HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-16-2013 Planning and Zoning CommissionPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, May 16, 2013 - 7:00 PM
Formal Meeting
Iowa City City Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
410 E. Washington Street
AGENDA:
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
D. Comprehensive Plan / Rezoning Item
1. A public hearing of an application submitted by John Hieronymus to amend the Comprehensive
Plan - Southeast District Plan to change the land use designation from multi -family to
commercial for property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Muscatine Avenue
and Scott Boulevard.
2. Discussion of an application submitted by John Hieronymus for a rezoning of a total of 5.95-
acres of land located north of Muscatine Avenue, west of Scott Boulevard, 2.23-acres from Low
Density Single -Family (RS-5) zone to Low Density Multi -Family (RM-12) zone, 0.85-acres from
Low Density Single -Family (RS-5) zone to Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) zone and 2.87-
acres from to Low Density Multi -Family (RM-12) zone to Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1)
zone. (CPA13-00002/ REZ13-00012)
E. Rezoning Item
Discussion of an application submitted by Jeff Miller Construction for a rezoning of 1.05-acres of
land located on First Avenue, north of Rochester Avenue from Low Density Multi -Family (RM-
12) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multi -Family (OPD/RM-12) zone.
(REZ13-00004)
F. Code Amendment
G. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: May 2, 2013
H. Other
I. Adjournment
Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings
Formal: May 16 / June 6 / June 20 / July 18
Informal'. Scheduled as needed.
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Item: REZ13-00012 and CPA13-00002
GENERAL INFORMATION:
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Sarah Walz and Andrew Bassman,
Planning Intern
Date: May 16 2013
Applicant: John Hieronymus
3322 Muscatine Avenue
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
j.hieronymus@mchsi.com
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
File Date:
45 Day Limitation Period:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the
future land -use designation from Multi -family to
Commercial for approx. 3,72 acres at the northwest
corner of Muscatine Avenue and Scott Boulevard,
and rezone the site from RM-12 and RS-5 to CN-1,
and rezone approx. 2.23 acres adjacent to the north
from RS-5 to RM-12
Development of a gas station/convenience store and
three 4-plex buildings multi -family buildings
Northwest corner of the intersection of Muscatine
Avenue and Scott Boulevard
5.95 acres
Undeveloped (RS-5, RM-12)
North: public (P-1)
South: residential (RS-5)
East: residential (RS-5 pending rezoning to RM-12)
West: residential (RS-5)
Southeast District Plan: Multi -family and low -to -
medium density single-family or duplex
April 11, 2013
May 26, 2013
The applicant, John Hieronymus, has requested a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change
the Southeast District Plan future land -use map from Multi -family to Commercial for the northwest
corner of Scott Boulevard and Muscatine Avenue. The applicant has also requested a rezoning
from Low -Density Multi -Family residential (RM-12) and Low -Density Single -Family residential (RS-
5) to Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) for approximately 3.72 acres of property located at the
northwest corner of the intersection of Scott Boulevard and Muscatine Avenue and a rezoning
from RS-5 to RM-12 of approximately 2,23 acres of property located immediately to the north on
Terrence Lane. The applicant has indicated that the purpose of the amendments is to allow the
construction of a gas/station convenience store at the Muscatine Avenue -Scott Boulevard
intersection and three 4-plex buildings on the property immediately to the north. In addition to a
Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning, the gas station will require approval of a Special
Exception by the Board of Adjustment.
The property located at the Muscatine Avenue -Scott Boulevard intersection was rezoned from
RS-5 to RM-12 in January 2011. The rezoning was subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement,
which specified that the applicant would install a sidewalk on the north side of Muscatine Avenue
from Juniper Drive to Scott Boulevard, and that the applicant would build multi -family units (up to
23 townhouse style units) on the property as proposed on the submitted site plan —any substantial
changes would require approval by the Staff Design Review Committee.
A final plat for Terra Verde subdivision was approved for the subject property and property to the
west in April 2011. The approved plat includes 3 multi -family lots (in the same vicinity of the
proposed commercial zone) and 19 single-family lots as shown on the attached plat. If the current
rezoning request is approved, then the property is likely to be replatted to show the change. The
applicant has submitted the attached concept plan showing how that might occur.
The applicant has indicated that they intend to use the "Good Neighbor Policy" and have
conducted a neighborhood meeting.
d►G I
Current and Proposed Zoning: RS-5 zoning primarily provides housing opportunities for
individual households. RS-5 zoning can feature some non-residential uses that contribute to the
livability of residential neighborhoods, such as parks, schools, religious institutions and daycare
facilities. RM-12 zoning provides for high -density, single-family housing and low -density multi-
family housing, with the goal of creating diverse housing options. In the RM-12 zoning, the variety
of housing types requires careful attention to site and building design to ensure compatibility with
surrounding housing. No commercial uses are allowed in the RS-5 or RM-12 zone.
The purpose of the Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) zone is "to promote a unified grouping of
small-scale retail sales and personal service uses in a neighborhood shopping area; encourage
neighborhood shopping areas that are conveniently located and that primarily serve nearby
residential neighborhoods; promote pedestrian -oriented development at an intensity level that is
compatible with the surrounding residential areas, and promote principles of site design, building
articulation, scale and proportion that are typical of traditional main street design. Allowed uses
are restricted in size to promote smaller, neighborhood serving businesses and to limit adverse
impacts on nearby residential areas."
The applicant is proposing a Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) rezoning in order to allow a gas
station/convenience store. The Zoning Code categorizes these uses Quick Vehicle Servicing,
which is permitted by special exception only. Sales -Oriented is considered a provisional use in the
CN-1 zone and is limited to 2,400 square feet of gross floor area. The CN-1 zone restricts the
size of allowed uses to limit adverse impacts on nearby residential uses.
Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The Southeast District Plan's future land -use map
(2011) designates the property at the northwest corner of Muscatine Avenue and Scott
Boulevard as appropriate for multi -family residential uses, similar to the three other corner
properties at the Muscatine Avenue -Scott Boulevard intersection (the southwest corner is
depicted as single-family residential). Commercial areas within the district are shown in
Sycamore Mall and First Avenue, along Scott Boulevard and north of Highway Six and
PCD%Staff Rep0r151re213-00012 and spa13-00002 staff report doc
3
Towncrest. A small Neighborhood Commercial area is designated for the far -east boundary of
the district at the intersection of Court Street and Taft Avenue.
The Comprehensive Plan calls for focusing commercial development in defined commercial
centers, including small-scale neighborhood commercial centers. In addition to commercial
centers shown in the Southeast District Plan, established commercial centers serving east Iowa
City are located at the intersection of Court Street and Scott Boulevard (approximately'/2 mile
north of the subject property) and Rochester Avenue and Scott Boulevard.
The applicant has indicated that a CN-1 zone at this location would be appropriate given that it
is the intersection of two arterial streets and based on the Neighborhood Design Concepts
included in the Comprehensive Plan. The Neighborhood Design Concepts describe
Neighborhood Commercial areas as "providing a focal point and gathering place for the
neighborhood. The businesses within a neighborhood commercial center should provide
shopping opportunities within convenient walking distance for residents in the immediate area.
The design of the neighborhood commercial center should have a pedestrian orientation with
the stores placed close to the street, but with sufficient open space to allow for outdoor cafes
and patios or landscaping. Parking should be located to the rear and sides of the stores with
additional parking on the street." In staff's opinion a stand -a -lone convenience store with
several gas pumps is not what the Comprehensive Plan envisions for Neighborhood
Commercial areas.
Staff believes the neighborhoods in east Iowa City are already well -served by existing
commercially zoned property and there has been no substantive change in conditions to
warrant a change in the Southeast District Plan Map for a commercial zone in this area. The
submitted site plan for the proposed CN-1 zone shows commercial development that is out of
scale and character with the definition for Neighborhood Commercial zone and does not meet
the intent of a Neighborhood Commercial Area, envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. The
proposed plan is the sort of large-scale gas station/convenience store that is characteristic
along highways and within much larger commercial areas. The commercial building shown on
the site plan is nearly double the size allowed as a provisional use in the code and includes
none of the pedestrian -oriented or open gathering space amenities envisioned in the
Comprehensive Plan. It would essentially be an intensive auto -oriented use located in
residential neighborhood.
The Neighborhood Design Concepts of the Comprehensive Plan (Pages 21-25) indicate that
intersections of collector and arterial streets are appropriate for multi -family zoning and that
these buildings should be of a similar height and appearance to the surrounding single-family
homes. In general, multi -family zoning is encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan where it has
access to arterial streets and city services such as transit and parks.
The Southeast District Plan future land -use map shows the 2.23-acre property to the north as
suitable for low- to medium -density single-family or duplex development. The Southeast District
Plan and Comprehensive Plan include the goal of creating a variety of housing options. For
these reasons, staff believes the proposal to rezone this property to RM-12 for development of
townhouses would be compatible with the Comprehensive Plan.
Compatibility with neighborhood: Low -density single-family residential zoning exists to the
south, east and north of the site of the proposed gas station (City Council is now considering a
rezoning request for the property at the northeast corner of Scott Boulevard and American
Legion Road to RM-12). At the time of the 2011 rezoning, staff found the plans for multi -family
housing at the site of the proposed gas station to be compatible with the nearby area. For the
current application, staff believes the request to rezone the 2.23-acre property to the north to
RM-12 may also be appropriate depending on the outcome of the proposed commercial zoning
PC01Staff Report.V.,13-0D012 antl cpa13 OD002 staff report.d.
13
and the redesign of the previously approved Terra Verde Subdivision. The applicant has
submitted a concept plan for the townhouse -style multi -family development, which staff believes
to be compatible with the future single-family uses planned to the west. However the proposed
multi -family development will need to be considered in the context of what will be developed on
the south side of the proposed Silver Lane. If the commercial zoning is approved there will
need to be some sort of screening provided to buffer the residential from the commercial
directly the south. If the area to the south is developed with multi -family buildings, according to
the current zoning, then site layout of the two multi -family areas will need to be coordinated.
Staff believes that the proposed rezoning to CN-1 is incompatible with the residential
neighborhood for the following reasons:
The establishment of a use as intensive as the proposed gas station/convenience
store in such close proximity to residential uses would generate additional noise, traffic
and light that would, in Staff's view, adversely impact nearby residential property. This
is of significant concern given the high visibility of the property at the topographic peak
of Scott Boulevard and Muscatine Boulevard. The grade of the property will make it
difficult to screen lighting and signs typically associated with convenience stores.
• As stated above, the Neighborhood Design Concepts in the Comprehensive Plan
describe Neighborhood Commercial areas as "providing a focal point and gathering
place for the neighborhood." The applicant has proposed a gas station/convenience
store of an intensity, scale, and design that is more typical in the Highway Commercial
zone. In staff's opinion it would not be in keeping with the described character or scale of
the CNA zone or the Neighborhood Design Concepts in the Comprehensive Plan.
Traffic implications: The proposed commercial zone is at the intersection of two arterial
streets that carry approximately 6,000 to 8,100 vehicles per day. The proposed convenience
store is not likely to create a significant contribution to traffic on Muscatine Avenue and Scott
Boulevard, but the number of turning movements into and out the subject property will increase
considerably when compared to the previously approved residential development on this
property. As proposed the convenience store driveway to Muscatine Avenue is too close to the
intersection with Scott Boulevard. If this proposal is approved the driveway would need to be
moved to the west where turning traffic would affect more residential properties.
The Southeast District Plan shows the route for Terrence Lane within the Terra Verde
subdivision as a loop street from Muscatine Avenue along the west side of the site of the
proposed gas station, serving future residential development to the north of the site of the
proposed gas station, and reconnecting to Muscatine Avenue to the west. Instead of accessing
the subdivision from Muscatine Avenue via Terrence Lane, as was originally approved with the
Terra Verde subdivision, the applicant has proposed moving the access point to Scott
Boulevard via a proposed street, Silver Lane. Staff found, after consultation with Transportation
Planners, that street access from Scott Boulevard would meet sight distance requirements and
thus be acceptable.
The proposed Silver Lane would end in a cul-de-sac, which is discouraged by subdivision
regulations unless unusual features preventing extension of the street to the property line or
connection to other streets within the subdivision can be clearly demonstrated. The plan
submitted by the applicant indicates that single-family residential lots would be arrayed around
the cul-de-sac. This layout would impede the future connection of Silver Lane to Muscatine
Avenue to the south. If the concept for the subdivision with access to Scott Boulevard proceeds,
staff recommends changing the layout in this portion of the subdivision and building Silver Lane
in a way that would allow the right-of-way to extend south from the cul-de-sac bulb to Muscatine
PCD\Staff RaportsV.s13-00012 and opa13-000C2 staff r.pc,rt do,
Avenue as is provided on the existing approved Terra Verde plat
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the request to amend the Southeast District Plan future land -use map from
Multi -family to Neighborhood Commercial and rezoning from RM-12 and RS-5 to CN-1 for
approximately 3.72 acres of property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Scott
Boulevard and Muscatine Avenue be denied.
Staff recommends deferral of the proposal to rezoning of approximately 2.23 acres of property
from RS-5 to RM-12, until a concept plan is submitted showing how it would coordinate with the
existing multi -family site plan for Terra Verde subdivision.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Previously approved final plat for Terra Verde
3. Concept plan showing how property might be replatted to allow convenience store
4. Photographs and drawings of proposed development
5. Applicant's Narrative for Comprehensive Plan Amendment
6. Correspondence
Approved by:��_
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
PC MSIaff Reponslrez1 &OD012 and cpa13 OD002 staff report. doc
o
�
N
O
o
O
�
w
J
_
_
O
�
¢M-I
V
A
a
a
U
co
N
'a10 153a0a3nll`.
O
N
O
o
�
M
N
LU
>
J
(n
J
w�yyr/r
Y.'
LU
a
w
V
K
w
(n
i
I'` //rJ
■
v
a
�
o
i
L,
�/� 1g N33a9 30V�� 1 N
DOM3ldvh
w
Fp
WN
2;
ui
9
6
Nx
Nx
S•:
N�
h
1ERRENCE LANE
U�
Syl;
rl
1(II Fd t n Ly
04
g4 LL Y
�gi�w 5 oo:00
�a:^! u C55 L,m� �bd i uE4 • fir' 931• [fiY
�xm �+xx C .vmz�uv✓. warcxinw.r,.ve �x ncr a. ,.
C5 �tii� c��b��xFn, •�v=u s=una we.. wp ivvxm» rvur.W "
T2S
7�ipG�b�1(�OO ��So7U �6bb��1
I
gyp'+raa Fa�.cra,•,�,¢•=a,°.'� E�slaer
----- ----7---T--- ---�—
N�
Z
pang<o
�
�
ay
i
s
a
—�
/ > }\\�\
®
°
;
!,!
/}
e /
%_..
u §
/\
>§
/).�
/(
Narrative for Comprehensive Plan Amendment
In connection with their rezoning request, the applicants also request that the Comprehensive
Plan be atnended to reflect a Neighborhood Commercial zoning designation for the 2.79 acre
convenience store site. The subject property is located in the center of the Southeast District at
the intersection of two arterial streets, Muscatine/American Legion Road and Scott Boulevard.
Appropriate land uses at the intersection of arterial streets includes a good mix of higher density
residential and neighborhood commercial. The establishment of smaller neighborhood
commercial. uses (convenience store) at the intersection of arterial streets is encouraged as part of
the Comprehensive Plan's Neighborhood Design Concepts. A small neighborhood commercial
site will provide shopping opportunities within convenient walking distance for the residents in
the immediate area. Lighting and signage associated with the convenience store will be located,
screened or buffered so it will not detract from nearby residential uses.
The proposed rezoning of 2.79 acres to Neighborhood Commercial is a relatively small
modification to the Comprehensive Plan, but is consistent with the land uses found at other
arterial street intersections within the Southeast District, the Court Street/Scott Boulevard
intersection and the Court Street/Taft Avenue intersection. This intersection includes a nice mix
of low density single family (SW Corner) and planned medium density residential (SE Corner).
The property immediately east of the subject property (NE Comer) is currently being rezoned to
medium density residential (RM-12). The Eastside Growth Area to the south and to the east of
the subject property will bring more residential development to the area. The resulting mixed
use development on the NW Corner of the intersection will include low to medium density,
single family residential development, low density multi -family units and a small neighborhood
commercial area (convenience store) consistent with the Southeast District Plan.
