Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-07-2008 Planning and Zoning CommissionPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Thursday, August 7, 2008 - 7:30 PM Formal Meeting Iowa City City Hall Emma J. Harvat Hall 410 E. Washington Street AGENDA: A. Call to Order B. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda C. Rezoning Item REZ08-00005/SUB08/00005: Discussion of an application submitted by Ike Akabogu for a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) zone to High Density Single Family (RS- 12) zone and an 11-lot residential subdivision for approximately .88-acres of property at 442, 446 & 452 Benton Street and 719 & 723 Michael Street. (45-day limitation period: August 7, 2008) D. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: July 14 and July 17, 2008 E. Other F. Adjournment Uncomina Plannina & Zonina Commission Meetinas Informal August 18 September 1 * September 15 September 29 October 13 Formal August 21 September 4 September 18 October 2 October 16 " Meeting cancelled due to holiday City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 7, 2008 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner RE: REZ08-0005/SUB08-0005: Rezoning and subdivision of 442, 446, & 452 Benton Street and 719 & 723 Michael Street The applicant has submitted a new site plan. The 6-unit structure on Michael Street has been changed to a 5- unit structure. This provides for an additional open space about 30 feet wide (approximately 1,600 square feet). Three parallel parking spaces have also been added. The Commission asked at the last meeting for a few pieces of information. The first was a sense of the redevelopment and reinvestment in the Miller -Orchard Neighborhood in the past ten years. A table of building permits in the neighborhood for the past ten years is attached. The second was for specific information on the funding that has been spent in the neighborhood in terms of GRIP funds. A table of these dollar amounts by property is attached. The third request was for a copy of the minutes from April 19, 2007 when the rezoning to RM-20 was considered. These minutes are attached. Attachments: Revised site plan Building permit table GRIP/TARP funding table Minutes from April 19, 2007 510 East State Street FC HART - FREDERICK CONSULTANTS P.C. TIFFINPIOWA�52340-0660 Phone f319) 545-7215 I fC',TAL. AR, A = :9826E3 Sf". PROPOSED GREENSPACE 19040 SF, PERCENT GREENSPACE 50'L I 20,OC i I i i I I PROPOSED 1' 70 s' (KEYSTONE DL.00K WALL ` VARY HEIGH1 AS NEEDED MOO I ff=89 10.49 I � C i C I � I I V I Y 8'00, ff=98,25 ff=96.77 - Y X 1 P ff=95A6 T- I �.. 120,14' -- J42,00' ff=93,35 I i i I ff=91.87. TIONA APAIRKINCi _ ,) I i � I{ ff=65 ff=P4 ff=83 F' u r1--64,161; a I 0 r,m-72.77 L- I.=� _.t 7 F(=65 SO .IM=7: 3,24 LEGEND Q GOVERNMENT CORNER SET 5/6- IRON ROD 10 FOUND IRON ROD (#17544) T FOUND ROIP RAIL, O FND PIPE AS NOTED (R) RECORDED DIMENSIONS (M) MEASURED DIMENSIONS PROPERTY/BOUNDARY UNES SBTBACE LINES — — — RIGHT—OF—WAY LZMS — — SECTION UNES ------- EASEMENT LINES ------- LOT LINES PLATTED OR BY DEED ScolG I- - 4U' I bereby certify that this land surveying document "a prepared and the related survey work was performed by me or ender my i,AND� direct personal supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Lend Surveyor under the laws of the State of loves V .+ I. SCOTT RITTER I. Scott Ritter, LLS. Date 16546 Iowa License Number: 16546 my license renewal date is December 31, 2006. *ZOWA� Pages covered by this seal: THIS SHIM ONLY MILLER ORCHARD NEIGHBORHOOD Building Permits Issued 1998-2008 Address Date Issued Project Description 320 DOUGLASS ST 1998 15 X 23'3" DETACHED GARAGE 410 DOUGLASS ST 1998 PUT PITCHED ROOF ON 480 SQUARE FOOT GARAGE AND 144 SQUARE FOOT PATIO 910 HUDSON AVE 1998 REPAIR FIRE DAMAGED APARTMENT UNIT 809 ORCHARD ST 1998 10 X 10 WOOD DECK ON SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (SFD) 310 DOUGLASS CT 1999 INSTALL A ONE -HOUR OCCUPANCY SEPARATION ON THE GARAGE SIDE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE/GARAGE WALL. 1010 HUDSON AVE 1999 18 X 22 DECK ADDITION 303 W BENTON ST 1999 12' X 22' DETACHED GARAGE 339 W BENTON ST 1999 DWELLING UNIT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SFD TO CREATE A DUPLEX WITH ATTACHED GARAGES. 608 W BENTON ST 1999 REPLACE FRONT STOOP 706 GIBLIN DR 2000 INSTALL AN EGRESS SIZE WINDOW AND WINDOW WELL IN BASEMENT. 727 MICHAEL ST 2000 REPAIR EXISTING EXTERIOR FIRE ESCAPE. 731 MICHAEL ST 2000 REROOF BUILDING 225 W BENTON ST 2000 DECK REPAIR 303 W BENTON ST 2000 REPLACE COVERED PORCH 314 W BENTON ST 2000 WHEELCHAIR RAMP 714 GIBLIN DR 2001 INTERIOR RENOVATION 720 MICHAEL ST 2001 5' X 6' UNCOVERED WOOD DECK 225 W BENTON ST 2001 2 CAR ATTACHED GARAGE AND FAMILY ROOM ADDITION TO SFD 320 DOUGLASS ST 2002 INTERIOR ALTERATION OF SFD 205 W BENTON ST 2002 DECK ADDITION TO SFD 205 W BENTON ST 2002 PORCH ADDITION TO SFD 315 DOUGLASS ST 2003 WINDOW REPLACEMENT 333 DOUGLASS ST 2003 ENCLOSE CARPORT 808 HUDSON AVE 2003 FOUNDATION/PATIO FOR FUTURE 3 SEASON ROOM 808 HUDSON AVE 2003 12' X 17' PATIO ROOM 302 W BENTON ST 2003 INSTALL EXTERIOR DOOR AND EXTERIOR SET OF BASEMENT STAIRS 314 W BENTON ST 2004 MOVE GARAGE DOORS AROUND TO BEARING WALL 311 DOUGLAS CT 2005 REROOF INCLUDING SHEATHING 836 HUDSON AVE 2005 SFD - NEW ADDITION 1011 HUDSON AVE 2005 WINDOW REPLACEMENT FOR SFD 1011 HUDSON AVE 2005 REROOF 1012 HUDSON AVE 2005 ADDITION AND REMODEL OF SFD 308 DOUGLAS ST 2006 REPLACE 2 CAR DETACHED GARAGE FOR SFD 830 HUDSON AVE 2006 SCREEN PORCH AND DECK ADDITION FOR SFD 836 HUDSON AVE 2006 BASEMENT BEDROOM FOR SFD 930 HUDSON AVE 2006 REPLACE STEPS 1011 HUDSON AVE 2006 EGRESS WINDOW FOR BEDROOM 627 ORCHARD CT 2006 REPLACE AND ENLARGE COVERED PORCH FOR SFD LOST IN STORM 525 W BENTON ST 2006 REMOVE WALLS WITHIN DUPLEX DWELLING UNIT 525 W BENTON ST 2006 DECK AND STAIRS FOR DUPLEX 525 W BENTON ST 2006 DECK ADDITION FOR DUPLEX 417 DOUGLASS CT 2007 EGRESS WINDOWS FOR SFD 441 DOUGLAS CT 2007 HOUSE REMODEL AND DETACHED GARAGE ADDITION 723 MICHAEL ST 2007 BASEMENT FINISH FOR SFD 727 -29 MICHAEL ST 2007 REROOF RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY (RMF) 218 W BENTON ST 2007 REPLACE WEST BASEMENT WALL WITH CMU FOUNDATION 820 HUDSON AVE 2008 FRONT AND BACK DECK ADDITIONS FOR SFD GRIP/TARP Funding in the Miller Orchard Neighborhood approximately 1987 - 2008 (dollar figures are approximates) Miller Ave - 4 properties $73,625 Hudson Ave - 8 properties $49,438 Douglass Ct - 6 properties $20,100 Douglass St - 1 property $29,000 Giblin Dr - 1 property $14,400 W Benton St - 3 properties $11,300 Total - 23 properties $197,863 Average per property $8,603 Planning and Zoning Commission April 19, 2007 Page 5 When he moved, around 10 years ago, there was a proposal for a small sand operation which was well thought out and had a strong environmental plan. Five years later they came back with a larger operation that goes 30 years into the future. Their original hours of operation were 8-5 and now they start at 7 a.m. and go late into the night. He is concerned about a bait and switch program where the plan is increased in the future. He also asked if the building heights have been run by the airport commission. Miklo responded that this has not yet occurred and that the building official will need to determine whether it meets the requirements. Smith confirmed that the 1-2 zoning would allow more heavy industry, which Full is looking to avoid. Freerks confirmed that if this operation wants to expand in the future, it will have to come back before the Commission. Walz stated that the land that is in City limits, the land would still be subject to the 1-1 limitations. If they wanted to change their zoning, they would have to come back before the Commission. Miklo added that, at this point, the applicant is using most of the land on the site that is not being set aside as wetlands so there would be little room for expansion. Smith made a motion to approve, subject to staffs 11 conditions specified in the amended staff recommendation. Shannon seconded. Eastham asked if they could get an analysis of whether the roads could accommodate the extra traffic and how much extra traffic there would actually be. Miklo responded that the Jeff Davidson, Transportation Planner & the City Engineer analyzed the roads in this area. Izaak Walton Road is in the county's jurisdiction. Oak Crest Hill is in. better shape on the north half. As part of the conditional use agreement between S&G and the county, S&G improved the intersection of Izaak Walton and Oak Crest Hill. If there is any damage to the road, S&G is responsible for fixing it. Miklo also stated that there is the potential for another access point on the northwest side of the road, which would be to Old Highway 218 which is in good condition and is able to handle the traffic. Miklo stated that the pedestrian issue is a problem, but the development of the manufactured housing park in the County where there are no sidewalks was a decision that was made years ago and is difficult to rectify. Freerks was happy to see that this was a down zoning as it is a compromise since the land cannot currently be used as open space. She felt that the way the wetlands were to be treated was appropriate and the conditions would provide some safe guards. Motion carried unanimously. REZ07-00005: Discussion of an application submitted by Ezebube Real Estate Investments LLC for a rezoning from Medium Density Single -Family (RS-8) zone to Medium Density Multi -Family Residential (RM-20) zone for approximately .40 acres of property located at 719 & 723 Michael Street Eastham stated that he is the President of a non-profit called Housing Fellowship. The non-profit owns two properties in the area on Douglas Court and Douglas Street. He doesn't think there is a conflict with the current application. Attorney Holecek was asked for her opinion and asked if Eastham felt he was able to render an unbiased opinion. Eastham responded that he has considered this question and feels that he can. The applicant owns two small properties on Michael Street, a short dead-end off Benton Street. There are numerous apartment buildings at the end of the street. The applicant is requesting rezoning because it was surrounded on three sides by RM-20. However, the Comprehensive Plan and Southwest District Plan calls for this to remain single-family or duplex residential. Howard showed photos of the area and the properties. There are several concentrations of apartments in the area, including 7 apartment buildings and 82 apartments at the end of Michael Street. There is a concern that the small, single- family, affordable homes in the area be maintained. In order to keep this balance, and given that the Comprehensive Plan calls for this space to remain single-family residential, staff does not recommend approval and does not find the applicant's reason compelling. Another concern about increasing density in this area is that Michael Street is substandard and has no sidewalks. Planning and Zoning Commission April 19, 2007 Page 6 Eastham asked if the applicant had any option except to redevelop this as two single-family residences. He stated that if the lots were combined and divided into three parts, the lot width would not be sufficient. Howard responded that duplexes are only allowed on the corner lots in RS-8 zones. Currently, one of the homes has been divided into three apartments, which is nonconforming. Howard stated that it would be hard to tell how it would work to redevelop the property in the way Eastham proposes, and that it would be an appropriate question for the applicant. This option would reduce the number of units. Smith asked if the lots were conforming today. Howard responded that the lots are conforming but the triplex is not conforming, but was grandfathered in. Kevin Hochstedler, representing the applicant, gave a background on the applicant who came from Africa in the 1990's, went to Georgia State and got a degree in chemistry. He is currently a research scientist at the University who works with bone marrow transplants for cancer patients and has gone into the ministry. The applicant owns both properties and wants to put more money into them. It would not be financially feasible to bring the properties up to code. Ezebube apologizes for not being here tonight due to prior commitments. He would like to express his interest in working with the City. He would like to build a solid property which will benefit the City, be affordable for many residents, and add to the neighborhood. Ezebube owns other RS-8 property in the area which he is also putting money into. He does not request rezoning on these properties. Each property is worth approximately $115,000, His intent is to put one large building on these lots with underground parking. He feels this would be the best use of the property. Freerks opened the floor to public discussion. Ann Kohl (709 