HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-18-2014 Planning and Zoning CommissionPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Iowa City City Hall
410 E. Washington Street
Work Session
6:00 PM
FAC] A 0 1 BAT
MM I UsWelTe rM
I -_m :no I Ken I I
C. Discussion of Arterial Street Planning
D. Adjournment
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Iowa City City Hall
410 E. Washington Street
Formal Meeting
7:00 PM
AGENDA:
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
D. Rezoning / Development Item
Discussion of an application submitted by Iowa City Co -Housing for a rezoning of 9.65-acres of
land located at Miller Avenue and Benton Street from Medium Density Single -Family (RS-8)
zone and Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Medium Density
Single -Family (OPD-8) zone for 7.68-acres and Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone for 1.97-acres,
and a preliminary plat of Prairie Hill, a 2-lot residential subdivision with 32 dwelling units,
(REZ13-00010/SUB13-00008)
E. Site Plan
Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Company for approval of a
site plan for 32 multi -family dwelling units on 2.19 acres located in the Low Density Multifamily
Residential (RM-12) zone at 1425 Dodge Street (intersection of Dodge Street, Conklin Lane
and Dodge Street Court).
F. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: September 4, 2014
G. Planning & Zoning Information
H. Adjournment
Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings
Formal: October 2 /October 161 November 6
Informal: Scheduled as needed.
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Item: REZ1 3-00010 & SUB1 3-00008
Prairie Hill
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Prepared by: Robert Miklo
Date: September 18, 2014
Applicant: Iowa City Co -Housing
P.O. Box 926
Iowa City, IA 52244
bibailey52@gmail.com
Phone: 319-530-4049
Requested Action: Rezoning from Medium Density Single Family
Residential (RS-8) and Public (P-1) to Planned
Development Overlay (OPD-8) and P-1 Preliminary
Plat approval.
Purpose: To allow a 32-unit co -housing (condominium)
development with shared open space and public
park land.
Location: Miller Avenue and Benton Street
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
Neighborhood Open Space District:
File Date:
45 Day Limitation Period:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
9.65 acres
Vacant, park and open space zoned RS-8 and P-1
North: Residential, Roosevelt School - RS-8 & P-1
South: Commercial - CC-2
East: Residential RS-8
West: Residential RS-8
Southwest District Plan —
family development with the
allow clustering.
September 10, 2014
October 24, 2014
medium density single
potential for an OPD to
The subject property is southwest of the intersection of Benton Street and Miller Avenue.
Currently the property is vacant. The surrounding area consists of residential homes varying from
single family to apartments. The Theodore Roosevelt Education Center (former Roosevelt
Elementary School) is located to the north. Commercial areas are located to the south of the
2
property along Highway 1
The applicant, Iowa City Co -Housing, is requesting a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family
Residential (RS-8) and Public (P-1) to Planned Development Overlay (OPD-8) for 7.68 acres and
P-1 for 1.97 acres and preliminary plat approval of Prairie Hill. The rezoning would allow for a 32-
unit condominium development with units 26 units clustered in duplex style townhouses. The plan
also includes a community building with common facilities and 6 apartments. Six of the duplexes
would have garages incorporated into the units. There would be 19 parking spaces in five
garages and 29 surface parking spaces. The plan includes relatively large areas of open space,
some of which would be dedicated to the City for extension of Benton Hill Park in exchange for
land that would provide private street access to Benton Street.
The applicant requests access to the development via Benton Street on land currently owned by
the City as part of Benton Hill Park. A conservation and public access easement would preserve
much of this existing open space for public use. In exchange for acquiring 1.8 acres of park land
the applicant has offered to dedicate 1.97 acres of land on the southeast end of the property for
park use.
The property does contain sensitive features and the applicant has submitted a Sensitive Areas
Development Plan and a subdivision called Prairie Hill. The subdivision would create the Lot 1, a
7.68 acre tract that would contain the development, and Outlot A (1.97 acres) which would be
dedicated to the City for addition to Benton Hill Park.
The property would be developed by Iowa City Cohousing. A cohousing community is a type of
intentional community composed of private homes supplemented by shared facilities.
Cohousing is designed with the intention of facilitating interaction among neighbors for social,
practical, economic and environmental benefits. The community is planned, owned and
managed by the residents — who also share activities which may include cooking, dining, child
care, gardening, and governance of the community. Common facilities are proposed to include
a kitchen, dining room, laundry, guest rooms, and recreational features. The attached
statement labeled "The Cohousing Concept" (Exhibit A) provided by the applicant contains a
more detailed description of Co -housing.
The applicant has used the "Good Neighbor Policy" and has conducted two neighborhood
meetings as discussed in Exhibit A.
ANALYSIS:
Current Zoning: The current zoning of the property is for Medium Density Single Family
Residential (IRS -8), which allows single family homes on lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet
of lot area and a minimum lot width of 45 feet. Duplexes are allowed on comer lots. Nonresidential
uses, such as religious institutions and day care centers, may be allowed by special exception.
The applicant has submitted the attached plan (Exhibit B) showing how the property could be
developed with at least 32 single-family lots within a conventional subdivision.
Proposed Zoning: The applicant requests rezoning to a Planned Development Overlay Zone
(OPD-8), which permits flexibility in uses and design when conventional development is
inappropriate and changes are not contrary to the Comprehensive Plan. The OPD zone
encourages the best use of the existing landscape and infill development. The applicant requests
approval of an OPD rezoning to allow dwelling units to be clustered on the property so that less
grading will be required and that common open space may be set aside for use of the residents
and the general public. The clustering will also help achieve a physical environment that is
conducive to the formation of a community as envision in co -housing developments. The details of
the OPD plan are discussed below under the OPD Plan.
PCDXSWff ReponsV�13-00WO, sub13-00008 pmide hills.doc
3
Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The property falls within the Southwest District Plan,
Roosevelt subarea in the Miller -Orchard Neighborhood (pages 25 to 36 and Appendix C of the
Southwest District Plan). The District Plan encourages the preservation of the existing housing
and encourages infill development that is compatible with the neighborhood; and indicates that the
area lacks pedestrian links within and between surrounding properties. This concern has been
partially addressed by recently constructed sidewalks/trail along Miller Avenue, Hudson Avenue,
Orchard Street and Highway 1.
The District Plan notes that the existing RS-8 zoning is appropriate for this property, but that a
Planned Development Overlay (OPD) zone would allow the clustering of housing units to
encourage the best use of the existing topography. The plan states: "Future development of the
vacant land along Miller Avenue should be carefully considered with regards to efforts to stabilize
and revitalize the Miller -Orchard Neighborhood."
In staffs view the proposal complies with the goals stated in the Comprehensive Plan as it would
bring a new form of owner occupied housing into the Miller -Orchard Neighborhood and would
compliment the City's and the Neighborhood's efforts to improve the housing stock in the area.
Planned Development Overlay (OPD) Plan: To achieve the cluster plan the applicant is
requesting several modifications of the zoning and subdivision regulations including:
1) One common lot as opposed to individual lots as required in RS-8 zones.
2) Multiple duplex style dwellings on one common lot (which otherwise are limited to
corner lots in the RS-8 zone).
3) A common house that would contain a common kitchen and dining room and 6
apartments.
4) A private street that has a 20-foot wide pavement within a 35-foot wide easement,
rather than the minimum 26-feet wide pavement within a 60-foot wide right-of-way
required for public streets.
5) Waiver of the requirement of sidewalks in certain locations.
7) A non-standard cul-de-sac design.
Four general standards must be met when the applicant requests waivers of underlying zoning
and subdivision regulations as discussed below:
1. The density and design of the Planned Development will be compatible with andlor
complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and scale,
relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout.
In staffs opinion the proposal meets the standard pertaining to density. The proposed
density of 32 units on 7.68 acres equals approximately 4.5 units per acre. Historically RS-8
zoned subdivisions have developed at approximately 5 units per acre although some have
achieved 8 units per acre.
In staffs opinion the proposal is also compatible with the neighborhood in terms of land use.
The Miller Orchard neighborhood contains a mix of single family homes and duplexes. The
area to the west contains a significant number of multifamily buildings. This proposal
contains mostly duplex style dwellings and only six apartments in the common house. This
combination of units provides for clustering and the preservation of large areas of open
space and would support the community -oriented environment desired in co -housing
developments.
The building mass and scale for most of the buildings is similar to many of the houses in the
PCID'Staff Repoft�rez13-00010, sub13-00008 prairie hills.dw
rd
Miller Orchard Neighborhood and as discussed in number 3 below would likely have less of
an adverse effect on the adjacent properties than a conventional development.
Traffic from this proposal will be no more and may actually be less than the amount of traffic
that would be generated from a conventional subdivision.
2. The development will not overburden existing streets and utilities.
The applicant is proposing a driveway access to Benton Street, an arterial street which
carries approximately 11,000 vehicles per day in this vicinity. A 2-lane arterial street with
adequate access control has a capacity of 15,000 vehicles per day. Transportation
Planners estimate that this proposed development will generate approximately 200 vehicle
trips per day. This is a small percentage of the existing traffic on Benton Street and will not
overburden the street.
