Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-18-2013 Planning and Zoning CommissionPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Monday, April 15, 2013 — 5:15 PM Informal Meeting Iowa City City Hall Helling Conference Room 410 E. Washington Street Thursday, April 18, 2013 - 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Iowa City City Hall Emma J. Harvat Hall 410 E. Washington Street AGENDA: A. Call to Order 10-311111011MI C. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda D. Rezoning Item REZ13-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by Rockne Cole; Jon Fogarty and Mark McCallum for a rezoning from Public (P-1) zone to Central Business Support (CB-5) zone for approximately 0.38- acres of property located at the northeast corner of Gilbert and College Streets. (45 day limitation period: April 18, 2013) E. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: April 1 and April 4, 2013 F. Election of Officers G. Discussion of Work Program H. Other I. Adjournment Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings Formal Meetings: May 2 / May 16 / June 61 June 20 Informal Meetings: Scheduled as needed. r ® CITY OF IO11 A CITY Date: April 12, 2013 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Department of Planning and Community Development Re: REZ13-00009, Request for rezoning from P, Public to CB-5, Central Business Support Zone, northeast corner of College Street and Gilbert Street This memorandum is to address questions from the Planning and Zoning Commission at its April 4, 2013 meeting. How does the Comprehensive Plan address downtown historic buildings? The current Comprehensive Plan refers to the Historic Preservation Plan. The #1 objective in the Historic Preservation Plan for the Downtown District is to emphasize the improvement of key historic buildings. The #2 objective is to encourage fagade improvements for intact, adjoining buildings especially those along S Clinton St, S Dubuque St, and Washington St east of Clinton St (the City recently implemented a grant program to help fund fagade and other building improvements). Other goals include designating qualifying buildings as historic landmarks, supporting a downtown manager and Self Supporting Municipal Improvement District (implemented in 2012), encouraging building fagade renovation on Iowa Ave in front of the Old Capitol, and preparing a separate historic preservation commercial plan. Downtown has several designated historic landmark properties, but is neither a historic district nor a conservation district. The emphasis has been on protecting and designating specific structures, while allowing for infill redevelopment on non -historic properties. There are several examples of taller buildings adjacent to designated historic structures, such as Ecumenical Towers adjacent to the Old Post Office (currently the Senior Center), Plaza Towers near the old Carnegie Library and the Sheraton Hotel next to the College Block Building at 125 E. College Street. Similarly, the downtown plan section of the Riverfront Crossings Plan states: • New development should be located on sites which do not contain historic buildings • Corner locations should be reserved for taller buildings There has been some discussion of the fact that the subject property at the northeast corner of College Street & Gilbert Street was not included in the downtown plan section of the Riverfront Crossings Plan, but is in the Downtown Planning District of the Comprehensive Plan. This was due to time and resources constraints. The Riverfront Crossings Plan states that: The plan is simply a vision, highlighting certain areas. The decision to redevelop is ultimately up to the property owner. Likewise, any areas not shown as redeveloped could have ideas implemented. April 12, 2013 Page 2 How does the Comprehensive Plan address transitional areas between downtown and near -downtown areas? The Comprehensive Plan states the City should preserve the integrity of existing neighborhoods and the historic nature of older neighborhoods by supporting Historic Preservation goals. Appropriately, the City has implemented numerous historic districts and conservation districts in near -downtown neighborhoods, most recently the Jefferson Street Historic District. Much of the east -side and north -side neighborhoods are designated as either a historic or conservation district. There is little mention in the Comprehensive Plan regarding prescribed methods for transition areas between downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. The emphasis has been on historic preservation and conservation districts for qualifying neighborhoods, which have been implemented for many years. To the east of the subject property is additional publically zoned property with a public parking facility, and CB-2 zoning which continues the transition to the east near Johnson Street where there is RM-12 (Low Density Multi -Family) and RNS-20 (Neighborhood Stabilization Multi -Family) Zoning. The College Hill Historic and Conservation Districts begin approximately 600 feet east of the subject property. In the proposed Comprehensive Plan, two areas are noted in the text of introductory section - one located to the east of Gilbert Street and north of Burlington Street; the other located north of Iowa Avenue and west of Dubuque Street. The text states that while both areas have the potential to redevelop at higher densities due to their proximity to the Downtown and University, both should comply with policies and goals of the Central District Plan in order to ensure quality design and appropriate transitions to the lower -density residential neighborhoods that border them. It is recommended a process be initiated to address how these areas develop over time. The reason for staffs suggesting that these areas be considered for inclusion in the Central Planning District is that developments in the Downtown District are not automatically subject to a design review process, whereas in the Central Planning District multi -family buildings are subject to design review. Which Comprehensive Plan should the Commission consider when reviewing zoning I development proposals in this area? The current Comprehensive Plan and the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan are adopted, and it is appropriate to utilize them when considering zoning and development proposals. Neither of these documents address this property specifically (nor does the Comprehensive Plan address many properties specifically — it is a broad plan), but do have policy and narrative statements that would support downtown zoning on this property. Higher density development is encouraged in the Downtown Planning District; taller buildings on corner lots which are not occupied by historic structures are supported in the Riverfront Crossings Downtown Plan; mixed -use development which adds to the mix of uses downtown is supported in both documents. In staffs view, CB-10 zoning on the property at the northeast corner of College St / Gilbert St is better able to deliver these goals. The Commission should also certainly consider the proposed Comprehensive Plan update, but keep in mind that it has not been adopted and has the potential to undergo revisions as it is April 12, 2013 Page 3 considered by the City Council. As noted above there is a transition in place given the zoning pattern of P zoning transitioning to CB-2 and then RM-12 zoning to the east. Zoning History Questions were asked about the zoning history of the subject property and about the drafting of the CB-5 zoning district. Prior to 1983 the property was zone Commercial (C2). In 1983 the City adopted a new zoning code with new zoning classifications, including the Public (P) zone intended for properties owned by government entities. The property was zoned P at that time. The zoning code was amended in 1992 to include the Central Business Support CB-5 zone. CB-5 was drafted to encourage the implementation the Near Southside Redevelopment Plan. The plan applied to the area south of Burlington Street, west of Gilbert Street, north of the Iowa Interstate Railway tracks and east of the river (generally the northern portion of Riverfront Crossings). When first adopted the CB-5 zone had a height limit of 65 feet. This height limit was based on the height of the Capitol House Apartments, which at the time was the tallest building in the area south of Burlington Street. In 1994 the height limit was increase to 75 feet to allow taller floor to ceiling height necessary for commercial uses, which were encouraged by the Near Southside Plan. Building Height At the April 4 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, there was much discussion of a 20- story building being proposed. Both 16-story and 20-story options were presented to the City Council. The specific height of the building is and will be the subject of a development agreement negotiation between the City and the selected developer. In these discussions, the developer has agreed the building will not be a 20-story building. If the property is to be zoned CB-10 in the future it may be subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement that limits building height. At this point, the question before the Commission is whether the property should remain zoned P, Public or be rezoned to CB-5. Staff recommends the property remains zoned P, Public