HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Agenda Packet 01.17.2024PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Wednesday, January 17, 2024
Formal Meeting – 6:00 PM
Emma Harvat Hall
Iowa City City Hall
410 E. Washington Street
Agenda:
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
Rezoning Items
4. Case No. REZ23-0010
Location: 1810, 1816, and 1828 Lower Muscatine Road
An application for a rezoning of approximately 6.1 acres of property from Neighborhood
Public (P-1) to General Industrial (I-1).
Comprehensive Plan Update
5. Introductory presentation by staff on the comprehensive plan update.
6. Consideration of meeting minutes: December 20, 2023
7. Planning and Zoning Information
8. Adjournment
If you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact
Anne Russett, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5251 or arussett@iowa-city.org. Early requests are
strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs.
Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings
Formal: February 7 / February 21 / March 6
Informal: Scheduled as needed.
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Item: REZ23-0010
Prepared by: Melanie Comer,
Planning Intern
Date: January 17, 2024
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant/Owner:
Troy McQuillen
Kirkwood Community College
Troy.mcquillen@kirkwood.edu
Other: Joe Townsend
Procter & Gamble
4760 Rapid Creek Rd NE
Iowa City, IA 52240
Townsend.jr@pg.com
Contact Person: Nick Hatz
Shive-Hattery
222 3rd Ave SW Unit 300
Cedar Rapids, IA 52401
nhatz@shive-hattery.com
Travis Wright
Shive-Hattery
222 3rd Ave SW Unit 300
Cedar Rapids, IA 52401
twright@shive-hattery.com
Requested Action: Rezoning of 1810, 1816, and 1828
Lower Muscatine Road from
Neighborhood Public (P-1) to
General Industrial (I-1).
Purpose:
Request to rezone the subject
properties for industrial use. The site
is currently for sale and Procter &
Gamble anticipates closing on the
property in February 2024.
Location:
Northeast of Lower Muscatine Road
and Northwest of Mall drive.
2
Location Map:
Size: 6.8 Acres
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant educational facilities in a
Public Zone (P-1).
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: RS-5, Low-Density Single-
Family Residential Zone
RS-8 Medium-Density
Single-Family
I-1 General Industrial Zone
South: RS-5 Low-Density Single-
Family Residential Zone
CC-2 Community
Commercial Zone
West: RS-5 Low-Density Single-
Family Residential Zone
I-1 General Industrial Zone
East: I-1 General Industrial Zone
RS-5 Low-Density Single-
Family Zone
Comprehensive Plan:
Public/Semi-Public
District Plan:
Southeast District Plan, Public
Institutional
Neighborhood Open Space District:
SE2
Public Meeting Notification: Properties within 500’ of the subject
property received notification of the
Planning and Zoning Commission
public meeting. A rezoning sign was
posted on the site on December 18,
2023.
File Date: December 8, 2023
45 Day Limitation Period:
January 22, 2024
3
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The owner, Kirkwood Community College, has requested a rezoning of approximately 6.8 acres
from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to General Industrial (I-1) zone located at 1810, 1816, and
1828 Lower Muscatine Road. The property currently contains vacant educational buildings formerly
occupied by Kirkwood Community College. The subject properties are currently for sale. The party
interested in the purchase of these parcels is Procter & Gamble, a company which currently owns
land to the east of the proposed rezoning. Based on correspondence from Proctor & Gamble, they
anticipate closing on the site in February 2024.
In 2002, the City initiated a rezoning for the property located at 1828 Lower Muscatine Road.
Kirkwood Community College purchased this parcel in 2002 to extend the Community College.
This rezoning changed the zoning designation from Community Commercial (CC-2) to P-1 to
reflect the change in ownership to a public entity and bring the property into compliance with the
Zoning Ordinance. This property has remained P-1 since the 2002 rezoning. If the property will
no longer be owned by Kirkwood, or another public entity, a rezoning will be needed.
ANALYSIS:
Current Zoning:
The properties are currently zoned Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone, which is intended for uses such
as schools, parks, fire and police stations, and other civic uses. The purpose of public zones is to
provide reference to public ownership and use of land, or to use the land for infrastructure services
that need to be located in or near the area where the service is provided.
Proposed Zoning:
The request is to rezone the subject properties from P-1 to General Industrial (I-1) zone. The
purpose of the I-1 zone is to provide the opportunity for the development of most types of industrial
firms. Since this zone is regulated to protect adjacent developments, the land uses allowed are
not heavy or intense in operation. Table 1 outlines the uses allowed in the I-1 zone.
Table 1: Uses Allowed in I-1 Zone
Use Categories:
Building trade (e.g. contractor shops) P
Industrial service (e.g. machine shops, towing yards, repair of machinery) P
Technical/light manufacturing (e.g. manufacturing of electronic components, optical
instruments, lenses)
P
General manufacturing (e.g. includes manufacturing of most chemical and food products,
but excludes heavy manufacturing uses like meatpacking, sawmills, papermills)
PR
Heavy manufacturing (Limited to concrete batch plants only) S
Self-service storage P
Warehouse and freight movement (e.g. warehouses for retail stores, wholesale distribution
centers railroad switching yards, storage lots for fleets)
P
Waste related (Limited to recycling processing facilities) PR
Wholesale sales P
Basic utility PR
General community service (e.g. neighborhood centers, museums) S
Utility-scale ground-mounted solar energy systems PR
Helicopter landing facilities S
Communication transmission facility PR
Consumer firework sales PR
P = Permitted
PR = Provisional
S = Special exception
4
The I-1 zone has a maximum height limit of 45’. The minimum front yard setback is 20’, while the
side and rear have a minimum 0’ setback unless it abuts a residential zone. Although the rear
property line is near residential uses, the property does not abut a residential zone. Therefore,
the rear setback would be 0’.
In terms of screening, development in the I-1 zone is subject to the industrial and research zone
site development standards. Parking and loading areas must be located behind buildings or
screened from view to at least the S3 standard when an industrial use abuts or is across a street
or railroad right of way from a residential zone. Additionally, outdoor storage is allowed provided
it is concealed from public view to the extend possible. If it is not feasible to conceal the storage
areas behind buildings, the storage areas must be set back at least twenty feet (20') from any
public right of way, including public trails and open space, and screened from view to at least the
S3 standard. S3 screening requires enough shrubs and small evergreens to form a continuous
screen or hedge at least 5’-6’ in height. Screening materials must be at least three feet (3') high
when planted. At least one-half of the shrubs must be evergreen varieties.