Area residents have expressed concerns about sight distance on Benton Street. The
proposed private drive access is discussed in the attached memo from Kent Ralston,
Transportation Planner (Exhibit C). As detailed in the memo the proposed access point
meets standards for sight stopping distance and there is not a high collision history in this
area. Therefore the proposed driveway location is found to be acceptable.
There are currently no sidewalks on the portion of Benton Street adjacent to the property
because of steep slopes and topological features. To address pedestrian access to the
development, an alternative trail is proposed through Benton Hill Park, connecting the
development with sidewalks continuing on Benton Street east of Miller Avenue.
As noted in the Southwest District Plan, pedestrian connectivity is a concern in this
neighborhood. When the Hawk Ridge (formerly the Lodge) student housing complex was
developed in 2003, there was a requirement for a pedestrian easement over the subject
property to provide for a potential trail connection to Benton Hill Park. The location of that
easement is in an area that is too steep for a trail connection. The applicant proposes to
relocate the easement to the south side of lot 1. The grading that will be done for this
project will provide for a better location for a future trail.
Municipal water and sanitary sewer services are adequate to serve the proposed
development.
Stormwater will be directed to a basin proposed in the southeast corner of Lot 1. A berm is
proposed along the south property line to prevent stormwater from flowing onto the
properties to the south. The City Engineer has reviewed the stormwater management plan
and has approved it in concept, although some construction details may need modification.
3. The development will not adversely affect views, light and air property values and
privacy of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development.
In staffs opinion the application meets this standard. The existing RS-8 zoning on this
property allows single family homes to be as tall as 35 feet. The applicant proposes to
construct cottage style duplexes that would generally be less than 20 feet tall. Although
some of the units will have walkout lower levels, even those will be 25 feet or less in
height. The common house is proposed to be approximately 30 feet tall. In addition to
being shorter than what the RS-8 zone allows, the buildings would be built downhill from
or at a lower elevation than the nearest homes. This combination of height and lower
PCDk8taffRepcns\rez13-00010, sublMMOprairie hills. doc
5
grade will result in no more, or even a less adverse effect than conventional development.
4. The combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the underlying
zoning requirements or from City street standards will be in the public interest, in hannony
with the purposes of this Title, and with other building regulations of the City.
The applicant is proposing to cluster 32 units into attached dwellings rather than single
family houses, a private street which is 6 feet narrower than the minimum street standard
and modification of front setbacks for 3 units and the rear setback for 1 of the units. The
proposed clustering and private street would further the community based design desired
in co -housing by emphasizing pedestrian traffic on an internal sidewalk network. Primary
pedestrian access to the larger community would be via a trail that would extend through
Benton Hill Park. The applicant has agreed to install portions of the trail within the park
and to provide lighting to help assure pedestrian and bicycle safety. The applicant has
submitted templates showing that as designed the private street will be able to
accommodate fire trucks and other emergency vehicles.
In staffs opinion the proposed buildings are an attractive design and would be made of
quality building materials in an effort to support sustainable development. The proposed
co -housing community will be a unique form of housing that has had success in other
communities. Its construction in the Miller -Orchard Neighborhood would support the City's
efforts to provide a variety of housing types within the neighborhood and therefore be in
the public interest and in harmony with the zoning code.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas. The property contains steep and critical slopes and
woodland covering approximately 3.2 acres. The site slopes from a low point adjacent to Miller
Avenue to a high point in the western portion of the property. The applicant has provided a
soils study indicating that the property has been graded or filled to create the current condition.
The applicant proposes to grade the slopes (100% of the critical slopes and 94% of the steep
slope) to allow for creation of more gradual and stable slopes. Because of the amount of
grading proposed the Zoning Code requires level 11 sensitive areas review (Planning and Zoning
Commission Review and City Council approval),
A level 11 sensitive areas review is also required when more than 50% of a woodland is
proposed for removal. In this case the plan proposes that approximately 37.6% of the
woodland be removed. An additional 24.8% of the woodland is located within the 50 foot buffer
area and thus could be affected by construction activity and must be counted as being impacted
by the proposed development. Based on the amount of clearing, the sensitive areas regulations
require the planting of 127 replacement trees on this property or on public lands approved by
the City Forester. The City Forester has reviewed the woodlands on this property and found
that the areas that are proposed to be removed consist of undesirable species or species that
are susceptible to disease, including Ash and Walnut, and the woodlands have not been
properly maintained. The OPID plan includes a landscape plan showing the location of
proposed trees, however individual species are not identified. To assure appropriate species
are properly located, staff recommends that the final landscape plan be approved by the City
Forester.
As noted above a considerable amount of grading and woodland removal is proposed for this
development. However, due to the condition of the current slopes and the woodlands on this
property, the long-term slope stability and woodland health after development should be an
PCDX8taffRepoft1,.1MW10, sub13-0000p.iriehillsAm
improvement when compared to what exists today
Neighborhood parkland or fees in lieu of: Neighborhood open space requirements for this
property were satisfied with the approval of the Ruppert Hills final plat in 2003. That plat included
the dedication of Outlot A Rupport Hills, which later became the eastern portion of Benton Hill
Park.
The Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the proposed trade of land of the western
portion of Benton Hill Park for Outlot A. The Parks Department has determined that the
topography of Outlot A is more conducive to use as a neighborhood park and supports the trade.
Infrastructure fees: A water main extension fee of $415 per acre applies. There are no addtianal
infrastructure fees in this neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of REZ13-00010 and SUB13-00008 a rezoning of 9.65-acres located
at Miller Avenue and Benton Street from Medium Density Single -Family (RS-8) and
Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Medium Density Single -
Family (OPD-8) zone for 7.68-acres and Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone for 1.97-acres, and a
preliminary plat of Prairie Hill, a 2-lot residential subdivision, subject to 1) the landscaping plan
to be reviewed and approved by the City Forester, 2) City Engineer approval of the stormwater
management plan and 3) the applicant installing the offsite improvements to the trail and
lighting in Benton Hill Park.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . Location Map
2. Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan
3. Exhibit A Co -housing Concept Narrative
4. Exhibit B showing conventional subdivision
5. Exhibit C Memo from Kent Ralston, Transportation Planner
6. Building elevations
7. Correspondence
Approved by: _7 o.,4 �
John Yapp, Development Services Coordi�ator,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
PCMSWRepons\w13�0010, sub13-OD008pminehills.doc
RM44
BENTON ST
IRM
PDj 20
� RM44
MIPL
-1 lorlocke Hl'
F-
OPD/RM20
CITY OF 10 IVA CITY ON
RM2
0 pp5
Roosevelt
School
P1 to OPD8 (1.8 acres
1' ;/o
*/Mlm 9
- -1 0
to OPD8 (5.9 acres)—
P1 (1.9
DOUGLASS ST
0
-o E::
DOUGLASS CT
STATE HIGH'i
C1 Me.
SITE LOCATION: Prairie Hill REZ13-00010 & SUB13-00008
PRELIMINARY PLAT
PRELIMINARY OPD SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PRAIRIE HILL
IOWA CITY, IOWA
OU997
R ... F mts- 0
nIz—F
t�j I 1 11 1
Lo , r uni
FMT�ffiEfflr.-m 0�1 SECONO AMMON
�r-: �27
77
Rem—.—
Z:7-
:7:7 2.----
7—=
r-
PRELIMINARY PLAT
PRELIMINARY OPD SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PRAIRIE HILL
IOWA CITY, IOWA
0 VT A
MUP2p
. ...... .
2"
------- ---
0"
—7�
LOT 2
Hns? A
LOT I
ETON
TA
211
-- --
--- - ----
PRELIMINARY PLAT
PRELIMINARY OPD SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PRAIRIE HILL
IOWA CITY, IOWA
-Z� I
p tklswkLs�
-4-' 02"
2,
m
E-
Exhibit A
Cohousing Concept
Iowa City Cohousing plans to develop Prairie Hill, Iowa's first cohousing community. Cohousing is a concept developed in
Denmark in the 1960s and brought to the US in the 1980s. There are now more than 100 cohousing communities in the
country and about that many in planning stages. Many American cohousing communities are in university cities including
Eugene OR, Boulder CO, Lawrence KS, Madison WI, Ann Arbor and Lansing MI, Chapel Hill NC and Northampton MA
among others. There are cohousing communities in Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Austria,
Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada
Cohousing developments are intentional communities in which members plan, develop, build and maintain neighborhoods
of owner -occupied private homes in close proximity to each other along pedestrian walkways. Clustering homes permits
the community to enjoy more shared green space than in a conventional housing development. Homes typically surround
a jointly owned Common House which functions as the hub of community activity where members share some meals in a
community kitchen and dining room and pick up their mail. Other spaces include a laundry, a children's playroom, an
exercise room and a workshop. Locating guest rooms in the Common House means members do not need spare
bedrooms for occasional visitors. Residents who participate in outside groups may host meetings there. Potluck meals
take place along with other activities that require more space than can be comfortably accommodated in members'small
homes such as birthday parties, instructional workshops and cultural events.