{01391488.DOCX}
1164 Hampton Court
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
May 8, 2013
Planning and Zoning commission
410 East Washington
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
RE: Muscatine Ave., west of Scott Blvd (CPA13-00012/REZ13-00012)
Dear commission members:
I am writing to express my opposition to the construction of a convenience
store across the street from my backyard. When my husband and I built our
home at 1164 Hampton court we believed that we were building in a residential
neighborhood. We believed it was a safe neighborhood where our daughters
could walk to school. We believed it was a neighborhood where it would be
quiet at night. We believed that our community of neighbors also valued the
safety and quiet of this peaceful residential neighborhood. For more than
twenty years our neighborhood has been all that we believed it would be when
we built our home here. The construction of a convenience store/gas station
across the street from our backyard will change everything. Increased traffic
and additional light will replace our quiet, peaceful nights. Late -night
business and customers passing through or hanging out will certainly replace
our sense of safety.
I do not wish to see this residential neighborhood rezoned for commercial
use.
Sincerely,
Eileen M. Kjonaas
1164 Hampton Ct.
Iowa City IA 52240
8 May 2013
Planning and Zoning Commission
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City IA 52240
RE: Muscatine Avenue, west of Scott Boulevard (CPA13-00012/REZ13-00012)
Dear Commission members:
I am writing this letter to express my opposition to this rezoning request
My wife, Eileen, and I have lived in Iowa City for forty years. I practiced optometry in the Towncrest
medical center for nearly 35 years until my retirement at the end of 2007. We carefully chose the site for
our current home across from the proposed rezoning. Our goal was to live within the community where I
worked so that I could walk to work, our children could walk to and attend Robert Lucas Elementary
school and Southeast Junior High. In short, when many of my colleagues chose to live out of the city
limits, commute to work and drive their children to school, we chose to be a part of the community where I
worked. The location we chose on Hampton Court was completely surrounded by residential zoning.
The parcel to the north of our home was rezoned in 2011 to RM-12. Although not ideal, this seemed to be
a reasonable compromise enabling the property owner to better utilize this property. Now, a new request
seems to be using the 2011 rezoning as a stepping stone to acquire commercial zoning with plans of
building a convenience store in that location. I feel that such a change will decrease our property value.
Just as importantly, it will add undesirable increases in lighting, noise, and congestion to this area which
will affect our quiet enjoyment of our home and property.
This area of Iowa City has significantly changed over the past forty years. The Towncrest area is now in
the process of revitalization with two recently renovated convenience stores. There is a commercial zone
nearby at Court Street and Scott Boulevard with a convenience store and another retail area with a
convenience store near the intersection of Highway 6 and Scott Boulevard. A commercial zone in this
proposed area could compete with the redevelopment of the Towncrest area, whereas low density multi-
family, especially if designed for age 55 plus residents, could dovetail nicely with the surrounding medical,
shopping, and senior living facilities available in the area.
It is my hope that you will decide against approval of this rezoning request and urge the developer to
move forward with plans to develop this property with the zoning changes approved in 2011. Thank you.
Sincerely,
_ a
M Is K. Klonaas%'O D p
DAVID C. & JOYCE A.STOCHL
1158 HAMPTON CT.
IOWA CITY, IA 52240
319-330-4453
david.stochl@gmail.com
May 9, 2013
Planning and Zoning Commission
410 East Washington Street
Iowa city, IA 52240
RE: Muscatine Ave., West of Scott Boulevard rezoning request (CPA 13-00012/REZ13-00012)
Dear Commission Members:
The purpose of this letter is to voice our opposition to the rezoning request CPA 13-00012/REZ13-00012
My wife and I live directly across Muscatine Ave. from the proposed rezoning site. We purchased our lot
and built our house in 1991 in an area that was zoned residential. Our house faces south and the
majority of our living space, including, the bedrooms, family room, kitchen, dining room, 3 seasons
porch and outside patio face north. We believe that rezoning the land on the north side of Muscatine
Ave. to a commercial status and building a convenience store/gas station whose size will encompass
3.72 acres will create a negative impact for us and for our neighborhood. This negative impact includes
an increase in traffic congestion, additional traffic noise, and extensive light pollution due to the fact
that the convenience store elevation will be higher than our house. A high traffic volume business with
extended hours is sure to affect the safety, quietness and family orientation of our current
neighborhood. We feel that all of these negatives will also create a decrease in our property value and
make our house less marketable in the future.
Currently our area is well served by two major grocery stores and four convenience store/gas stations.
All are located within approximately one mile to the north, south or west of the proposed rezoning site,
thus eliminating the need for an additional business of this type.
It is our hope that the Planning and Zoning Commission will deny approval of this rezoning request and
that the developer will proceed with the existing plan approved in February, 2011. Thank you.
Sincerely, S
' '. b
////ffffFFFFD++++'"'avid C. Stochl (�
Joyce I.Stochl
r
.® 1 T-Y OF 1OWA CITY
-.....__
Date: May 10", 2013
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Darian Nagle-Gamm, Traffic Engineering Planner
Re: North 15f Avenue Parcel (REZ13-00004)
We are expecting revised plans from the applicant. Depending on when they are submitted, we
may have a staff report for your Thursday, May 16t meeting. If we have not received the plans
in time for staff review prior to the meeting, we will recommend deferral.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY
MAY 2 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Anne Freerks, Phoebe Martin,
Paula Swygard, Jodie Theobold, John Thomas
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Darian Nagle -Lamm, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff Miller, James Buddenbaum, Ed Wasserman, Sue Ford, Mary
Gilbert, Judy Buddenbaum Mark Mossman, Ryan O'Leary, Mary
Knudson
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission voted 0-6 ( Eastham recused ) to recommend denial of an application
submitted by Ranshaw Limited Partnership for a rezoning of 0.69-acres of land located at
1014, 1016, 1022 Hudson Avenue in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone to amend
the conditional zoning agreement regarding access to Hudson Avenue.
The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of REZ13-00013, an application
submitted by City of Iowa City for a rezoning of 5.23-acres of land located at 515, 527, 539
Normandy Drive and 820, 822, 930 Park Road, from Low Density Single -Family (RS-5)
zone to Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone.