until such time there is a development plan for the property, to be considered in association with a CB-10 zoning application. April 9, 2013 To: Members, Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission From: Joy Smith and David Rust We write to add our voices to those urging you to support CB-5 zoning for the public parcel at the northeast corner of College and Gilbert Street. We take the redevelopment of downtown Iowa City very seriously. We have lived in the Northside and Goosetown neighborhoods for the last twenty-eight years. We own a commercial building in Northside Market Place. We dine, recreate, and shop primarily in downtown Iowa City. We participated in community discussions to develop the city's comprehensive plan and the proposed amendments to the plan. We contributed to that effort with the understanding that the document would guide city planners, boards, commissions and councilors. At the P&Z meeting on April 4 many members of the community clearly articulated why CB-5 zoning is most consistent with the comprehensive plan and why zoning for an orderly transition between the downtown district and the neighborhoods to the east and north is so important. Others who spoke at the meeting implied that community members who oppose CB-10 zoning on this parcel are a fringe minority of misguided individuals. We disagree. In this debate, as in most community conflicts, it is those with the greatest vested interest who are most likely to speak -out. Among community members who are "silent," there are many who share concerns about the proposed Chauncey Project. They depend on the zoning process to take the long view, plan for orderly development, and protect the interests of citizens and neighborhoods. A vote for CB — 5 zoning will be consistent with the comprehensive plan, will respect the interests of those whose property adjoins this parcel, and will return this matter to the city council for additional consideration. CITY OF 1 O WA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: April 12, 2013 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner Re: Planning and Zoning Commission Work Program — Establish Priorities We have completed several items on the Commission's work program as noted below. We would like to discuss potential additions and establishing priorities for the remaining items on the list. If you there are addition items that you would like to be considered, please be prepared to discuss them at the informal meeting on April 15. Planning and Zoning Commission Work Program 1. Comprehensive Plan Update (Completed) 2. Complete Riverfront Crossings Plan (Completed) 3. Review of CB-10 zone requirements including setbacks and height limits. 4. Draft Urban Mixed Use Zone for Riverfront Crossings, Towncrest and other areas. 5. Review RM-44 Zone (Complete) and neighborhood stabilization issues — includes review of private dorms, open space, setbacks and backyard paving. 6. Revise nonconforming situations regulations to create a trigger point for bringing properties into compliance with site development standards based on the value of the improvements being made to the property (Completed) 7. Add bonus provisions for CB-10 Zone to allow FAR to exceed 10 (Completed) 8. Review woodland buffer requirements (Completed) 9. Review Comprehensive Plan land use map for properties on Governor Street north of Happy Hollow Park (Completed) 10. Draft entryway overlay zone or standards for properties at the major entrances to the city 11. Research prohibiting or limiting residential development in the flood hazard area 12. Review Comprehensive Plan land use map for Roosevelt School. 13. Review 500 foot separation of bars in outlying areas. (added by City Council) 14. Amendments to CI-1 and CC-2 zones (added by staff) Additional items for consideration: Examine parking standards and policies in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings (parking impact fees, minimum parking requirements) Clean-up the standards for the PRIM Zone that have become obsolete with the recent amendments to the MF density standards. Amend sign code to allow canopy roof signs in more locations and adjust standards for projecting signs Comprehensive Plan implementation PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 1 — 5:15 PM — INFORMAL EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Stewart Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Phoebe Martin, Paula Swygard, John Thomas, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: Anne Freerks STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, John Yapp, Sarah Walz, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. Rezoning Item REZ13-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by Rockne Cole, Jon Fogarty and Mark McCallum for a rezoning from Public (P-1) zone to Central Business Support (CB-5) zone for approximately 0.38-acres of property located at the northeast corner of Gilbert and College Streets. Yapp explained to the Commission that he helped coordinate the Request for Proposals (RFPs) for the City for the subject property, and because of his familiarity with that project, he prepared the staff report. He said that the subject property is currently zoned Public (P) and owned by the City. He said the RFP process resulted in nine development proposals, which were culled down to three finalists before the Council chose The Chauncey. He said Planning Is currently in negotiations for a development agreement with the developer and had anticipated applying for a rezoning to Central Business (CB-10) once that agreement was largely accepted. He said the main distinction between the Central Business Support (CB-5) and CB-10 zone is height limitation. Yapp explained that for the CB-5 zone the limit is seventy-five feet, which is approximately a six story building, while the CB-10 zone does not have a strict height limitation, but does have a Planning and Zoning Commission April 1, 2013 - Informal Page 2 of 7 floor to area ratio requirement of ten or up to fifteen with bonus provisions. He explained what the zones were immediately bordering the subject property. Yapp said in evaluating this application to CB-5, staff's conclusion was that the subject property has characteristics which would make it appropriate for CB-5 or CB-10. He explained all the characteristics that are written into the Comprehensive Plan and the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Plan that made it appropriate for the CB-10 zoning. Yapp said staff recommendation is to recommend against CB-5 zoning with the eventual goal of applying for CB-10 zoning. Eastham asked if Yapp could expand upon the idea that there is a functional transition here that would actually accomplish whatever transition areas are supposed to accomplish. Yapp said he thinks of a transition area as stepping down in zoning and intensity from a higher intensity area to a lower one. He said staff looked at the fact that an existing 475 space parking facility is to the east of the subject property and there's additional Central Business Service (CB-2) zoning to the east side of that parking ramp and to the east side of Van Buren Street for the transition from the residential zone to the east. Eastham said he understands what zones are there and said what he wants to know is the purpose of a transition zone and how either the CB-5 or the CB-10 zoning accomplish that purpose. He asked if the sole measure of transition zoning is that there's some other zoning on each side of it. Greenwood Hektoen said she thinks that's a good question for Thursday because many people are interested in that discussion. Eastham said he thinks that the other aspect at play here is that the recently adopted Riverfront Crossing/Downtown Development Plan talks about at some length about preserving historic buildings. He says from this staff report it seems to say that the only strategies necessary to preserve our historic buildings is that they are not redeveloped. He said there might be other things that affect whether or not a historic building is able to functionally maintain itself as a historic building. He asked Yapp to comment on that, particularly since there is a historic building directly to the west of the subject property. Swygard said the staff report talks about the shadow effect, focusing on the park. She said it mentions that shadow studies were done. She said would like to see the shadow studies that were done on surrounding buildings. Yapp said shadow studies were done on the three final proposals that Council considered. Martin asked upon which buildings they considered the shadow affects. Yapp said the impetus for that was on Trinity Church. Swygard asked if any of the studies were directed to the east. Yapp said they were. Swygard asked to have that information made available to the Commission. Thomas said they don't have any information on what the shadow affects would be of a CB-5 building. He said he would like to see what the effects of a CB-5 building would be. He said the shadow affects were studied at the minimum and maximum elevations of the seasons, the winter and summer, and he would like to see it at the midpoint because there's wide variation in terms of sun elevation throughout the year. He said what they are seeing from the existing studies are the two extremes from during the year. Yapp said the City does not have the