Residents design cohousing communities according to their shared values and to meet their specific needs in contrast to
developers who speculate on homes they think will sell. Sustainability is a common value of cohousing communities.
Homes are usually small and highly energy efficient; some make use of solar energy. Urban cohousing communities
choose locations that permit members to walk, bike or use public transportation to get to work, school, shopping areas
and leisure activities, Members minimize their use of automobiles, and parking is often located on the periphery of the
community. Some green space is devoted to community gardens which provide food for gardeners and for common
meals.
Cohousing communities intentionally foster social relationships. Some communities seek members diverse in age and
other social, economic and cultural attributes; others feature facilities and services of specific value to seniors.
Regardless of the composition of the community, many residents intend to grow and age in place with the support of each
other. Turnover in completed cohousing communities is usually low, and they have waiting lists of people interested in
joining. The physical arrangement of homes with front porches facing each other along sidewalks that lead to the central
Common House is intended to facilitate regular informal interaction among residents. Some form of consensus decision -
making is the primary process for planning and operating a cohousing community.
Prairie Hill Colhousing
Prairie Hill will be a diverse cohousing community of 32 owner -occupied units located on a private street in 13 duplexes
and 6 owner -occupied apartments in the Common House. Each home will have a kitchen of its own. The community will
have the legal structure of a condominium. The duplexes are designed to be LEED certified. Some will have solar
collectors on their roofs. Most units will have zero -step entries, wide doorways and open floor plans to accommodate
people with disabilities. Iowa City Cohousing has received loans to fund zero -interest down payments for three affordable
units for income -qualified residents, and we intend to seek further support for affordable units. The development is within
a mile of the University of Iowa and downtown Iowa City, adjacent to several bus routes and near the walkable west side
Riverfront Crossing district. It is adjacent to Benton Hill Park. As recommended by City staff, we will transfer 1.97 acres of
the 7.8 acre site along Miller Avenue to the City of Iowa City in exchange for 1.85 acres of the western part of Benton Hill
Park for an access road to Benton Street. Of that area 1.12 acres located to the west of the access road will be protected
by a conservation easement and continue to provide public access, but will be owned and maintained by the Iowa City
Cohousing community.
Good neighbor meetings & questions about Prairie Hill
Iowa City Cohousing members have conducted four Good Neighbor meetings: two individual meetings in 201Z and 2013
with property owners who have property directly adjacent to the cohousing property on Benton Street and Miller Avenue
and two public meetings (2013 and 2014) inviting all residents of the Miller -Orchard neighborhood. The two property
owners who were involved in the individual meetings attended these meetings in addition to about half a dozen neighbors
in 2013 and 14 in 2014.
The property owner along Benton Street was concerned about maintaining the view to the southeast and loss of City -
owned wooded parkland adjacent to her property. The layout of the Prairie Hill buildings as depicted in the site plan was
designed so they will not block that view. Some of the neighbors objected to a road cutting through the park saying they
had worked hard over many years to secure the park. As stated above, a public -access easement will be established on
1. 12 acres of property to preserve the woodlands and to continu ' e to allow public access. The trade of property with the
City will provide a larger, more level, and usable park area for the neighborhood.
The access onto Benton Street has been discussed at all of these meetings. When initially proposed, the location was
evaluated and the City traffic planner concluded that the Benton Street location of the entrance to Prairie Hill Lane would
provide adequate site distance for Prairie Hill residents as well as vehicles traveling on Benton Street.
Some neighbors expressed concern that Prairie Hill would include rental units. Prairie Hill will be a community of owner -
occupied units. Living in cohousing involves commitment of time to maintaining the community. Diversion of units to
renters would dilute the pool of working members. Members will be responsible for maintenance of the community,
including lawn mowing, snow removal, gardening, cleaning the common areas, preparing meals and cleaning up after
them as well as general governance of the community. Members will either perform these tasks or commit funds to hire
people to do them.
We have adopted regulations that prohibit sale of units to be used as rental properties. According to the regulations, if
owners are temporarily away on sabbaticals or work assignment for periods no longer than one year, units may be rented
only with approval of the Board of Managers. Rentals will not be approved under any other circumstances. The
experience of other cohousing communities is that turnover of homes and therefore the impetus to rent out vacant units is
low.
Traffic and parking
One of the basic principles of cohousing is conservation of energy, which includes minimizing the use of automobiles. The
location of Prairie Hill near the University of Iowa and downtown Iowa City and on bus routes will make it possible for
residents to limit their use of private cars. The interdependence of residents in the community will foster sharing of rides
when they do use cars. Current members already share rides to meetings despite the fact that our current homes are
dispersed around the city. We expect the community of 32 households to generate considerably fewer trips by car and
therefore less traffic than a conventional subdivision of similar size.
There will be enough parking spaces and/or garages to meet the requirements of the zoning code and some extras for
visitors. Although they are required to have two parking places based on the number of bedrooms in their units, half of the
current member households have only one vehicle. Some of these members rely primarily on bicycles for transportation.
Members will purchase individual garage spaces, and parking places will be assigned. Cohousing communities are
unlikely to appeal to people who maintain multiple vehicles requiring extra parking spaces.
Construction timetable
Construction will begin after 50 percent of the units —or 16—are sold. Eleven have already been sold, and applications
have been submitted for at least 3 more. Members will choose among the units available on the site plan wherever they
are located. Basing our assumptions on the experiences of other cohousing communities, we expect more than 16 to be
sold by the time we actually break ground. After the first 16, we will build additional units in the order in which they are
sold.
For further information about Iowa City Cohousing, see our website: http:NNiowacitycohousing.org
I I IYZ
- -- - ------------------
F- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
in 0, 45.01 45.0' 45.a �.O' �w �01 45.0, �v �Sff 450 45,0' �w
N11.5BD SOFT
11,760 SOFT
11.605 SOFT
ll.� SOFT
S.OM r� 5,242 r. 5.242 r� 5,242 r 5,242
P. �242 P. 5,242 1 5.242 1 5.242 0. 5,2Q 5.242
SOFT SOFT SOFT SOFT WFT 5 1� 18 S.242 0. 5,242 0. 5.094
SOFT it SO" � SOFT SOFT 6 swy S�
PRAIRIE HILL CT
GO.O'
5,030
5,242 r. 5,242 P_ 5.2Q F. 5.242 r. 5.242 r 5.242 r_ 5.242 r_ 5,242 P. 5,242 P. 5.242 r. 5.242 5,2Q "oel
SOFT SO" SOFT SOFT SOFT SOFT SOFT SOFT r Sm r SOFT
FO
TV
m
Uollilsol
im
Ch—bk-�
P.O. BOX m
IOVVA�,MMM
MBE
DETERMWED
Exhibit B
u
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 28, 2014
To: John Yapp; NDS Coordinator
Bob Miklo, Senior Planner
From: Kent Ralston, Transportation Planner
Re: Proposed access to Benton Street on the west side of Benton Hill Park
Staff has measured 'stopping sight distance' from the proposed access onto Benton Street for
the Co -Housing develo ment proposal. The posted speed limit is 25 MPH. Measured traffic
speeds are 34 MPH (P percentile speed) for eastbound traffic. Sight distance evaluations are
based on the 851� percentile speed of traffic (the speed at which 85% of traffic is traveling or
below).
Stopping sight distance: Stopping sight distance is a measurement of the distance it takes for
a driver to react and stop their vehicle to avoid a collision. It is a safety -related standard, and
the minimum amount of sight distance which should be met for a new access. Recommended
stopping sight distance for 35 MPH on a 9% downhill grade is 287'.
Staff measured a total of 430' of sight distance for the proposed access point which easily
meets the recommended sight distance of 287'. While concerns with an access point located
.mid -hill' remain, they are lessened by the adequacy of the measured stopping sight distance.
The slope of the property west of the proposed access will need to be cleared of trees/brush for
this to function as an adequate access point and should be maintained in perpetuity. This
should be made clear in the developers agreement and/or HOA documents.
Collisions: Staff reviewed the collision history at/near the entrance to Roosevelt Elementary
School Oust west of the proposed access) as it is also a mid -hill access. Staff's review indicated
that there were 5 (potential) collisions at this location between 2008-2012 with 4 collisions
involving wet/snowing conditions. A collision history of 1 collision per year, on average, is not
uncommon for an access on an arterial street and does not necessitate further review.
Left turn lanes: There is currently an unfunded project in the City Capital Improvement
Program to reconstruct this segment of Benton Street including turn lane improvements. A
westbound left -turn lane at the proposed access would improve Benton Street capacity by
allowing left -turning vehicles to maneuver out of the through travel lane. However, a left -turn
lane analysis was conducted based on estimated traffic volumes generated by the proposed
development, and a dedicated westbound left -turn lane will not be warranted in the AM or PM
peak travel hour and need not be a requirement of the development.
