such fact to the city and shall have such animal placed in isolation and quarantine as directed by the city for such period as may be designated and at the expense of the owner. B. Reports Required: 1. Physicians: It shall be the duty of every physician or other medical practitioner in the city to make written report to the city of the names and addresses of persons treated for bites inflicted by animals, together with such other information as will assist in the prevention of rabies. 2. Veterinarians: It shall be the duty of every veterinarian in the city to report to the city any diagnosis of animal rabies. 3. Owners: An owner of any animal or any person having knowledge of such animal biting or causing a skin abrasion upon any human in the city shall promptly report such fact to the city. C. Whenever it becomes necessary to safeguard the public from the dangers of rabies, the city council may issue a proclamation ordering every owner of an animal to confine the same securely on the owner's premises at all times for such period of time as is deemed necessary. D. Any person having knowledge of the presence of any disease among animals capable of being communicated to humans shall immediately report such knowledge to the county health officer. 8-4-5: Nuisances The following acts and circumstances are hereby declared to be public nuisances: A. Accumulation Of Wastes: The keeping of an animal on private property in such number or in such manner that allows for the accumulation of animal waste so as to become detrimental to the public health and/or the animal's health. B. Noisy Animals: No person shall cause or allow any animal under their care, charge, custody, or control to emit any noise which annoys, disturbs, offends, or unreasonably interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property of the neighborhood or general public. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to a commercial establishment which is permitted pursuant to the zoning code. C. Animals Damaging Property: Allowing an animal to cause any damage or defilement to public or private property. D. Harassment By Animals: Allowing an animal to molest any human or animal on public or private property when the human or animal is lawfully on the property. 7 E. Animals Injuring Or Killing Other Animals: Allowing an animal to molest or kill wildlife, birds, animals or domestic animals on public or private property. 8-4-6: Prohibitions And Requirements A. Prohibited Animals: No person shall keep or maintain an animal declared to be prohibited under this chapter. Notwithstanding this provision: 1. Indigenous wildlife rehabilitators who possess required Iowa state department of national resources, or its successor, permits may maintain prohibited wildlife for rehabilitation purposes. 2. A prohibited animal which is properly and appropriately restrained may be transported to a veterinarian for emergency medical care or treatment and may remain within the confines of the veterinary clinic or hospital as long as the animal is receiving medical treatment. B. Restricted Animals: No person shall keep or maintain an animal declared to be a restricted animal under this chapter without a valid permit issued by the division of animal control of the city or its successor. Notwithstanding this provision: 1. Indigenous wildlife rehabilitators who possess required Iowa state department of national resources, or its successor, permits may maintain prohibited wildlife for rehabilitation purposes. 2. A restricted animal which is properly and appropriately restrained may be transported to a veterinarian for emergency medical care or treatment and may remain within the confines of the veterinary clinic or hospital as long as the animal is receiving medical treatment. • C. Pigeon And Dove Lofts: Pigeon lofts and dove lofts are prohibited within the city. Notwithstanding this provision, any person who owns or operates a pigeon and/or dove loft within the city prior to July 1, 1997, may continue to operate such pigeon and/or dove loft subject to the following restrictions: 1. As of July 1, 1997, pigeon and dove lofts shall not house more than forty(40) pigeons and/or doves at any one time. 2. As of July 1, 2000, pigeon and dove lofts shall not house more than thirty (30) pigeons and/or doves at any one time. 3. The exemption for persons who own or operate pigeon and dove lofts within the city as of July 1, 1997, shall not be transferable to another person or another property. D. Animals At Large Prohibited: 1. No animal shall be found at large within the city at any time. An animal shall not be deemed at large if: a. It is tethered or on the enclosed fenced premises owned, leased, occupied, or controlled by the owner; or 8 b. It is tethered or on the enclosed fenced premises owned, leased, occupied, or controlled by another person with the knowledge and consent of that person; or c. It is a dog in a city dog park and has been issued a use permit; or d. It is under the control of a person competent to restrain the animal and: (1) is on a leash; or (2) enclosed within a building or structure; or (3) properly restrained within a motor vehicle as provided herein. 