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.
Comprehensive Plan
Setting a public hearing for May 16, 2013 for an application submitted by John
Hieronymus to amend the Comprehensive Plan - Southeast District Plan to change the
land use designation from multi -family to commercial for property located at the
northwest corner of the intersection of Muscatine Avenue and Scott Boulevard.
Miklo explained that the Commission will receive a staff report on the proposed
Comprehensive Plan amendment and an associated rezoning in their next packet.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 2, 2013 - Formal
Page 2 of 11
Eastham moved to set a public hearing for May 16, 2013 for an application submitted
by John Hieronymus to amend the Comprehensive Plan - Southeast District Plan to
change the land use designation from multi -family to commercial for property located at
the northwest corner of the intersection of Muscatine Avenue and Scott Boulevard.
Thomas seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Rezoning Items
REZ13-00004: Discussion of an application submitted by Jeff Miller Construction for a
rezoning of 1.05-acres of land located on First Avenue, north of Rochester Avenue from
Low Density Multi -Family (RM-12) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density
Multi -Family (OPDIRM-12) zone to allow the construction of a 16-unit multi -family
building.
Miklo said this property was before the Commission last year, at which time they approved a
rezoning of the property from Low Density Single Family (RS-5) to Low Density Multi -Family
(RM-12). He said the proposed Comprehensive Plan that will be considered by City Council
shows this area as multi -family like the other properties in this vicinity. He said at the time the
Commission rezoned this property it wasn't known if the slopes on the property were steep,
critical or protected. He said now it is known that there are steep and critical slopes in the
southwest portion of the property. He said the sensitive areas part of the Ordinance requires
that if more than thirty-five percent of those slopes are to be disturbed approval of a planned
development overlay review is required by the Commission and the Council. Miklo said that this
application is solely about putting forward a specific plan to address the slope on the property.
Miklo said the currently submitted plan is very similar to the plan the Commission reviewed at
the time of rezoning. He said the building is slightly larger and longer. He said the concept plan
showed a fifteen to twenty foot setback from the south property, compared to a ten foot setback
shown on the current plan. He said the previous zoning was conditional on a twenty foot buffer
between the park and any paving or driveway activity on the site. He said staff thinks the buffer
width is worth reconsideration, particularly if it allows the building to move to the north five to ten
feet to allow more space between the proposed building and the existing building to the south.
Miklo said the slopes are such that any type of development will require a significant amount of
grading. He said the Ordinance requires review of the grading by the Commission and the
Council. He said the City Engineers have reviewed the plan and are for the most part in
agreement with the grading, however, there are some concerns about storm water management
and run-off from this property. He said they feel more work is needed in terms of how the storm
water management is handled. He said for that reason, staff is recommending that this
application be deferred until May 161h to allow the drainage calculations to be further reviewed.
He said staff asked the applicant to provide an elevation drawing showing how the retaining
walls at the front of the property would work and look in relationship to First Avenue. Because
they have not yet received that drawing this is another reason to defer the application. He said
they had received only a drawing that contained very few details.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 2, 2013 - Formal
Page 3 of 11
Freerks asked about the height of the roofline on the drawing that the applicant had sent over.
Miklo said they would get some more information about that before the next meeting. He
showed some photos of the property and the area.
Eastham asked what the Commission needs to do if they wish to move the proposed building
further north. Miklo said the Commission could condition the approval on that.
Thomas asked if there was any latitude on the setback. Miklo replied that there is a minimum
setback on the street side of forty feet, and the building is set right at forty feet. He said because
of the steep hill, there's very little latitude in moving it to the west. Thomas asked about moving
it to the east. Miklo explained that under the Sensitive Areas Ordinance you could move the
building closer to the street if that resulted in preservation of a sensitive area.
Freerks opened public hearing.
Jeff Miller, the applicant, said the plan got a little bigger just to make sure they had thirty-two
parking spots and to make the units larger and more marketable. He explained that they chose
not to do townhouses because they would require more earth moving. He indicated that
decreasing the buffer between his property and Hickory Hill Park would be a good thing to
perhaps increase the distance between the lot line and the existing property to the south. He
talked about some of the site specifics.
Jim Buddenbaum of 557 N. First Avenue said he has concerns about storm water drainage on
the subject property. He said he is opposing the application because of the sensitive areas and
the documentation the City has done since this application came before the Commission in
November 2012. He said he also objects to the building design looking like a hospital and the
way the ramp faces his building. He said he is mostly concerned about the wetland and the loss
of trees, including some oaks, and he strongly opposes the application. He said to put in a
retaining wall just to keep the building from washing away is a foolish investment.
Freerks asked Miklo to please check if there are any oak trees on the property.
Eastham asked about the run-off. Miklo said the run-off is going away from the property and
flowing towards First Avenue and the creek. He said the Public Works Department is
investigating how it will affect the street, and that is the reason this application should be
deferred to the next meeting. Eastham asked if the City has a mechanism that might ensure that
the building will survive. Miklo said they have building codes, the sensitive areas ordinance, and
the City Engineers are satisfied with the retaining wall in the back of the subject property.
Freerks asked if the sidewalk along the south side of the proposed building is the same width
throughout. Miklo said it is.
Ed Wasserman of 555 North First Avenue said the trees between his and the applicant's
property site are mature and healthy. He showed some pictures of the site and said it is
extremely steep. He said by making the building larger and moving it to the south, none of the
trees will remain. He said there would be no visual buffer for either the existing or the proposed
building. He said beyond the serious issue of water are the integrity of his building and
landscaping and the preservation of an attractive site which would be wiped out by putting the
building where it is planned. He said it's too much building for that space.