technology to develop shadow studies. Thomas said that given how important this project is, they need to have that information. Swygard said if the argument for or against any proposal is the shadow affect, she feels she needs more information. Eastham concurred with Swygard's statement. Weitzel asked if there was a fourth person interested in this kind of study. Dyer said she is. Planning and Zoning Commission April 1, 2013 - Informal Page 3 of 7 Thomas proposed starting at 7:00 a.m. and continuing the study at 10:00 a.m., 1:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. Yapp said the studies he has did 7:00 a.m., 9:00 a.m., 11:00 a.m., 1:00 p.m., 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. Thomas said that would be fine. He asked for a bigger picture of the subject transition zone. Swygard said she wants to see the residential zones from the east from the parking ramp marked out clearly. Thomas said in the staff report there is a mention of the properties in the Downtown Planning District and his understanding is with the update, Iowa City 2030, there is a discussion of having a redevelopment plan for study done, with whatever that comes out of that being folded into the Central District Plan. Miklo explained that the reason staff suggested that those areas might be added to the Central District is that the Downtown District does not automatically require design review for multi- family infill buildings. Therefore staff suggested that the areas that are not currently covered by the Downtown Plan or the Central District Plan be added to the Central District to assure design review. Eastham asked if the Commission is going to look at the design of the proposed building at College and Gilbert Streets. Miklo replied that if this comes back before the Commission as a CB-10 zone, those are conditions that can be considered with the possibility of a Conditional Zoning Agreement. Eastham said he would like staff's comments about why we are doing anything with zoning in those areas now when the overall plan is to have a more detailed study about what to do with zoning in those areas. Miklo said staff's concerns are that these areas are likely to develop without any sort of guidelines. In the case of the subject property it is zoned P but the City has determined that it is not needed for City purposes and there was interest from private developers so that the decision was made to handle the property through the RFP process. Eastham asked what the Commission's role is with this application. Greenwood Hektoen said they would consider whether the zoning request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as they would do with any other zoning request. Eastham asked if he had to consider the Council's RFP. Greenwood Hektoen said he would. Thomas said he would like to know what the building height is on the Gilbert Street side, so he will have an idea what seventy-five feet would mean on Gilbert Street. Eastham said he would appreciate staff's comments on any other areas where CB-10 zoning occurs other than in the Central Business District, and he would like that to be noted in the staff report. Thomas said he wants to bring in any information from the Riverfront Crossings Plan that speaks to the question of building height. He said that would pertain to development standards or the recommended building heights with the proposed development. He said he thinks that ties to the concept of transition. Eastham said he is struggling with the notion of the recently established Riverfront Crossings Planning and Zoning Commission April 1, 2013 - Informal Page 4 of 7 and Downtown Districts and the emphasis in those locations for much more dense uses in higher buildings and how planning for uses in those are superseded by or complementary to the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown District Plan. He wants to know how those recent planning efforts fit in with the current situation at Gilbert and College Streets. Thomas said he wants to know how this plan for a twenty story building reflects the more general thrust of the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Plan as being in a more southern direction. He said he's not aware of any discussion that the CB-10 character should be moving east. Swygard said that in going over map after map it's obvious as mentioned in the staff report, that the downtown is bordered on Gilbert Street. Miklo explained that the CB-10 zone has traditionally been the Center Business District zone, and that stops at Gilbert Street. He said the Downtown District for planning purposes extends further east, north and south. He said the CB- 2, CB-5 and CB-10 zones are all downtown zones. Dyer wants to know why the City has a Planning and Zoning Commission or why this doesn't come here first. Miklo asked if she is asking in terms of the RFP. She said she was, and dealing with rezoning after the decision has already been made that what's going to be there is going to be in that zone. Greenwood Hektoen said it hasn't been rezoned yet, so it's still a question for the Commission to consider and for Council to consider. Thomas said the Ryan proposal could be used as an example of a CB-5 building for the shadow study. He said he would like to see the Fall and Spring equinox in the shadow study. Comprehensive Plan Item Public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to adopt an update to Iowa City's Comprehensive Plan: "Iowa City 2030." Walz said they have made some changes to this Plan based on feedback at the last meeting, and she handed out the changes to the Commission. She explained that she is adding Hazard Mitigation Risks to a sidebar that lists all the components of the Comprehensive Plan. She said in response to Eastham's request she had eliminated the word "lure" in two places. She said she had added a brief statement after public safety and how that's part of good neighborhood planning. She explained how she has strengthened the portion regarding continuing to track, measure and reduce energy consumption and greenhouse emissions. She said that in her research she found no derogatory connotations to the term "workforce housing". She said she could only find the term "workforce" in the economic development section of the plan and it did not refer to housing but developing the workforce. Planning and Zoning Commission April 1, 2013 - Informal Page 5 of 7 Walz said there has been a call from both the Commission and some people in the community for more concrete steps and measures regarding achieving sustainability. She said once Brenda Nations has completed her report the City will have clear measures of where we are and what is possible, and as a result of that assessment the City can set clear goals and steps to attain sustainability. She said the things that lead to sustainability are already written into City Code, things like walkability, complete streets in every subdivision, and the use of mass transit. She said commercial development is spread throughout the city so there is access for the neighborhoods. Thomas said he thought the walkability is the best indicator of all sorts of measures. He said that we do need to measure the goals set forth in the Plan. Eastham said that measuring lets them know what is actually happening, even if it not what the Plan calls for, but they have to know whether it is or isn't happening. Walz said that is what Nations is doing at present. Thomas said having the measures may promote cooperation between agencies. He said we are all one community and these things do all fold together in establishing quality of life. He said measuring gives them a better idea of where they need to focus. Eastham said he is not satisfied with a part of the Plan that designates the College/Gilbert Street parcel for Commercial Development within the new Plan. Miklo said the reason for the change is that the Council has decided that the property is going to be sold. Miklo said three blocks, with the exception of the subject corner, are shown as Public. Eastham said the borders on the east side are shown as mixed uses. Miklo said that is based on the previous Comprehensive Plan which was based on the uses that are there. Eastham said perhaps he should note that Commercial doesn't mean CB-10. Development Item SUB13-00007: Discussion of an application submitted by S&J Development for a preliminary plat of Country Club Estates 4-7 Additions, a 67-lot, 51.08 acre residential subdivision located west of Lake Shore Drive. Miklo explained that this application has expired, as all preliminary plats do after two years. He said there haven't been significant changes in zoning regulations since this application expired for this part of the city. He said the plan before the Commission is almost the same plan that was approved before. He showed the Commission the changes that were made. He explained that the reasons for the staff's concerns are that the corner lot will have streets on three sides, which isn't very desirable, and another house has a street in front and in back of it. He said the subdivision Codes try to discourage that. Staff is recommending approval of this application. OTHER ADJOURNMENT: Swygard moved to adjourn. Thomas seconded. Planning and Zoning Commission April 1, 2013 - Informal Page 6 of 7 The meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 vote. Z O W N_ O U 0 Z Z N 06 0 Z_ Z Z J a 0 O C9 U z W W w LU CW.) N m Z N J � Q N Z O W L H L H Q N X X X X X X X M I.