Rezoning Review Criteria:
Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezoning:
1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan;
2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan:
The Future Land Use Map of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies the subject properties as
suitable for Public/Semi-Public uses. The plan also includes an Economic Development goal that
states Iowa City should “Increase and diversify the property tax base by encouraging the retention
and expansion of existing businesses…”. By allowing for this land to be rezoned to I-1, the already
existing company Procter & Gamble would be able to expand upon purchasing this space, adding
more facilities directly adjacent to their already existing buildings.
Similarly, the Future Land Use Map of the Southeast District Plan identifies these properties as
suitable for Public Institutional uses. The plan, adopted in 2011, includes a discussion of planning
for the expansion of Kirkwood Community College as it continues to grow. It specifically includes
an objective to “plan for the future growth of Kirkwood Community College to support and enhance
this commercial area”. Circumstances have changed since the adoption of this plan.
This plan identifies the need to preserve and expand industrial uses on page 37, stating, “The
Southeast District is an ideal place to expand Iowa City’s industrial base” due to its ideal
landscape of level and well-drained land with proximity to adequate services and utilities. The
plan also includes a goal to “preserve and expand the industrial tax base” and objectives to
“protect designated industrial areas from incompatible uses, such as residential dwellings and
retail and consumer services that would interfere with industrial operation”. Expansion of existing
industry such as Procter & Gamble aligns with the goals of the Southeast District Plan.
The plan also includes a goal “minimize conflicts between industrial areas and nearby
developments” and an objective to “develop a better buffer between the residential areas located
north of the Iowa Interstate Railroad and industrial uses to the south. For example, trees both
fast-growing and slow-growing species, planted on both sides of the railroad could create a visual
screen and sound buffer.” Approximately 187 feet of the subject property abuts the Iowa Interstate
Railroad.
Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character:
The area surrounding the subject properties to the northwest and southeast is zoned as I-1 and
has existing light industrial uses of MidAmerican and Procter & Gamble. To the north is the Iowa
Interstate Railroad, separating the subject properties from a Low-Density Single-Family Residential
5
(RS-5) zone. Land to the south is also zoned RS-5, which is separated from the subject properties
by a major thoroughfare. The Iowa City Market Place area is also across Lower Muscatine Rd and
is zoned CC-2.
The I-1 zone is intended for light industrial uses. Technical/light manufacturing is permitted in the
I-1 zone. Heavy industrial uses are allowed through a special exception process. One of the
special exception criteria is that heavy manufacturing uses in the I-1 zone are limited to concrete
batch/mix plants only. Additionally, the concrete plant would need to be located at least 500’ from
any residentially zoned property.
The I-1 zone would allow for the expansion of Procter & Gamble’s operations adjacent to their
current facility. Since Kirkwood no longer is operating at this site, this rezoning would make the
proposed use consistent both adjacent properties. The subject properties are separated from
existing residential areas by both a major thoroughfare and the Iowa Interstate Railroad,
surrounding by industrial uses to the north and south.
Access and Street Design:
Access to the subject properties is provided via Lower Muscatine Road through an already
established intersection at Lower Muscatine Rd and Sycamore St. Access to 1828 Lower
Muscatine Rd is provided through an existing drive across from Deforest Ave.
NEXT STEPS:
Upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council will hold a
public hearing on the proposed rezoning ordinance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of REZ23-0010, a proposal to rezone approximately 6.8 acres of
property located at 1810, 1816, and 1828 Lower Muscatine Road from Neighborhood Public (P-1)
zone to General Industrial (I-1) zone.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Zoning Map
3. Applicant Statement
4. Rezoning Exhibit
Approved by: _________________________________________________
Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
ATTACHMENT 1
Location Map
ATTACHMENT 2
Zoning Map
ATTACHMENT 3
Applicant Statement
Project 2112307450
December 6, 2023
City of Iowa City Neighborhood & Development Services & Planning & Zoning Commission
Phone | 319-356-5000
RE: Proposed Rezoning Applicant Statement
To Whom It May Concern,
On behalf of Kirkwood Community College and Procter & Gamble (P&G) a rezoning request is
respectfully submitted as shown in the provided Rezoning Exhibit.
The rezoning is warranted as the parcels under review are currently owned by a public non-profit
organization, Kirkwood Community College, and will be purchased by a private industrial owner, Procter
& Gamble (P&G). Under the current zoning of Public (P1) in the City of Iowa City zoning code, the uses
described are intended for public ownership. Proctor and Gamble (P&G) is a private owner whose
intended uses best align with the Industrial zoning (I1).
The proposed I1 zoning would be consistent with the existing zoning of directly adjacent parcels,
MidAmerican to the northwest and P&G to the so utheast. The parcels southwest face is adjacent to
Lower Muscatine Road right of way, giving a buffer between the parcels and the residential
neighborhood across the street. The northeast face of the parcel abuts railroad right of way and gives a
buffer from the residential neighborhood across the train tracks. The City of Iowa City future land use
map designates a Public/Semi-Public use to this area, which is reflective of current uses and ownership;
however, City Staff generally showed support for the purchase and rezoning during the pre-application
meeting given the location and intended use by P&G.
Public infrastructure appears adequate or can be reasonably upgraded in the area based on existing
uses, development and utility mapping.
SHIVE-HATTERY, INC.
Charles “Nick” Hatz II, PE
Principal, Civil Engineer
Copy:
Troy McQuillen, Kirkwood Community College
Joe Townsend, Proctor & Gamble
Sarah Naberhaus, Shive-Hattery
Wade Wamre, Shive-Hattery
Travis Wright, Shive-Hattery
ATTACHMENT 4
Rezoning Exhibit
Date: January 10, 2024
To: Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner, Neighborhood & Development Services
Re: Comprehensive Plan Update
Introduction
The IC2030: Comprehensive Plan, adopted in May 2013, is the adopted broad-based policy vision
that guides growth and development within Iowa City. The City Council’s Strategic Plan adopted
in December 2023 includes an action step to “initiate a comprehensive plan update and
subsequent zoning code review to more broadly incorporate form-based principles, expanded
missing middle housing allowances, incorporate minimum density requirements, and streamline
approval processes.” Based on this action step, staff is moving forward with a comprehensive
update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
This memo explains what a Comprehensive Plan is and how it differs from zoning and subdivision
regulations. It explains the role of the Comprehensive Plan in the land development process.
Finally, it outlines some outcomes and next steps for the update to the Comprehensive Plan.
What is a Comprehensive Plan?
The Comprehensive Plan is the guiding policy document for growth and development in the city.
It establishes the high-level land use policy vision that informs and guides decisions related to the
built environment. Comprehensive Plans are adopted by resolution and are not regulatory.
The Comprehensive Plan includes a vision statement and associated goals and strategies that
cover a range of topics, including land use, housing, economic development, transportation,
environment and resources, parks and open space, and arts and culture. The Comprehensive
Plan also includes a broad community vision statement and incorporates neighborhood design
principles that are focused on creating and sustaining healthy neighborhoods. The categories
covered in the neighborhood design principles range from compatible infill development and
diversity of housing types to neighborhood commercial and interconnected streets to parks and
open space.
One of the most important components of the Comprehensive Plan is the Future Land Use Map.
The FLUM identifies the general intended land uses (e.g. residential, mixed-use, neighborhood
center) for all properties within the city. For residential land use designations, the FLUM generally
identifies the intended type of residential development (e.g. low density residential). Residential
land use designations sometimes also identify the envisioned housing types (e.g. single-family,
duplex), and the associated density (e.g. 16-24 dwelling units/acre). The FLUM land use
designations should be fairly broad in nature and allow for some flexibility in types of uses.
The adopted Comprehensive Plan, IC2030, includes goals, policies, and strategies, as well as a
FLUM for the entire city. There are also several other plans that are components of the
comprehensive plan:
• Central District Plan, Adopted 2008
January 10, 2024
Page 2
• Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, Adopted 2013
• North District Plan, Adopted 2001
• North Corridor District Plan, No plan adopted
• Northeast District Plan, Adopted 1999
• Northwest District Plan, No plan adopted
• South Central District Plan, Adopted 2000
• South District Plan, Adopted 2015
• Southeast District Plan, Adopted 2011
• Southwest District Plan, Adopted 2002
• Historic Preservation Plan, Adopted 2008
• City/County Fringe Area Agreement, Adopted 2021
The district plans are intended to provide more specific policy direction for unique geographies
within the city. However, when not updated regularly the district plans can become outdated in
their reflection of City priorities, market conditions, and general best development practices. The
historic preservation plan outlines policies related to preservation. The City/County Fringe Area
Agreement guides growth and development within the city’s 2-mile fringe area. Together, along
with IC2030, these plans make up the city’s Comprehensive Plan.
Zoning and Subdivision Regulations
While the Comprehensive Plan provides the guiding policy direction for land development it is not
a regulatory document. Zoning and subdivision codes are adopted by ordinance and are
regulatory. The comprehensive plans works together with the zoning and subdivision codes,
which are tools that implement the conceptual vision and policy direction outlined in the
comprehensive plan.
Zoning Regulations
There are two components to the City’s zoning regulations: 1) the zoning code, and 2) the zoning
map. The zoning code (Title 14 of the Municipal Code) includes a variety of provisions and
standards that regulate the development of new buildings and structures. It includes several
zoning designations that cover various use types, such as residential, commercial, public, and
industrial uses. It also includes form-based zones. It identifies the specific land uses (e.g. single-
family, multi-family, office, retail) that are allowed in the various zones and the associated
development standards (e.g. height, number of dwelling units, lot coverage). The zoning code
also includes provisions related to parking, landscaping and screening, and sensitive areas. The
City’s zoning map identifies a zoning designation for all property within the City’s corporate limits.
Ideally, the zoning code and zoning map align with the adopted policy vision in the comprehensive
plan. More specifically, the zoning map should generally align with the FLUM. For example, if the
land use vision in the FLUM is multi-family that should also be reflected on the zoning map with
a zoning classification that permits multi-family housing development. Additionally, the regulations
in the code should help to accomplish the goals and policies of the plan. For example, the
sensitive areas ordinance should help to preserve valued environmental resources and the
regulations related housing should ensure a diverse housing stock.
The code must balance multiple, and sometimes conflicting goals, that are included in the
Comprehensive Plan, such as protecting property values, neighborhood compatibility,
encouraging appropriate uses of land, providing for a variety of housing types, promoting
economic stability of existing and future land uses, lessening congestion and promoting access,
preventing overcrowding of land, avoiding undue concentration of population, and conserving
open space and natural, scenic, and historic resources.
January 10, 2024
Page 3
Subdivision Regulations
The subdivision regulations outline the provisions for the creation of a subdivision drawing that
shows the precise location and dimensions of features such as, streets, lots, easements, and
other elements pertinent to the transfer of property.
Where zoning regulations outline standards related to private properties, the subdivision
regulations incorporate standards related to the public realm. For example, subdivision
regulations address the width of the public right-of-way, pavement width of streets, and block
length. They also outline standards to ensure an interconnected network of streets, sidewalks,
and trails, as well as access to public open space areas.
Role of the Comprehensive Plan in the Land Development Process
The Comprehensive Plan serves as the foundational land use vision for a community. This
formally adopted vision is used in the review of legislative land use approvals, including
annexations, rezonings, and subdivisions. These actions are site-specific and typically initiated
by property owners and developers; however, they are occasionally initiated by the City.
Legislative land use approvals also include text amendments to the zoning code. These requests
require a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and formal approval from
the City Council. Consistency with the comprehensive plan is evaluated for these proposals.
The Comprehensive Plan is most often used to analyze proposed amendments to the zoning map
(i.e. rezoning requests). Rezonings need to demonstrate consistency with the Comprehensive
Plan. Per state law (Section 414.3) zoning “regulations shall be made in accordance with a
comprehensive plan…” The Future Land Use Map designations guide what zoning classifications
can be applied, and ultimately what can be built in different parts of the city. However, there is
some flexibility, as the Comprehensive Plan is a non-regulatory conceptual vision and the Future
Land Use Map designations of the Comprehensive Plan are general in nature and should be used
in conjunction with the plan goals, policies and strategies.
Outcomes of a Comprehensive Plan Update
There are several outcomes that staff seeks to achieve by developing a new community vision
for growth and development within the city.
1. New Vision and Policy Direction: A new plan that places equity, climate change and
resiliency and housing at its core and addresses existing disparities and prepares the city
for the future.
The City Council recently adopted several zoning code amendments to help improve
housing choice, increase supply, and encourage affordability. These amendments were
focused on supply side zoning reforms to help increase the supply of housing in Iowa City.
These incremental and conservative amendments aligned with the current policy direction
of the Comprehensive Plan. A new vision and policy direction is needed to further address
the ongoing housing crisis and address some of the Strategic Plan actions such as missing
middle housing, minimum density requirements and streamlined approval processes
2. Outreach and Engagement: A public process that uses varied methods of engagement to
drive participation that is more reflective of the city’s demographics and ensures
underrepresented groups are actively engaged in the process. A robust outreach and
engagement process upfront can serve as that strong foundation for a common vision that
then can be implemented in a more streamlined fashion through streamlined approvals
and more by-right development allowances. This can serve the community well and result
January 10, 2024
Page 4
in addressing our most pressing needs (e.g. diverse housing supply) in a more timely
manner.
3. Updated Analyses: A regional housing needs assessment, evaluation of current land use
policy, as well as other updated analyses that will allow us to better understand changing
needs, trends, and demographics. These updated analyses will help to inform the vision
and land use policy direction.
The regional housing needs assessment will provide a holistic, regional understanding of
the areas housing market. A comprehensive assessment of the region’s housing needs
would help assess the number and type of housing units needed to meet demand, gaps
in the housing market, how the policies of neighboring jurisdictions interact, and how the
City can ensure it meets its share of regional affordable housing needs. The assessment
will also evaluate the needs of specific populations, like the unhoused, immigrants, and
persons with disabilities. Additionally, the assessment could include a needs allocation
that identifies how many new housing units are needed to address the housing needs
identified through the assessment, which would be categorized by housing type.
4. Connection with Other Adopted Plans: A clear connection between the Comprehensive
Plan and the City’s other planning documents. Examples include the Strategic Plan, Bike
Master Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, Climate Action and Adaptation Plan and others.
All these plans will need to be reviewed since the Comprehensive Plan should function as
the overarching policy document that incorporates and references the vision and goals of
other plans as needed.
5. New Framework: A new planning framework that identifies specific typologies unique
enough to warrant further planning efforts. Examples include community nodes/centers,
corridors, employment centers, and others.
The current 10 district planning framework was established in the 1997 Comprehensive
Plan. Over time a specific planning process was initiated for the development of long-
range plans for these districts. The district planning schema was continued with the
adoption of the 2013 comprehensive plan. However well intended, in 26 years there are
still district planning areas with no district plans. No plans have been adopted for the
Northwest or North Corridor Planning Districts, as well as a portion of the Downtown
Planning District. There are also district plans that are decades old no longer reflective of
City goals, market conditions or best practices. Maintaining a Comprehensive Plan, 10
District Plans, plus focused planning efforts like the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings
Master Plan (which covers three different planning districts) is not feasible and can create
unnecessary confusion for all stakeholders and unintended barriers to desired
development. Additionally, many of the various districts do not vary enough between each
other to warrant unique planning documents. Much of the information contained within the
current existing documents could be held as a common expression of the community’s
vision and goals with fewer specific planning areas more closely studied. In short, many
of the district plans are outdated and/or include redundant policies.
As part of this effort, the existing district planning framework will need to be reevaluated
to determine if district planning areas are still needed. Staff would recommend either
reducing the number of planning districts or removing them entirely. Specific policy issues
or goals that are unique to certain areas could easily be incorporated into the
Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, removing the district planning areas entirely would
provide more flexibility to respond to pressing planning issues. An example of this is the
Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. A need existed for an updated plan for
this area after the 2008 flood. However, the area that needed a new land use plan did not
January 10, 2024
Page 5
fit neatly into the already designated planning districts. In fact, the Downtown and
Riverfront Master Plan covers three different district planning areas (Downtown, Central,
and Southwest).
6. Future Land Use Map: An updated Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan with
land use designations that include descriptions of general intended land uses, as well as
physical characteristics of the envisioned built environment. The plan will also include a
land use designation table with clear descriptions and an explanation of how these
designations work with the City’s zoning districts.
The adopted FLUMs within both the IC2030 Plan and District Plans have inconsistent land
use designations. There is no consistent naming convention for the designations and the
descriptions vary. This can make it difficult to implement. Additionally, some plans do not
include a description for the land use designation. Descriptions can help clarify the general
intended uses, and even form, of the land use designation. For example, the IC2030 plan
includes land use designations such as Rural Residential and Office Research
Development Center, with no related description for what those classifications mean.
Furthermore, many of the land use designations are use based (single-family, duplex,
multi-family, office commercial, etc.). These use-based designations can make it difficult
to create more mixed-use and diverse communities. In addition, the residential categories
often distinguish between single-family and multi-family as opposed to focusing on the
intended form of the building. For example, in the Central District Plan there is a land use
designation where the intent is to “preserve the single-family residential character”. Land
use designations like these make it difficult to ensure all of our communities have a
diversity of housing types.
7. Implementation Program: An implementation program that identifies specific actions that
should be pursued to implement the vision of the plan.
Anticipated action items include a City-initiated rezoning that rezones land to higher
density zones in alignment with the adopted land use vision. The land use entitlement
process, particularly the rezoning process, acts as a barrier for many needed
developments that can help address critical gaps or shortages in the market, especially
those looking to build higher density and lower cost housing types. A City-initiated
rezoning will help to address the City Council’s goal of streamlining the process outlined
in the Strategic Plan. Additionally, a comprehensive review and update to the City’s zoning
code will be needed with the adoption of a new plan. An updated zoning code is needed
to better align with the community’s increasing focus on climate action and resiliency,
equity, and housing.
Next Steps
In terms of next steps, staff is working on a scope of work to include in a request for proposals.
Staff anticipates issuing the RFP in Winter or Spring of 2024. A consultant should be secured by
Summer 2024, which will require City Council approval of the contract. Staff anticipates the
planning process will take approximately 18-24 months with the Comprehensive Plan update
commencing in Summer 2024 and adoption anticipated in Winter 2025 or Spring 2026.
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 20, 2023 – 6:00 PM – FORMAL MEETING
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Maria Padron (via zoom), Scott
Quellhorst, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade
MEMBERS ABSENT: Susan Craig
STAFF PRESENT: Madison Conley, Sara Hektoen, Kirk Lehmann, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Tyler Leo
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of CPA23-0002, a proposed amendment
to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use designation from Office Research
Development Park to Intensive Commercial for approximately 61.72 acres of property located
north of Interstate 80 and west of Highway 1.
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ23-0009, an application to rezone
approximately 61.72 acres of the property north of I-80 and west of Highway 1 from ID-RS, RDP,
OPD/CH-1 to CI-1 subject to the following conditions:
• Prior to approval of a preliminary plat, completion of a traffic study.
• Prior to issuance of a building permit, completion of all required improvements, including
off-site improvements, as determined by the traffic study, subject to review and approval
of the City Engineer.
• Prior to site plan approval, approval of a preliminary and final plat. The public
improvements shall include water main designed to extend and connect to the existing
water main along I-80 to create a loop to prevent a dead-end spur.
CALL TO ORDER:
Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND REZONING ITEMS:
CASE NO. CPA23-0002
Location: North of 1-80, West of N. Dodge Street, at the end of Moss Ridge Road
A public hearing on a proposed amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use
map from Office Research Development Center to Intensive Commercial for approximately 61.72
acres of property.
Lehmann stated the Moss Ridge campus has been considered in the past, it's north of I-80 and
west of Dodge Street at the end of Moss Ridge Road. He showed an aerial map noting it's
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 20, 2023
Page 2 of 11
undeveloped land of approximately 60 plus acres. There are some environmentally sensitive
features on it and it's largely undeveloped. The land to the west and north is also largely
undeveloped and to the east is the former Pearson property which includes office and
warehousing space. To the south is I-80 and across I-80 are some light industrial and some
indoor recreation uses. The zoning reflects the most recently adopted plans for the property and
includes primarily Research Development Park (RDP) zones and Highway Commercial with the
Plan Development Overlay in the southeast corner. The Pearson property to the east is also
zoned RDP but the remainder of this site and property to the west and north are all zoned Interim
Development Research Park (ID-RP) which means the land is not yet ready to be developed.
In terms of background, the owner/applicant is interested in selling the subject properties. These
60 plus acres has been the subject of several previous proposals that have never fully been
developed. The first was the Moss Green Urban Village, which was adopted in 2010, and that
plan included a rezoning and preliminary plat for around 141 acres. The goal was to create an
office research park and mixed-use commercial development. As a result, the adopted rezoning
was Planned Development Overlay with portions zoned Office Research Park (OPD/ORP),
Research Development Park (OPD/RPD), and Mixed Use (OPD/MU). Access to this property
would have been from an extension of Oakdale Boulevard which would have been constructed
from North Dodge Street to the west through the subject property, again that never happened.
The second proposal for the site was the Moss Ridge Campus or office campus proposal that
was proposed in 2012 after the previous concept failed to materialize. The new development
included a rezoning and preliminary plat for around 172 acres, a much larger area that would
have allowed the first phase of an office park with associated retail and service uses in the
southeast corner of the property. This concept had no residential component, unlike the other
one. The zoning for that development was similar to the zoning proposed now with the Highway
Commercial in the southeast corner with the OPD and then the rest being RDP. Lehmann stated
this was also the project that spurred the construction of Moss Ridge Road. In 2015 this Moss
Ridge Campus concept was updated mostly to adjust the zoning and plat to slightly different
boundaries that would reflect a new, slightly refined street layout and also conservation
stormwater management areas. That zoning also adjusted the conditional zoning agreement
from the 2012 concept. A final plat was going to be considered in 2016, which would have
created the lots in this subdivision, but the application was pulled at the request of the applicant.
Subsequently, the preliminary plat expired, and no development has occurred since then.
Lehmann explained the new proposed concept for this area would change course from what's
currently there which is why a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is needed. They're also
proposing a rezoning and are looking at proposing intensive commercial uses for the area due to
changes in the office market conditions since the COVID 19 pandemic.
Lehmann stated no Good Neighbor meeting was held for the property this time.
Regarding Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Section 14-8D-3D of the City Code provides two
different criteria. The first is that circumstances have changed and/or additional information or
factors have come to light such that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. The
second criteria is that the proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or
provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, including any District Plans.
Regarding the first criteria that circumstances have changed such that it's in the public interest to
look at reviewing and changing it Lehmann explained this area has long been identified for office
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 20, 2023
Page 3 of 11
and research park style uses. This designation first started after such uses were established in
the 1960s and 1970s. The former Pearsons and the ACT campus started around those times
and as a result that is how the property began being shown in the 1978 Comprehensive Plan. As
Plans were updated, this land use category was reaffirmed in the Comprehensive Plans in 1983,
1989, 1997, and most recently in 2013. Some important considerations in providing this
designation was that there's interstate access, topography and nearby major employers,
including most recently Pearsons and ACT. Early proposed developments for the property
followed this general vision of Office Research Park style development, which is why they did not
include any Comprehensive Plan changes. Lehmann noted some of those concepts were also
being reviewed as the 2013 Plan was being updated so it does mention the Moss Ridge urban
renewal area. That being said, development has never occurred on this subject property despite
nearly 50 years showing it as appropriate for that use. Since that time, the landscape for office
space has changed dramatically following the COVID 19 pandemic, which started in 2020. They
have seen a substantial decrease in the demand for office spaces with the rise of remote work
which is also reflected in the closure of some major office spaces in the area, including
employers such as ACT and Pearsons, which both close their offices over the last couple of
years. As a result there is quite a bit of high quality office space available, and given the slow
pace of office park development in the area prior to that, staff believes it does make sense to
reconsider the future land use category for this area. In terms of the proposed future land use
category it would be intensive commercial which can allow a wide variety of uses like
transportation, warehousing, compatible semi industrial uses, and land intensive commercial
uses. Within that they may see retail or all sorts of things as it's a pretty wide category of is allow.
What staff has seen is that there has been a demand in this use category since the pandemic
has happened. They have especially seen interest in transportation and warehousing facilities,
and other flex space facilities that are pretty commonly in these sorts of areas. Utilizing this
access to I-80 for these sorts of uses might be in the public interest.
In terms of is it compatible with other policies or provisions of the Code. The vision within the
Comprehensive Plan for economic development is to build a resilient economy that grows the tax
base and supports a high quality of life for the community. It talks about attracting long term
investment, creating jobs, entrepreneurship and innovation and also supporting opportunities for
growth and prosperity within the community. To help attain this vision the Plan encourages
attracting businesses that have growth potential, that are compatible with the City's economy,
and also trying to improve the environmental and economic health of the community by
developing in a compact, efficient and contiguous manner. Lehmann noted however it is
important to understand that that growth shouldn't come at the expense of everything else so
especially protecting the community's environmental and aesthetic assets is important. He stated
this Amendment does meet several strategies and goals that are within the Comprehensive Plan
like identifying appropriate nodes and zone accordingly to meet the needs of present and future
population, identifying zoning and preserving land for industrial uses in areas with ready access
to rail and highways, guiding development away from sensitive features and providing
appropriate transitions between lower and higher intensity uses and also supporting appropriate
development in the City's designated urban renewal areas such as this Moss Green area.
Therefore, staff does believe that the proposed amendment is compatible with the
Comprehensive Plan because it allows the development of businesses that align with the needs
Iowa City has seen within the community. Specifically, the Moss Ridge urban renewal area
already has highway access and is also contiguous to adjacent development and utilizes
currently underutilized road capacity on Moss Ridge Road. It also has natural features around
the site which provides a natural buffer from adjacent lower density uses. There is the Rapid
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 20, 2023
Page 4 of 11
Creek stream corridor which provides a natural boundary around from the rural residential uses
further to the west.
Lehmann noted staff has not received any public comments as part of this application at this
time.
Staff does recommend approval of CPA23-0002, a proposed amendment to change the
Comprehensive Plan future land use designation from Office Research Development Park to
Intensive Commercial for approximately 61.72 acres of property located north of Interstate 80
and west of Highway 1.
In terms of next steps, upon recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission tonight it
would be scheduled for consideration by Council theoretically at the same time as the rezoning.
Lehmann explained for the rezoning to be approved, the Comprehensive Plan would need to be
amended since the rezoning would be a departure from the current Comprehensive Plan
category. The potential timeline might be Council to set a public hearing for both of these items
on January 2, that public hearing could then be heard on January 16 for both items. At that
meeting the Comprehensive Plan could be adopted as it only takes one reading, the rezoning
requires three readings so it would just be the first reading for the rezoning at that time. After
which there'd be two more hearings and if all goes smoothly the rezoning being adopted as early
as February 20.
Hensch noted in the staff report related to environmental health, the environmental and
archaeological assessment, phase one, showed that there could be some archaeological issues
associated that area but as long as the development isn't in those identified areas they don’t
need to go to a phase two. Hensch asked for clarification. Russett explained there was a phase
one archeological study done for the site and there were some archaeological sites identified
with some of those potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Therefore, the
phase one study recommended development being avoided in those areas, but if development
does occur in those areas, they'd recommend a phase two. At this point depending on the final
location of the street network they would be looking at that as part of the subdivision.
Townsend asked is there any reason why that archaeological piece is not part of the
recommendations. Russett replied they’re recommending that the sensitive areas development
plan be prepared with the subdivision phase of the project, so it would the archaeological piece
be reviewed at that time. Russett stated it’s not a condition that staff is recommending for the
rezoning, the property will be reviewed when they get a preliminary and final plat approved, that
is when the zoning code requires that process, that is when they will have to submit a sensitive
areas development plan.
Townsend noted there was no good neighbor meeting, but how would they determine who would
be invited to those meetings since it's so spread out. Russett explained all property owners within
500 feet of the property were notified. She added they will sometimes notify renters if they have
the rental information but in this case it was just property owners within 500 feet.
Quellhorst stated it seems pretty evident that demand for classic office space has diminished.
That being said, did staff consider any other alternatives that might be preferable or viable
without changing the future land use designation of research park to intensive commercial.
Lehmann stated this request was provided by the property owner, so it wasn't part of a larger
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 20, 2023
Page 5 of 11
review of future land use categories. It is possible that in a different review staff might come up
with different solutions but they've been talking about this category, especially as it relates
throughout the City, since these have been zones that they've had for a long time and haven't
seen a lot of movement with them. The current zone doesn't appear to be meeting the needs of
the community so in terms of looking at proposed uses the property owner came forward with
this use and it is a use that's needed within the community, so staff evaluated it according to
those standards.
Quellhorst asked about the current supply of intensive commercial property and whether staff
feels that it's sufficient to meet demand. Lehmann replied they’ve seen some larger intensive
commercial developments occur recently; they've had some larger rezonings such as west of
218 on Melrose. They've seen site plans start occurring on some of those properties and they’ve
also seen other properties that have been vacant for a relatively long time that allow these sorts
of uses start to develop recently. Therefore, staff feels they are seeing movement in that sector
and it seems to be something that is needed and the need has increased since the pandemic.
Hensch asked if it was a year or two ago that the Commission did something very similar for the
research office park land on the west side of Iowa City. Russett confirmed there was a research
development park area west of St. Andrew's Church that was rezoned to residential.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Tyler Leo (ATI Group) stated they are really excited about this project and they spend a lot of
time having their fingers on the pulse of what's in demand. This site excited them because
access is great and they feel like it's a huge asset to Iowa City. They are still putting all their
plans together but this site fits really well. He acknowledged staff has been very helpful to them
through this process by thinking creatively and helping them through this process quickly.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Elliott moved to recommend approval of CPA23-0002, a proposed amendment to change
the Comprehensive Plan future land use designation from Office Research Development
Park to Intensive Commercial for approximately 61.72 acres of property located north of
Interstate 80 and west of Highway 1.
Townsend seconded the motion.
Hensch stated it makes sense for the intensive commercial, especially since the I-80 interchange
is there and they are spending $686 million on other improvements to Interstate 80 through
there. It makes sense to have something that could do with warehousing and trucking.
Quellhorst agreed office space at this point really isn't a viable use and intensive commercial
seems suitable for the property.
Wade agrees as the growth that they see along Tiffin, along the greater Des Moines area and
Cedar Rapids makes sense for location and he supports this application.
Padron understands the comments about all the companies going to remote work right now but
she is a little bit concerned that not every company is going remote and some companies are
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 20, 2023
Page 6 of 11
actually pushing to get people back into the offices and with the City growing they have to be
careful, but she does support this application.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
CASE NO. REZ23-0009
Location: North of 1-80, West of N. Dodge Street, at the end of Moss Ridge Road
An application for a rezoning of approximately 61.72 acres of property from Research
Development Park (RDP) zone, Interim Development Research Park (ID-RP) zone, and Highway
Commercial with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/CH-1) zone to Intensive Commercial
(Cl-1) zone.
Conley presented the rezoning application for this property. As Lehmann mentioned there are
agricultural areas to the north and the west and the vacant Pearson property to the east. She
stated this property is comprised of environmentally sensitive features such as slopes,
woodlands, stream corridors, potential wetlands and archaeological sites. The property is
currently zoned Research Development Park (RDP), Interim Development Research Park (ID-
RP) and Highway Commercial with the Planned Development Overlay (OPD/CH-1). To the north
is agricultural areas, which is the Interim Development Research Park, to the south of Interstate
80 there is some light industrial uses, indoor recreation and some commercial office. To the east
is the Office Research Development Park and to the west more agricultural and Interim
Development Research Park areas. Specifically, the RDP has 35.23 acres, the ID-RP zone is
10.98 acres and the CH-1 with the overlay has 15.80 acres. Conley noted with this zoning there
is a conditional zoning agreement that states:
1. A comprehensive landscape plan that considers stormwater facilities and environmental
features but does not need to include details for individuals lots.
2. A master sign plan that includes a design concept for the office park.
3. Additional allowances, standards, and restrictions apply for the OPD/CH-1 zoned areas:
a. Two drive throughs maximum.
b. Buildings shall have prominent entrances and parking toward the side or rear.
c. Parking areas setback 50 feet and landscaped from I-80.
d. Allows uses in CH-1 in addition to sales oriented and personal service-oriented retail,
general animal related commercial, and specialized educational facilities.
4. Site plans for individual lots will be reviewed and approved by the City according to
standards relating to landscaping, building materials, building articulation and
fenestration, and signage.
Staff finds now that these existing conditions are no longer necessary and will not be carried
forward since commercial office is no longer the proposed use and therefore a master sign plan
with a design concept for office park would be no longer applicable or relevant and the existing
conditions are related to allowances, standards and restrictions for the OPD/CH-1 zone. Due to
the market conditions and the decline in the need for office space and the vacation of the
Pearson property the proposed zone here would be Intensive Commercial (CI-1). The CI-1 zone
is created to provide areas for sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are
typically characterized as outdoor storage and display storage of merchandise or operations are
conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. This zone does allow warehouse
and freight movement, outdoor storage and display, industrial service and some wholesale uses.
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 20, 2023
Page 7 of 11
Anything in this zone would adhere to the commercial site development standards in 14-2C-6 of
the zoning code. Conley showed a picture of the development concepts submitted by the
applicant.
Conley next reviewed the approval criteria for a rezoning, consistency with the Comprehensive
Plan and compatibility with the existing neighborhood. She stated the proposed rezoning is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan assuming that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is
adopted. The future land use map is being amended from Office Research Development Center
to Intensive Commercial and as noted in the Comprehensive Plan the Moss Ridge location is
identified as beneficial to businesses that require close access to Interstate 80. It's in a prime
location to get on the interstate there and would have good access. In the Comprehensive Plan
there is a land use section that states Iowa City would like to encourage compact, efficient
development that is contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods to reduce the cost of
extending infrastructure and services and to preserve farmland and open space at the edge of
the City. One of the strategies to meet this goal includes guiding development away from
sensitive environmental areas such as floodplains, wetlands, woodlands, steep slopes, flood
hazard areas and streams and this property contains a majority of those environmentally
sensitive features. Additionally, another goal in the Comprehensive Plan includes a focus on
industrial development on land suitable for industrial use, with good access to rail and highways
but buffered from residential neighborhoods. Conley noted that a lot of the agricultural and
environmentally sensitive features act as a natural buffer for this property which keeps it away
from many of the surrounding uses. Therefore, the strategies to support this goal would be:
• Identify, zone, and preserve land for industrial uses in areas with ready access to rail and
highways.
• Ensure adequate roads and other infrastructure that will attract new employers to the
community.
• Plan for appropriate transition between residential neighborhoods and higher intensity
commercial to ensure the long-term health of neighborhoods.
• Provide adequate buffer areas between residential areas and intensive industrial activity to
mitigate any negative externalities, such as noise, odors, dust, and vibrations.
Regarding the Economic Development section of the Comprehensive Plan this is known as an
urban renewal area according to the Comprehensive Plan and the goal for this section states
that Iowa City hopes to improve the environment and economic health of the community through
efficient use of resources such as support and promote appropriate development in the City's
designated urban renewable areas, which includes the Moss Green location.
Conley next discussed compatibility with the existing neighborhood. She reiterated this property
is not super close to neighboring properties therefore this would have minimal impact on existing
neighborhood character. The Pearson property is now vacant, there's undeveloped land towards
the north and the west and the environmental features would act as a natural buffer to the
residential uses further west. I-80 separates the property from the commercial uses to the south.
Additionally, now that the Pearson property is vacant, it also has a large warehouse and few
neighbors, which would best support the CI-1 zone compared to other properties. The property in
question would best fill the current market need along the interstate more effectively than the
other sites that are in transition. Any development that does go into this area would have to
adhere to the commercial site development standards, which would serve and manage any
future commercial development to ensure compatibility to the surrounding uses.
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 20, 2023
Page 8 of 11
Regarding the environmentally sensitive areas, Conley reiterated there are a number of them on
site. She noted again an archaeological study was done in 2010 and that phase one study was
done to determine the archaeological sites on the property and noted there are a couple of sites
potentially eligible for the listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Avoidance or phase
two level investigation of these sites is recommended if development were to occur near or on
those sites. Conley also stated this property is located on a floodplain, the Rapid Creek is the
specific creek on this property and it is in the 100-year and 500-year floodplains so therefore staff
is also recommending a condition that prior to approval of a site plan the owner must obtain
approval of a preliminary and final plat.
Conley next reviewed transportation and access. She noted the only way to get to the Moss
Ridge property is through Moss Ridge Road which was constructed by the City in 2015 in order
to encourage development of the area. There was a traffic study done in 2012 that conducted a
review in order to address the impacts of the proposed office research park development project
that was proposed on the property and to see what impacts it would also have on the
surrounding area. Conley stated due to the project scope change, a new traffic study would be
needed as there is a public need to identify and implement orderly development and an inter-
connected street network. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition that a traffic study be
completed to ensure that any transportation impacts identified by the study are addressed as
determined by the City Engineer. If any offsite improvements are identified as part of the traffic
study, the developer will be required to make these improvements subject to review and approval
by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. Another condition is that the water
main should be designed to extend to the existing watermain along I-80 which will then create a
loop system and avoid a dead-end spur that would be greater than 500 feet.
Staff recommends approval of REZ23-0009, an application to rezone approximately 61.72 acres
of the property north of I-80 and west of Highway 1 from ID-RS, RDP, OPD/CH-1 to CI-1 subject
to the following conditions:
• Prior to approval of a preliminary plat, completion of a traffic study.
• Prior to issuance of a building permit, completion of all required improvements, including
off-site improvements, as determined by the traffic study, subject to review and approval
of the City Engineer.
• Prior to site plan approval, approval of a preliminary and final plat. The public
improvements shall include water main designed to extend and connect to the existing
water main along I-80 to create a loop to prevent a dead-end spur.
Hensch asked if this will this come back to the Commission for the preliminary plat review.
Conley conformed yes and at that point they’ll know what the phase two survey showed if in fact
development occurs on either of those sites that are acknowledged as archaeological sites.
Quellhorst asked if the applicant has identified a proposed use for the land. Conley replied it will
be the warehouse and freight use that the proposed zoning identifies, they do not have any
specifics yet. Russett noted that the staff’s review of the rezoning was based on all uses allowed
in the CI-1 zone as the proposed use may change.
Quellhorst asked about environmental impacts and the approval process for the sensitive areas
development plan. Russett acknowledged sometimes they are provided at a rezoning, but they
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 20, 2023
Page 9 of 11
are not required at rezoning. This project will have to go through the subdivision process, which
will require a sensitive areas development plan, and at that point the Commission will see a
preliminary sensitive areas development plan that will show all regulated sensitive features,
woodlands, stream corridors, wetlands, and any potential impacts. Since this is not going through
a plan development overlay rezoning the applicant has expressed their desire to meet the base
requirements of the sensitive areas ordinance, which means it could be administratively
approved. Sometimes applicants have to impact wetlands or woodlands more than the base
requirements of the sensitive areas ordinance, which then requires a planned development
overlay rezoning, but this is not the case and this applicant is not asking for special permission to
impact environmentally sensitive features more than the Code already allows.
Quellhorst asked about the archaeologically sensitive portions of the site and why it might be
eligible for National Register. Russett stated she couldn’t answer that.
Townsend asked about the uses allowed, who determines whether the provisional or the special
exceptions are okay, will those come back to this Commission. Russett replied the provisional
uses would be reviewed by staff and if a special exception is required it would go to the Board of
Adjustment, but neither would come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Elliott asked if a buffer is needed to the east with Pearsons because they had warehousing.
Russett stated no buffers are needed there, some screening may be required along the property
line if there's surface parking, or outdoor storage uses but there wouldn't be any additional buffer.
Elliott asked if they will be able to see this from Highway One. Russett doesn’t believe so
because is set way back but it will definitely be seen from the onramp headed west on Interstate
80.
Wade asked if the Commission will see the site plan review. Russett replied site plan review is
always administrative, but the Commission will see the preliminary plat. Wade also asked about
lot sized and the current concepts. Conley replied the applicant can address the concepts.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Tyler Leo (ATI Group) stated this was just a quick concept drawn up but those lots are anywhere
from seven to 10 acres, that's kind of their plan sweet spot just to give some flexibility on site
planning and whatnot.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Townsend moved to recommend approval of REZ23-0009, an application to rezone
approximately 61.72 acres of the property north of I-80 and west of Highway 1 from ID-RS,
RDP, OPD/CH-1 to CI-1 subject to the following conditions:
• Prior to approval of a preliminary plat, completion of a traffic study.
• Prior to issuance of a building permit, completion of all required improvements,
including off-site improvements, as determined by the traffic study, subject to
review and approval of the City Engineer.
• Prior to site plan approval, approval of a preliminary and final plat. The public
improvements shall include water main designed to extend and connect to the
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 20, 2023
Page 10 of 11
existing water main along I-80 to create a loop to prevent a dead-end spur.
Elliott seconded the motion.
Townsend stated it looks like a good project, there’s not much going on in that area and the City
needs something there for the revenue.
Quellhorst noted some concerns about possible environmental impacts and archaeological
impacts but it seems like that can be addressed as part of the platting process and so long as
those are diligently addressed he would also support the proposal.
Wade looks forward to development in that area.
Hensch also supports this noting there's sensitive areas so he’s very interested in how that will
be worked out. Rapid Creek is also going right through the north there and he very concerned
about the floodplains, he is also interested in the archaeological resources that may be present.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: DECEMBER 6, 2023:
Elliott moved to approve the meeting minutes from December 6, 2023. Wade seconded the
motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Townsend moved to adjourn, Quellhorst seconded and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2023-2024
12/21 1/4 1/18 2/15 3/1 4/5 4/19 6/21 7/5 7/19 8/2 8/16 10/4 10/18 11/158 12/6 12/20
CRAIG, SUSAN X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E
ELLIOTT, MAGGIE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X
PADRON, MARIA X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X O/E X
QUELLHORST, SCOTT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X X
SIGNS, MARK X X X O/E O/E X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
TOWNSEND, BILLIE O/E X O/E X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X
WADE, CHAD X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member