Sue Ford of 616 N. First Avenue said her concern with this project is that it is very large for the
amount of land. She said that the City's Neighborhood Planning Principles call for preserving
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 2, 2013 - Formal
Page 4 of 11
natural features in the Northeast District and preserving green, open space areas or buffers
between urban development and sensitive features such as Hickory Hill Park. She said the
drainage from the proposed site would exacerbate the chance for damage in the Park.
Eastham asked staff to provide the lot coverage ratio for the proposed development and the two
buildings immediately to the south.
Mary Gilbert of 918 Bluffwood Drive said her main concern is the way in which this unusually
difficult site will impact Hickory Hill Park. She asked if the developer had submitted a legally
binding executed option agreement for purchasing all the property. Miklo said staff will check the
file. Gilbert said she wants to know who will own this property before and after development.
Greenwood Hektoen said that zoning decisions are not typically based on who owns or who will
be occupying the space. She said they need to make sure that if a covenant is going to run with
the land, the person making representations has the authority to encumber the land. Gilbert
asked if the proposed building was going to be condominiums. Miklo said that is something the
zoning ordinance does not address.
Gilbert said she is concerned about the close proximity of the high retaining wall on the subject
site to the Regina boundary. She said if more than fifty percent of the earth on this property will
be disturbed, it makes sense to do a soil analysis to see if it can bear such a massive retaining
wall. She is concerned that moving so much earth and making more than forty percent of the
site impervious will affect Hickory Hill Park and Ralston Creek adversely.
Judy Buddenbaum of 557 N. First Avenue said the proposed building will be a burden to the lot,
to the neighborhood and to the environment.
James Buddenbaum of 557 N. First Avenue said he doesn't see how the massive retaining wall
could sustain the test of time. He said the site plan shows mature trees and is a gross
exaggeration of the reality.
Jeff Miller referred everyone to a preliminary plan that shows all the topography and inlets that
will direct all the water to a storm water drain on the lot. He said that the retaining wall will be
much lower than ten feet in height.
Eastham asked Miller to comment on the technology now in building and designing retaining
walls so there's insurance for everyone that the wall will function effectively and be preserved
for decades to come. Miller said that a structural engineer has to approve the wall design before
a building permit can be issued, and the wall will be inspected during the building process.
Thomas asked what the wall height will be where it runs along the back of the parking stalls.
Miklo said it's between four and five feet.
Freerks asked how many guest parking spaces are proposed. Miller said there are six.
Mark Mossman of 535 N. First Avenue agreed with what the previous speakers had said. He
also said building on this site will increase the traffic in the morning. Freerks asked if any of the
neighbors have seen police radar trailers on N. First Avenue since the previous Commission
meeting that addressed this application. Mossman and others said they have seen it
occasionally.
Wasserman asked what the sequence of events will be after this point. Miklo explained that this
application could be on the May 161h Planning and Zoning Commission agenda if staff receives
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 2, 2013 - Formal
Page 5 of 11
storm water management plans that satisfy the City engineers and the information they have
requested about the retaining wall, or it could be deferred to the meeting after that if the
information is not forthcoming. He explained that they have also requested a detailed
landscaping plan. Wasserman asked that serious consideration be given to the impact on the
trees that are on the subject property due to the possibly detrimental effect on the root systems
that may undermine his property.
Freerks said perhaps the Commission would agree on seeing the building moved farther to the
north, where its presence would have less of an impact on the park than it would on the building
to the south.
Wasserman asked that the elevation drawings include his building as well to compare how the
buildings will look next to each other.
Eastham said that the current Code does not require on -site storm water management, and he
asked for staff's explanation at the next meeting.
Judy Buddenbaum said they will need access to their three terraces. Greenwood Hektoen said
that would be between the two private property owners.
Freerks closed public hearing.
Eastham moved to defer this item until the meeting of May 16t"
Swygard seconded the motion.
Thomas said if they could narrow the buffer on the north to the minimum dimension that would
give more room to work with between the subject property and the one to the south. He said
that from the Johnson County GIS system, he can see that there is a mown area on the north
boundary that might be reclaimed for an even wider buffer.
Freerks asked if there were others interested in moving the building to the north. Freerks,
Eastham, Thomas and Swygard said they were.
Thomas said if the ramp on the south side were moved closer to the building that would create a
wider planting area for trees.
Martin asked if the integrity of the neighboring building and its retaining wall has been
considered.
Swygard asked if they can require a report from Miller via a structural engineer evaluating the
current retaining wall on the south property. Greenwood Hektoen said as part of the rezoning
they can't request that, but as part of the grading plan that will be done.
Eastham said he would like a comparison between the lot coverage on the proposed building
and the building to the south.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer was approved 7-0
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 2, 2013 - Formal
Page 6 of 11
REZ13-00011: Discussion of an application submitted by Ranshaw Limited Partnership
for a rezoning of 0.69-acres of land located at 1014, 1016, 1022 Hudson Avenue in the
Community Commercial (CC-2) zone to amend the conditional zoning agreement
regarding access to Hudson Avenue.
Eastham recused himself from this application because he a board member of an organization
that owns property within two -hundred feet.
Miklo explained that a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA) for the rezoning to CC-2 on the
subject property addressed the building design and vehicular access to Hudson Avenue. He
said three previous rezoning attempts failed in part due to concerns about access to Hudson
Avenue. He said that Hudson Avenue is a twenty-five foot wide residential street and has a
higher traffic volume than desirable for a residential street of this length, approximately 775
vehicle trips per day. He said there is excessive speed on the street of about thirty-three miles
per hour.
Miklo said the applicant would like to remove the stipulation of prohibition of commercial traffic
entering onto Hudson Avenue from the subject property. He said the application provides no
compelling reason why that stipulation should be removed from the CZA. He said the
Commission recently received correspondence from the applicant stating that the concern is the
interested tenants would like to have access to Hudson Avenue. He showed the Commission
pictures of the lot and the neighborhood. He said that staff is not recommending approval of
amending the CZA.