- 0 LIJ X X X X X X 04 X X X X X X N O N X X X X X X X n X X X X X X X co X X X X X X X 4 X X X O X X X w X X X X X X X 00XXXXXXX m oXXXXXwX O oXXXXXXX (XXXXXXD � XXXXXXD m0XXX0 0 m IXXXXXXX r- �XXXXXXD cn w(D(D co r Lo Lo co F X o 0 0 0 0 0 0 W W_ J w J z m J 2 Q w Q a.O 2 0 U 2 adNJ zQQw N mwcnww�0F Q� 2 W Q� Q d ZD W U-20 C9 z F w w J Q O LL z X X 0 X X X X M X X X X X X X N X X X X X X X 0 X X X X X X N X X X X 0 X X M N X X X X X X X oOXXXXXO c,OXOXXXco I X X X X X Xco D O ^XXXXOXD 00 CDOXXXXOO ZtXXXXXXX CIO XXXXXXX N �w(O (OMI�In InM F X o o o o o o o W W J z W CO 7 J 0 2 U Q= w Q LL 2 O v=�?QQNw WD'FW w00� Q� Q d Q 2 W ZD WLL'mini- a U E LU Q_<< XoW O Y PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 4 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Anne Freerks, Phoebe Martin, Paula Swygard, John Thomas, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, John Yapp, Sarah Walz, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: Rockne Cole, Mark McCallum, Jon Fogarty, Nancy Quellhorst, Louise Young, Mary Gravitt, Josh Schamber, Diane Machatka, Peter Jordet, Erik Gidal, Elizabeth Michael, Amanda Van Horne, Paul Hanley, Alan Swanson, Regenia Bailey, Bill Nusser, Jan Palmer, Elsie Gauley Vega, Dhyana Kaufman, Ann Christenson, Sonia Ebbinger, George Etre, Tim Connery, Philip Kemp, Perry Lenz, Nancy Adams Cogan, Eric Johnson, Linda Fisher, Nancy Carlson, Mary Murphy. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to adopt an update to Iowa City's Comprehensive Plan: "Iowa City 2030." The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of SUB13-00007 an application submitted by S&J Development for a preliminary plat of Country Club Estates 4-7 Additions, a 67-lot, 51.08 acre residential subdivision located west of Lake Shore Drive. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. Rezoning Item REZ13-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by Rockne Cole, Jon Fogarty and Mark McCallum for a rezoning from Public (P-1) zone to Central Business Support (CB-5) zone for approximately 0.38-acres of property located at the northeast corner of Gilbert and College Streets. Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 2 of 15 Yapp explained that the property is currently owned by the City, is zoned Public (P) and is in the Downtown Planning District. He showed a view of the property, and, at the request of the Commission, showed a large view of the zoning patterns in this part of the city. He said in staff's opinion the zoning does step down in density as the zoning pattern moves east from this property. He said that the Riverfront Crossings/Downtown Plan, while not specifically including this parcel, does state that corner lots should be reserved for taller buildings and that new development should be focused on lots that do not contain historic buildings and that mixed use developments should be encouraged. He said that the current Comprehensive Plan states that higher density development in the Downtown reduces pressure on the less dense surrounding neighborhoods. He said the property has many characteristics consistent with either Central Business Support (CB-5) or Central Business (CB-10) zoning as outlined in the staff report. He said the site is close to arterial streets and several public buildings. Yapp said staff feels that the property has several elements that make it more appropriate for CB-10 zoning than for CB-5 zoning: the adjacency to existing CB-10 zoning; it is on a corner lot and adjacent to a 475 space, 24 hour parking facility; CB-10 is more consistent with the larger strategy of promoting a pedestrian -oriented downtown; the ability to add more to the mix of destinations and residences downtown; and the ability to deliver a mixed use development, which is emphasized in the Downtown Plan. Yapp said they were able to mock up a shadow study, at the Commission's request, for a generic CB-5 building. He showed shadow studies for both that and The Chauncey. He showed the studies for various times of day and at the highest and lowest points of the sun during the year. He said in staff's opinion the shadows are similar. He showed other months and times for both buildings. Yapp said that staff recommends denial of the request from the applicants. He said staff feels that a CB-10 zoning is more appropriate given the characteristics of the property. He said staff intends to apply for CB-10 zoning when an agreement to transfer to private ownership is more imminent. He said until that time, staff feels that it's appropriate that the property remain zoned Public (P). Eastham asked Yapp if he is correct in that there is more of a shadow effect for a two -hundred than a one -hundred foot building on the Trinity Church property to the west. Yapp said that all other things being equal, he would agree. He said that the he believes the setback of the upper floor of the building make a difference. Eastham asked if there is some way to measure or to assess the effect of the shadowing from either building on either the Trinity property or the park to the north. He asked if there being a shadow would be a problem. Greenwood-Hektoen said she thought that was a subjective question that's difficult for staff to answer. Thomas asked when the CB-5 and CB-2 zonings were developed and how the building heights and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) standards for those zones were developed. Miklo said the CB-2 zone was put in place in 1985 and allowed ten -story buildings at that time. He said reforms in 2005 reduced the height limit to four stories. He said the CB-5 was developed in the early 1990s as a way of encouraging redevelopment south of Burlington Street and east of downtown. Thomas asked if the two aforementioned zones were developed at the same time as the CB-10 zone. Miklo said the CB-10 zone has been in place since at least 1983. Freerks asked if CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10 zonings have all had a number of changes. Miklo said Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 3 of 15 the only significant changes to the CB-10 zone have been some design guidelines for storefronts and some requirements for parking for residential uses. He said he doesn't think the CB-5 has changed significantly. He said the CB-2 zone had the change in height requirements. Thomas asked why seventy-five feet was set as the height limit for the CB-5 zone. Miklo said he would have to look at the files to get that information. Freerks asked if there are bonus points available in CB-5 zone. Miklo said there are and the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) can go up to five with streetscaping improvements and masonry construction. Freerks asked if there are any height restrictions in the CB-10 zone or if it's all about lot area. Miklo said in zone has a maximum FAR of ten, but you can get a higher FAR by including things the City wants to promote, such as Class A office space. Swygard asked if this is in the Downtown District in the current Comprehensive Plan. Yapp said it is. Swygard asked if in "IC 2030" it will remain in that district. Miklo said the draft document indicates that that the area between Gilbert Street and College Green Park needs further study and depending on that study may be added to the Central Planning District. Eastham said that in the staff report it says that reducing development pressures on surrounding near downtown neighborhood is one of the rationales that staff uses to support CB- 10 zoning for this parcel as opposed to CB-5. He asked if staff is going to propose additional CB-10 zoning to the east or north of the current proposal. Yapp said staff is not contemplating additional CB-10 zoning in that area, however, the downtown section of the recently adopted Riverfront Crossings Plan does state that underutilized properties, corner lots and non -historic properties are appropriate for higher density development. Thomas asked why the staff reported that the main distinction between CB-5 and CB-10 zoning is the building height. He said the two aspects that differentiate the two zones are building height and Floor Area Ratio (FAR), so he's not clear why Yapp said the main distinction is building height. Yapp responded it's because the two are related in that the higher the FAR, the taller the building can be. Thomas asked if the shadow study they did on a generic six story building was for the entire footprint of the building. Yapp said they had a setback on the upper floors. Thomas argued that the FAR in the two zones is different. Yapp agreed. Eastham referred again to the statement about reducing the development pressures on surrounding near downtown neighborhoods. He said he thought the gist of what they had been doing the last several years to address that issue has been trying to reduce the number of short- term renter occupants in those neighborhoods. Miklo said they have been undertaking other measures to reduce pressures. Eastham said the proposed use of this parcel under CB-10 zoning would do that, unless staff is recommending that some of the residents in the proposed building are used for short-term student occupancy. Miklo said it's not just about student housing. He said the City's efforts have been to channel the demands for space to areas that don't have