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of this subsection, any animal shall be deemed at large at any time when the animal is attacking humans, other animals, or destroying property or is on any public property, except when under restraint as set forth above. In addition, any female animal in estrus shall be deemed at large at any time, except: a. When housed in a building or structure completely enclosed; or b.When housed in a veterinary hospital or boarding kennel licensed or registered with the state; or c. When on the premises owned, leased, occupied or controlled by the owner, provided the area in which such animal is located is completely enclosed by a fence or other structure having a height of at least sixty inches (60"); or d. When under the control of a person competent to restrain the animal by leash. E. No animal shall be taken, allowed or permitted on private property not owned by the owner of the animal without the permission of the person owning such property or the person in possession or control thereof. F. No animal shall be allowed, taken or permitted on or in any building, store, restaurant, tavern, sidewalk cafe, or outdoor service area where food or food products are sold, prepared or dispensed to humans other than the owners thereof, except for service animals as defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act. G. No owner shall fail to provide an outdoor confinement area of less than the following: 1. For one dog under 50 pounds: 60 square feet 2. For one dog over 50 pounds or two dogs under 50 pounds: 80 square feet 3. For two dogs over 50 pounds each or three dogs under 50 pounds: 96 square feet 4. For three dogs over 50 pounds each or four dogs under 50 pounds: 140 square feet 5. Four dogs over 50 pounds each: 192 square feet Outdoor confinement area means an outdoor space securely enclosed, such as by chain link fencing material, that is the primary space the dog lives, eats, and sleeps every day including overnight. H. Any person who shall walk an animal on public or private property shall provide for the disposal of the solid waste material excreted by the animal by immediate removal of the 9 waste, except for animals properly trained and certified to assist persons with disabilities while such animals are acting in such capacity. I. Pet shops displaying, selling, or transferring turtles, tortoises or iguanas must display in public view a notice of warning regarding the transmission of salmonella. J. Tethering means fastening an animal to a fixed object so as to limit its range of movement using a rope, chain, or similar device. 1. a) No person shall allow an animal to be tethered and unattended with a rope, chain, or similar device that is less than ten feet(10') feet in length. An animal is unattended if the animal is more than 50 feet from the person and the animal is not in the person's line of sight. b) No person shall allow an animal to be tethered and unattended for more than 30 minutes continuously in any given 3-hour period. An animal is unattended if the animal is more than 50 feet from the person and the animal is not in the person's line of sight. 2. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, a) no person shall allow any of the following animals to be tethered: dangerous animal or animal in estrus. b) no person shall allow an animal to be tethered using a collar made of metal or chain, excluding the buckle or using a collar, even if made of cloth, designed to continue to tighten, such as a slip lead or noose, when pulled tightly. c). No person shall allow an animal to have access to a public sidewalk or street while tethered. d) No person shall allow an animal to be tethered to a utility pole, parking meter, building, structure, fence, sign, tree, bush, bench, newspaper or advertising rack or other object on public property. e) No person shall allow an animal to be tethered in an unsafe location. An unsafe location includes, but is not limited to, near a fence whereby the animal could asphyxiate itself if it jumped over the fence or on a deck whereby the animal could asphyxiate itself if it jumped off of the deck. f) No person shall allow an animal to be tethered in a manner that allows it to become entangled with another tethered animal. L. Animal acts or exhibitions, and animal performances in which prohibited animals are used are prohibited. Additionally, any public showing, carnival, fair, parade, petting zoo, ride, race, film shoot or other undertaking in which prohibited animals are required to perform tricks, fight or participate as accompaniments for the entertainment or amusement of an audience in exchange for a fee or consideration is prohibited. 