Giblin Drive) feels that there are already enough apartments in the area and that adding more would create too much extra traffic. Freerks closed public discussion Freerks made note of the letter that was received via email from Mary Knudson -Dion in opposition of the zoning. Howard stated that if the Commission decides to go forward with this rezoning, the Comprehensive Plan would have to be amended. Koppes made a motion to deny the application. Smith seconded. Koppes stated that both of these properties are in good shape, and that there is a clear delineation where the apartments stop and the homes start. She feels we should stick with the Comprehensive Plan. Brooks stated that he did not think the street could handle anymore traffic and that it was worrisome that the street was not pedestrian friendly. He feels that this application would start a slippery slope. He feels that the need for affordable housing is paramount in this case. Plahutnik stated that he doesn't feel that a past intrusion into RS-8 zoning merits a continuation of this intrusion. He stated that this zoning would increase the value of this property to the detriment of the surrounding properties. Shannon stated that he was in support of this rezoning. He feels that the RM-20 zone should be squared off. He is upset that the Comprehensive Plan has not prevented the retirement home down the street on Benton from gobbling up homes surrounding them. He feels that this development would be positive. Smith feels that in order to be consistent with past applications, he is in support of Shannon. In past applications, the Commission has used the Comprehensive Plan as a guide and loose deviations are allowed without changing the plan — he referred to the rezoning for Sonic Burger. Miklo stated that this case is different because of the specificity of the language in the plan which makes it clear that Michael Street and the larger area should be preserved for small lot single-family homes. He said at the time the Planning and Zoning Commission April 19, 2007 Page 7 Southwest District Plan was drafter there was considerable citizen discussion and support for this concept. He said in the case of the Sonic Burger staff recommended approval without changing the Comprehensive Plan because we felt that if a proper buffer was required the development could occur without harming the housing in the adjacent neighborhood. In the case of Michael Street the rezoning has implications for the adjacent single-family homes on Benton Street. Because of the grade of the land the proposed apartments would tower over the existing one story homes and would likely lead to request to rezone them. Smith asked if we should be considering the need for affordable single-family housing in deciding zoning issues. Miklo responded that since it's listed in the Comprehensive Plan, it should be taken into account. Howard stated that the main concern of the property owners during this district plan is the need for maintaining the balance between affordable, single-family homes and apartment buildings. Howard stated that this looks to be squaring off zoning on the map but when you go to the neighborhood it would feel differently. Smith asked about the access points for the properties. Howard responded that all single and multi families are accessed from Michael Street. Eastham has reservations about the options that are available to the property owner under RS-8 zoning in trying to take existing properties that don't have the market place that is attractive to rental households. He doesn't have any problem with not distinguishing between rental and owner properties in applying the Comprehensive Plan. He feels that the current flexibility is less than optimal. He feels that combining these lots and building three single-family homes might be attractive as far as housing prices go, but he doesn't know if this is financially feasible. Eastham said that he realizes that the Commission just went through updating the zoning ordinance and perhaps there was not the desire on the part of his fellow Commissioners to revisit the issue. Freerks and Eastham stated that this was a discussion for another night. Freerks stated that she did not think that the applicant's reason was compelling and agrees with the current motion to deny. She feels that there was a great deal of work put into this district plan and that the neighbor's concerns about affordable housing should be taken into account. Motion carried 6-1 (Shannon voting no). Vacation Item VAC07-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Services LLC to vacate a portion of Hollywood Boulevard located south of Highway 6 east of Broadway Street Miklo said the request is to vacate a 6-foot wide section of the Hollywood Boulevard right of way. Staff doesn't want to vacate the entire right of way because of the trail and utility lines. The most the staff would recommend to be vacated is 6 feet. They are recommending approval subject to retention of utility easements. There is at least one gas line within the area. This is what was contemplated at the time of the rezoning application. The applicant had asked for as much as was possible, and 6 feet was the maximum that was possible. The applicant declined the opportunity to speak. There was no public discussion. Smith made a motion to approve subject to retention of utility easements. Plahutnik seconded. Freerks stated that the vacation request does not present a problem when she considers things such as pedestrian and vehicular traffic, circulation, access to private property, access for utility vehicles, or operation of public or private utilities. Plahutnik stated that this was considered and discussed during the rezoning application for this property To: The Planning and Zoning Commission From: Mary Knudson Date: July 31, 3008 Re: Ike Akabogu's zoning request While the objections that I mentioned in my previous letter to P&Z over Mr. Akabogu's request for a zoning increase from RS8 to RS12 still hold, my primary objection of the zoning increase is that we will be setting a bad precedence. This neighborhood is over 50% rental and the property is cheap relative to other areas in Iowa City. Hence, it is a way people can purchase land for investment reasons. Their property values would go up if they can increase the zoning. It would be expected, then, that there would be a ripple effect from a zoning increase and would cause more instability in the neighborhood — which is contrary to the SW District plan. I also believe that this ripple effect would not contained to the Miller Orchard neighborhood. Thank you. Regards, Mary Knudson 725 West Benton St. DATE: July 31, 2008 TO: Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Members FROM: Ruth Baker, 515 West Benton Street, Iowa City This letter concerns the application from Ike Akabogu requesting the rezoning of properties on Benton and Michael Streets. The Planning and Zoning Commission met on July 17 to review the application and it is my understanding that further discussion is scheduled for August 7. 1 regret I was unable to attend the July 17 meeting, but I felt confident knowing our neighborhood representative, Mary Knudson, would be speaking for me and other neighbors. Our neighborhood, with the challenges of a busy street that divides neighbors and with more than our share of apartment complexes, has often been called a "fragile" neighborhood. We strive to improve one of the few diverse neighborhoods located close to downtown and the University that has affordable houses for first-time homebuyers, young families, and the elderly, and we continue to take pride in the little neighborhood park we worked so hard to acquire; this park has proven to be a valuable resource in bringing neighbors together. I will have to admit that I'm having a difficult time understanding why an application for higher -density zoning is even being considered in our neighborhood at this point. A few years ago, I recall city staff and Iowa City residents spending a considerable amount of time and effort determining the best plans for the various districts in our city. The consensus of those efforts, as outlined in the Southwest District Plan, clearly states the importance of "preserving and stabilizing close -in, diverse neighborhoods." There is no doubt in my mind that to allow rezoning from medium density (RS-8) to high density (RS-12) would be devastating to our fragile neighborhood, and I hope you concur and deny this application. As our representative related to Mr. Akabogu in a letter following the neighborhood meeting with him in May of this year, we would welcome the opportunity to continue a dialogue with him to explore innovative and neighborhood -friendly ways of uses of his properties to make improvements to our RS-8-zoned neighborhood (as he indicated to us was his intention). Page 1 of 1 From: Mark Cannon [Cannon. Mark@iccsd. k1 2. ia. us] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 1:48 PM To: PlanningZoningPublic Subject: Rezoning in Miller -Orchard Neighborhod Dear Planning and Zoning Committee Members, First, thanks for the opportunity I had to address you in the July meeting. Since we met, Ike, Mary Knudson and I met to discuss the plan further. We spent time walking the property with Ike at my request. In spite of all the plans which he presented, I was unable to get a good feel for what the property would 'feel like' in our neighborhood until we walked the property and had an opportunity to ask questions and have a more in-depth conversation After spending the time to do this, I continue to have the concern that the density would greatly 'stress' our neighborhood in the ways that I discussed at the July meeting. In our informal discussion with Ike, I stressed that I can not accept the thought that this will be housing for low income families. All of the information I have reviewed continues to lead me to believe that this would become student and absentee landlord property. I suggested to Ike that rather than continue to suggest that this would be low income housing, it might be more prudent to bill this as a 'higher end' development with lower density than he is proposing. He could then market to university people and others who want to be closer to downtown. As I thought through this, it is not more low income housing that our neighborhood needs. We have much of that type of property in our neighborhood. A well -thought out, 'new urban housing' approach ( I'm not sure if I've used the correct terminology but I'm referring to some of the dynamics which were incorporated in the peninsula buildings), higher end development might signal that our neighborhood has been injected with some new life. I look forward to continuing this discussion at our next meeting. Mary Knudson and I are committed to having an ongoing discussion with the City Planners and the business leaders in the properties on South Riverside to explore creative ways to make our neighborhood one that is moving in positive directions. Mark Cannon 706 Miller Avenue 8/1/2008 MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 14, 2008 — 6:00 PM — INFORMAL CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Tim Weitzel, MEMBERS EXCUSED: Elizabeth Koppes, Wally Plahutnik STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Christina Kuecker, Sarah Greenwood-Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: None CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:03 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks. Miklo introduced Christina Kuecker, a new Associate Planner who has been with the City for a few months. Kuecker started as a part-time planner in January and began working full-time in May. Kuecker has a Bachelor of Architecture from Iowa State University, and a Master's in City Planning from the University of Iowa. Kuecker will be working 20 hours per week dealing with historic preservation issues, and 20 hours on planning and zoning matters. This is Kuecker's first planning and zoning case. REZONING ITEMS: REZ08-00005/SUB08-00005: Discussion of an application submitted by Ike Akabogu for a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) zone to High Density Single Family (RS-12) zone and an 11-lot residential subdivision for approximately .88 acres of property at 442, 446, & 452 Benton Street and 719 & 723 Michael Street. The 45-day limitation period is August 7, 2008. Kuecker explained that the application is to rezone the corner of Michael and Benton Street to a high - density single-family (RS-12) zone. The plan calls for attached single-family townhouses. The intention is to tear down the five existing single-family structures to construct a 6-unit, a 2-unit, and a 3-unit townhome, which would be on 11 individual lots. The neighborhood currently consists of medium -density multi -family and medium -density single-family residential. The Comprehensive and Southwest