historic buildings on them. Freerks opened public hearing. Rockne Cole of 1607 East Court Street said that the Comprehensive Plan is a document that the Commission is sworn to uphold. He said what the Iowa Coalition Against the Shadow is asking the Commission to do is to follow and uphold this document that citizens have spent countless hours developing as they determined what kind of city we want to become. He said Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 4 of 15 their application for CB-5 zoning complies with the Comprehensive Plan in every way. He said negotiations are underway, and it is still to be determined if the City will give away thirteen million taxpayer dollars. He said the applicants' request boils down to determining the appropriateness of CB-5 zoning for this parcel. Cole read from the City Code that says: The purpose of the height limitation is to promote 1. Reasonable building scale and relationship between buildings 2. To provide options for light, air and privacy 3. To prevent buildings that visually dominate other buildings in the vicinity. He said the proposed development will be higher than any other development in the city by at least six stories, and it will tower over all other developments in the community. He said the community believes this area should be transitional. He said the purpose of CB-5 zoning is to provide orderly transition from the Central Business District. He asked under what definition of orderly is the very first expansion of CB-10 as a twenty -story building. He said that's not orderly, it's not in scale, and it's a violation of the public trust. He said the applicants want the Commission to grant the application and put it in the hands of the City Council, who were the ones who did not first consult this Commission or determine if the community would uphold this. He said the applicants and the coalition support higher density that's environmentally sustainable for business expansion. He said what the applicants are asking is that the very first expansion from the Central Business District is not the highest building in the 170 year history of this community. Greenwood Hektoen clarified that there is no developers' agreement for this site, so the building height has yet to be determined. She said Council has indicated that they would anticipate CB- 10 zoning there. Mark McCullum of 1610 Crescent Street asked what zoning this lot was prior to the City's ownership. Miklo said staff would research that and report back to the Commission. McCullum said he participated in the Zoning Code rewrite in 2005 where they got lots of feedback from the citizens indicating that the subject area was a transition area. He said when the City studied this area for the Code rewrite, the result was a downzoning, not an up zoning. He asked if there is an intention to rezone all public spaces in the area to CB-10. Yapp said there was not. McCullum said he had been hearing that the Recreation Center, which covers an entire city block, is in play before this is all over. He said if they start expanding the CB-10 zone, what's to keep other buildings in CB-5 zones and CB-2 zones from asking for a CB-10 rezoning. He suggested that everyone view the city from College Green Park and look at what's happening to that area and they'll see how the city is moving eastward towards the park. He said this is the first of many steps that he would call a slippery slope in why the CB-5 zone makes so much sense as a transition zone. He said the applicants are for development, but would like to use East Village in Des Moines or McQuillen Place in Charles City as models where there can be reasonable transitional development that also expands the tax base. Jon Fogarty of 1111 Church Street said in retrospect, if City Council had been doing their homework, they would have rezoned this before they put out the Request for Proposals (RFP) and the community would be discussing this map long before time and expense were put into proposals. He said if you had asked citizens what size building should be put on that site; he doesn't think many would say it should be the tallest building in town. He said the historic neighborhood adjacent to this proposed building is only two stories high. He said he can't imagine many people recommending going from five, to twenty to two stories all within a block. Fogarty said the vision that is being put forth is myopic and doesn't take into account the rest of that property. He said if they stick to the Comprehensive Plan and go south of Burlington and the proposed building is as wonderful as is being touted, it's going to be a magnet for Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 5 of 15 development as downtown moves south of Burlington in accordance with all the planning that has been done. He said if they are going to not go south of Burlington and spot zone this and make a giant wart in the midst of CB-5 and CB-2 buildings, they might as well go all out and bulldoze everything on three blocks from the Recreation Center to United Action for Youth, sell it all for lots of money and be ready to zone it CB-10, do CB-5 all around it and watch the encroachment into College Street. He said if the building is as good as advertised, it will be a magnet for other density, and that's why it belongs in another part of the city. He said there have recently been a number of great buildings in that neighborhood fall to the wrecking ball and be redeveloped, and that is the future of the neighborhood if this one property is spot zoned. He said then everyone from the Credit Union to United Action for Youth and others could then ask for higher density zoning if this one building is spot zoned. He said when talking about vision, let's not just look at this small subject parcel of land, but think about the vision for the entire neighborhood and downtown and stand by our Plan. Nancy Quellhorst of the Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce said she supports the retention of Public zoning with the hope that this property will at some point be zoned CB-10. She said CB-10 would better align with Smart Growth strategies, which include dense urban areas, enable walkability, and boost the local economy, and create an environment that feels safe. She said most importantly it could bring a real vibrancy to our area. She said CB-10 will allow for a critical mass of the workforce housing with office space and ground level activity that will best utilize this unique parcel. Louise Young of 320 E. Washington Street said that this zoning should never be moved to CB- 10. She emphatically stated that a twenty story building does not belong in this part of town, and it's inconsiderate of someone to put that building up when so many other buildings are affected by the shadow it creates. She said she belongs to Trinity, and they use the sun and the ground to go green on their heating and electricity. She said a smaller building that makes use of the green methods of conserving electricity would be much better suited to that site. She said the people at Trinity are very puzzled why the Council did not choose the one proposal that did fit the bill. Mary Gravitt of 2714 Wayne Street said Gilbert and College Street is only an approach to the downtown area so that twenty story building is completely inappropriate and would create a canyon. She said City Council has gone insane and thinks this town is Los Angeles or Paris or New York. She says putting a twenty story building there looks very suspicious, as it may forebode a move toward Linn Street, and building its brothers and sisters. She said she doesn't want to see Iowa City overextend itself when we are what we are. Josh Schamber, president of the Iowa City and Coralville Area Convention and Visitors' Bureau said they have been pleased by the transparent and inclusive process of staff and City Council. He said they are pleased with the cinema and bowling alleys that are proposed as they will bring more community residents into the downtown area. He said they are pleased by having another hotel and workforce housing. He said he believes that the developer will work to develop a project that a majority of the community can be proud of. Diane Machatka of 406 Reno Street disclosed that she works in the University of Iowa Planning Department but she does not speak on behalf of the University and her comments do not represent any University position. She said she supports development on this corner and the City's goals for this development. She said, however, she doesn't think it's safe to assume that just because something is outside the border of a neighborhood it's not really going to have a negative impact. She said we have a responsibility to make sure that historic neighborhoods and historic properties are not diminished by new development. She said the blockjust east of Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 6 of 15 the subject site is zoned CB-2, and all the other boundaries on the CB-10 zone that are not public are zoned CB-5, which then steps down to CB-2 or CC-2. She said this is the only location in town where a CB-10 area is bordered by CB-2, and to say that going directly from what could be a twenty story building to a half block wide of CB-2 and then directly into a residential historic district does not constitute a reasonable transition. Peter Jordet, a student at the University said he believes the CB-5 zone achieves just as well if not better what the CB-10 zone could achieve. He said the infill that has occurred so far in the adjacent CB-10 zone is lower height buildings that fit into what is already there and the CB-5 zone would insure that trend continues near downtown. He said CB-5 would make a better transition area. He said much of the Riverfront Crossings area will be zoned CB-10 and near downtown, so if the subject property were to be zoned CB-10 it would only marginally improve walkability or increase the amount that will be here in the future looking at the entire picture of what's going to happen to the city. Erik Gidal of 328 Brown Street said he thinks City Council and City Staff as well as many people who are interested in downtown commerce are collectively losing their minds when they think about building a twenty story building. He said this building would be a monumental disaster for the downtown of the city. He said this is a matter of intervention among friends, and he is asking the Commission to step in preemptively and zone this CB-5 as a message that there needs to be a limit to the kind of development that's going on and a sense that City Council really needs to rethink this. Elizabeth Michael of 2801 Highway 6 E. said when she read about how the decision came about in choosing the proposed building she decided that the fix was in. She said other people talked to her and were similarly outraged and suspicious. She said it may be that the building City Council chose may be the best building, but the process by which it was chosen does not inspire confidence. She said before City Council is able to move ahead with the process she wants them to use the criteria that they established to decide if this is truly the best choice. Amanda Van Horne said she is the Junior Warden at Trinity Episcopal Church and is speaking for CB-5 zoning on behalf of the congregation and vestry. She said they think that CB-5 zoning would result in a development that's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, maintains the viability of their congregation, and provides for the welfare of all citizens. She said the Commission has a responsibility to be the gatekeeper of the Plan, insuring that everyone, including the City, abides by the Comprehensive Plan. She said the ways Trinity uses their property are limited by the parking and space constraints that come with their decision to remain downtown. She said they fear that increased pressure on parking, which may result from CB-10 zoning, would limit their economic viability. She said if limited parking causes people to go to other churches or causes them to alter church activities, they may no longer be a viable congregation and may be forced to abandon a historic building that they treasure. Van Horne said Trinity has long been an advocate of affordable housing. She said high rise construction limits who can afford to use the building. She said that buildings taller than seventy- five feet are required to meet the building codes for high-rise construction, meaning increased construction costs and higher rents that will limit the ability of low and moderate income individuals and non-profit entities to use the space. She said given the public investment via the TIF, it should be insured that the building is open for use by tenants of both modest and extravagant means. She said CB-5 would limit the height of the building and therefore limit construction costs, allowing the building to be more accessible to the general public. She said they are urging the Commission to decide for a building scale that respects the City's own plan for the neighborhood. Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 7 of 15 Paul Hanley of 518 Meadow Street said he taught Urban Planning, and he thinks it is premature for the applicants to be asking for a change in the zoning. He said he believes a higher density belongs on this side of Burlington Street. He said he doesn't think a rezoning to CB-5 will relieve the concern of the shadow affecting Trinity Church. Alan Swanson of 930 Foster Road said CB-10 zoning indicates a city moving forward, not stuck in neutral when it comes to an exciting urban future. He said this building is a beacon of progressive thinking. He said he sees the offerings of this building as a great addition to help top off the complement of arts that the city offers. He said as a realtor he knows that young and aging populations want to live downtown. He said we are no longer a small town, but rather an international city. Regenia Baily of 310 Reno Street said it's rare when a public space is turned into commercial land. She said this is the community's land, and they should seek the highest return on it, and CB-10 makes that possible. She said to deal with the growth pattern of Iowa City; it makes sense to look into increasing the density where there already is the infrastructure. She said development like this takes the pressure off our older neighborhoods. She said CB-10 offers the most possibilities of the vision of bringing people downtown and it supports the vibrant and active community downtown. She said she would hate to see this rare opportunity squandered by keeping things short. Bill Nusser, owner of Hand's Jewelers, said that we need responsible development that will increase the chances of sustainability and survival for commercial business owners downtown. He said that the Moen project offers that. He said he frequently hears that people want to live downtown, and that opportunity doesn't exist right now. He said he thinks this project offers a more stable type of resident as opposed to all the student housing that is in the downtown area. He said he thinks this is exactly what the town needs exactly where we need it. Jan Palmer of 814 Bowery Street said the genius of Iowa City is that it does not read as a city, offering a rich cosmopolitan environment with the warmth and hospitality of a large town. She said if they don't destroy it, this unique blend of elements may prove over time to be Iowa City's civic asset. She compared Iowa City to Madison, Wisconsin, a city, not a town, which has maintained a strict height limit on its buildings. She said a seventy-five foot limit seems entirely appropriate for this location. She said anything larger would be out of scale and significantly obstruct the view of downtown from neighborhoods to the east. She said the CB-5 zoning would help assure that growth can be accommodated while protecting the essential nature of the community. Elsie Gauley Vega of 320 E. Washington Street said that a tall building just across from a historic property is too close. She said just because the site is on a corner, it doesn't seem to be calling for a tower. She said it's an insult to Trinity Episcopal Church, which just completed a project on their building to provide more service to people. She said we are called Iowa City but we are really a town. She said build the tall buildings in Riverfront Crossings instead of in a residential district. She said the apartments in the proposed building would be too expensive for the working class. Dhyana Kaufman of 422 Wales Street said this site is just not the right place for a twenty -story building. She said this is public land, held in trust by the City, and she doesn't feel there has been enough genuine public discussion about what should be put on this site. She said she feels that staff and City Council had this grand vision for what should go here, but they missed the piece about talking to the community. She said a lot of people are passionate about the Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 8 of 15 character and nature of this town. She said because this is public land, the community needs to hold the commission to higher standard for expectation of how it is used. She said this should go back to City Council for more public hearings. She said this is indeed a rare opportunity to make a space that is special and is really for the whole community, and could still be a magnet. She said this is more about return on the dollar. Ann Christenson of 827 Dearborn said she has a Masters in Urban Studies. She said a building of twenty -stories is entirely inappropriate for that site. She said she thinks there are more appropriate opportunities for a building of this type in the Riverfront Crossings area. She asked why the City isn't pursuing the plan they already have for high rises in that area. She said this building on the proposed site would obscure the view of Old Capital, our most recognizable image. She asked why the City is giving so much TIF money to a project that should be able to stand on its own. She said tax payer money should not go into it at the level it's being offered. Sonia Ebbinger suggested we wait until the Park 2001 has been completed to see what the shadow is like with this fourteen story building. She said the apartments in these high rises are too expensive for the working people. She said this is a charming town, and we shouldn't make it bigger than human, and she thinks these big buildings in the downtown are going to make it lose its humanity. She said if Gilbert Street and College Street are going to have both more residential and visitor traffic spilling out onto them, it's going to get overloaded with both drivers and pedestrians. George Etre, a downtown business owner, said he is excited by the proposed development. He said projects like this only help the vibrancy of downtown. Tim Connery said he believes that the strong economic environment in Iowa City was fostered by the ability for responsible developers such as The Moen Group to proceed with projects such as the proposed one. He said he thinks we shouldn't be afraid of this project. He said it is what is needed to attract young professionals to the city. Philip Kemp said he is speaking on behalf of Trinity Episcopal Church as a vestry member and wants to emphasize that this is a historic decision that should be taken in context with what may happen next. He said the Commission is setting a precedent here. He said if they recommend CB-10 zoning they are opening a door to other CB-10 development moving to the east. He cited an example in a section of London that was glutted with high rises that have not turned out to fulfill the hopes and dreams of their planners and builders. He said we have to think about environmental sustainability, and the carbon footprint of the proposed building may be quite extensive in terms of light, energy and people commuting in by car. He said Trinity was getting LEEDS certification on its building when they redeveloped it in 2009. He said if the proposed building without any height restriction goes ahead, that will increase Trinity's costs of lighting and heating and possibly cause them to relocate. Freerks called for a five minute break, after which the meeting was called to order and public hearing continued. Perry Lenz of 113 Post Road said his concerns with a CB-10 zone is the traffic or parking problems that could be created. He said with the character of the neighborhood, CB-5 zoning would be more appropriate. Nancy Adams Cogan of 1117 St. Clements Alley read a poem about light on College Street and beyond that indicated her concern about light, the sky and the views of Iowa City if high rises start proliferating. Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 9 of 15 Eric Johnson of Oxford said it is conceivable that the proposed building could be the seventh tallest one in Iowa in a transitional zone. He said the proposed building, only one story lower than the Alliant Tower in Cedar Rapids, is entirely out of place in the proposed location. Linda Fisher from Coralville said she likes Moen's ideas very much, but he may be able to find another place for this proposed building that won't pull the community apart. She said she has faith in him to do that. Mary Gravitt said she had issues with the pejorative connotations of the term "workforce housing." She argued that there was nothing transparent about the City Council's selection of that twenty -story building. She said Trinity Church made their improvements on their own and didn't get any TIF money. Louise Young said she and the people at Trinity are in favor of responsible development. She said it not responsible to build multiple skyscrapers in this town, particularly in a transitional area. She said the decision needs to be made carefully and prayerfully. She then said a prayer. Nancy Carlson of 1002 E. Jefferson Street said from attending Planning and Zoning Commission meetings for over twenty years, she has come to realize that one of the major arguments that's always used by staff is that the subject area is already zoned a designation, so why not expand it a little, with disregard to the area around it. She said she is frustrated by the fact that the rest of the buildings in the CB-10 zone across from the proposed development are of CB-5 character. She reminded the Commission that every time a developer has tried to up zone an area they have told the Commission that if they don't do this it will be to the detriment of the city. She argued that it would instead be a detriment to them, not to the city. She said the City has turned down many of these projects, and she asked as a result if the city has suffered or moved forward in a way that is better for all the citizens of the community. Bill Nusser said he was happy that the shadow effect between a CB-5 and CB-10 building appeared to be negligible. He said the people downtown have a concern that a CB-5 designation would bring more of what we have now, and it's inexpensive student housing, and they don't think anyone could build anything other than that in a CB-5 zone. Amanda Van Horne said she is again speaking on behalf of Trinity Church as an entity. She argued that if a setback was included in shadow study for a CB-5 building, the shadow effect could possibly not affect Trinity as intensely. She said even if there isn't much of a shadow on Trinity after 9:00 a.m., two of the Sunday morning services and four weekday services are held before 9:00 a.m. She pointed out that all the units proposed for workforce housing would be one or two -bedroom units and the rents would be between $1100 and $2500 if it conforms to the workforce housing restrictions. She said this is not affordable for those who are classified as "workforce." She said it's been put forth that increased density downtown would improve walkability. She said it might improve walkability for the people who live downtown but many people drive from outlying areas and need to park to access the areas that are public spaces. She said having a movie theatre and hotel that have varying capacities would influence the ability of people to access the downtown. She cited instances of church members being adversely affected by the safety issues of ice created by the shadow effect, parking and more traffic. Paul Hanley reminded the Commission that the decision on the petition is to change from P-1 to CB-5 zoning. He said it's not making a comparison between CB-5 and CB-10, and that's an argument for another day. Planning and Zoning Commission April 4, 2013 - Formal Page 10 of 15 Freerks said she feels like the Commission might not want to decide on this application tonight. Cole asked if the Commission needs other information or facts. Freerks said if the Commission doesn't feel confident making a vote, sometimes they will just deny the application, and she wants to give this the opportunity to have thought and consideration. She said she's going to have to think about it more. Cole said given that this decision will have implications for potentially one -hundred years and potentially involve tens of millions of dollars of taxpayer money as well as private development, the applicants will waive the 45 day limitation period. Freerks closed public hearing. Thomas moved to defer until April 18, 2013 REZ13-00009 an application submitted by Rockne Cole, Jon Fogarty and Mark McCallum for a rezoning from Public (P-1) zone to Central Business Support (CB-5) zone for approximately 0.38-acres of property located at the northeast corner of Gilbert and College Streets. Eastham seconded the motion. Thomas said a great deal of thought has gone into this on the part of the community, and it's a major decision for the Commission. He said he's looking forward to reflecting on the comments he's heard today. Eastham said the issues that he will be interested in at the next meeting will probably be protection of historic structures as called for in the Riverfront Crossings/Downtown Master Plan and the Comprehensive Plan. He said he's interested in the staff's further discussion about how that protection is actually supposed to occur. He said he is not clear on what a transition zone meant to accomplish and how to insure that purpose is actually accomplished. Martin said this is a question of zoning, not a building, so she needs to separate the two issues. Swygard said for her it's a zoning issue, and it's not about the buildings but she appreciates the input, because the types of issues the public hearing has brought forth, like height and light, are important for her to hear. Freerks said her hope will be that whatever occurs in this area in the future will be something that strengthens this area and doesn't break it apart. She said the Commission has a lot to think about. She said she can understand why it's an area keen for development. She said it's close to a lovely area to the east, but that want to keep that area lovely. She said Trinity has put a lot of work and money into part of the downtown, and they want them to stay downtown. She says she feels that the building and the zone are intertwined in some ways. She said in her mind, it would be nice if what is being negotiated right now weren't twenty stories, and she's not sure how putting the tallest building in Iowa City in a transitional zone achieves transition. Dyer said she doesn't think the Commission can consider this as only a zoning question. She said if they think of it as a zoning question, she is really troubled by this being another example of the City deciding to approve something and then coming to the Commission to see if they can have the zone. She said it's supposed to work the other way around. She said she is persuaded by the light argument because of a personal instance when her house lost its passive solar capacity by a three story building on the adjacent lot. She said light matters. Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 11 of 15 Eastham said formally, this is an application to rezone a parcel of land. He said his responsibility as he understands it is to consider that application in light of the current Comprehensive Plan applicable to that parcel, which is the Vision 2000 Plan. He said that they are currently in the process of recommending a revision of that Plan which has basically a call to study this and other parcels. He said he would like the staff to help him work his way through what Plan he should be applying to this and without regard to whatever action the Council has taken. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Freerks called for a five minute break, after which the meeting was called to order Comprehensive Plan Item Public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to adopt an update to Iowa City's Comprehensive Plan: "Iowa City 2030." Walz pointed out the changes that have been made to various portions, including Hazard Mitigation, Economic Development, Environmental, and Arts and Culture. She reminded the Commission that the issue of setting specific goals and measures for sustainability will be published in the Iowa City Sustainability Assessment that should be coming forth in the next few months from Brenda Nation's office. She said she will add some language to the background section of the Code just to call people's attention to that assessment, and that will be the City's opportunity to set very specific, measurable goals for sustainability. Eastham asked if those goals will be applicable to private developments in the city. Walz said some of them will. Freerks opened public hearing Mary Murphy of Parkview Terrace said she has seen some deterioration in Iowa City. She complained about pan handlers and petty theft being less than helpful in attracting people to the city. She said many people with children that she knows have moved out of the city. She said she would like to see the "Iowa City 2030" Plan be truly evaluated to see if it is competitive with neighboring areas. She said there is a bias in this plan that does not favor families like hers. She said she would have liked to have seen the staff ask the community what they didn't like about Iowa City, which is just as important as what they like. Murphy said the comments of the people on McCollister Court were ignored, and they will now have high density housing behind their single family homes. She said not everyone wants to live at certain points in their lives in a mixed neighborhood, and she thinks the Plan needs to respect consumer choice more. She doesn't like the Plan's emphasis on shallow front yards or that it discourages cul de sacs, and driveways in front yards because these are all elements that affect a family with children. She said there's no reason why they should cram as much housing as possible into Iowa City, despite its limited tax base. She said she doesn't agree that there's an increased demand for higher density urban housing. She said workforce housing needs to be better defined in the plan. She said there needs to be more choices for aging people in the community. She said the Plan should think about whether commercial on the first floor is an idea that should continue, as some of those retail areas don't look that well patronized. Murphy said she likes the focus on the environment, but Iowa City is subsidizing a flood gate in Coralville and some of the University. She said that's bad public policy because it encourages Planning and Zoning Commission April4, 2013 - Formal Page 12 of 15 people to build in a flood plain. Freerks closed public hearing. Weitzel moved to recommend approval of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to adopt an update to Iowa City's Comprehensive Plan: "Iowa City 2030." Eastham seconded. Eastham said the only major objection he has to what is before the Commission now is the land use map, which shows the property at the corner of Gilbert and College Streets for commercial development. He said his purpose is trying to avoid confusion about what they are doing with this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for that parcel. He asked about showing the property as mixed use. Miklo said they have generally shown downtown and other major commercial areas as general commercial, which allows for mixed use. He said at this point staff would advise continuing with the Plan as drafted. Freerks said it does become an island if you show it as mixed use, and she doesn't know if she has a better answer to the dilemma than Eastham has. Eastham asked if in the staff's opinion if this land use scenario map is adopted is there any reason why the Commission could not approve zoning for CB-5 on that parcel. Miklo said he doesn't believe so because CB-5 and CB-10 are both commercial zones. He said adoption of this map doesn't compel the Commission to deny the CB-5 zone. Freerks said she would agree with that. Swygard said this update and the Riverfront Crossings/Downtown Plan project a lot of growth, and she said that could create a lot of strain on City resources if they don't keep up with the growth that is happening fairly quickly. She said in the Fire Department's strategic plan 2016 they list as one of their threats city growth outpacing department growth. Freerks said she sees that happening in Parks as well. Miklo said it will be decades before Riverfront Crossings builds out. He said the Plan doesn't make the growth happen, but it provides a plan that it can fit into. Swygard said with the buildings going higher, there may be additional training needed for fire fighters. Eastham said that Thomas had suggested that at some point they incorporate into the Comprehensive Plan a list of actual, measurable goals which gives indication of progress over a period of years. He said he supports doing that. Thomas said there's lots of good language in the update, but his concern is that in looking at plans from twenty years ago, there has been mixed success in meeting the goals and strategies, and measurability is a way of tracking that. He said he thinks it's important to come up with an action plan. Miklo said a good model of that might be the Historic Preservation Plan, which the Historic PreservationCommission meets on annually to review and plan progress. Dyer said there should be some goals and then an annual report on the progress of the goals and whether they need to be modified. Martin said this update is a lot of good work and still something of a work in progress. She recognized that it is not going to be everything to every person. She had questions about how you measure a goal. Freerks said she thinks goals are how you do it with limited time and resources. Planning and Zoning Commission April 4, 2013 - Formal Page 13 of 15 Eastham said there were comments earlier about honoring consumer choice, especially in housing type and location, and although that's an important thing to keep in mind, he also has to bear in mind that his responsibility is to the entire community. He said developers don't necessarily have the same inclination as he does all the time. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Development Item SUB13-00007: Discussion of an application submitted by S&J Development for a preliminary plat of Country Club Estates 4-7 Additions, a 67-lot, 51.08 acre residential subdivision located west of Lake Shore Drive. Miklo said he received a revised plat and the technical deficiencies have been corrected. He said the two double fronting lots have been combined into one, so staff is recommending approval. He reminded the Commission that this is basically the same plan that was approved in 2009. He said one of the concerns was connectivity to Melrose Avenue. Miklo said in the long term a collector street is anticipated in the vicinity of Slothower Road connecting Melrose to the Country Club subdivision and eventually Rohret Road. Freerks opened public hearing. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham moved to recommend approval of SUB13-00007 an application submitted by S&J Development for a preliminary plat of Country Club Estates 4-7 Additions, a 67-lot, 51.08 acre residential subdivision located west of Lake Shore Drive. Swygard seconded. Freerks said this complied with the Comprehensive Plan previously, there have been very few changes, and it still complies with the Plan. Eastham agreed with Freerks' remarks. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: March 21, 2013 Eastham moved to adopt the minutes of March 21 with minor corrections. Martin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. OTHER Planning and Zoning Commission April 4, 2013 - Formal Page 14 of 15 ADJOURNMENT: Thomas moved to adjourn. Eastham seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 7-0 vote. Z O W N_ O U 0 Z Z N 06 0 Z_ Z Z J a D O C9 U z W W w LU CW.) N m Z N J CD C Q N Z O W L H L H Q �XXXXXXX N X X X X X X X M CO0 X X X X X X N X X X X X 0 X N X X X X X X X —I X X X X X X X co X X X X X X X co N X X X LLI O X X X w �XXXXXXX �XXXXXXX 00 oXXXXXwX Q a X X X X X X X se XXXXXXD � XXXXXXD co co6XXXOXD m �XXXXXXX cn F X o 0 0 0 0 0 0 W W_ J w cc J z m J 2 Q w Q a. 2 0 U 2 O LLNJ w z QQW W = w — N mwcnww�0F W Q>-Qd'Q m z 0 W LL m2 0 F3: C9 z ww w J Q O LL z X X 0 X X X X M X X X X X X X N X X X X X X X 0 X X X X X X N X X X X 0 X X co N X X X X X X X oOXXXXXO c,OXOXXXco �XXXXXXD O ^XXXXOXD �OXXXXOO CDXXXXXXX Cl) XXXXXXX a N gw(o(oMr- LoLo F X o o o o o o o W W J z W CO 7 J 0 2 U Q w 2 Q LL 2 O v=�?QQNw w wcnw � � F Q w Q� w XW ZD WLLdM,Q 01-3: a U E LU Q_<< XoW O Y