8-4-7: Dangerous Animals A. Definitions: Dangerous animal means: 10 1. An animal that has killed a human being; 2. An animal that has taken aggressive action that caused a serious injury (as defined in Iowa Code Section 702.18) to a human; 3. An animal that has killed another domestic animal; 4. An animal that has engaged in exhibitions of fighting; 5. An animal that has a propensity to attack or bite humans or animals that has been shown to exist through one or more attacks or attempted attacks and where such propensity is known to the owner or ought to reasonably be known to the owner thereof; or 6. An animal judicially or administratively determined to be a dangerous animal, or similar designation, by another jurisdiction with a substantially similar definition. An animal shall not be deemed dangerous if the Chief of Police or designee determine that the animal acted under the following circumstances: 1. A dog engaged in law enforcement work that is engaged in official law enforcement activities at the time of the attack, or bite; 2. An animal that attacks or bites a person who at the time of the attack or bite, is engaged in a criminal act against the person or property of another; 3. An animal that attacks or bites another animal in order to protect a human being, domestic animal or livestock; or 4. An animal that was unreasonably or deliberately provoked by the person or animal that was harmed. B. Prohibitions: 1. No person shall own, keep, harbor, foster, or maintain any dangerous animal except as specifically provided for herein. 2. No person shall allow a dangerous animal to be in or upon any premises or vehicle owned, leased, occupied, or controlled by the person, except as provided herein. 3. No person shall bring any dangerous animal into the City of Iowa City without approval of the Chief of Police, or designee. 4. No person shall tether a dangerous animal. 5. No person shall allow a dangerous animal in a City dog park. C. Impounding and Costs: 11 1. If animals services personnel have probable cause that an animal is a dangerous animal, the animal may be immediately impounded if found in violation of this chapter. 2. If an animal has been determined to be a dangerous animal, the animal may be immediately impounded if found in violation of this chapter. An animal is determined to be a dangerous animal if: a) the City Manager, or designee, determines the animal to be dangerous following a hearing as provided herein; b) the district court finds the animal to be a dangerous animal; or c) the animal has been judicially or administratively determined to be a dangerous animal, or similar designation, by another jurisdiction with a substantially similar definition of dangerous animal. 3. Any person who owns, keeps, harbors, fosters, maintains or controls an animal involved in such impoundment shall pay all expenses, including shelter, food, veterinary care, boarding and all other expenses necessitated by the impoundment and containment of the animal, during its impoundment. D. Spay/Neuter and Microchip/Tag: 1. The owner of a dangerous animal shall have the animal surgically sterilized at the owner's expense by a licensed veterinarian within 30 days after being determined to be a dangerous animal as provided herein. The owner shall provide written verification of the surgical procedure to the animal shelter within 24 hours of the procedure being completed. 2. The owner of a dangerous animal shall have the animal implanted with a microchip identification at the owner's expense by a trained microchip technician within 5 days after being determined to be a dangerous animal as provided herein. The owner shall provide written verification of the implanting and provide the microchip number to the animal shelter within 24 hours after the procedure is completed. 3. The owner of a dangerous animal shall place on the animal's collar a City-issued tag that identifies the animal as such within 5 days after being determined to be a dangerous animal as provided herein and shall maintain the tag on the collar at all times. E. Administrative Hearing/Terms & Conditions/Grounds for Destruction: 1. If an animal is alleged to be a dangerous animal by the Chief of Police or designee, an administrative hearing on the disposition of such animal may be held. Pending such hearing, the animal shall be impounded in the city shelter, or in lieu of impound, the Chief of Police or designee may permit the animal to be confined, at the owner's expense, in a City approved dog kennel or veterinary facility within the City or at the owner's residence, provided the owner: a. Shall not remove the animal from the kennel, veterinary facility or residence without the prior written approval of the Chief of Police or designee; and b. Shall make the animal available for observation and inspection by Chief of Police, or designee, and authorized representatives. 12 2. The hearing shall be before the City Manager, or designee, shall be public, and shall be scheduled after at least ten (10) calendar days'written notice to the owner of said hearing. The owner may waive the notice and agree to an earlier scheduled hearing. The hearing will be informal, and the owner will have the opportunity to offer any written or oral information relevant to the hearing, including witnesses. The standard of proof is preponderance of evidence. 3 If, following the hearing, the City Manager or designee determines that the animal is a dangerous animal, the City Manager or designee may require reasonable terms and conditions for the training, handling or maintenance of the animal to abate the condition which gave rise to the hearing. In lieu of a hearing, the Chief of Police or designee may agree on reasonable terms and conditions. Terms and conditions may include, but are not limited to: a. Selection of locations within the owner's property where the animal shall be maintained. b. Requirements as to size, construction or design of an enclosure where the animal may be kept. c. Completion of obedience training from a trainer or training program approved by the City. d. Types and method of restraint, or muzzling, or both. e. Requirements for the owner to carry liability insurance. 