Conclusion: The proposed access to Benton Street in the location shown on the plan is
acceptable from a stopping sight distance perspective and meets all applicable access
standards.
Exhibit C
F&A54,li Material Ost
Lta Seam Metal Roof
2
.nding
Cement Board Siding
3
Fngineemd Composite Trim Material (Boral or Azek)
4
Hke%ilass Insulated Windows
5
Galvanimd Metal Railing
6
Enffinee d Composite Railing
7
Concrete Foudation Wall
8
Compos te Garage Doom with Exposed Panels
IOWA CITY COHOUSING
Architect JohnF.Shaw
I AIA,11ED",INC
(�J)
PLANS ARE IN DEVELOPMENT AND SUBJECT To REVISION- Do
NOT USE FOR PERMITTING NOR CONSTRUCTION
LL
0 8 16' 24'
1 Bullding Material Ost
I
Standlng5eam Metal Roof
2
Cement Board Siding
3
0
Engineered Composite Trim Material (Bor., or
4
Fiberelas sIn�.IatedWInd.ws
5 5
GalWanized Meul Railing
6
Eajjate�Ralllng
_
__.
7
Concrete Foudati.n Wall
8
CompositeGarag Doom with Exposed Panels
IOWA CITY COHOUSING
Architect JohnF.Shaw
I AIA, DEED AP, INC
PLANS ARE /N DEVELOPMENT AND SUBJECT To REVISION- Do
NOT USE FOR PERMITTING NOR CONSTRUCTION
ww. wz; zz
(similar)
10,
vf�p
�1 '! I
(Z) (W)
!��g Material Ust
1
st��
2
.-
QiementBoa �Stding
_3
Ingineemt�LIE2!Lft—Tr',Iy!�t,�riaI (Boral OrA�.Ik)
4
FiberglIss Insulated Windos
5
GalWanized Metal Railing
6
EngineemdComposlte Railing
7
Concrete Foudation Wall
8
�-�-fte Garage Doom with Expose nek
PLANS ARE IN DEVELOPMENT AND SUBJECT To REvisloN- Do
NOT USE FOR PERMITTING NOR CONSTRUCTION.
IOWA CITY COHOUSING
Architect John F. Shaw VVZ (with garage)
IAIAUEDAP, INC 01 8'
I di ng Material List
1
Standi ng Se ain Metal Roof
2
Ce oard Siding
EBui
3
Engineered CDmposite Trim Iviaterial (Bonal orAzek)
4
Fiberglass Insulated Windo
5 5
Galvanized Metal Railing
6
6
Engineer!dCoinpo�ite Wing
7
Concrete FoudationWall
8
Cnp dLanels_j
I ME
or
IIWI m
PLANS ARE IN DEVELOPMENT AND SUBJECT TO REVISION- DO
NOT USE FOR PERMITTING NOR CONSTRUCTION.
4-
7--
ILI
r
10WA CITY COHOUSING
01
Architect John F. Shaw XG 01 /01 2' 30,
I AIA, LEED AP, INC
y
i L , —7
3'�
T.111;
1.14 66 111jilli'Ir.
Building Material List
I
Standing Seam Metal Roof
2
Cement Board Siding
3
Engineered Composite Trim Material (Boral or Azek)
H]berg.1m_InsuIated Windows
_4 _.
5
Gal"niz.d Metal Railing
6__
Engineered Composite Railing
7
Concrete Foudatilon Well
8
Composite Garage Doors with Exposed Panels
PLANS ARE IN DEVELOPMENT AND SUBJECT To REVISION- Do
NOT USE FOR PERMITTING NOR CONSTRUCTION.
IOWA CITY COHOUSING XY mommommonec�—
Architect John F. Shaw 01 101 20' Jol
I AI& HED AP, INC (similar)
46-0
980 SF
3 BAYS 4 BAYS
IOWA CITY COHOUSING
NO
00
Q� -4
U)
L
5 BAYS
(�) CP---6-)
ol /01 20' jol
10,520 SF
3 STORY
I
-- --- ------ -
IOWA CITY COHOUSING ol /0, 20' Jol 40'
Basement Floor Plan 1A,,
(9)First Floor Plan
[� I., lf.;..� I PRING
B I G IT "
Rating Legend
lz
w <
GN,,GAMN,,EU,MG,N'NM
L� Q
UNG'ARM."EM."A"'.
5
Ax
All-
-GWI
C�de Rovi� For R-2 (Apartments)
MIREM" I ..I
OCCUPANCY CREEP
REE BEIANATICH IT..
A&LEAMAM AMA
HARMASE HER BIRRIBIMI
z ce
ACTUAL FLOOR AFEA-
o
AILEMHARGE INC.
0
ui
ACTUAL HEIGHT,
V)
LNEREAM ICR EMBINKLERRH
D <
FIRE REBRETWE RATINGS.
INMATE STRUCTURAL FRAME
o
MEANING VAI - HATERICER
MEN REAUGGING WALLI BATSON
z
BEARING WAGES HIGHFURN
0
EIGER CONEETIMETHI I
MENBERA
GOOF "CRETRUCTRIN I SECOUNI
WERNERE
0
ENCRINGS IN EXTERRA WALLIS )30 IT,
EMNKLEGE.
EMT ENELEGURES
REPARATEM BETWEEN MILLINER
EMBI N HIM BARREN
01.1. IN 1. 'AFGHER
FETAL AUTONATIC SPI BYETEN W ACCOMMANTE
.1. FIC MCON - BETTER EM�
A1.2
_GI_
- --------------------------------
-----------------------------------
--------------------------
mr
-
-----
- -----
Second Floor Plan
LU
F DIM
z
to
0
0
0 Lu
U)Q
M
31 t
uo�
0
0
S�d �r
of Plan
A1.3
From:
Mary Knudson <mary_knudson@msn.com>
Sent:
Friday, September 12, 2014 10:27 AM
To:
Plan ningZon ingPublic
Subject:
Prairie Hill Co -Housing
Sept. 12, 2014
Dear Zoning Commissioners,
I am writing to express some concerns about the proposed development, the Prairie Hill Co -Housing
development, for the Miller Orchard Neighborhood.
My property (725 West Benton St.) will be critically affected by this development as it will surround half my
property, the south and east sides. My objections are in regard to two elements of the proposa; the driveway
on to Benton St., and the transfer of city parkland to a private entity.
The first objection is allowing a driveway on the Benton St. — the same area the City denied access to Mr.
Braverman when he proposed a development there. The reason it was denied was that it was dangerous to put
multiple cars entering on the Benton St. in the middle of the hill. It is hard to see precisely what has changed in
the intervening period to make the City reverse its earlier decision. The Cohousing group are undoubtedly right
in noting that the individuals currently working on development are less likely to drive than others, but there
can be no guarantees as to the driving habits of those who will move in after the property has been developed. I
believe that reason still exists.
My driveway is on the hill and I know first hand how fast cars go down this hill. A traffic study by Iowa City
showed that the median speed is past the 25 mile hour speed limit. This coupled with that drivers will not
expect additional traffic, and that the light on Benton Hill at certain parts of the moming, and more true in the
evening, is blinding, makes putting a driveway here risky.
It should also be noted that the property that Cohousing is planning to purchase already has access to Miller
Street. It is thus not a question of whether the new development has access, but rather of the relative costs to
them. While I have seen no actual estimates from contractors, I understand that it would be less expensive to
build an access road through the Park to Benton Street than it would be to use their own property to reach
Miller. However, I feel these costs are irrelevant to citizens who use Benton St. Their safety should be of
higher concem.
The second part of the plan, the one involving Benton Hill Park, is much more problematic, both for us as
property owners and for you as the city.
The Miller Orchard neighborhood worked for over 20 years to acquire this park. I participated in its
planning. The acquisition of the park came in two phases. The initial area acquired is this wooded area east of
my house, It had been donated by Braverman for a park just before we purchased our home in 1999. We
bought our home thinking we had a park next to us. The second area is the comer piece that Calloway donated
to the City when they purchased the Rupert land and built Hawks Ridge. (I will say more about this later). The
distinctive arch at the entrance speaks to what this park is -- "To Walk In Beauty". It is a unique, beautiful
neighborhood park that is utilized greatly — for both the playground area and the woods. After the unfortunate
closing of our neighborhood elementary school, the park is the remaining unifying element of our
neighborhood. And it saddens me to think that this last vestige will now be parceled out.
As you know, it appears that the City has never transferTed parkland over to a private interest before. And there
is a very simple reason why this has never happened — before the ink was dry on any such agreement, you
would be immediately deluged with petitions from developers and others petitioning for similar deals for the
other 40 parks currently listed on the Parks and Recreation website. While you undoubtedly would know the
most attractive development opportunities, it is hard to think that no one would express interest in nibbling
away little pieces of Happy Hollow, Wetherby, or even the area around the new Terry Trueblood Park. It is
tempting to think that wholescale park poaching will not occur, but then again who would have thought that the
ped mail would be home to not one but two high-rise structures?