District Plans designate this area as single-family residential or duplexes. Previously, the applicant had submitted an application to rezone the upper two parcels on Michael Street to Medium Density Multi - Family (RM-20). That application was denied because it was not in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. Under the current zoning of RS-8, it is possible to further subdivide the land into six or seven lots, provided there is an alley or rear driveway. With the new RS-12 zoning, the applicant would be able to have a smaller lot -area minimum and would therefore be able to get a maximum of 11 attached family houses. The Southwest District Plan had expressed concern about the future loss of the smaller, more affordable homes in the neighborhood, and the plan does make an effort to stabilize and revitalize the Miller -Orchard neighborhood by encouraging rehabilitation of the existing housing stock. The houses on these lots are quite small and without basements. It is not necessarily feasible that those lots, even if rehabbed, would be appealing to modern households. Freerks said she believed some of them did have basements based on the documentation. Kuecker clarified that the units along Benton Street did not have basements. She believes it is feasible to think that redevelopment could give the opportunity to build new homes that have amenities that longer -term tenants or owner -occupied households would desire. Kuecker said that staff sees merit in this rezoning because the new construction may be more attractive to long-term renters or homebuyers than the current houses. But staff is not convinced that the 6-unit building on the northern edge would fit into the topography and be compatible with the other houses in the Planning and Zoning Commission July 14, 2008 - Informal Page 2 neighborhood. Obviously, Kuecker said, a multi -family structure will be larger than the other single-family structures in the neighborhood. There could be some adjustments to scale, fenestration, landscaping that could make the building more compatible. Staff believes that more of these kinds of design details should be shown before approval could be recommended. Kuecker said that it should also be noted that there are steep slopes on the site, the maximum of which is approximately 25%. These slopes would qualify for a sensitive areas review by the Staff. The steep slopes do make it difficult to create useable open space in the front and rear yards. They also make creating a maneuverable drive more difficult. Staff does not anticipate traffic difficulties arising from this development. Under the current zoning there are approximately 49 vehicle trips per day. Under the new zoning, with 11 households, there would be approximately 77 trips. In light of the traffic on Benton Street, that is a minimal increase. Currently there are no sidewalks along Michael Street. With a subdivision, the developer would be required to install sidewalks. The current right-of-way on Michael Street is 41 feet; the current requirement is for 50 feet. The applicant would be required to dedicate an additional 4.5 feet of right-of-way. Staff sees merit in the proposed rezoning and redevelopment. The current homes lack some of the amenities that households are looking for. The redevelopment gives the opportunity to provide homes that are attractive to long-term tenants and owner -occupied units. However, because it is infill development in a fairly sensitive neighborhood, Staff would like to see a more detailed plan demonstrating how the redevelopment would fit into the neighborhood. The applicant is hesitant to spend more money on design without some indication that this could be approved. The primary areas of concern that Staff has are: the maneuverability of the driveway, lack of useable open space, the slopes and the challenges they bring, the large scale of the building, and the lack of landscaping. Kuecker shared two elevations that the applicant submitted; however, the drawings do not take the slope of the site into consideration at all. Freerks asked if there was any verification that the increase in right of way would make the lots smaller than the minimum for the zone. Kuecker said that there would have to be a reconfiguration of the plan because some of the lots are right at 3,000 and some are bigger, so there may need to be some shifting around. Eastham asked if an exception would be needed or if the applicant could make them the proper size by moving things around. Miklo said that Staff was not sure at this point. Kuecker shared some photographs demonstrating the change in the grade. Miklo pointed out that the street would be too narrow for on -street parking, which makes the maneuverability of the drive in back even more critical. Kuecker shared photographs of other houses nearby in the neighborhood. Miklo said he would like to emphasize that Staff does see some merit in up -zoning to RS-12. The plan submitted shows the maximum number of units that could be developed here under RS-12. If this was not an infill development and was a fairly flat piece of land then Staff would not have as many issues with this. Given the grade, the street and the challenges of fitting into the neighborhood, Staff's impression is that the six units are just too much to fit into the space. Staff has advised the applicant to look at doing four or possibly five units, but the applicant questions whether that would be financially feasible. Miklo said Staff is not comfortable endorsing the plan that is before the Commission. Freerks said that she questioned how this plan helps support the stabilization and revitalization of the neighborhood that is cited in the Southwest District Plan; a feature of the plan that had a lot of time and effort invested into it. What kind of precedent might this set for other neighborhoods if a project that seemed to run counter to the imperatives of the Southwest District Plan was approved? Miklo said this was a good question and one that Staff has struggled with as well. In this case, Miklo said the current size and condition of the housing units that are there is a factor. Freerks countered that this was what the neighborhood was like. Miklo said that these particular houses were some of the ones in poorer condition. He said that the City would not want to send the message that if a property owner lets their house run down that a benefit in the form of rezoning would be granted. However, Miklo said, it could be argued that the size and condition of the current units actually have a destabilizing effect on the Planning and Zoning Commission July 14, 2008 - Informal Page 3 neighborhood, and that newer construction with more amenities that is designed to fit into the neighborhood (something Staff has not yet seen in this case) could be more stabilizing than maintaining the status quo. Miklo acknowledged that it was possible that someone would invest in these properties to fix them up, but Staff discussions deemed it less likely that an owner -occupant would invest in these properties than in a new townhouse. In this market, Miklo said, it was possible that new townhomes could attract residents at the hospital or graduate students, a population that is less transient than the current renter population and less likely to move out every year. While Staff is looking for some stability for the neighborhood, the neighbors do not necessarily agree with Staff's perspective. In short, Miklo said, this would be an opportunity to help stabilize this corner rather than having houses there that are not in great shape and do not invite investment. Miklo said that this case is different than other properties in the neighborhood in that this property does have RM-20 directly to the north of it. Miklo said that another property owner in the neighborhood has said that if this rezoning is granted then she expects her rezoning to be granted as well. Miklo said that he did not necessarily agree with that assessment of the situation. Freerks said that there was a bit of a "creep" effect, in that if this rezoning was approved then there would be RS-12 across the street from RS-8 and the same argument could be made again. Technically, Miklo said, these would be single-family housing units. Freerks agreed that whether the units were owner -occupied or rental would not really be a part of the Commission's decision. Busard said that one of his concerns would be how to make these townhomes fit into the neighborhood. Busard said that he had a lot of questions regarding: parking, green space, and the lack of a designer. Busard thinks that particular attention needs to be paid to the scale of the buildings to make sure they fit into the area. Freerks said that it seemed as though at this point the buildings clearly overpower the area. In terms of the expense, Miklo said, the topography makes the project difficult. Because this is not the average, fairly level lot, a pre -drawn plan cannot simply be implemented; a design that takes the steep slope into consideration is needed. Miklo said that while Staff sympathizes with the applicant's concerns for spending money on a designer to design something that could potentially not be allowed, more detailed plans are needed. Miklo said that he suspected there would be neighborhood opposition to the plan, and that it was for all of these reasons that staff believed it would be good to have the public meeting on the matter to get some of these questions on the table so that both the neighbors and the applicant know what the issues are and what needs to be the next step. Eastham said that in reading the Southwest District Plan he came upon a passage stating that results from a survey done in 2000 said that one-third of all single-family homes in the Miller -Orchard neighborhood were in need of major repairs. Eastham asked if that survey had been updated. Miklo said that he did not know but would check on it. Eastham said the reason he was interested in this was because it would speak to what the state of housing in the general area is. Eastham also asked Staff to determine what the current total living area of the present houses, and what that of the proposed townhomes would be. Eastham said he did not see the proposed total living area in the computations provided, and that he would also be interested in knowing the bedroom configurations. Miklo said Staff could provide some estimates. Eastham asked what code provisions would be cited in giving the Commission control over the design of this development. Miklo said there would not be anything in the code, that the question was one of zoning. The conditions placed on the design would be authorized by the state code which gives cities the right to place conditions on zonings above and beyond the code in order to address a public need. In this case, the public need would be to fit into the topography and the neighborhood. Eastham said he was trying to understand the land -use scenario for the Southwest District Plan in general and this neighborhood in particular, and to determine if RS-12 zoning is contemplated for this area. As Eastham understands it, the types of housing outlined in the Plan's appendix could arguably include or not include RS-12 zoning. His understanding of it is that the only area specifically calling for RS-12 zoning is in the Rohret south sub -area; almost all of the other areas have single-family/duplex designation. Eastham asked if townhomes had been allowed in any of the other sub -areas in that single- family/duplex designation. He asked, is there precedent for fulfilling this request? Planning and Zoning Commission July 14, 2008 - Informal Page 4 Miklo responded that he did not believe there was a precedent. However, he said that the plan had been done before the RS-12 zone was modified to encourage townhomes and other attached smaller single- family lots. That is why there is some discrepancy between the way that plan was written and the current zoning. Miklo said given this gray area, this makes it all the more important that the Commission, Staff, Council and the neighborhood be comfortable allowing townhouses in this neighborhood. Freerks asked if the Commission felt that these townhomes were appropriate infill in this neighborhood, and if the Commission would feel the same for any other area of town. Freerks said she did not know that she would. Eastham said he was not committed either way, but was trying to determine a reasonable zoning that would preserve the single-family nature of the area (not necessarily detached) under current economic conditions. Freerks said she sees the other side of the coin in looking at this proposal. She sees the focus on the Plan's mandate to stabilize, revitalize and encourage rehabilitation of the existing housing stock. Eastham agreed that that could be a sticking point. Eastham asked what programs have been available for successfully