4. If the Chief of Police, or designee, determines that the owner has violated the terms and conditions required by the City Manager or agreed to by the Chief of Police or designee, the Chief of Police, or designee, may schedule an administrative hearing on the consequences of said violation with notice to the owner and opportunity to be heard as provided herein. The only issues at the hearing will be whether the terms and conditions have been violated, and if so, the consequences of the violation. The question of whether the animal is a dangerous animal will not be at issue as the City Manager, or designee, has previously made that determination. 5. If the City Manager or designee determines: 1) that the animal is a dangerous animal; 2) that the owner has failed to restrain such animal reasonably; and 3) that it is in the public interest to destroy such animal, the animal shall be destroyed in a manner deemed appropriate to the city after five (5) calendar days unless the determination is appealed to a court of competent jurisdiction. 8-4-8: Impoundment And Redemption Of Animals A. Any animal found in violation of the provisions of this chapter may be impounded by the city. B. Not later than two (2) calendar days after the impoundment of any animal, the owner, if known, shall be notified, of such impoundment. C. Redemption Of Impounded Animals: 13 1. The owner of any animal impounded pursuant to this chapter may reclaim such animal upon proof of current license and rabies inoculation, payment of the redemption fee and payment of all costs and charges incurred by the city or the agency authorized by the city to impound such animal, including costs of maintenance of said animal. 2. If an animal four(4) months of age or older and unlicensed is impounded, the person to whom the animal is released shall apply for a license for such animal and shall be required to first show proof of current rabies vaccination or obtain a rabies vaccination receipt in order to obtain the release of the animal. 3. All dogs, cats, rabbits, and ferrets impounded by the animal shelter which do not have traceable identification shall have a microchip identification implanted permanently into the animal prior to redemption at the owner's cost. D. The City shall keep all animals impounded pursuant to this chapter for a period of seven (7) calendar days after the owner has been notified, in writing, of possible disposition, which notice shall be given to the animal owner by personal delivery, electronic mail, or by U.S. mail. U.S. mail is deemed completed four(4) days after the notice is deposited in the mail and postmarked for delivery. Electronic mail is deemed completed twenty-four(24) hours after it is sent. After such time period has expired and the owner has failed to claim and redeem any such impounded animal, such animal shall become the property of the City. This provision does not apply to stray animals for which the owner is unknown. E. The City personnel or veterinarian authorized to impound animals, upon receiving any animal pursuant to this chapter, shall make a written record of receiving such animal. 8-4-9: Animal Neglect and Cruelty A. 1. Prohibition against Animal Cruelty. No person shall abandon, abuse, torture, torment, mutilate, overwork, overload, beat, starve, dehydrate, suffocate, kill or cause the death of any animal, or take any other action which causes unjustified pain, distress, or suffering. 2. Prohibition against Animal Neglect. (a) No person shall fail to provide any animal with adequate care, food, water, exercise, sanitation, space,outdoor confinement area, indoor shelter, outdoor shelter, or veterinary care (b) No person shall leave an animal in an unattended motor vehicle or trailer as provided herein. It shall be unlawful for any person to place or confine an animal or allow such animal to be confined in a vehicle or trailer under such conditions or for such periods of time as may endanger the health or well-being of the animal or as may cause unjustified pain, distress, or suffering due to extreme temperature. 3. Threatened animal means an animal that has been subjected to animal cruelty or animal neglect as provided herein. B. 1.A law enforcement or animal services officer, after consulting with a veterinarian licensed by the State may rescue a threatened animal as provided in this section. The officer may enter onto private property to rescue threatened animal if the officer obtains a search warrant issued by a court or enters onto the premises in a manner consistent with the laws of the state of Iowa and the United States, including article I, section 8, of the constitution of the state of Iowa, and the fourth amendment to the constitution of the United States. 14 2. If an animal is rescued pursuant to this section, the city shall provide for the maintenance of the threatened animal at the city shelter. The city may also contract with an animal care provider for the maintenance of the threatened animal. The city shall post a notice in a conspicuous place at the location where the animal was rescued. The notice shall state that the animal has been rescued by the city pursuant to this section and section 717B.5, code of Iowa, as amended. The city shall pay the animal care provider for the animal's maintenance regardless of proceeds received from the sale of the animal or any reimbursement ordered by a court pursuant to section 7178.4, code of Iowa, as amended. 