It would of course be possible to deny these inevitable requests, but doing so of course opens the City up to
costly litigation as it attempts to explain why an action taken with respect to one park should not be extended
elsewhere.
I know the Co -Housing group will donate the land by Miller St. to the City which will be used of parkland.
However, we don't know when monies will be available for this development, it will be a different kind of park,
and we still as a neighborhood will be below City standards for green space.
Finally, I want to discuss Hawks Ridge which will shed light on to why we are concerned about communication
regarding developments. Doug and 1, and my neighbors to the west of me, did not know of the Hawk Ridge
development until the trees were cut down on the property south of us. This was done on a weekend. A couple
of weeks later a machine showed up on the property behind us ready to dump 200,000 cubic tons of dirt. While
this was legal, for us not to be notified by anyone of the huge negative externality we were going to bear for the
next year seemed discourteous. We were also told that Calloway would be putting the topography back to its
orginal condition, It was not. The slope of the land behind us was much greater than it is now, which makes a
difference in the view of what we see when buildings are put there.
To sum up, both Doug and I are hopeful that the IC Cohousing group will be successful in their plans to develop
the property behind us in a way that secures the value of our own property while providing a new and exciting
housing opportunity for Iowa City. I want to add that in my discussions with the developers, they indicated
they are considering my view very much. Doug and I are grateful for that. However, opening the IC park
system, and putting a driveway on to Benton St. should not be the means to that end.
Thank you.
Regards,
Mary Knudson -Dion
From: Versgrove, Mary Beth <mb-versgrove@uiowa.edu>
Sent: Friday. September 12, 2014 9:48 AM
To: Bob Miklo
Subject: IC Cohousing
To Mi. Miklo and the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Committee;
I write in support of the proposed Iowa City Cohousing community, Prairie Hill.
My husband and I have been looking for a new home in Iowa City for almost seven years. I have been a
resident on the eastside of the city since 1983 and my husband lived here previously. We were discouraged by
new developments because of the size of the homes and the apparent lack of concern for many overall
environmental concerns of the developments. Although there are plenty of existing homes for sale, we had
specific requirements which were often not met by neighborhoods where we looked at older homes. It is hard to
determine who your neighbors will be unless you know them.
When we discovered the ICCH community at Prairie Hill we were delighted, This group of dedicated
individuals continues to support our decision to become members of an intentional community. We are excited
to be moving into a multigenerational corrimunity that supports the environment, economic diversity,
sustainable lifestyle, and each other's needs. We look forward to sharing and caring for our community in a way
that will enrich our lives and respect the fact that we are connected with each other and the earth.
I hope that the committee and the City Council will approve the plans for this community which have been
designed by its members and in so doing, embrace a way of living for the future whose time has come to Iowa
City and the state of Iowa.
Thank you,
Mary Beth Versgrove
Iowa City Cohousing - Prairie Hill
I I -
From:
Mike Pacha <mpacha@cvoils.com>
Sent:
Thursday, September 11, 2014 8:46 AM
To:
Bob Miklo
Subject:
CO -HOUSING FOR IOWA CITY
Follow Up Flag:
Follow up
Flag Status:
Flagged
Good Morning!
My wife and I are members of co -housing and are thrilled at the opportunity to become a part of the FIRST Co -
Housing Community In Iowa!
Since we have been married, we have discussed building a home that we can truly call our own in a community
where we can share or skills/ideas/activities and learn new ones with like minded people that we have got to
know through this process.
Neighbors that will be friends that we can call by name for the rest of our lives.
I am hoping that Planning & Zoning of Iowa City is excited as we are to have this new community become a
part of/and enrich a town we have grown up in and love.
Thank -you for your time and consideration.
Michael Pacha
Disclaimer - September 11, 2014
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for 'bob-miklo*iowa-
city.org'. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute, copy or alter this email.
Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and might not represent those of
CFC, Inc.. Warning: Although CFC, Inc. has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in
this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or
attachments.
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
From:
Bruell, Sue E <sue-bruell@uiowa.edu>
Sent:
Wednesday, September 10, 2014 8:50 PM
To:
Bob Miklo
Cc:
Bruell, Sue E
Subject:
please support the co -housing movement!
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
Dear Mr. Miklo,
I am interested in the co -housing movement for those of us
who desire to scale back the size of our homes and our habits
of rampant consumerism.
The Iowa City co -housing project could become a
model for the Midwest, if not for the nation.
Regards,
Sue Bruell
From:
Ann Haugland <annbhau@gmaii.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, September 10, 2014 8:51 PM
To:
Bob Miklo
Subject:
In suppport of IC co -housing proposal
Please support the IC co housing proposal for a shared cooperative housing project. what they have planned makes so
much sense, offers so many good things for the individuals and families who will live
there and for the community as a whole. It's a sensible and
efficient way to live. I hope Iowa City will support, welcome, and encourage proposals like this --I want to have those
opportunities in the future
Ann Haugland
From: MARY Kirkpatrick <patchworkmaryj@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 8:53 PM
To: Bob Miklo
Subject: . support cohousing in Iowa City!
Hello,
I am a financial supporter of the Iowa City Cohousing group, having invested funds to help them purchase
land. I believe that having a cohousing community in Iowa City will be a great asset.
Cohousing is popular in other cities, such as Madison WI, which has 3 cohousing groups. The Iowa City group
is planning very energy efficient units and many other sustainable elements. Cohousing offers its residents an
opportunity to support each other and share resources.
I encourage planning and zoning to approve the cohousing proposal so they can begin to build.
Thank you,
Mary Kirkpatrick
431 Elnuidge Avenue
Iowa City, IA 52245
From: Gienapp, Barbara <barbara-gienapp@uiowa.edu>
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 11:21 AM
To: PlanningZoning Public
Subject: Benton Street and Miller Ave
I would like to voice my strong objection to rezoning this green space. This neighborhood (Miller/Orchard) and
the Iowa City Community needs to keep this area as a public park. This area is so heavy with apartments
complexes that the last thing we need is more. The additional traffic that this plan would add should be
considered when planning to change this area. This is a heavily traveled street as it is.
Please consider keeping this green space green!
Thanks,
Barb Gienapp
38 Highland Drive
Iowa City
Notice: This Ul Health Care e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error,
then delete it. Thank you.
From: Teri Collins <tericollins2010@grnail.corn>
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 12:39 PM
To: PlanningZoningPublic
Subject: Miller Avenue & Benton Street Subdivision
I am writing to express my sincere concern for the above subdivision to be potentially located at Miller &
Benton. I live in a condo on Benton Drive and drive up the Benton Street Hill several times a day often times
taking Miller Avenue from Hwy. 1. This area is already congested and the road condition is poor. Visibility at
that intersection is awful. If a housing development were to be located in that vicinity, traffic studies need to be
taken into account so that entrance and exits will be as such to not cause further congestion.
In addition to the traffic issues, my biggest concern is that we will lose a fantastic piece of timber and a fantastic
park. That park provides the ONLY means of real woodland in the area and to lose it would be
devastating. That park is really the only park other than the one by Aber on the West side that people in the
area can visit. To lose it would be a huge mistake.
I hope that the City takes into account the traffic issue as well as the thought that we can lose a great park into
account. That area has been there for quite some time and we do not need further multi or single family housing
in that area. It just doesn't make sense.
I cannot attend the 9/4 meeting, so please pass my concerns along to members so that my concerns can be
heard.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Teri Collins
Benton Drive resident.
From: Mary Blackwood <blackwoodl3@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 9:08 AM
To: Bob Miklo
Subject: Prairie Hill - support
Dear Mr. Miklo,
From a friend I have heard about the Prairie Hill - Iowa City Cohousing proposal off Benton Street. As I live
just off Benton Street myself and drive on it daily to get to downtown, to work, etc., I have an interest in this.
The Benton Street park and the woodlands in that area are really beautiful. I believe that cities need to have
woodland preservation within them. My understanding is that the Prairie Hill neighborhood would include
preserving the woodlands.
In addition, I think the idea of a new sort of neighborhood like this is a great fit for Iowa City. Humans need to
stop using so many resources per person with gigantic houses and too many cars. This neighborhood clearly
wants to go the other way - use fewer resources and live more in harmony with each other and with nature - and
that would set a great precedent and be a great example to show other communities that this sort of thing can
work.
Thank you to the city for working on this project with the private citizens who are part of Prairie Hill.