rehabilitating single-family, owner - occupied, existing housing stock. Busard asked to what extent conditions could be placed on this project. Greenwood-Hektoen said the conditions would have to be directly related to public needs generated by the rezoning. Busard asked if building scale or landscaping could be addressed in terms of how the buildings fit into the neighborhood. Typically on a sensitive infill site like this, Miklo said, Staff would recommend that the developer do a planned development. This project is just shy of the required one -acre minimum for doing a planned development. With a planned development, Miklo said, the City is given a very specific plan of what the planned development is going to look like on the outside, how it is landscaped, etc., and any significant variation would have to come back before Planning and Zoning or City Council in order to change it. In this case, Staff sees a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA) as serving in lieu of a planned development. Eastham asked if there could be a condition to have the area developed as a planned development even though it doesn't meet the requirements. Miklo said it could not. Eastham asked if additional submissions by the applicant were expected before the formal meeting. Miklo said he did not think so, that the applicant was simply requesting direction at the meeting. Miklo said that the applicant has indicated that in order for the project to be financially feasible he would need the full 11 units. Miklo said the applicant also has the option of developing under the current zoning. In terms of the issues that the Commission has discussed and the compatibility of the development with the neighborhood, Miklo said he believed that getting them on the table in a public forum would be beneficial. Weitzel said the neighbors have communicated that they believe these proposed units are intended to be affordable housing. Weitzel asked Miklo if this was true. Weitzel asked if the Commission could take into account that the current units are affordable and require that the units replacing them also be affordable. Weitzel said that neighborhood was also concerned about student rentals. Miklo said he had no indication as to the population living in the current units. He would caution against getting too involved in those matters for the purposes of a rezoning. Eastham said that he hated to be contrary, but that in looking at the Big Ten Rental proposal the Commission actually made the decision on that proposed rezoning in part based upon the proposed occupancy of the units. There, Miklo said, either zoning was going to allow the five -bedroom units; it was the number of bedrooms, not who was occupying them, that was at issue. Eastham said that there was a discussion about bedrooms, but that there was also a discussion about the number of bedrooms per unit, and the fact that it was a design primarily marketable to undergraduate students. Eastham said that it was discussed that this design was specifically not marketable to families or professionals. Freerks recalled that the concern was one of a lack of variety in units. Miklo agreed that the Commission had gotten into it somewhat with those units, but that he would caution against doing that in this case. He said that requirements for owner -occupied versus rental would not be appropriate, but that number of bedrooms was one way of swaying that in certain directions. Some of the initial applications on this Planning and Zoning Commission July 14, 2008 - Informal Page 5 property were for RM-20; the applicant at that time said that he needed to have 4-bedroom units in order to make the project financially viable. Staff informed him that that was not something they could support and he eventually came around to the idea of RS-12 zoning. Greenwood-Hektoen said that even during the Big Ten Rental discussions it was acknowledged that the Commission should not delve into the occupancy of the units and then the Commission backed off of those discussions. Eastham said he felt that it was appropriate to discuss those issues in land -use planning because there is a large student market in the community. There are significant neighborhoods, Eastham said, where everyone is trying to balance the student needs with the needs of families and home -owners. Greenwood-Hektoen said that the problem was that there was no telling who would actually rent a given unit and that this was why who would be living at a property could not be focused on by the Commission. In terms of affordability, Freerks said, it was reasonable to assume that a couple with a child could not afford a 5-bedroom unit. This is just one factor in many, Freerks said. Eastham said that he believed the Commission actually had some information on what types of unit -design was attractive to a particular market. Miklo said that one issue that did come up with the applicant was that it was the applicant's goal to make these units affordable. Staff asked the applicant if he would be willing to put covenants on the property making it affordable over time or on a certain number of units, and he said that would be willing to discuss that. Then again, Miklo asked, if the applicant is trying to make this work financially, should the City get into that detailed level of telling him what he can charge for his units? Eastham said that if the applicant were receiving tax breaks or public assistance those conditions would be on the units. Busard said he wished to reiterate his concerns for the design scale on the site, and asked Miklo if he expected any concept plan from the applicant. Miklo said that he believed the applicant's intention was to hear from the public and the Commission at the formal meeting. If the Commission indicates that RS-8 is the appropriate zoning for the area and they would not consider an RS-12 plan, then the applicant will not spend the money to develop more detailed design plans. If there is some indication that RS-12 was open to possibility but not for the maximum number of units given the sensitivity of the neighborhood and the slope, then he would consider taking his design to the next level. Freerks stated that this was not the usual way of doing things; generally, she said, people do not first test the waters and then come back later with a more concrete plan. Usually, Freerks said, things are at a more fixed point before the Commission even sees them. Miklo said he felt it was important to both sides to have the public hearing because there are a lot of gray areas; there are some positives to this application and also some questionable things. Done correctly, the development could be much better for the neighborhood than what is there now; or, if it is done poorly, it could have a destabilizing effect. Giving some direction after there has been a public hearing will help the applicant and Staff to know the best way of moving forward, Miklo said. Busard said that he felt uncomfortable with a Conditional Zoning Agreement. He cited the original 1989 Wal-Mart example of a significant change from the original plan as part of his reason for this discomfort. Miklo said he believed the City was much better at conditional zoning at this point. Busard said he felt the Commission should pick the zoning that it felt most comfortable with, not allow for the zoning applied for and assign so many conditions upon it that it was essentially reduced back to the original zoning. Freerks advised everyone to read the plan and the staff report and think them over carefully prior to the formal meeting. Eastham noted that it would still be single-family, regardless of whether the zoning was RS-8 or RS-12. Miklo said that the City may want to go back and re-examine some of their plans now that the zoning is different. At the time the plans were completed, Miklo said, townhouse meant RM-12 zoning. Miklo said he believes there is a gray area. If the plan is read literally, one might conclude that townhomes would not be appropriate for this area. If one recognizes that one of the zoning codes has been rewritten to encourage townhomes since the plan's adoption, then the answer becomes less clear. Freerks said that at the time of the new Zoning Code's adoption there was much discussion about infill and the townhouse structure and of how several of these neighborhoods were not appropriate fits for such structures. Miklo said that he believed that was why the question is one of whether or not this is a neighborhood in which infill should be encouraged, or is what is there now, or what can be achieved in the RS-8 zone, satisfactory. Planning and Zoning Commission July 14, 2008 - Informal Page 6 Eastham asked if the applicant has looked into the possibility of doing single-family detached on narrow lots, something that would be allowed under current zoning. Miklo said he believed it was the applicant's preference to do the townhomes. Weitzel asked if a series of duplexes had been considered. Miklo said that was a possibility. Freerks added that duplexes could be created that fit into the neighborhood. Miklo said that he believed in this case it would be zero -lot lines, but that it would certainly be a possibility. Eastham asked if there was a rear -drive requirement for duplexes in an RS-12 zone. Miklo said he believed that was correct for narrower lots. Weitzel said that his concern was about having one large structure on a hill. Miklo said that the drawings did not accurately reflect the elevations as the buildings would be stepped. Even with steppes though, Miklo added, there are still concerns. Freerks said that the way in which this rezoning would affect all other plans and its further ramifications must be taken into consideration. Eastham said that if the Commission was really good they would come up with something that actually can be used in other parts of the community and will actually help in terms of stabilizing the neighborhood. Freerks said that she could not yet reconcile the mandate to try to rehabilitate existing housing stock with a plan like this. Eastham said that Freerks had an interesting question, and wondered if rehabilitating a fifty year old house that had an expected life -span of fifty years was really workable. Miklo added that of these five houses, some of them were actually built better than the others. Miklo's concern is that the basic structures of some of the buildings are not adequate to really do too much rehabbing. He said that it did keep the building affordable, however. One negative is a positive in another light, Freerks commented. Miklo said that the Commission was welcome to go by and take a close look at the structures, and noted that the one on the corner units was presently empty. There were no further questions, and the meeting was adjourned at 6:49 p.m. c O N N oXXxx ! X ' xxxxx x Co Lf) xxW "x O i O ; x x x x x x i i X X X X � I X x xxxxxo C X l X x x x X X l M X x X X- Ix o xxxxxo , N e- x 1 XxxXox O r- - M CV 0 CO CO CD w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO 0 0 Y O N o ccY d d— = C cM Z N 2 m 7 m. O s E d E mmwu- 2H:0 3: z om-,cjQui3c►=� X XXOO ww X Co M ; XXXXX ; ; X W 1 1 Nw 0o ' xxXX ;� ' rl �0XXXX X X X X X X X X N 0 i X x X O O X I N X j X X X W 000 W LLU j I E 2c:`mNOOOT-M H W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EW-Emm Y = om d =s°� ea d Em`mwliYa OU) Zm UQuI�:l6. MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 17, 2008 — 7:30 PM — FORMAL CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Elizabeth Koppes, Wally Plahutnik, Tim Weitzel, Josh Busard MEMBERS EXCUSED: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Christina Kuecker, Sarah Greenwood-Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: Ike Akabogu, Anna Buss, Mark Cannon, Mary Knudson -Dion, Josh Neuman, Ann Kohl RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING ITEMS: REZ08-00005/SUB08-00005: Discussion of an application submitted by Ike Akabogu for a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) zone to High Density Single Family (RS-12) zone and an 11-lot residential subdivision for approximately .88 acres of property at 442, 446, & 452 Benton Street and 719 & 723 Michael Street. The 45-day limitation period is August 7, 2008. Kuecker reported that the applicant is requesting a rezoning of the five properties listed from RS-8 Medium -Density Single -Family to RS-12 High -Density Single -Family Residential in order to redevelop the site into 11 single family attached townhomes. Kuecker said there would be a six -unit structure, a two - unit structure, and a three -unit structure. Kuecker described the existing buildings on the property as small, single-family homes from the mid-1950's, which are currently rental properties. To the north of the property, Kuecker said, are several Medium -Density Multi -Family structures, but on all other sides, the zoning is RS-8 Medium -Density Single -Family Residential. Kuecker stated that the applicant had previously submitted a request for rezoning for the two Michael Street properties, which he wished to change to RM-20 Medium -Density Multi -Family Residential. That application was denied due to inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan and the Southwest District Plan, which designate this area to stay small -lot, single family residential. The current zoning of RS-8 could allow these five properties to be subdivided into six or seven single family detached units, with potential for a duplex on the corner lot. The new RS-12 zoning has a minimum lot area of 3,000 square feet, and would allow a maximum of 11 attached single family units to be built. The Comprehensive Plan and the Southwest District plan note that any redevelopment of this area should be sensitive to the existing neighborhood. Under RS-12 zoning, the units are on individual lots, and are single family residential. During the planning process, the citizens of the neighborhood expressed concern about the loss of smaller houses and affordable single-family homes in the Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 2 neighborhood. As a result, the Plan states that there should be an effort to stabilize and revitalize the Miller Orchard neighborhood by encouraging rehab of existing housing stock in the area. This will help to maintain the balance between owner -occupied and rental housing. Kuecker stated that although the proposed rezoning is not rehabilitating existing housing stock, it would add new single-family units to the housing stock. There have been concerns expressed by current residents that the increased density resulting from this project would detract from the efforts to stabilize the neighborhood. Staff does see some merit in the redevelopment of this corner: three of the existing homes do not have basements; all of the homes are quite small, and may not be as attractive to homebuyers or more long-term tenants as a new townhome may be. However, Staff also believes that any redevelopment does need to be sensitive to the neighborhood, and Staff believes that if this is approved, there should be conditions attached which ensure this new development is integrated into the neighborhood appropriately. This proposed development would be a 2-unit and 3-unit structure along Benton Street, with a six -unit structure on Michael Street. Staff believes that with some attention to detail such as landscaping, window placement, trim, porches, rooflines, etc., the larger structures could be made more compatible with adjacent, detached single-family homes. However, plans have not yet been submitted that illustrate that these buildings will fit in with the site and the neighborhood. Additionally, the challenge which the steep slopes provide has not been adequately addressed, and Staff feels that resident access to the building could be an issue because of this. The maneuverability of the driveway and the parking in the area are a concern as a result of these steep slopes. Staff's primary concern with a 6-unit structure along Benton Street is that it would result in very little open space for the residents. The five units along Michael Street have a greater setback that would allow for a nice front yard. The applicant did submit some elevation drawings showing the general concept for the exterior of the townhomes. The drawings are preliminary and would be amended to allow for additional design work to ensure that the structures fit into the neighborhood and the site. For example, the current drawings do not show the way in which the buildings would move up the hill along Michael Street. Because there are steep slopes in the area, Kuecker said, there would be a need for a Sensitive Areas review of the site. However, the review would be performed by Staff, not the Commission. Estimated vehicular trips would rise from approximately 49 trips per day, to approximately 77 trips per day if 11 units were built. Staff believes that given the traffic along Benton Street, this increase is minimal. Currently Michael Street does not have a sidewalk. With this new development, the subdivision code would require the applicant to put in sidewalks along his side of the street, thereby improving the pedestrian nature of Michael Street. Because the street is very narrow with a paved -width of only 20 feet, there will be no on -street parking available to residents. Kuecker stated that the current homes lack some of the basic amenities that homeowners are looking for. The proposed redevelopment could create homes that longer -term tenants or owner -occupied homeowners desire; however, because of the sensitive nature of the neighborhood, Staff would like to see a more detailed plan that demonstrates how the development would fit in with the neighborhood, before recommending it for approval. The applicant has asked the Commission to give some indication as to whether this project would be recommended to City Council for rezoning, and what conditions would be necessary to achieve the approval. Some of the issues that Staff has with this project as it relates to the Comprehensive Plan are: 1) the vehicular access and the parking, 2) the lack of open space, 3) the steep slopes and how they are handled, 4) the scale of the building as it relates to the neighborhood, and 5) landscaping, and how it is used to help this development blend in. Kuecker stated that at the informal meeting the Commission had requested answers to a few questions they had regarding the application. The first concerned the 2000 Housing Commission Survey in which one-third of all homes in the area reported being in need of major repair. Commissioners had asked if Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 3 this survey had been updated, and, if so, what the current statistic was. Kuecker said that the survey was updated in 2007, and that while no official report was done, Staff that had administered the survey reported that one-third or more homes in the area still were in need of major repair. The Commission had also requested information on funding that might be available to rehab homes in the neighborhood. Kuecker reported that there is a locally funded source called G.R.I.P., General Rehabilitation and Improvement Program, (formerly known as T.A.R.P.) available. So far, Kuecker said, there has only been one successful project north of Benton Street in the neighborhood, and several on Douglass Street and Douglass Court. Kuecker said that there have been many applications submitted for properties in the neighborhood, but for various reasons, no others have been successfully seen through to the end product. Kuecker stated that a second funding source was the federally funded CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) and HOME (HOME Investment Partnership programs) which cover repairs only and often are conditional upon occupancy, or are low -interest loans. All of these funding sources are only available to owner -occupied units, not to rental units. Kuecker said that the Commission had expressed an interest in what the current total living area of the five properties is, and what the total living area of the proposed properties would be. The total living area in all five houses combined is 3,904 square feet. By looking just at the footprint submitted by the applicant, and not considering the units as two -floor structures, Kuecker said that the total square footage of the proposed property could be estimated at just over 10,000 square feet. Kuecker said if you allowed for the fact that there are two levels planned, that takes the number to over 20,000 square feet. Total living area, Kuecker said, increases quite a bit with this plan. Kuecker noted that the Commission had been interested in discovering what the code said as it pertains to placing conditions on the design in a rezoning. Kuecker said that in the Iowa Code, there is a section that sates that additional conditions can be applied on a rezoning, but that those conditions must be reasonable and satisfy a public need(s), which are directly caused by the requested change. In this case, Kuecker continued, the conditions would have to ensure that the redevelopment was an asset to the neighborhood and not a detriment. Miklo added a couple of points at the end of Kuecker's presentation. He asked Kuecker to give the average square footage of the existing units, which, she replied was 672 square feet (without basements) along Benton Street, and 1,076 and 812 for the existing units on Michael Street. Miklo reiterated the concern Staff had for having six units on Michael Street. While Staff believes the units on Benton Street could be designed to fit in with the neighborhood, because of the steep slopes of the street itself and the design of the property, the six units on Michael Street could represent a problem. Staff is concerned that perhaps there should be fewer units in that area, maybe only four. If the RS-12 zoning is approved, Miklo said, 11 units is the maximum that the zone allows. However, because of the topography, and the character of the neighborhood, Staff does not feel that six units could properly fit on the Michael Street side. Staff shared some photographs of what they deemed well -designed, well thought-out townhomes and duplexes. Given the Comprehensive Plan's goal of improving and stabilizing the area, these examples of recent in -fill development fit in with the character and quality of design, and the breaking up of large buildings into smaller components which Staff would recommend. Miklo asked the Commission to give Staff and the applicant direction as to how best to proceed after their public hearing. Weitzel asked if historic significance could be a concern in redeveloping this area, and asked if there was a survey for this neighborhood. Miklo replied that he did not believe there was. Eastham asked if his understanding that the proposed units had approximately 20,000 feet of living space was correct. Kuecker said that it was. Eastham asked if Staff knew what reinvestment/redevelopment had occurred in the area over the last ten years. Miklo said that there has been some development on Orchard Street, and he believed there was a house built on Hudson or Miller recently, but that they do not currently have an exact figure. Miklo said that Staff could certainly check building permits to get a more conclusive picture. Eastham asked if Kuecker knew the dollar amounts of assistance that had been Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 4 received in reinvestment assistance such as CDBG and HOME funds in the Miller Orchard neighborhood. Kuecker said she did not have the numbers on hand, but could get them for the Commission. She said that she knew that one home north of Benton had received approximately $40,000. Eastham requested more specific details and information regarding reinvestment funding that had gone to neighborhood homes. Freerks opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak. Ike Akabogu, the applicant, stated that when he and his wife saw the opportunity to buy rental properties on Benton Street, they saw it as an opportunity to give back to the community that had given them so many blessings. Akabogu said that the properties they had purchased kept deteriorating, and that he and his wife have spent thousands of dollars trying to do work on them. However, Akabogu said, the properties are not the kind of properties that you can just spend money on and expect it to keep getting better without having to raise the rent. Akabogu said that they were very conscious of wanting to keep the rents low and the units affordable, but that it just was not working financially. Akabogu said that he and his wife had been participating over the last few years in a program that takes families from renting to owning their own homes, and Akabogu said that this was their goal and their mission, and what they have in their heart to do. Redeveloping these sites, Akabogu contended, would give the opportunity of eventual homeownership to other low-income families in the community. Letting the properties sit the way that they are, Akabogu said, would work against the idea of working together to improve the community aesthetically. Akabogu said that he has met with the neighborhood to get their input, as well as with Staff. Akabogu said that he is not trying to force something on the neighborhood, but that on the last two meetings he went to, he felt he was basically yelled at and shut down rather than anyone giving ideas of things that they thought would work. Akabogu said that he and his wife want to do something that works for everyone and makes the city a more beautiful place. He said as it is, the numbers show him losing $114,000 by building the 6-plex on Michael Street. Akabogu said that if this was part of his charity work, he would have no problem