3. The animal shall be subject to disposition as required by a court pursuant to section 7178.4, code of Iowa, as amended. C. The disposition of a threatened animal rescued by the city shall occur as provided in section 7176.4, code of Iowa, as amended. 8-4-10: Prohibited Acts And Conditions No person shall: A. Expose or permit to be exposed any poisoned meat or other poisoned substances on public or private property where the same may be removed, handled or consumed by an animal. B. Trap or attempt to trap any animal with other than a nonkill live trap deemed acceptable to the city. Excepted from this prohibition are instant kill traps for the purpose of small rodent pest control. C. Offer to give any live animal as a gift or prize for any contest or other competition, or as a business inducement or promotion. This provision does not apply to animal shelter staff. D. Leave an animal unattended inside the animal shelter or on the premises of the animal shelter without express permission of animal shelter staff, a community service officer, or a police officer. E. No person shall take any animal from the custody of animal shelter staff, community service officer, or peace officer or resist, oppose, obstruct or impede any said City employee or officer in the discharge of their duties. F. No person, except the owner of an animal or authorized agent, shall willfully open any door or gate on any private or public premises for the purpose of enticing or enabling any such animal to leave such private or public premises, nor shall any person willfully molest, tease, provoke or mistreat an animal. G. No person shall transport any animal or leave any animal unattended in the back of a motor vehicle in a space intended for any load, including, but not limited to, the cargo bed of a truck or the trunk of an automobile, except an animal may be transported or left unattended in the cargo bed of a truck if: 1)the space is fully enclosed (such as a topper); or 2) the animal is secured by an animal crate in a manner which will prevent the animal from either being thrown from the motor vehicle or falling or jumping from the motor vehicle. This shall not apply to the transportation of livestock. 15 84-11: Irresponsible Owner A. Irresponsible owner means an owner who has been adjudged by the court to have violated this chapter four(4) or more times within a twelve-month period. B. For a period of twelve months, an irresponsible owner shall not reside with or maintain any animal and shall not allow any animal owned by the irresponsible owner to be maintained within the City. C. An irresponsible owner who maintains any animal at any premises owned, leased, or controlled by the irresponsible owner in violation of this chapter shall immediately surrender the animal to the Chief of Police or designee. If the irresponsible owner does not immediately surrender the animal, a municipal infraction citation may be filed for violation of this provision requesting a court order that the animal become the property of the City. 84-12: Permit Required A. No person shall keep, maintain, conduct or operate any activity that requires a permit issued by the Police Chief or designee as set forth herein without a permit. B. 1. Each application for a permit hereunder shall be in writing upon a form to be furnished by the City. 2. All permits issued shall automatically expire one year from the date of issue, unless revoked or suspended. 3. A permittee wishing to renew a permit shall apply for and secure a renewal of the permit in the manner provided for in this chapter no later than thirty(30) days after the expiration of any permit. 4. All permits issued to commercial establishments, animal acts or exhibitions, and rodeos shall be kept posted in a conspicuous place. 5. All applicants shall be furnished with permit rules at the time the application is made. C. Upon the filing of an application for a permit or renewal thereof, the Police Chief, or designee, may make such investigation and inspection of the animal, and the premises where the animal will be kept, as it deems proper within the law. The City shall then issue a permit to an applicant unless the Police Chief or designee finds: 1. The keeping of the animal at the place set forth in the application and the conduct or operation of the business, activity, or event for which the permit is requested will violate any law or ordinance of this city, or any law of the state; or 2. The keeping of the animal at the place set forth in the application and the conduct or operation of the business, activity, or event for which the permit is requested will constitute a danger to the health, peace or safety of the community; or 3. The applicant has failed to provide any animal in his or her possession, care, or control with adequate food, drink, shelter, or protection; or 16 4. The premises and establishment where the animal is to be kept is not maintained in a clean and sanitary condition; or 5. The applicant has failed to protect any animal in his or her possession, care, or control from needless suffering, torment, cruelty, abuse, or neglect; or 6. The applicant has had a permit revoked within one year prior to the date of the application; or 7. The applicant has been convicted of or has had judgment entered for the violation of chapter 717A or 717B, code of Iowa, as amended, or any provision of this chapter. 8. The applicant has previously violated terms and conditions of a permit. 9. Doing so would be detrimental to the safety, health or welfare of the residents of the city or an animal. D. Any permit issued under this chapter may be revoked or suspended if, after due investigation and after the permittee has been given the opportunity to give a written and oral statement and present evidence, the Police Chief or designee successors finds: 1. The keeping of the animal at the place set forth in the application and the conduct or operation of the commercial establishment for which the permit was issued violates any law or ordinance of the city, or any law of the state; or 2. The keeping of the animal at the place set forth in the application and the conduct or operation of the commercial establishment for which the permit is requested will constitute a danger to the health, peace or safety of the community; or 3. The permittee, agent, or employee has failed to provide any animal in their possession, care, or control with proper and sufficient food, drink, shelter, or protection; or 4. The permittee, agent, or employee has failed to maintain the premises or caging areas in a clean and sanitary condition; or 5. The permittee, agent, or employee has failed to protect any animal in their possession, care, or control from needless suffering, torment, cruelty, abuse, or neglect; or 6. The permittee has had a permit revoked within one year prior to the date of application; or 7. The permittee has been convicted of or has had judgment entered for any offense involving the violation of chapter 717A or 7178, code of Iowa, as amended, or any provision of this chapter. 8. The applicant has previously violated terms and conditions of a permit. 9. Doing so would be detrimental to the safety, health or welfare of the residents of the city or an animal. E. Reserved. F. Urban Chicken Permits: 1. No person shall raise, harbor or keep chickens without an urban chicken permit, or other permit, issued by the city. 17 2. "Chicken" means a member of the subspecies of Gallus gallus domesticus, a domesticated chicken. 3. In order to obtain an urban chicken permit, an applicant must submit a completed application on a form provided by the city accompanied by the permit fee. 4.Within thirty (30) days of submission of the application, the police chief, or designee, shall issue the urban chicken permit if the applicant meets the requirements of this provision and the policy adopted by city council resolution or deny the application. If the application is denied, the police chief, or designee, shall state the reasons in writing. 5. The urban chicken permit shall be valid for three (3) years and may not be sold, transferred or assigned. 6. The police chief, or designee, may revoke an urban chicken permit as provided in the policy adopted by council resolution. 7. Appeals of the decision to deny or revoke an urban chicken permit are to the city manager, or designee, and must be filed within ten (10) days of the decision. 8. Subsections A through E of this section and section 8-4-13 of this chapter do not apply to this subsection. 9. Additional requirements, including permit fees, shall be adopted by resolution of the City Council. 10. Violation of this subsection or the terms of the urban chicken permit are punishable by a municipal infraction with a civil penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00)for first violation, two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00)for second violation, and five hundred dollars ($500.00) for third and subsequent violations. 8-4-13: Fees Animal fees shall be set by resolution of the city council. 8-4-14: Administrative Rules The Chief of Police or designee is authorized to establish administrative rules not inconsistent with any ordinance to carry out the provisions of this chapter. A copy of said rules shall be on file with the city clerk, available at the animal shelter, and posted on the City website. 8-4-15: Penalties Any violation of this chapter shall be considered a simple misdemeanor or municipal infraction as provided for in title 1, chapter 4 of this code. Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. 18 Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this 4th day of September , 2018. yor Attest tyd l {� edi_.4a:0 City lerk v/ljj Approved g City Attorney's Office 19 Ordinance No. 18-4767 Page 20 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Thomas . that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Vacant—Botchway seat X Cole x Mims x Salih X Taylor X Thomas X Throgmorton First Consideration 08/07/2018 Vote for passage: AYES: Cole, Mims, Salih, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vacant — Botchway seat. Second Consideration 08/21/2018 Vote for passage: AYES: Throgmorton, Cole, Mims, Salih, Taylor, Thomas. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vacant — Botchway seat. Date published 09/13/2018