Best,
Mary Blackwood
From:
Quinn Dilkes <quinndilkes@gmail.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, June 03, 2014 10:39 AM
To:
Bob Miklo
Subject:
Prairie Hilil Co -Housing Project
I believe this project sets an EXTREMELY important precedent for cooperative housing in Iowa City. Given
the lack of affordable housing, cooperative housing of any kind is an inspiring example of how we can solve
innumerable problems through cooperation as opposed to the building of individual, isolated houses. I hope
you will do everything in your power to facilitate the building of Prairie Hill.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Quinn Dilkes
320 E. Washington, 8D
Iowa City IA 52240
From: Roxane Mitten <rmitten57@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 3:23 PM
To: Bob Miklo
Cc: rmitten57@gmail.com
Subject: PLEASE SUPPORT: Iowa City Cohousing / Prairie Hill Neighborhood between Benton St.,
Miller St. and Highway 1.
Dear Mr. Miklo,
Please forward this letter to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
I am writing in support of the development of the Prairie Hill Neighborhood by the Iowa City Cohousing group.
This will be located at the old Miller Orchard locations that is between Benton St., Miller St. and Highway 1.
I will be brief, since I plan to attend the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on Thursday, June 19th, at 7
pm, willing to step up to speak in support.
I am not a member of Iowa City Cohousing, however have been following this project and have assisted in
supportive roles for I believe strongly in what this Prairie Hill Neighborhood will become!
• I strongly support that this neighborhood is includes planning for ecological impact and energy
efficiency (green building and water management).
• I strongly support that this cohousing structure incorporates community -connection pieces through this
intentional neighborhood model that has worked in other forward -moving communities in the United
States.
• I appreciate that the city has been very engaged with this project, integrating design with existing Iowa
City planning. This is the kind of forward -thinking approach that I have been looking for in Iowa City
planning!
Thank you for your attention to this project!
Roxane Mitten
319-321-8979
rmitten57na,gmail.com
From: larry marsh <larrymarsh2@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 1:31 PM
To: Bob Miklo
Subject: Prairie Hill Co -housing
I support the plans and people involved in getting this community housing alternative underway. Please pass my
comments to Planning and Zoning.
Thankyou,
Larry Marsh
From:
MARY Kirkpatrick <patchworkmaryj@msn.com>
Sent:
Thursday, May 29, 2014 7:24 PM
To:
Bob Miklo
Subject:
for Planning and Zoning Commission
Hello,
I would like to speak in support of the Prairie I -Ell Cohousing community. I am thrilled that this group has
worked so long and so hard to bring a wonderful form of housing to Iowa City. This site will offer very energy
efficient options to those who live there and be a role model for sustainable living.
I invested money to help this group purchase their land and am cheering for their success.
Thank you,
Mary Kirkpatrick
431 Elmridge Avenue
Iowa City 52245
From:
Don Laughlin <laugh@avalon.netb
Sent:
Wednesday, May 28, 2014 7:18 PM
To:
Bob Miklo
Subject:
PRAIRIE HILL
Dear Bob Miklo,
Just a note in support of the Prairie HIII venture.
Once this group has buildings up and visible I think there will be a surprising amount of interest shown.
know many of the group and have been working with them in their interest in renewable energy since I use it
extensively for my house on the corner of Church & Governor. It will be an outstanding example to have a whole
community interested and applying solar power to supply their energy needs. Solar power is a wave of he future and
this group is determined to use it to the fullest extent possible.
. They are also interested in water conservation and management. With good management, storm
water --from streets and roofs --can supply most of the needs for irrigation of gardens. They realize that it doesn't make
sense to use expensive, processed, potable water for irrigation of plants.
This group will be an outstanding asset to Iowa City.
Please send this email on to the Planning and Zoning Commission if that is appropriate.
Sincerely,
Don Laughlin
From: Marti VanAllen <mjvanallen321@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 8:22 PM
To: Bob Miklo
Subject: Proposed Prairie Hill neighborhood / Iowa City Cohousing
Dear Bob Miklo,
Please favorably consider the proposed Prairie Hill neighborhood between Benton St., Miller St. and Highway
The concept of an intentional, diverse and multigenerational neighborhood is just the kind of development that
Iowa City needs. The buildings are designed to be green and there will be community gardens. A large
common house is in the center of the plan to help create community by having a large, shared kitchen; central
mail room; central laundry and gathering rooms. The houses have been designed with shared walls for energy
efficiency.
What more could you ask for in a progressive, city like Iowa City, Iowa?
Please forward this email to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
From a hopeful, potential resident of Prairie Hill.
Thank you,
Marti VanAllen
123 Cayman St.
Iowa City, IA 52245
mjvana11en321 P gmail. eom
From: Mary Martin <maryada623@gma11.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 7:57 PM
To: Bob Miklo
Subject: PRAIRIE HILL ... YESIII
Hi. My name is Mary Martin and I am writing you to show my support for Prairie Hill. (Co housing) I think
iowa city needs development like Prairie Hill. The concept of Co housing is a neat idea and you should
definitely support it. I am considering living there someday myself and I want that opportunity available to me.
Thank you for your consideration. Be well and support Prairie Hill! My email is maryada623@gmail.com and
please feel free to send it to the housing commission if needed to show my support of Prairie Hill.
From: Ann Stromquist <annstromquist@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 8:57 AM
To: Bob Miklo
Subject: Support for co -housing project in Miller/Orchard/Benton neighborhood
Dear Mr. Miklo,
My husband and I have lived at 316 Myrtle Ave., on the comer of Myrtle and Oak Park Court, for more than 30
years. We are officially part of the Melrose Neighborhood, but we drive daily on Benton St. and frequently on
Miller St. Our three children went to Roosevelt School. We have been active in the Melrose Neighborhood
Association and its attempts to preserve our fragile neighborhood and its older homes. We care deeply about
maintaining a sense of community in Iowa City's neighborhoods and are concerned about the environmental
impact of urban development.
We write to support the co -housing project that is being planned in the Miller/Orchard neighborhood. The
project has been carefully and thoroughly researched by those involved, with special attention to its impact on
the environment. Its location, close to the university and downtown Iowa CIty, will enable folks who are
currently dependent on their cars to ride their bicycles instead. The land surrounding the housing units will
provide opportunity for a shared common garden as well as individual garden plots, thus creating a source for
locally -grown food. Shared facilities, such as a laundry room, will cut down on energy use. And, the co -housing
community can serve as a model for the rest of us who might be considering multi -generational living.
In short, we welcome the co -housing project to our neighborhood and look forward to witnessing and
supporting its progress.
Best wishes,
Ann and Shel Stromquist
316 Myrtle Ave.
Iowa City, IA 52246
337-5463
From: Mary Ann Dennis[mailto:mdennis@housingfellowship.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2014 9:42 AM
To: Marcia Bollinger
Subject: Proposed Co -Housing Development in Miller Orchard Neighborhood
Marcia,
The Housing Fellowship owns/manages three homes in the Miller -Orchard neighborhood, near where Iowa City
Co -Housing plans to build. I have seen Co-Housing's plans and I very much support the concept. I think it
would be a wonderful addition to the neighborhood.
Thank you,
Maryann Dennis
Executive Director
The Housing Fellowship
322 East 2nd Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
319-358-9212 X 5
mdennisghousingfellowshin.com
r
r�.�l�,;.® C 9 T Y OF 1 O W A CITY
Date: September 12, 2014
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Re: REZ13-00020 rezoning at Dodge Street, Dodge Street Court and Conklin Lane
Background: In October 2013, the City Council approved the rezoning of 2.19 acres of land
located on the southeast side of Dodge Street east of Conklin Lane and north of Dodge Street
Court, from Community Commercial (CC-2) to Low -Density Multi -Family (RM-12). The rezoning
was subject to the following conditions:
a. Multi -family Development, other than townhouse style, shall not occur within 80 feet of
Dodge Street Court right-of-way; development within 80 feet of Dodge Street Court
right-of-way will be limited to single family, duplex or townhouse style dwelling units.
b. Approval of a development plan, including a landscaping plan, building designs, and
site plan by the Design Review Committee and the Planning and Zoning Commission,
to ensure compatibility with adjacent residential properties and appropriate
development appearance for an entranceway to the city, shall be required prior to
approval of a building permit.
c. If development on this property has vehicular access to Dodge Street Court, the
developer shall install improvements needed to bring the street up to City standards to
the point of access (driveway location) prior to issuance of a building permit.
d. Owner shall dedicate sufficient land along the entire property frontage to widen the
Dodge Street Court right-of-way to 50 feet prior to approval of site plan or building
permit.
e. Owner shall install sidewalks along the Conklin Lane and Dodge Street Court
frontages, and provide pedestrian connections from the development to the sidewalk
on Dodge Street prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
f. Development on the subject properties shall be designed to drain on -site storm water
away from Dodge Street Court. The City Engineer shall review and approve the
drainage plan prior to approval of a site plan or building permit.