going for it, but, Akabogu said, needing money to pay back the bank, they feel they must do what the bank says, which in this case, is building at least a 6-plex on that site. Akabogu said that Staff has informed him that a more full and complete plan must be submitted before approval could be recommended. He said that what he was hoping to get from the Commission was direction. If the Commission could see a way that the rezoning might work, then he could spend the money necessary to get more detailed plans developed. Eastham asked Akabogu about the square footage per unit. Akabogu said that currently the estimates are for 1,800 square feet per unit. However, he said, that number is going to change because as they draft and work with the building, changes that need to be made will come up. Akabogu said that the square footage will definitely be almost double what is offered by the current units. Each unit will have a basement, which, Akabogu said, is a common request when renting to families. Busard asked if the 1,800 square feet figure included the basement, and if the basement would be a livable space. Akabogu said that the basement will be finished into a family room. Weitzel said that with such a size, the average unit size will be dramatically increasing. Considering Akabogu's pledge that he wishes to keep the units affordable to families, Weitzel asked how Akabogu planned to do so, given the large size and cost of the units. Akabogu said that what he has done in the past is refer families to organizations that can really help them. He said that through these organizations, families have been able to learn how to save and to make better money, eventually purchasing homes of their own. Akabogu said that to him, this is more about the work he does for Almighty God. He said that he is not a developer and has never developed before, and that this was a chance to give back to people. Busard asked Akabogu if it was correct that the bank had told him that in order to get a loan he had to have a minimum of 6-units. Akabogu stated that this was correct. Eastham asked if this meant that Akabogu must have 11 units altogether in order to receive his loan. Akabogu said that this was correct, and that the bank was looking at it from a perspective of how could this project make money for the bank. Right now, Akabogu said, the numbers for him are $114,000 in the negative, and the bank needs him to Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 5 show how he is going to make it work financially. Akabogu said that he is looking at the project as a long- term ambition, and that he is counting on spending significantly less on maintenance in the first few years of the new buildings' lives in order to counteract the high costs of building. Plahutnik asked Akabogu if his ongoing plans to have tenants first rent and then buy his units specifically included these particular units. Akabogu said that it did. Plahutnik said that even at roughly $150 per square feet, a relatively low cost for housing in the current market, which would price the units at approximately $270,000-$275,000 per unit, a price that would presumably be out of the range of low- income families. Akabogu said that the 1,800 square feet figure was subject to change, and that nothing was yet set in stone. Akabogu said that if the units were $275,000 he would not want them and he would not sell them to anybody; he said this would erase the whole purpose for him of making it low-income. Eastham asked if Akabogu had a sale price in mind. Freerks interjected, saying that while she believed Eastham's question was important, it was not really the biggest issue in terms of rezoning. She acknowledged that it was something that needed to be looked at, but felt that it needed to be looked at in the context of it being one of the many things that are considered in a rezoning. Greenwood-Hektoen said that she agreed with Freerks and that financial feasibility is not one of the primary factors in a rezoning decision. Eastham said that his thinking in this line of questioning was that financial feasibility does have an effect on size and scale. Freerks said that she did not believe that this could be answered at this time. Greenwood-Hektoen said that it is not a condition of the applicant's plan that the housing be affordable. She said that while he is representing orally that it would be affordable housing, that is not really what the Commission is considering at this point. Eastham asked if it could be a condition of rezoning. Miklo said that Staff would have to look at it. Freerks said that it is for the applicant to decide how much he wishes to rent his units for. Akabogu said that the numbers could still change from that 1,800 square feet figure. He said that as they work on the designs, this is something that he will work through with Staff. Busard asked if Akabogu had considered designing the project to have more open space. Akabogu said that he has talked with the project's engineer regarding the slope of the land and that one option they had discussed is trying to add more dirt to better level the lot into useable open space. Busard asked if Akabogu had thought about a shared open space with the larger community. Akabogu said that something like that could be looked at, but that, again, because he did not yet know if the project was a possibility, he had not spent the additional money on design needed to consider such possibilities. Busard also asked about parking, and what the applicant's plans for parking entailed. Akabogu said that there were two car garages for each unit and that in the course of this project he would be widening Michael Street and installing sidewalks. Freerks asked if other members of the public would like to speak about this application. Anna Buss, 525 W. Benton Street, a neighbor and property owner in the area said that a master plan had been developed for this neighborhood a few years ago, and that a lot of time and taxpayer money went into developing that plan. She stated that if the Commission decided to amend the plan in favor of this project, she and her neighbors would thank the Commission from the bottom of their billfolds. Buss said that Akabogu had implied that his properties were too old to maintain; Buss said that all of her properties are older. Buss said that Akabogu had stated that his properties cost too much to maintain; Buss wondered if perhaps he was penny-wise and pound foolish, and said that all of her properties also cost a lot of money to maintain, but that nevertheless maintenance is done on a very regular basis. Buss said although Akabogu had pointed out that he was a doctor, she had been in the rental property business since she was 19, and is now 58. Buss said that she evaluates properties for a living, and she wonders how he is able to maintain his rental permits with his properties in such a disparaged condition. Buss said that Akabogu has 38,160 square feet which he is proposing to develop. Directly across the street from Akabogu's proposed development site, Buss owns 51,000 square feet ready to be developed the minute the area is rezoned to accommodate Akabogu's project. Buss said that she has talked to her neighbors, and that all of them have expressed interest in redeveloping their land if Akabogu's rezoning went through. Buss said that she had pulled up the number of rental permits that were issued for her Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 6 neighborhood and found the following: on Miller Avenue, 9 of 16 houses had rental permits, although not all of the 7 without rental permits were owner -occupied; on Hudson, 18 of 33 houses have rental permits, the remaining are not all owner -occupied. Buss pointed out that there were 9 acres of undeveloped land on Miller Avenue just after Benton Hill Park, and that if the area was rezoned this would all be developed immediately. Buss said that if Akabogu successfully got his property rezoned, all of the neighborhood's property owners would be coming before the Commission to ask for rezoning too. Buss said that she has wanted a rezoning such as this for years and that she wanted to put duplexes all down Miller Avenue, but that she was basically shot down because of the Comprehensive Plan. Buss said that she owns five lots on J Street that she has considered developing, and that based on the figures she has calculated for development, she sees no way Akabogu can maintain affordability with his proposed units. She said that if Akabogu could find a builder to work for $125 per square foot, which she doubted was possible, six units of 1,800 square feet each would be $1,350,000, or $225,000 per unit. If he builds 11 units, Buss said, the price is $2,475,000. Buss said that if Akabogu reduced the units to 1,200 square feet per unit, the price would go down to $900,000 for six units or $1,650,000 for 11 units. Buss said she would defy Akabogu to even find a builder who would do the development for $125 per square foot. Buss said that affordable housing does not exist in this town because the City will not work with the builders to get the prices down. Buss said Akabogu bought his properties knowing full well the condition they are in. She said he bought them knowing that he intended to develop there, and that the properties are in the condition they are in because he has not taken care of them. Buss said that every one of the properties she owns on Miller and Hudson are older than Akabogu's, and all are well kept up. She said that her newest properties in that area were built in the 1950's, and that she would bet that any one of the Commissioners would live in any of her homes in a heartbeat. Buss said that if there are no modern amenities in Akabogu's units, it is because he has not put them in. She said that she has no problem renting the three homes she has that do not have basements. Buss said that if you keep your property up, then one tenant to the next will rent them. Buss invited questions from the Commission. Koppes asked Buss if she owned any property on Michael Street. Buss replied that she looks at Michael Street all of the time. She stated that her residence was at 525 West Benton, and asked Koppes what part of the statement "across the street" she did not understand. Buss said she owned a number of properties in the immediate area but none on Michael Street. Plahutnik asked if he was correct in his understanding that Buss lived right amongst all of her properties. Buss said that she did not for several years, but that she does now after having remodeled this property. Buss said that all that is necessary to do to have properties that look good is to put the right amount of money in the right places with the right people doing the work. Eastham asked Buss how long she had been investing in her rental properties. Buss replied that she purchased her first rental home in 1988. Buss said that for a time she had owned everything on Miller except for two houses, but that she had sold a few of those homes because the City was not going to let her do what she wanted with them. Buss said she knows all of the people who bought those homes and that she has informed them of what is coming, and that all of them are willing to band together to do something new and wonderful if this rezoning goes through. Mark Cannon, 706 Miller Avenue, said that he had attended the University of Iowa in the 1960's and 1970's and that after having lived elsewhere for a number of years, he returned to Iowa City in 1992. Cannon said that he returned to Iowa City because he knew that it was a progressive and forward -looking city, and that it was this spirit he wished to invoke in these discussions. Cannon expressed his apologies to Akabogu if he had felt yelled at in his meetings with neighborhood residents, and assured him that this had not been the intent. Cannon said that he is not against change. He said that his neighborhood is not a very nice one from an aesthetic standpoint, and that both the commercial and residential zones in it are in jeopardy. Because of these deficiencies in his neighborhood, Cannon said, he is not against change at all. His concern, however, is that this development will increase the density of the neighborhood with detrimental effects. Cannon said that he is certain that allowing townhomes in the area will encourage Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 7 student -living and absentee landlords. Cannon, who is committed to the neighborhood and who wants to see the neighborhood grow and be attractive, believes that it will become his job to call the police every Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday night to quell parties. Cannon said that he believes that if the Commission takes an honest look at neighborhoods that are dominated by students they will acknowledge that this is a reasonable assumption of what could happen. While Cannon is not against