Freerks opened public hearing.
Freerks disclosed that she had had a phone call the previous evening from Ryan O'Leary. She
said they discussed traffic on Hudson Avenue, but they had no conversation about any of the
other particulars of the application.
Theobold asked if sidewalks are being installed along Hudson Avenue. Miklo said they were
being installed along the west side of the street.
Ryan O'Leary, representing the co -owners of the property, said opposition to the past rezoning
requests had a lot to do with feuding neighbors. He said they have had prospective tenants
inquire about the property who want access to the property from Hudson Avenue. He said
current standards for access points would be closer to Iowa City Landscaping's driveway, and
the applicant's proposed driveway would be further back than is required. He said the owners
feel that in order to obtain locally owned, smaller businesses they need to have ease of access.
He claims that people who live and work in this neighborhood said this access just isn't that big
of an impact on the neighborhood. He asserted that a staff member indicated that there are
other possible ways to limit access, traffic and speed in this area. He said the problem with this
street is the people who are cutting through from Highway 1 to Benton Street. He said that with
the additional access cut, the traffic speeding down Hudson Avenue will learn eventually that
there will be slow traffic exiting from the subject property and they will begin to cut through on a
different street. He said they know there will be some increased traffic on Hudson Avenue, but
they feel that some traffic calming and limiting access and discouraging fast traffic will benefit
the neighborhood.
Swygard asked if their proposed access would be further back toward the residential area.
O'Leary said the proposed access point would be fairly close to Iowa City Landscaping's second
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 2, 2013 - Formal
Page 7 of 11
access point and would be about one -hundred and twenty feet away from the residence closest
to the applicant's property line and would be shielded by a seventy foot deep building.
Theobold asked if it would be where the current curb cut is. O'Leary replied that the access
would be approximately within five feet of the Tucker's old curb cut.
Theobold asked about the prospects of making Hudson Avenue one-way. O'Leary said there
had been discussions within the neighborhood association over the years about making Hudson
one-way or a dead end street, but the City is moving away from creating one-way streets.
Swygard asked if he currently has any plans for building on this site. O'Leary said he had a
concept plan that was provided to the Commission. Swygard asked how the building would be
configured on the lot. O'Leary said a thirty to thirty-five foot distance between the existing
building and the proposed one is necessitated by the existence of an electrical substation that
requires an eight foot wide access for a truck and gas and electric lines that would have to be
relocated to have the buildings any closer. He said it would not extend past the fagade of Paul's
Discount store and would mirror the existing complex.
Freerks asked how many businesses use the current driveway onto Highway 1. O'Leary said
there are six businesses. Freerks asked how many entrances Iowa City Landscaping has.
Theobold said she works at that business and knows there to be three entrances. Greenwood
Hektoen asked Theobold what she does there and if she feels that her employment there would
be affected by her vote on this item. Theobold said she is a horticulturist, and she does not feel
that her employment is threatened. Greenwood Hektoen asked if anyone had approached her
and spoken with her about how she should vote and if she feels that she can be impartial in
considering this application. Theobold said no one had approached her, and she feels she can
be impartial.
Swygard said the drawing O'Leary showed them tonight shows room for as many as five more
occupants, and she wanted to know who has approached him and what kind of car traffic that
might generate. O'Leary said there has been interest from a medical office user, a coffee shop
interested in attracting students from nearby residences such as the Seville Apartments, and
two specific restaurant users. He said the heaviest users right now are Paul's, Hertz and the
restaurant.
Dyer asked if this proposed access would be used by any of the current occupants. O'Leary
said it would be. He said this access would make it safer for pedestrians walking through the lot
to get to their cars.
Theobold asked how the one-way traffic at Paul's was configured. O'Leary explained the
north/south patterns and which exits patrons would be likely to take depending on in what
direction they were heading out.
Mary Knudson of 725 W. Benton Street and a representative of the Miller Orchard
Neighborhood Association said they object strongly to having access from Hudson Avenue,
primarily because of the high volume of cut through traffic and because they think it will add
traffic to Hudson Avenue. She said there are already two entrances/exits on the property. She
said compared to the driveways along Riverside Drive and Highway One this is consistent to
how driveways are set up. She said she's not convinced that traffic will slow down even if
people know there would be traffic entering and exiting off Hudson Avenue.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 2, 2013 - Formal
Page 8 of 11
O'Leary asserted that higher traffic counts don't necessarily mean more noise, speed or
nuisance. He said in time people will learn not to speed down Hudson Avenue with speed
humps and with slower traffic entering and exiting from the Hudson Avenue access.
Freerks closed public hearing.
Freerks asked if there is a reason why there haven't been speed bumps placed on Hudson
Avenue. Miklo replied that as part of the Miller Orchard Neighborhood Study, traffic calming was
identified as a need in this neighborhood, and specifically on Hudson and Miller. He said for that
to proceed, the Neighborhood would have to petition the City to pursue that.
Thomas moved to recommend approval of amending the conditional zoning agreement
for 1014, 1016, and 1022 Hudson Avenue.
Martin seconded the motion.
Swygard said it will be wonderful to see that empty lot put to use. She said she thinks the
integrity of the residential neighborhood needs to be protected from the commercial because
they are close together with no buffer. She said she thinks the additional traffic will create
problems. She said it is a very narrow street with parking on one side, occupied by many
rentals, families, many of which are single family. She said she is not in favor of changing the
CZA.
Theobold said she drives that street every day, and often has to pull over and stop for oncoming
traffic, so the width of the road is an issue as well as speed. She says there are children in the
neighborhood and lots of people walk down the middle of the road on their way to the Deli Mart.
She agrees that it's nice to have something positive going into that space but as far as having
extra traffic on that street without any traffic calming would be a big safety issue.
Thomas said there's already an issue of volume and speed of traffic on both Miller and Hudson.
He said with another opening that volume would increase. He said he supports the project, and
if it's a strong, commercial neighborhood presence, it will be successful. He said he would
encourage pedestrian access from Hudson Avenue. He said if there was another access, it
would create a frontage road of sorts, with all the parking lots connecting on this side of the
street.
Freerks said she likes the design that's been brought before the Commission but volume and
speed are issues with such a narrow street. She said she thinks most of the traffic will spill out
onto Highway One and not toward Benton Street, but without calming she doesn't seeing the
proposed access happening. She doesn't see how the project and traffic calming can happen
without some more conversation with City staff. She said she hopes not having this access
won't be a hurdle to getting good tenants on the subject property. She said she can see where it
might make sense to make that cut in some instances, but only with traffic calming, because it
might be a street that people might then want to avoid.
Martin said she would feel more confident with the additional access cut if she could know what
tenants would be in the proposed site and what the traffic calming would be. She said if there
was more research done on traffic calming she would feel more confident.
Freerks agreed with what Martin had said, but said that for now she was voting to deny the
application.
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 2, 2013 - Formal
Page 9 of 11
Dyer said that this access cut would probably increase the flow of traffic from the existing
businesses.
A vote was taken and the motion failed 0-6 (Eastham recused)
Freerks told the applicant that the Commission has talked about some things they might want to
pursue, and she would like to see more development on the south side of Highway One like
this.
REZ13-00013: Discussion of an application submitted by City of Iowa City for a rezoning
of 5.23-acres of land located at 515, 527, 539 Normandy Drive and 820, 822, 930 Park
Road, from Low Density Single -Family (RS-5) zone to Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone.
Miklo said it is required by the City Code that land owned by a public entity be zoned Public. He
said these properties were bought as part of the flood buy-out program and all of the houses on
these properties have been removed with the exception of the Ned Ashton House, a historic
building that will be used for park facilities. He said staff is recommending approval of this
application.
Freerks opened public hearing
Freerks closed public hearing.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of REZ13-00013, an application submitted
by City of Iowa City for a rezoning of 5.23-acres of land located at 515, 527, 539
Normandy Drive and 820, 822, 930 Park Road, from Low Density Single -Family (RS-5)
zone to Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone.
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Discussion of Work Program
The Commission discussed work program priorities for the coming year. The issues they agreed
on were:
1. Draft Mixed Use Zones for Riverfront Crossings/Towncrest Area
2. Parking Standards for the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings
3. Neighborhood Stabilization, Private Dorms, Open Space Setback, Backyard Paving,
RNS-20 zone
4. CB-10 Standards
5. Review 500 foot separation of bars in outlying areas
6. Amendments to CI-1 and CC-2 zones
7. Clean-up standards for the PRM Zone that have become obsolete with the recent
amendments to the MF density standards
8. Amend sign code to allow canopy roof signs in more locations and adjust standards for
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 2, 2013 - Formal
Page 10 of 11
projecting signs
9. Comprehensive Plan implementation
10, Consideration of protections for Downtown historic properties
It was noted that some of the less complex items, such as numbers five and six, might be
completed prior to the higher priority projects due to the amount of research needed.
Consideration of Meeting Minutes: April 15 and April 18, 2013
Eastham moved to approve the minutes of April 15 and April 18.
Swygard seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Other
New Commissioner Jodie Theobold introduced herself.
The Commission agreed that they would like a training session and concluded that an Informal
Meeting would be the best venue for that.
ADJOURNMENT:
Martin moved to adjourn.
Swygard seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 7-0 vote.
z
O
N
N
O
U
0
z
Z
O
N
06
CD
z
Z
z
Q
J
O Z
W
r W
UCD LU
N 2
Z N J
r a
o �
z O
W LL
H
Q
LXXXXXXIX
�XXXXX
!rXX
v
i
x
X
X
X
x;
X
X
r
Nxxxxxlxx
LU
0XXXxxX
N
x
x
x
x
x
!
O
x
1,X
X
X
X
X
!
Xix
i
n
-I
r
X
X
X
X
X!
x
X
�XXXXlx
xx
�XXX0X!XX
w
Ln
XXXXXIXX
r
X
Xj
w
Xlx
, i
X
x
X
1
o
X
X
X
X
x
1
w
xi
r
O
v
oxxxxxlxx
x
x
x
x
x
1
X,
LU
wann�nnl��n
�x00000!000
w
w
J
w
J
zw
J
2
Z
w
a
LL0
m
2
O
U
Q
=
0
vi
wQ
aw
<
grw.l
arawa
o°xw
z❑
W
LL
w�
F�
(7
z
H
W
W
J
a
K
O
LL
z
LO
raXXXXXXX
Xx0><
M
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
M
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
;IX�Xxxxx
r
N
r
X
XIX
X
Lu
I
x
x
x
x
x
N
x
x
x
x
r
0
O
X
X
X
X
X
10XOXXxo
Z
X
X
X
X
x
X
0
nXXXIXOX
-
100
0XXXXO1O
V�XXXXXXX
Mlxxxx
I�
xxx
NI
w
(D
(D
C)
I--
(D
(D
M
FCL
X
N
o
N
0
LO
0
LO
0
LO
0
LO
0
Lo
0
W
w_
J
W
J
z
m
J
=V
2
Q=O2
W
a
LL
M
CL
-w
Lu
wOPwF02
F
ai
z
a
awa
wLL
0)H�:
=ul
A
A-
rkl
Pa
vml
W
r
0
0
CL
0
06