The applicant, Southgate Development Company is now seeking to fulfill condition b., the
approval a development plan, including a landscaping plan, building designs, and site plan by the
Design Review Committee and the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Development Plan: The plan includes a 15-unit apartment building, three 4-unit townhouse
style building and one 5-unit townhouse style building for a total of 32 dwelling units. This is the
maximum number of dwelling units permitted by the RM-12 zone for this property, based on
2,725 square feet of lot area per acre. The apartment building includes 12 3-bedroom units, 2 2-
bedroom units, 1 1-bedroom unit. There are 15 2-bedroom townhouse units and 1 1-bedroom
townhouse.
Vehicular access to will be via a driveway to Dodge Street. Although there will be pedestrian
access via sidewalks on Conklin Lane and Dodge Street Court, there will be no vehicular
access to these two streets.
Based on the number of bedrooms, 62 parking spaces are required. The plan shows 62
spaces. The driveway from Dodge Street will provide access to an underground garage with 17
September 12, 2014
Page 2
parking spaces for the apartment building. Twenty surface parking spaces will be provided to
the east and south of the apartment building.
The driveway will also provide access to a one -car garage at the back of each townhouse unit.
Eight surface parking spaces will be provided between two of the clusters of townhouse units.
Although there are driveways leading to each garage, these are not counted towards the
required number of parking spaces by the zoning code, though vehicles may park in these
driveways.
The plan appears to meet the dimensional requirements of the zoning code. All of the buildings
will be setback 20 feet from the streets as required in the RM-12 zone. The apartment building
will be located at least 80 feet from Dodge Street Court as required by the Conditional Zoning
Agreement.
The 3-story 15-unit apartment building will be largest building and will be at the 35 foot height
limit allowed in the RM-12 zone. Two clusters of 2-story townhouses will be located between
the larger apartment building and the single family and duplexes on the south side of Dodge
Street Court. Where the garage side of the townhouses are facing toward the street, a dense
landscape screen meeting the S-3 standards of the zoning code is proposed. In staff's opinion
this building arrangement and design achieves the neighborhood compatibility required by the
Conditional Zoning Agreement.
Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee reviewed the plans and made
requests for corrections and suggestions for design of the buildings and site plan. It appears
that most of these requests have been satisfactorily been addressed with the revised plans
(copies attached). However the full committee has not had a chance to review the latest plans.
It is anticipated the committee will complete its review before the September 18 Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting.
The City Engineer is also reviewing the plan compliance with other City Codes.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of a site plan for 32 multi -family dwelling
units on 2.19 acres located in the Low Density Multifamily Residential (RM-12) zone at 1425
Dodge Street, subject to approval of the site plan by the Design Review Committee and by staff
for technical compliance with City Codes.
Attachments:
1. Location map
2. Site plan
3. Elevation drawings and floor plans
Approved by:
John Y
Department of
and Development Services
CITY OF ION CITY ON
;OPD8
CAROLINE! RS RS5
DRIVE
-T-A zo
RS8
i. CN1
, m
RW,
RM1 2
Pi
SITE LOCATION: North Dodge Street REZ13-00020
---_--_--___---
._bL _. :� ! ru.�cmwva N" ONMER/APPLICANT OWNER'S ATN
'� •.� \ oz / •\ m ' /
N 1`
\\1010 4
'/(Z.-✓`'^.,'W^a �. I`Y.
�[
wdn axmw,.m•w P ROJJIfCT AaMmA�,
Pwu aAR D 5y v
:aMaww am im BUILDING AREAS
PROJECT LOCATION `-
ZONING owz�-•.v w.cw•
oIMENs!oNAL STANDARDS: RM-12
PARKING $MULTIpfAMILY����m'm'
}} - �;y�y�••-fa°3¢��-J
.,-
I'
( I . 2 6 3 BEDROOM UNITS)
aX, i d "'►
-
uoroA.Ir..m,�
11(yJll
IMPERVIO 5ARE�c.•.
mu
`KI __� � su...i..�
PPPROVA.in z.www a.o�.....
.n
�—
wzssm�r�ro'-'1- - _ _—
_
o• mn
_ _ _ _ _ _
-- --
a"--T--
s,.,�
"a
s;:6•
as I
ce\
eOc
(
ogE���rs
Pmmpru
I
"
m AS NOT
wxovslN
ON 00'
N
i I • \.
i
n c
� , 1
11l0
�'�9"
8
T
/////////// d' � ew.
—% —
/ rlL Ira erlhe / 1
dllIT ER05ION COMROL NOTE5
vO RL.—
11=xw
/ /\\ =`'�\� W 1 \\\ — w w� • wuee..aamww waw rsww awes �xw�w
\ 5 � \ uxirw,mw me e.sn wz emam.,m.enum
1 \ \
nmr,weww w.,, nsws., rween umne '
E_gr
�
TYPICAL PCC PAVEMENT l„emm�
r .,e...ww.
SECMN DETAIL „RN
^'�""
•. \ mw.vann
®_ // ////"�S I •�� M — — — — — —
PIANTIN6 LEGEND �r rar
RE�VIRfMENT5 '
UMMJ
man
tam Egas
S 1
r .. � \ • V �T? .nr �.r ��rs e.a.mva � 4
'g:
C ?
Kr£ ILA a-°. / a' A.� �. \• rl _n mum[ewrureuo } a
c -- _ _____ �>
!
e
` oar—ini—"w—oar—�a.i$ nn.n. s
�p'Ym r.mnmun@ j
q/ 9
veemumwam I/"��I �S
em.aearo � ��
XOpf CCfM
� i OS<NLMENMMPrtYEiM �unua�
QM9MLl MG EXOIEf:
u�r :max
«m� wa nn wmna a rtv may w.v manc.e amean6
_ [mw vnmmumm..nwrvumomu�we_� emnwMaXaru¢rtwnmmmx✓mamun� iawu�rt�u:xwimuumlmu m
-
I�II�II
ICI
O
RIGHT ELEVATION
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR BID ONLY
AMxnxx
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR BID ONLY oM.
(319)39S99W
eb€E U
bEE{e
�.i •w.mn .awcon �!I �
u®nwm •
i' EIf9�
J i
Zj
Q Es 3�lii!
w
z�
p� / W
FL O
0.J gip U�
O
W 0
FFnm.�. r
�YX -
77
rt �
V -
lllff
� J v
.f
u
MAIN FLOOR PLAN
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR BID ONLY
Db41GN INI
SEOOND FLOOR PLAN
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR BID ONLY
TWRD FL'_ OR BEAN
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
............ -
.. .......... - .................. -
............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
..... .............. -
71
.
®
a
ff]
El
dM
mD
mm
19
ii
.................
............
P
MIM (610
kr]NO (119 HOJ
NNtlWHY
NOUXINJISNOD UOA ION
GENERAL HOLES:
AF Am
DESIGN INC.
(3119)3995-79M
r.�
v
gIN 1 z
- - _
a •. ..
e5{5{191��� i zO
cM GdRAG V
C6R Ctl E
§
[i 1111Q
iRdnINGy01C9.
�m
a
L
q
'I, I ICARG RAGE
'.➢�.
I�R^ RKaEE�
tliig"tl'vi�
���
332
�4
P IG P TIO
Pd O
P TIO
�S3etl�
0 ten.
n...,,:......... �...
W
...�q .f hSG ^
➢
A1
�� 1 YY
_.
�� r.w a.
rI
_ ._. • •
e
a
a V ` 1 NMG ° D M6
INMG
r�x • O IN3 m �
Z �
n w..00
T
KNITc1EN •
• rx
ITGN
L
Q Q
e'.
a
e
TRwa.
6RF4T RM
._ T �' fi
� w
s�eanexaT ra
�`
�O
��I`
Il .�O rose aW OO LATER
wraa
� OO rorve I
u�
§
WR d bi19C Ff.
L6 R.
Wrc.O.
6L °A
A31
�•J+A
1
�p
VOL
MAIN
FLOOR PLAN
GC.LE S<. e0
mnnmc NorEv.
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
�e�: .•. rb
A ANN
UIGN INC
(319)
AwANN
FslC INC.
f
O
U
Z
O
oa�.vrvi rLyyK f-'LAN
Y
11
FF°ggB�
° 4
DESIGN
3119)39
7W
a
h
E
���iip�YYpjji g
b
n
g��{e`e1p
b
SE'!i1EE�
Dame.0 corn_
6
e
S
A
N V
Eu
mr
S 'PRGnMG
b
NOinLU
Q
V
GE
LU
N LU
In
D
b
1
MAIN FLOOR FLAN
m
BCPLE. Vt.IO
I CRR
b
I �p
'.:i
1ee�mn e.ew
I
I
v
uw
�
IUR-
I
LLR
v',
ey
R 4E
� P
ICLR 04R
'jj
i
wue
wve
v
p
�
t
�.v
P�T
eGRP
TRH.
O RxSR
.'j
GRE.�Rn.
.rn�
wrErz
.
irvr
�' WTER
�
w O ro.rn I
�R'6' wa tle
is
BO. Fr.
b ulrt
HI
��
`tlF
1
e 6
SO FI.
uN
UI
D� 0
O. PI.
NUi •L
La xi
IMR E
Dom INC.
.......................... (319) M-7�
01 OYL
14
<70 ...... . ...... -.... 10
HE_
L6
iL
SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1 21
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 4 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Paula Swygard,
Phoebe Martin, Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT: John Thomas
STAFF PRESENT: John Yapp, Sara Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Ron Amelon, Becky Soglin (65 Rita Lyn Ct)
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission voted 1-5 to recommend approval of SUB14-00015 an application
submitted by Allen Homes for a preliminary plat of Evan Heights, a 10-lot, 3.59-acre
residential subdivision located at the NE corner of First Avenue and Hickory Trail.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There were none.
Development Item
SUB 14-00015
Discussion of an application submitted by Allen Homes for a preliminary plat of Evan
Heights, a 10-lot, 3.59-acre residential subdivision located at the NE corner of First Avenue
and Hickory Trail.
Yapp showed the preliminary plat and location maps from an aerial view for the proposed
subdivision. Yapp explained that this is the second meeting the commission has seen the current
proposed plat which is largely a single-family subdivision and is 3.59 acres. He noted that 10 lots
are proposed with eight detached single-family structures and the corner lot for a zero -lot line or
attached two -unit structure with each structure on its own lot. Yapp stated that this is permitted in
the RS-5 zone.
Yapp explained that at the last meeting the Commission questioned the interpretation of the
sensitive areas ordinance. Hektoen from the City Attorney's Office has provided the Commission
with a memorandum explaining the exemption process in the sensitive areas ordinance and refers
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 4, 2014 - Formal
Page 2 of 5
to a letter from the Director of the Neighborhood Development Services Department granting that
exemption for construction of single-family and two family structures. Yapp then distributed the
letter to the commission for review.
Freerks questioned the first paragraph of the Hektoen memo because it refers to a stream corridor
and wetlands which are considered protective sensitive areas with a footnote that says that the
steep and critical slopes are not considered sensitive protected areas. Freerks asked for an
explanation since they'll fall within the same category and will now be allowed to be disturbed.
Hektoen explained that per definition in the code steep and critical slopes are not protected areas
and are allowed to be disturbed.
Yapp stated that the slopes that are protected are 40% or steeper which are defined as Protected
Slopes.
Freerks had Yapp confirm that the slopes in this case are not 40% or steeper.
Eastham asked Yapp to once again review the purpose of the provisions in this sensitive ordinance
area that provide for establishing up to 100 foot buffer zone between development activities. Yapp
explained that the purpose of the wetland buffer is to protect the wetland by not allowing any
structures or paving within that buffer and then to encourage the planting of wetland friendly
vegetation.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Ron Amelon from MMS Consultants presented on behalf of the developer. Amelon stated that this
proposal is based on feedback from previous commission meetings, and feedback from
surrounding citizens requesting a single family development.
Freerks asked about Lot 1. Yapp stated that a `minimum low opening' will need to be designated
so if the stream overflows it would help protect the house on Lot 1.
Amelon confirmed that the plan was to establish the minimum opening elevation, which means that
the lowest elevation of a window or door of the house will be above the sidewalk of the street such
that whenever the rain causes water backup, even if it gets over the top of the road, it protects
water from getting into the home.
Eastham questioned if the area was in the city's water flood hazard area, and Yapp confirmed that
the area is not in a flood plain, and is not subject to the flood plan ordinance.
Eastham then questioned the distance between construction line limit and the edge of the wetlands
area. Amelon answered that the construction area is 30 feet from the edge of the wetland area.
Becky Soglin a resident of Iowa City spoke about her concern regarding the granting of the
exemption to the SAO (sensitive areas ordinance) for this subdivision as it seems like the decision
ignores the intent of the SAO and is concerned about how this could set precedent for future
analysis from this particular case and if there's a loophole in how a tract is defined, and/or when
shared infrastructure exists it seems that it should be corrected and considered in the
commission's decision tonight. Soglin questioned if the area is a tract, because the Assistant
Attorney's memo states it is not a tract because they're no shared common facilities that gives
three examples of the street parking, loading, and driveways. Presumably there are other features
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 4, 2014 - Formal
Page 3 of 5
that could be shared common facilities. Although in the Code there was no explicit definition of
that list but questioned if a shared electrical transformer which serves two or three houses would
be considered a common facility.
Soglin then stated if it this development is not considered a tract, the construction line should be
questioned, and separate construction access and storage, which doesn't make economic sense,
should be considered.
Theobold posed a question to Yapp regarding the mailbox cluster for this subdivision. Yapp
confirmed that the 10 lots will have one mailbox cluster where lot 1 meets lot 2.
Freerks closed the public discussion.
Freerks question if there were a grading plan.
Yapps stated that they did receive a grading plan for the sidewalks
Swygard moved to approve SUB 14-00015 a preliminary plat of Evan Heights a 10 lot
subdivision east of First Avenue and north of hickory trail. Martin seconded the motion.
Freerks raised the question concerning how a tract is being defined stating that in the report the
plat is not described as a tract, but the exemption states it is for activities on a tract of land. So
Freerks questioned using an exemption for a tract of land when this is not considered a tract.
Additionally Freerks questioned the exemption being from the zoning code, when this situation is
not changing zoning, but rather should be from the subdivision regulations.
Eastham raised the question regarding the construction line limit that the applicant agreed to on
the preliminary plat which is drawn at a 30 foot buffer from the stream edge which is the buffer
required by the sensitive area ordinance unless there is an exemption and asked for clarification if
that staff is saying that this application is exempt from that buffer.
Yapp stated that the ordinance does not allow development activity to encroach into protected
sensitive areas of wetlands and stream corridors. The construction limits line was requested for
this plat to protect the wetlands and stream corridor, which the applicant agreed to.
Hektoen stated that the exemption has already been administratively approved, and is not a
question on appeal before the Commission tonight. If the Commission so desires, they can
recommend that the sensitive areas ordinance exemption provisions be amended to clarify its
applicability to subdivisions of this nature.
Freerks still questioned the exemption being for a tract of land, whereas this plat was not a tract of
land. Hektoen replied that each lot is considered a tract of land in the situation of this exemption.
A vote was taken and the motion was failed 1-5 (Martin voting affirmative)
Consideration of Meeting Minutes: August 21, 2014
Meeting minutes approved 6-0 with minor amendments.
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 4, 2014 - Formal
Page 4 of 5
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION
Yapp introduced the new minute taker for the commission, Becky Scott
Yapp also shared with the commission some information about the South District Plan. There will
be a workshop on Monday, October 6 from 7-9 at Grantwood Elementary. Martin questioned if
this workshop was open to the public and Yapp replied that yes, it is primarily for the public and
postcards will be sent to the households in the south district inviting them to the workshop.
Commissioners are encouraged to attend to listen to the comments and be available to answer
questions, but are asked not to unduly participate in resident's discussions
Yapp then stated that there would also be a bike tour on September 20`n of the south district area,
again more for the public, but commissioners are invited to attend. Martin suggested sending
invites to the realtors as well, to see progress and plans for the south district. Yapp stated that
there is now a south district web page, and flyers for these events will be on that website.
Yapp stated lastly, the commission needs to schedule a van tour of the south district for the
Commission. The Commission agreed to do the van the tour on Wednesday, September 17 at 5:30
p. M.
Yapp reminded the commission that at the September 18 meeting there would be a work session
beginning at 6:00 p.m. to review street planning with a focus on the Couth District and Sycamore
Street.
Freerks asked if the commission should ask staff to look into the sensitive ordinance area, and the
commission agreed.
OTHER
Swygard reported to the commission that she
University of Iowa is putting on September 20`n
forward the email to the rest of the commission.
ADJOURNMENT:
Eastham moved to adjourn
Martin seconded,
Meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 vote.
received an email regarding a workshop The
a creative communities symposium and she will
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2013-2014
FORMAL MEETING
TERM
EXPIRES
12/19
1/2
1/16
2/6
2/20
3/20
4/3
4/17
5/1
6/5
6/19
7/17
8/7
8/21
DYER, CAROLYN
05/16
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
EASTHAM, EASTHAM
05/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
FREERKS, ANN
05/13
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
MARTIN, MARTIN
05/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
SWYGARD, SWYGARD
05/15
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
THEOBALD, JODIE
05/18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
THOMAS, JOHN
05/15
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
INFORMAL MEETING
NAME
TERM
EXPIRES
9/19'
1/2
1/13
2/3
2/20
DYER, CAROLYN
05/16
X
X
X
X
X
EASTHAM, EASTHAM
05/16
X
X
X
X
X
FREERKS, ANN
05/13
X
X
X
X
X
MARTIN, MARTIN
05/17
X
X
O/E
X
X
SWYGARD, SWYGARD
05/15
X
X
X
X
X
THEOBALD, JODIE
05/18
X
X
X
X
X
THOMAS, JOHN
05/15
X
X
X
X
X
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
" = Work Session