students, having come here himself to study, he feels that areas with high student populations need to be managed carefully and well, and that that would probably not be the case in this area. Further, Cannon said, there is no way that these units can be low-income; the cost threshold is just too high. Part of the frustration of the neighbors, Cannon said, is that when questions such as the amount of rent he intended to charge were asked in the meetings with Akabogu, he would often reply that he had not yet thought about that sort of thing. Cannon asked what kind of security that gave neighbors in believing that these units would actually be low-income — something that Cannon says he would welcome. Cannon reiterated that he is not against change, but that if the neighborhood moves in that direction then a lot of out -of -the - box, progressive thinking must be done to make this an enticing, stable neighborhood. Mary Knudson -Dion, 725 W. Benton Street, said she wished to express her objections to the proposal. Knudson -Dion thanked Akabogu for holding discussions with the neighborhood and stated that she felt the discussions had been collegial and productive. Knudson -Dion said that she likes the diversity of her neighborhood and its proximity to downtown, Oaknoll and the stadium. She noted that the neighborhood is an interesting but fragile one. She stated that a few years ago the Southwest District Plan was worked on and that a goal of this plan was to preserve and stabilize this neighborhood. Knudson -Dion said that she believes that the increase in high -density housing that comes with this proposal runs counter to that goal. She said that high -density is already a concern in this neighborhood and that this tends to make the neighborhood more transient. She is afraid that approving this plan will create a slippery slope because there are more units in the neighborhood that are renter -occupied than owner -occupied. She believes that more and more proposals will be put in for rezoning, turning the neighborhood into predominately duplexes and higher density units. This sort of activity would not fit in with the idea of preserving and stabilizing a neighborhood. Knudson -Dion expressed concern for the cost of the units and what type of people that might attract. If the costs are high, she believes more students will be attracted to the units than families. While she is not against students, she does want to make sure there are people in the neighborhood who want to preserve its richness and to watch it grow. Knudson -Dion expressed a concern for the lack of green space in the plan, particularly along Michael Street. If families will be living in the units then it is critical to have green space for children and adults to enjoy. The design is also a concern for Knudson -Dion, as it does not appear to fit in with the overall neighborhood design. The rest of the neighborhood consists of single units with a lot of yard, and Knudson -Dion would like to see that continue. So often, Knudson -Dion said, neighborhoods are in a position of simply reacting to things as they come along. One positive thing to have come out of these discussions is that the neighborhood has decided to proactively set forth a plan of what they want for their neighborhood. Josh Newman is the former owner of one of the properties Akabogu wishes to replace with the townhomes. The home, Newman said, is identical to the other two that Akabogu owns on Benton Street. Newman described the homes as pre-fab houses built in the 1950's that are built not with 2x4's or 2x2's, but out of a composite frame with % inch plywood as the outer walls. Newman said that living in the home, as he did for three years, was very unpleasant. Newman said the homes are in terrible shape and are deteriorating. He recalled that when large trucks would drive by on Benton Street the walls and windows would actually rattle. Newman stated his support for Akabogu's proposal. Freerks asked how many square feet Newman had in the home he had lived in. Newman replied that the house had 686 square feet. Ann Kohl, 709 Giblin Drive, has lived in the neighborhood for almost 35 years. Kohl said that when she purchased her home there was a nice grassy slope behind her house, but now there is a three-story apartment building. Now she has a brick wall and three stories of windows staring down at her backyard. Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 8 While Kohl believes Akabogu has good intentions, she feels his plan is simply too big for the area. Kohl said she is asking the Commission to vote against a higher density because she feels there are too many apartments in the area already. She believes the plan Akabogu has presented is unworkable, despite his good intentions. A smaller project that would not require a change in zoning would be a much better choice in Kohl's opinion. Freerks asked if there was anyone else who wished to address the Commission. As no one came forward, Freerks invited those wishing to speak a second time to the podium. Buss stated that she was very good at organizing her fellow -landlords, and no one that she has called has objected to hiring someone to represent their interests. Buss said that the Commission might want to think about that. Buss suggested that if Akabogu wanted better, more affordable housing, he should tear down the current homes and put up small single family units or duplexes to replace them. Buss invited the Commissioners to come sit in her yard and watch the traffic, and to then ask themselves if they really wanted more little kids on Benton Street. Buss said there were many things to consider and that Akabogu had no clue at this point what he intended to do. Buss said she has floor plans and building plans, but cannot find a builder to get her the price she needs to redevelop her property. Buss said that she is also a real-estate broker and that her specialty is selling apartment homes. She stated that there is no way these homes can be affordable housing. Buss said that if Akabogu tore down his houses and the Commission rezoned it, the land would be worth more than the houses sitting on it. Buss said that if Akabogu's rezoning goes through there will be 100,000 square feet in the immediate area whose owners also will demand a rezoning. If he gets it, Buss said, we want it too. Buss thanked the Commission for their time. Akabogu again addressed the Commission. Akabogu said he wished to remind the Commission that the lots being discussed are next door to an RM-20 zone, which has an apartment building on it. Akabogu contended that rezoning his property to an RS-12 only helps to blend the apartment buildings into the community. Akabogu took issue with Buss expressing concern that students would live in these dwellings. Akabogu requested that the Commission ask Buss what percentage of her homes in the area were occupied by students. Freerks requested that comments be directed to the Commission and remain on the topic at hand. Akabogu said that he was trying to show that his drive is to rent to families, and that the majority of people to whom he rents are families. The students are not his target and he hopes this knowledge reassures the community. Akabogu said that he wishes to work together with the community to keep the neighborhood peaceful. However, Akabogu said, all around these properties are huge apartment buildings in an RM-20 zone, units which a family could not possibly buy. Akabogu said that if the Commission resolves his application in the way he is asking, families will actually be able to buy his properties. That, he said, is his goal. Freerks invited anyone else to speak. No one came forward and the public hearing was closed. Freerks stated that a motion needed to be entertained prior to holding discussion and that her suggestion would be to defer the matter because there are so many issues to address. Eastham moved to defer items REZ08-00005 and SUB08-00005, an application submitted by Ike Akabogu for a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) zone to High Density Single Family (RS-12) zone and an 11-lot residential subdivision for approximately .88 acres of property at 442, 446, & 452 Benton Street and 719 & 723 Michael Street, until the Commission's next meeting on August 7, 2008. Weitzel seconded Freerks called for discussion from the Commission. Freerks advised Akabogu that this was somewhat different from the way the Commission usually goes about things because generally a proposal is relatively firm by the time the Commission sees it. In this case, Freerks said, she understood that the applicant wanted the Commission's feedback prior to going to the expense of creating more concrete plans. Miklo offered to help frame the discussion. The question, Miklo explained, is one of going from RS-8 to Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 9 RS-12. If the Commission feels there is some merit to pursuing that rezoning, the next question is: are there conditions the Commission wants to require in terms of the amount of open space, the number of units, etc. Staff's concern for the property on Michael Street, Miklo said, is that six units may be too many. Staff has looked to see if given the lot area and the slope it would be possible to fit six in, but because of the minimum lot width and dimensions of the RS-12 zone, this is probably the most realistic design. Miklo said that he does not see how the lots could be arranged any differently in an RS-12 zone to create more open space, and for Staff, that is a concern. Miklo allowed that there may be a very creative idea that the applicant could come up with to show six units more comfortably located on the lots, but he did not see that happening. That, Miklo told the Commission, would be their next question: should there be a condition on the number of units? Once those big questions are addressed, the details about design and parking and open space can be addressed. Freerks noted that those questions would be addressed if the Commission felt the application had merit. Miklo said that it was possible the Commission would determine that there is currently appropriate zoning for these properties and that there is no need for further discussion. Eastham asked what the RS-8 zoning actually permits. Because the RS-8 zone requires a larger lot area, it only allows duplexes on corner lots. Staff's calculations were that you could definitely get six single-family lots on this property. That would be single-family homes, not duplexes. This type of development would be a subdivision and because Michael Street is substandard, more lot area would need to be taken from the lots in order to make the Michael Street right-of-way wider. Miklo said there was some question as to whether a seventh lot could be created or perhaps a lot that would be big enough for a duplex. Eastham asked if that would be one duplex or two duplexes. Miklo replied that it would be at most one duplex. This type of redevelopment would require no rezoning, but would require subdivision. Busard asked if it was required to have a duplex on a corner and Miklo responded that it was not. Kuecker clarified that if the corner lot was a single-family then there would only be room for six single-family units on the property; if it was found that there was sufficient space to make the corner lot a duplex, then there would be room for seven total units on the property. Plahutnik noted that staff documents state that both the Southwest District Plan and the Comprehensive Plan indicate that the property should remain single-family or duplex residential. Plahutnik asked if rezoning the property to RS-12 would mean that the property would not be single-family or residential duplex. Miklo replied that RS-12 is single family. The Southwest District Plan does not show townhouses here, Miklo acknowledged, but added that since that plan was adopted the zoning code has been amended to allow attached townhouses in the RS-12 zone to be built more easily. Miklo said he felt it was a gray area as to whether the townhouses match the Comprehensive Plan. Freerks recalled that when the Commission worked on the code the intention was more for new development, not necessarily for infill. Miklo said that the main intent was to create new areas where it would be easier to build townhouses. Under the previous code, it was very difficult to build townhouses without doing a planned development. If one reads the Southwest Plan literally, then townhouses were not anticipated in this area; however, small -lot single-family was anticipated, and this, Miklo said, creates a gray area. Miklo said that there are two ways to approach it: 1) if the Commission felt it was a good project and really wanted to make it work, the Comprehensive Plan could be amended to show townhouses in this area; or, 2) because it is a gray area, RS-12 zoning could be adopted without amending the Comprehensive Plan if the commission determined it was in compliance with the intent of the plan to promote small lot single family and duplexes in this neighborhood. Freerks said that she keeps returning to the Southwest District Plan because she knows how much time and community input went into that document, and she has grave concerns about the precedent that rezoning this property could set. She said that she has real concerns about the implications of making a change like this. Freerks stated that she was not saying that the properties could not be redeveloped, but that she is not sure this particular redevelopment matches the Comprehensive Plan. Further, she said she was not sure the units could be affordable, even if the full 11 units requested in the rezoning were allowed. Freerks said she was concerned how this rezoning would trickle around the corner and across the street, and what that would mean for the neighborhood as a whole and the stated goal of the Southwest District Plan to preserve it. Koppes agreed with Freerks that up -zoning this property seemed to be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Koppes stated that 1,800 square feet is a huge unit, noting that her house is only 900 square feet. Koppes said that if affordable housing was the goal, the units could be down -sized. Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 10 Eastham said he has been striving to keep an open mind about the application and how it pertains to what the Comprehensive Plan says about the area. Eastham said it seemed to him that if townhouse development would help to achieve stabilization in this neighborhood, then one possible way to proceed would be to change the Comprehensive Plan so that townhouse development was allowed in this specific area and not another. Freerks replied that she was not prepared to look at the whole Plan. Eastham said he understood that and was just thinking his way through the process. The larger question, Eastham said, is how to do redevelopment, if redevelopment is necessary for stabilization of this neighborhood, within the confines of the existing zoning. Eastham said that he had heard comments suggesting that that may be possible for this area. Other statements suggested that stabilization may be occurring because owners are investing in their properties, something Eastham said he really had not heard before about this area. Eastham said he wanted to focus on the fact that half or more of the properties in that area are rental and a third or more are judged as being in need of major repair. So while some investment is going on, Eastham said, not enough to convince him that it is at the level that could achieve stabilization. Eastham said that he thought the proposal for 11 units currently before the Commission was probably not going to work for these five lots for all of the reasons Staff had suggested. He said the plan did not allow for adequate green space and vehicle access, and that 1,800 square foot units did not, to him, speak to neighborhood stabilization. The scale of the plans and the per -unit size would need to come down. Townhome developments, Eastham said, are actually supposed to allow for smaller units that are well -designed at a little bit higher density. Freerks stated that she just was not sure that townhouses were right for that neighborhood. Eastham said they may or not be, and that he was trying to maintain an open mind. Eastham said that Staff had asked the Commission to provide clear guidance on the matter, but that Staff had also stated that six units would not work on Michael Street. Miklo clarified that what Staff was saying was that Staff is having a difficult time seeing six units on Michael Street, but that they are open to being convinced by the applicant; after several weeks of discussions with the applicant, a plan that could properly demonstrate 11 units as feasible has not materialized. Eastham said that he would have a difficult time envisioning a plan in which six units could work on Michael Street, whether they were townhomes or detached single family homes, because of the topography of the area. Eastham said he was willing to entertain as a possibility somewhere between seven and nine units on the lots, although he was not committed to the idea. Busard said that it seemed like the Commission kept returning to the current zoning in their discussions. Busard stated that even if the area was rezoned to an RS-12, all of the conditions the Commission had discussed basically take it back to an RS-8 again. Weitzel said that he did not see it that way, but that he felt there were topographic problems and financial constraints on the applicant that make it un-doable in his opinion. Weitzel said he was not convinced that the zoning was worth it. Freerks said she felt the Commission needed to look at the basics. First and foremost, she said, the Commission is being asked to rezone something. The property could be rezoned and the applicant could sell it the next day. That may not be the applicant's intention, but it is a possibility the Commission must take into account. That is why, Freerks said, the first step is to go back to the Comprehensive Plan and determine what zoning, not what plan, is appropriate for the area. Busard said he that he just was not comfortable rezoning an area and then placing condition after condition upon it. Weitzel pointed out that the Commission is allowed to do that. Busard said he agreed that the Commission was allowed to do that, but that he felt it put them in danger of being developers rather than a Planning & Zoning Commission if extensive conditions were applied to each rezoning. Freerks maintained that conditions were part of the flexibility the Commission had and that sometimes they were necessary and others they were not appropriate at all. Plahutnik said, Akabogu had submitted a plan, but had not asked the Commission to redesign the plan. Frankly, Plahutnik said, he did not get paid enough to do so. In making his decisions, Plahutnik looks at what the applicant stands to gain with a vote of yes, and in this instance, the value of the property is increased enormously. Plahutnik also looks at what the community stands to gain because he feels that it is his job as a Commissioner to act on behalf of the community. The positive that the community stands to gain is the removal of a handful of undesirable houses. This positive must be weighed against a whole Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 11 series of negatives that could result for the community. In this case, Plahutnik said, the applicant stands to greatly gain, but the community does not fare so well. This makes his decision relatively easy, he said. Plahutnik said he is not looking to re -design the property to make it work for the applicant because that is not his job. Miklo wished to clarify a couple of points. In terms of the Comprehensive Plan, Miklo said, the Plan calls for small -lot single-family in this area. The RS-12 zone can be developed as small -lot single-family; it does not require townhouses. The difficulty for the applicant, Miklo said, was that without doing the townhouse design the rezoning would not be of any great benefit. Miklo said he just wished to make it clear that RS-12 can fit into what the Comprehensive Plan currently calls for here; the question of whether townhouses can fit is a gray area, making it a judgment call for the Commission. Plahutnik said he did not have enough information in his packet in terms of the applicant's design to make that determination. Miklo said it would be a goal to provide more detail at the next meeting. In terms of conditions, Miklo said if this was a newer neighborhood and a flat piece of land, there would be no need for the conditions being discussed. The reasons for concern with this project are because of its infill nature and its topography. The sensitivities of this neighborhood present challenges that Staff feels could be ameliorated with conditions. If this was a new subdivision with some RS-5, some RS-8, and some RS-12 zoning, the conditions would not be necessary because the concern with fitting in with existing properties would not be as great. Koppes asked if Miklo would expect similar conditions to be applied to the next RS-12 that came up for the area. In terms of the next RS-12, Miklo said that each would have to be examined on a case by case basis. He said he feels that the fact that this area is next to an RM-20 does open up some possibilities for some transitional zoning. Freerks stated that there would then be an RS-12 across the street from someone and this could all result in a trickle effect of up - zoning. Miklo said he did not know if they should be speculating on the next application because any application would have to be reviewed on its own merits. Koppes said that considering the surrounding area was a part of taking an application on its own merits. Eastham said that one of the most interesting things to have come up in the meeting was the idea that the people of this area are intending to sit down and think about what they want in terms of redevelopment and for neighborhood stabilization. Freerks said she was not sure that the resident had discussed redevelopment. Eastham said he would certainly be interested to see what the neighborhood came up with. Freerks said that she considered that plan to be the Southwest District Plan in many ways, as there was a great deal of community investment in that document. Weitzel stated that his discomfort in rezoning came in part from the fact that there was a lot of planning and effort that was involved in creating the Southwest District Plan, and into the zoning code that was amended since that time. Weitzel said he would be more comfortable if there was a neighborhood meeting to find out if the neighborhood in general was in favor of townhouses, before doing anything that would result in revisions to the intentions of plan. Weitzel said he has no problem with redeveloping the property but that attached property comes along with a rezoning to an RS-12. Miklo noted that it would be possible to condition RS-12 to detached houses only, although he did not know that there would be any merit to doing that in this case. Freerks asked if that condition would then be applied to the whole neighborhood and, if so, how does that fit in with the whole Southwest District Plan, which calls for stabilizing existing housing stock. She stated that she had a lot of concerns here, and that if she were to tip her hand she would have to say that she did not see how this would necessarily work out in terms of rezoning. Miklo asked if there was any particular information the Commission would like Staff or the applicant to bring to the next meeting. Weitzel stated that the plan was very preliminary and it was subsequently difficult to make judgments on some of the details. However, he could say that for him open space was still a problem, as was the scale of the units, driveway access and parking. If units had to be removed to address these issues, Weitzel said, then the Commission would need to ensure that happened. Koppes asked Miklo to provide the Commission with the minutes from the last rezoning to occur on Michael Street. Freerks stated that there had been a motion and a second for deferral and asked if further discussion was needed prior to a vote. No further discussion was requested. The motion to defer carried on a 6-0 vote. Planning and Zoning Commission July 17, 2008 - Formal Page 12 CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: June 30 and July 3, 2008: Koppes moved to approve the minutes. Weitzel seconded. The motion carried 6-0. OTHER: Miklo introduced Christina Kuecker, a new staff member who started full-time in May. Kuecker will be working half time with the Historic Preservation Commission and half time on Planning and Zoning issues. Kuecker has Bachelor of Architecture from Iowa State University and a Master's in Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Iowa. Busard announced that he had to travel for work the week of the next informal and formal meetings, August 41h and 7th ADJOURNMENT: Weitzel motioned to adjourn. Koppes seconded. All voted in favor of adjournment, 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. c 0 .N N E E 0 U7E c 0 E r o N �o 08 C N 'c m C � tv a a U O X X x X X X ti OX X X x X 02 X X X X X X ; Xxxo i i x o X X X X X X X i xxx LU o i X X xxxxxo W ; ; M X' x X X X X x ' � I N X X X X X x 0 i m 0 ! XXXXX 0 i N T X! X X X X LU X Nj Orr M N O CO r M F- W O O O O O O O O O E ca Y c C a) G> O�sE'm .0 E mppWW. eIL 0 03: z CO�tUQuJ�OF-F- XXXo'o wW ; ; x M ; XXXXX X xXXx X (Do 04 o x x x x x ;X ; Xxxxxx N O i X X X W O w O X ; N X x X X W O W O W O ; I E T O r r M N O co r M ` ,� r 000000000 r r r r r O r r F-W :Y C L O Q. 3 C C Gs O O L taw V! fA d L O R t _ E EmmwLLYa<ncn zoo-;(idui36F=I..: