HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-16-2015 Planning and Zoning CommissionPlanningIowa City
: Zoning Commission
° Formal Meeting
It Thursday, July 16, 2015
7:00 PM
j Iowa City Public Library - Meeting Room A
123 S. Linn Street
it - -7" -/
}t all j I
... s. �F
J`
r' CC. piCl1 C I s
Department of Neighborhood M
and �""®'®�
Development Services CITY OF IOWA CITY 1 i
UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, July 16 - 7:00 PM
Formal Meeting
Iowa City Public Library
Meeting Room A
123 S. Linn Street
AGENDA:
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
D. Rezoning Item
Discussion of an application submitted by Ed Cole for a rezoning to amend a Planned
Development Overlay (OPD) Plan to allow the addition of 45 manufactured housing units to
Cole's Mobile Home Community located in the Planned Development Overlay — High Density
Single Family Residential (OPD-RS12) zone at 2254 South Riverside Drive (REZ15-00007).
E. Annexation / Rezoning Item
Discussion of an application by CBD, LLC for annexation of 18.6 acres and rezoning from
County Multi -Family Residential (RMF) to Low Density Multi -Family (RM-12) for approximately
1.91 acres and Low Density Single Family (RS-5) for approximately 16.75 acres of property
located west of Churchill Subdivision, south of Herbert Hoover Highway. (ANN15-
00001 /REZ15-00014)
F. Vacation Item
Discussion of an application submitted by City of Iowa City for a vacation of approximately .276
acres (150' by 80) of unimproved Harrison Street located west of the Linn Street right-of-way,
south of Lot 4 in Block 1. ((VAC15-00003)
G. Code Amendment Item
Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning to add a definition for "rooftop service areas" and
establish standards for such uses.
H. County Rezoning Item
Discussion of an application submitted by Michael Furman for a rezoning from County
Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R3) for approximately 40 acres of property located at
3051 Buchmayer Bend NE in the Iowa City/Johnson County Fringe Area. (CZ15-00002)
I. Comprehensive Plan Item
A public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan: The 2015 South District Plan.
The plan may be viewed at: www.ic-gov.org/southic. (To be deferred to August 20.)
J. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: July 2, 2015
K. Planning & Zoning Information
L. Adjournment
Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings
Formal: August 6 ! August 20 ( September 3
Informal: Scheduled as needed.
r
r"`�I�'.®o`'r CITY OF I O W A CITY
'` '' IVI t 1V1 O RA N D U M
Date: July 10, 2015
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Re: REZ15-00007 Cole's Community Mobile Home Park
Staff is awaiting revised plans that address concerns raised by the City Engineer (see attached
memo). Staff has reviewed the storm shelter plan and has come to the following conclusions:
1. Based on the 100 units that will be in the former Thatcher portion of the development
there should be 700 square feet of ADA compliant shelter area (7 square feet per
manufactured housing unit). We are not applying this to the former Baculis section of the
park as it is not within the boundaries of the OPD.
2. The minimum 700 square feet shelter space should not be part of a residence. If the
shelter is in a building to be used as a residence the spaces should be distinct areas.
The shelter space may be used as a common facility, such as a community room. The
goal is to provide shelter space that is accessible 24 hours a day without infringing on a
tenant's residential space.
3. The space will need to be ADA compliant. If the existing building on lot B is to be used for
a shelter, the plan should illustrate the walkways and ramps necessary to make the
shelter compliant.
4. The HBK recommended conditions regarding signage, lighting, installation of doors and
windows should be part of the plan.
5. If the existing buildings can't be altered to comply with all of the above requirements, new
or additional shelter space should be built.
Staff recommends deferral of this application pending resolution of deficiencies noted in the
attached memo. Upon resolution of these items staff would recommend approval of REZ15-
00007, a rezoning to approve a Preliminary Plan for a 14.36-acre Planned Development Overlay
- High Density Single Family Residential (OPD/RS-12) zone located east of Riverside Drive and
north of McCollister Boulevard subject to:
1. The two existing properties (former Thatcher and Baculis parks) being combined into one
lot.
2. Resurfacing of the entrance road to the point of the new private street and designation of
pedestrian route where sidewalks are not possible due to existing development.
3. Submittal and approval of a storm shelter plan demonstrating compliance with conditions
outlined above.
4. Staff approval of structures to screen dumpster and recycling facilities.
ATTACHMENT:
Memo from City Engineering Division
Approved by: —7'�` 7
.+ ,..I � VV, nwi a va, vn,.a.0 vWv. uiuw�,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
DATE: July 8, 2015
TO: Bob Miklo, Planning
FROM: Dave Panos, Public Works Department / Engineering
RE: Preliminary Planned Development Overlay Plan
Coles Community Mobile Home Park
Please find Engineering Review of submitted drawing dated 6129115. Review comments are based
on a check of the 6/29115 plan for updates and corrections of noted DEFICIENCIES AND
DISCREPANCIES identified on the recent Staff Report Dated July 2, 2015.
Rezoning Exhibit
1. Street Typical Section
A. Label cross -slope on pcc sidewalk should be shown as 1.5%.
• OK, label provided. Drawing needs to show curb ramps at intersections.
Exhibit Plan view
B. Include pedestrian curb ramps at intersections
• Not Shown.
C. Include a grading plan showing site contours, overland flow paths, drainage ways, channels,
etc.
• Grading plan not included for site.
D. Show any proposed storm sewer & culverts (Verification with Final Construction Plans)
• Storm Intake and Piping locations are shown on updated plan, however the
lowpoint intake locations bring up questions about intent to provide drainage for
site for 100 year from each lowpoint. This helps to highlight the reason we need to
see a grading plan. The drainage of water through and around the site and impact
to homes on site and adjoining property is unknown without a grading plan and
supporting information in drainage report. We cannot support approval of a plan
until storm water drainage conveyance is clarified.
E. Will the drainage flow path along the south property line be south of the proposed
landscaping? How does the channel and landscaping go together?
• The cross section should be scaled drawing to determine the proposed right of
way slope impactor impact of water depth of a major storm event through this
area. The conveyance of water through should be addressed in drainage report
with what is represented on the plan.
F. Show permanent sanitary sewer easement for Willow Creek Interceptor Sewer (78" dia.).
Sanitary is on City Property— OK
3. The exhibit should be labeled Preliminary Planned Development Overlay Plan.
Storm Water Management Report
G. Will an ACOE permit to place fill within floodplain/floodway be submitted separately?
H. Not clear on intent of the first page of exhibit #2. Is this the diagram to denote the drainage
areas/sub-areas? Please include a legend and include this closer to the front of the report.
The diagram is needed up front understand the areas you are talking about. Why is this
behind the summary tables? The culvert conveyance and channels that are discussed in the
report need to be shown on the diagram. Would help to include drainage areas and Q for
each area on diagram so these can be referenced.
Culverts should have the capacity to convey the following:
a. 10 year storm without the headwater depth exceeding the diameter of the culvert.
b. 50 year storm without the headwater depth exceeding 1 foot over the top of the
culvert.
c. 100 year storms should be conveyed through the culvert without the headwater depth
exceeding 1 foot below the low point of the roadway/embankment, unless there are other
more restrictive elevations.
J. Final Report should indicate flow depth /ponding in streets and should be in accordance to
City Design Standards. This information is not apparent in the current report.
Please address items H. through J.
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Item: ANN15-00001/1REZ15-00014
GENERAL INFORMATION:
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Bob Miklo and Katie Gandhi, Planning
Intern
Date: July 16, 2015
Applicant: CBD, LLC
414 E. Market Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
319-631-1867
Contact Person:
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use:
File Date:
45 Day Limitation Period:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Duane Musser
d. m usser(ommsconsu Itants. net
319-351-8282
Annexation & Rezoning
To annex 18.66 acres located west of Churchill
subdivision and to rezone the property from County
Multi -Family Residential (RMF) to Low Density Multi -
Family (RM12) and Low Density Single Family (RS5)
South of Herbert Hoover Highway
18.66 acres (16.75 acres RS-5 and 1.91 acres RM-
12)
Agricultural - County Multi -Family Residential (RMF)
North: Residential — County Residential (R)
South: Residential and Agricultural — County
Residentiai (R)
East: In process of being developed — RM-12 and
RS-5
West: Residential and Agricultural — County
Commercial District (C)
Residential
June 11, 2015
July 26, 2015
CBD, LLC, with the consent of the property owner, Earlene J Dafazio Revoc Trust, has requested
the annexation and rezoning of 18.66 acres of property located south of Herbert Hoover Highway.
The applicant has requested the property be rezoned from County Multi Family Residential (RMF)
to 1.91 acres of Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM-12) and 16.75 acres of Low Density
2
Single Family Residential (RS-5). The Comprehensive Plan future land use map shows the
property within the long-range growth boundary of Iowa City and identifies the property as
appropriate for residential development. This property is west of Churchill Meadows, which was
recently annexed and zoned for a mix of single-family and multi -family development.
The applicant has indicated that they have chosen not to use the "Good Neighbor Policy."
ANALYSIS:
Annexation
The Comprehensive Plan has established a growth policy to guide the decisions regarding
annexations. The annexation policy states that annexations are to occur primarily through
voluntary petitions filed by the property owners. Further, voluntary annexation requests are to be
reviewed under the following three criteria. The Comprehensive Plan states that voluntary
annexation requests should be viewed positively when the following conditions exist.
The area under consideration fads within the adopted long-range planning boundary.
A general growth area limit is illustrated in the Comprehensive Plan and on the City's
Zoning Map. The subject property is located within the City's long-range boundary. The
boundary is located approximately % of a mile east of the subject property if continuing
along Herbert Hoover Highway.
2. Development in the area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need without
imposing an undue burden on the City.
Iowa City has a need for expanded housing options to accommodate a growing
population. The Northeast District Plan identifies the subject property as an appropriate
location for residential development, including single-family houses with the possibility of
some townhouses or small multi -family buildings adjacent to Herbert Hoover Highway.
Residential development of the subject property will fulfill the need for increased housing
availability in Iowa City.
The Comprehensive Plan encourages growth that is contiguous and connected to existing
neighborhoods to reduce the costs of providing infrastructure and City services. The
eastern border of the subject property is adjacent to Churchill Meadows Subdivision, which
was recently annexed and approved for development by the City Council, subject to the
condition that the owner shall be responsible for providing sanitary sewer and water
service. In light of this new development, the annexation of the subject property is
contiguous with planned future development.
The property will utilize the water main being installed along Herbert Hoover Highway to
serve the Churchill Meadows subdivision to the east. The property will also be able to
utilize the sewer infrastructure and lift station being installed for Churchill Meadows.
The Comprehensive Plan and Northeast District future land use maps identify the City's
intention to incorporate the subject property and the surrounding properties into the city.
Infrastructure developed to serve the subject property will allow for easier connectivity of
future infrastructure for the surrounding properties, promoting future annexation and
development of these properties. In staff's opinion annexation of the subject property is
thus in the City's long-term interest for development of this area of the Northeast District
and will not impose an undue burden on the City.
3. Control of the development is in the City's best interest.
The property is within the Long -Range Planning boundary. It is appropriate that the
PCD1SIaff Roponsl taff reportann75-00001 rez15-0 014.Coc
proposed property be located within the city so that residents of future development may
be served by Fire, Police, water, and sanitary sewer service. Annexation will allow the City
to provide these services and assure that infrastructure meets City standards. Annexation
will allow the City to control zoning so that it is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan.
For the reasons stated above, staff finds that the proposed annexation complies with the
annexation policy.
Zoning
The property is currently zoned County Multifamily Residential (RMF). Although the current
County zoning theoretically would allow apartments to be built on the property, the Fringe Area
Agreement and the need for adequate infrastructure prevents development of the property until it
is annexed into the city.
The applicant is requesting to rezone the southern 16.75 acres of the property to Low Density
Single Family Residential (RS-5). The RS-5 zone is primarily intended to provide housing
opportunities for individual households. The regulations allow for some flexibility of dwelling
types to provide housing opportunities for a variety of household types (duplexes and attached
single family on corner lots). This zone also allows for some nonresidential uses that contribute
to the livability of residential neighborhoods, such as parks, schools, religious institutions, and
daycare facilities. The RS-5 zone allows for single family lots with a minimum lot area of 8,000
square feet, and a minimum lot width of 60 feet. Lots that provide vehicle access from an alley or
rear lane have a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet, and a minimum lot width of 50 feet.
Duplexes or attached single family lots are allowed on street corner lots provided that there is at
least 6,000 square feet per unit.
The applicant is also requesting to rezone 1.91 acres on the northern edge of the property
(adjacent to Herbert Hoover Highway) to Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM-12). The
purpose of the RM-12 zone is to provide for the development of high density, single-family
housing and low density, multi -family housing. This zone is intended to provide a diverse variety
of housing options in neighborhoods throughout the City: Careful attention to site and building
design is important to ensure that the various housing types in any one location are compatible
with one another.
The Comprehensive Plan encourages housing diversity with townhouses and small apartment
buildings being located at major intersections, near commercial areas, and adjacent to parks
and open space. This rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Northeast
District Plan, which suggest low -density single-family residential development with the
possibility of multi -family adjacent to Herbert Hoover Highway. The proposed rezoning is also
compatible with Churchill Meadows to the east, which also includes RM-12 zoning adjacent to
Herbert Hoover Highway.
The applicant has submitted the attached concept plan showing how the property might be
developed according to the proposed zoning. It should be noted that this is a concept plan that
is subject to change. Staff will review the plan in more detail at that time of subdivision review.
Changes may be necessary to meet subdivision standards regarding block length and street
connectivity.
Sanitary Sewer and Water
As with Churchill Meadows, staff recommends that the owner/developer be responsible for
Providing sanitary sewer and water service to this property. The applicant plans to connect to the
water main that will be installed along Herbert Hoover Highway and to the sewer system of
Churchill Meadows development to the east. The City Engineer has determined that this plan is
workable.
?CD1S!aff RepodaWs report ann1500001 mz15-00014. doc
rd
Traffic Implications
Herbert Hoover Highway serves as the arterial street connecting the subject property with the
rest of Iowa City to the west; it is currently is not built to City standards. Although the pavement
is in reasonable condition, there is no curb, gutter, storm sewers or sidewalks. The Subdivision
Code gives the City the discretion to approve development on roads that do not meet City
standards, provided the developer contributes to the cost of improving the street in the future.
For arterial streets the fee is 12.5°% of the cost for improving the street based the City
Engineers estimate. Payment of these fees will need to a part of the developer's agreement at
the time the property is platted.
When Churchill Meadows was rezoned there was a requirement that a sidewalk connection be
provided to the existing sidewalk network within the city. A sidewalk along Herbert Hoover
Highway was considered to connect to the commercial development in Old Town Village. A
sidewalk through an easement across St. Patrick Church property was also considered. At the
time of final plat approval the route to the south across St. Patrick property was chosen. If
there is going to be more residential development in this area staff recommends that a sidewalk
connection Old Town Village be a condition of approval.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
There is a drainage way in the southwest comer of the property that could potentially contain
regulated slopes and other areas regulated by the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. The sensitive
areas on the property will be further evaluated when the property is subdivided.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of ANN15-00001 and REZ15-00014, annexation of approximately
18.66 acres and a rezoning from County Multi -Family Residential (RMF) to 1.91 acres of Low
Density Multi -Family Residential (RM-12) and 16.75 acres of Low Density Single Family
Residential (RS-5) for the property located south of Herbert Hoover Highway, subject to a
Conditional Zoning Agreement stipulating:
1. The owner/developer will be responsible for providing sanitary sewer and water service to
this property.
2. Approval of a development plan for the RM-12 zone, including a landscaping plan, exterior
building designs, and site plan by the Design Review Committee to ensure
Comprehensive Plan policies regarding compatibility with lower density residential
properties and appropriate development appearance for an entranceway to the City, will
be required prior to approval of a building permit.
3. The payment of fees required for the upgrade of Herbert Hoover Highway.
4. The ownerldeveloper will install a pedestrian walkway along Herbert Hoover Highway to
connect to Old Town Village.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Concept Plan
Approved by: _ "'4r r-j�
John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
PCO151aff 2epWslstaff report arn15-00001 rez15-0 014.doc
http://www. icgovorg/site/CMSv2/File/plann ing/urban/Zon ingMap.pdf
City of Iowa City e
ANN15-00001 & REZ15-00014
Feet
D 700 1.400
4 'lip
4 � 1
cs rT, 1 n
i , f
1,
d
Uma Prepared by. Katie Gandhi
Date Prepared: June 18. 2015
r_
N
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Item: VAC15-00003 Harrison St right of way
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Contact Person
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
File Date:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Prepared by: Katie Gandhi, Planning Intern
Date: July 16, 2015
City of Iowa City
410 E Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
John Yapp
319-356-5252
John-yapp@iowa-city.org
Vacation of a right-of-way
To vacate the 150' by 80' unimproved Harrison
Street right-of-way.
West of the Linn Street right-of-way and south of lot
4 in Block 1, according to the original town plat.
12,000 square feet or .275 acres.
Right-of-way
North: Vacant — South Downtown Sub -district
(RFC -SD)
South: Residential - Planned High Density Multi -
Family (PRM)
East: Residential — Planned High Density Multi -
Family (PRIM) and South Downtown Sub -district
(RFC -SD)
West — Office and Residential — Central Business
Support (CB-5) and South Downtown Sub -district
(RFC -SD)
Riverfront Crossings District
July 1s`, 2015
The applicant, City of Iowa City is applying for a vacation of the eastern 150-feet of the 80-ft wide
Harrison Street right-of-way located west of the Linn Street right-of-way and south of lot 4 in Block 1,
according to the original town plat. The right of way is unimproved i.e. it does not have any street
infrastructure. The City is requesting to vacate this right-of-way with the purpose of conveying the
right-of-way to CA Ventures, who were selected by the City Council to construct a mixed -use
development on the property at the southwest corner of Court Street and Linn Street.
z
ANALYSIS:
The following factors are to be considered in evaluating a vacation request:
a) Impact on pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation;
b) impact on emergency and utility vehicle access and circulation;
c) Impact on access of adjacent private properties;
d) Desirability of right-of-way for access or circulation needs;
e) Location of utilities and other easements or restrictions on the property;
f) Any other relevant factors pertaining to the specific requested vacation.
a) Vehicular and pedestrian circulation and access to private property:
The right-of-way is not developed and thus does not currently allow vehicular traffic. The right-of-way
is not required for future vehicular circulation. CA Ventures, the selected developer of the adjacent
property to the north, intends to construct a pedestrian walkway along the south border of this right of
way as a part of their project — this will improve east -west pedestrian circulation in this area.
b) Emergency and utility and service access:
Emergency, utility, and service access to this right-of-way will not be impacted by the vacation. The
right-of-way is unimproved and is not used for access.
c) Impact on access of adjacent private properties
This portion of right of way is not used for access to adjacent properties, as it is unimproved.
Adjacent properties do not rely on it for access.
d) Desirability of right of way for access or circulation needs
As a part of their project on the property to the north including this right-of-way, the CA Ventures site
plan includes a pedestrian walkway on the south edge of the right -of -gray. This will help improve and
facilitate pedestrian circulation in the neighborhood.
e) Location of utilities and other easements or restrictions on the property
The Iowa City Public Works Department has confirmed that there are storm sewer utilities located in
this section of the right-of-way. There are no existing water or sanitary sewer utilities in this location.
Staff has contacted private utility companies to determine if they have utilities in the right of way for
which easements need to be retained.
An easement will need to be retained for the public storm sewer, unless or until the storm sewer is
relocated. Any necessary private utility easements will be retained.
f) Any other relevant factors pertaining to the specific requested vacation
There do not appear to be other factors that warrant the retention of this right-of-way. As noted, the right
of way is unimproved. This segment of right of way is quite steep (approximately 18% over its length)
and the City has no plans to construct a street on it.
3
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of VAC15-00003, a vacation of the eastern
150-feet of the 80ft-wide Harris Street right-of-way located west of the Linn Street right-of-way and
south of lot 4 in block 1, according to the original town plat, subject to the creation of a pedestrian
easement, a minimum of 10' in width, for the southern edge of the right-of-way.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location map
Approved by: 7 414� /
John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
City of Iowa City e
VAC 15-00003 Feet
Harrison and Linn 5t. oo zoo
N
2
--�
d �
Y
yY
Vic, a �r _
e� T
IL
x
--x _,.
Prepared by: Katie Gandhi
Date Prepared: June 2015
'�+�mmfflfl*. - S
r
CITY OF IOWA CITY
fVm
Date: July 10, 2015
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Geoff Fruin, Assistant City Manager
Re: Rooftop Service Areas
At your May 21, 2015 meeting you requested that staff consider codifying stricter limitations on
amplified noise for rooftop service areas (RSAs). Previously, staff had suggested that amplified
noise be handled outside of the Board of Adjustment's special exception process through a
temporary use permit. Such a permit is renewed annually and can be granted with conditions
that are appropriate for the unique circumstances of each application. It is important to note that
a temporary use permit is not a right and if circumstances dictate, the City can choose not to
issue such a permit.
In response to the concerns articulated by commission members, staff has made the following
revisions to the ordinance:
We have added a table that more clearly indicates the zones where rooftop service
areas are allowed and under what conditions. Note that in a number of zones hours of
operation will be limited and occupancy will be limited to 30 or fewer persons. An
applicant may request a special exception to exceed these limitations in some zones,
but this option is not available in the zones that are more likely to be located in proximity
to residential areas (CO-1, CN-1, MU, RFC-G). Regardless of the zone, if located within
100 feet of a residential zone, the occupancy is limited to 30 and the RSA must close by
10:00 PM or when the kitchen is closed, whichever is earlier and there is no option to
exceed these limitations by special exception.
It is only in the CB-10 Zone where a RSA may be open during bar hours (midnight to
close), so we added a provision in the CB-10 Zone to address situations where the
property abuts or is directly across a public alley from a residential or hotei use that has
windows facing the RSA. In such a case the RSA must close by 10:00 p.m. Sunday
through Thursday and by 12:00 midnight Friday and Saturday. In addition, all RSAs
accessory to drinking establishments in the CB-10 Zone must be approved through a
special exception, so the Board of Adjustment may impose further restrictions if
warranted based on the particular location and the adjacency of other uses.
We added a provision requiring applicants to indicate how the RSA will be designed to
minimize carry of noise across property boundaries.
Amplified sound is prohibited within RSAs, except for RSAs accessory to hotels
(hospitality -oriented retail) in the RFC -South Downtown and for RSAs in the CB-10
Zone. in file CB-10 Zone, a seasonal temporary use permit is required for use of
amplified sound. Hotels are not required to apply for a yearly temporary use permit (see
further explanation below), but any use of amplified sound within an RSA must comply
with the standards listed below and are subject to the City's noise and nuisance
ordinance.
o If a RSA is located within 300 feet of a residential zone, amplified sound is
prohibited;
o The City may restrict the hours when amplified sound may be used. However, in
no case shall amplified sound be permitted between the hours of 12:00 midnight
and 10:00 AM;
o No live entertainment using amplification shall be allowed;
July 10, 2015
Page 2
o Amplified sound may be restricted or prohibited during public events, festivals or
concerts;
o The applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the design of
the RSA will minimize carry of noise across property boundaries. Use of
specialized screen wall materials, sound deadening techniques, control of
volume, or similar may be required.
Specific language is also included that reiterates the City's right to enforce its noise and
nuisance ordinance and to rescind the temporary use permit if nuisances arise.
While these revisions provide stricter rules to manage potential noise concerns, staff still
believes the amplified noise issue is best dealt with outside of the special exception process
through a temporary use permit. This will allow for additional conditions if warranted, and afford
greater flexibility and timely response to remedy unanticipated noise concerns.
While considering these additional conditions, it was brought to our attention that the Hotel
Vetro has a rooftop terrace where special events are often held, such as weddings,
conferences, receptions, and similar. As would be expected, amplified sound is sometimes used
during these special events and the City has never heard of or received any complaints
regarding the use of this space. Since we are trying to encourage more hotels downtown and in
Riverfront Crossings and special events are often an important part of a hotel's business model,
we recommend allowing rooftop service areas and use of amplified sound without a temporary
use permit. It is staffs opinion that hotels will tend to be self -policing with regard to nuisance
issues related to any rooftop or other outdoor amenity areas, so as not to disturb other guests in
the hotel, so there is little reason to impose additional approval processes regarding the use of
these outdoor spaces. It should be noted that as with all uses in the city, hotels are subject to
the City's general nuisance and noise ordinances, so the City is not without recourse to take
corrective action if an issue arises. Additionally, if alcohol is being served in the outdoor spaces,
hotels are subject to the City and State regulations regarding alcoholic beverages.
It is staff's opinion that the changes outlined above provide a good starting point for regulating
RSAs and for managing noise associated with RSAs. It is anticipated that changes to the
ordinance may be needed after the community has some experience with these uses.
Amend Article 14-9A, General Definitions, by adding the following definition:
Rooftop Service Area (RSA): An accessory use to an Eating or Drinking Establishment,
Commercial Recreational Use, Hospitality -Oriented Retail Use or similar principal use that is
designed as an outdoor seating or gathering space located on a rooftop or upper floor terrace of
a building, and that is regularly open to the public for events, entertainment, meetings, and/or as
a food and beverage service area. Rooftop patios or upper floor terraces intended for private
use by the residents or occupants of a building are not considered RSAs. If the RSA is
accessory to an establishment that is licensed by the State to sell alcoholic beverages, it is
considered a type of "Outdoor Service Area" as defined in Section 4-1-1, and is subject to the
applicable regulations in Title 4, Alcoholic Beverages.
Amend Section 14-4C-2, to add a new subsection V., as follows (and renumber the remaining
subsections accordingly):
V. Rooftop Service Areas (RSAs)
Rooftop Service Areas (RSAs), as defined in Article 14-9A, are regulated as indicated in this
subsection. Applications for RSAs allowed as provisional uses shall be administered through
the Design Review process. Applications for RSAs that require a special exception must be
reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Any RSA that is accessory to a use that
is licensed by the State to sell alcoholic beverages is considered a type of "outdoor service
area," as defined in Title 4-1-1 and is also subject to the applicable regulations in Title 4,
Alcoholic Beverages. Additional approval criteria apply to RSAs proposed for nonconforming
Drinking Establishments, as set forth in paragraph 2, below.
Table 4C-2: Rooftop Service Areas (RSA)
Zone
General Rules for RSAs
Approval tftria
10 Zones, 1.1,1-2
None permitted
Not applicable
Residential Zones
None Permitted
Not applicable
CO-i, CH-1, MU, RFC-G
Allowed as Provisional Uses:
See applicable approval criteria listed
Maximum Occupancy: 30, but may not
below.
exceed occupancy lim t of the principal use.
Amplified sound is not allowed.
Hours of Operation limited to:10:00 AM to
For RSAs serving alcohol, see applicable
10:00 PM or when the kitchen is closed,
regulations for outdoor service areas in
whichever Is earlier
Title 4, Alcoholic Beverages,
RSAs that exceed these thresholds are not
allowed in these zones.
CI-i, CG2, CH-1, CB-2, W-5
Allowed as
if proposed RSA
See prow; anal and special exception
RDP, ORP
Provisional Uses:
exceeds occupancy
approval criteria listed below. For RSAs
Max, Occupancy: 30,
or hours of operation
that require a special exception, the
b ;t may not exceed
limitations listed for a
general special exception approval
he Occupancy IimN,
provisional use, then
criteria set fo,",h In 144B-3 a!so apply,
of the principal use,
a special exception is
Amplified sound is not allowed.
Hours o` Operation
requ'lred.
For ,RSAs serving alcohol, see applicable
toted to:10:00 AM
If located within 100
regulations for outdoor service areas in
to 10:00 PM or when
feel of a residential
Title 4, Alcoholic Beverages,
the kitchen is closed,
zone, this speciai
whichever Is earlier.
exception option is
not allowed.
• HospitaNy-Oriented Retail allowed as a
provisional use. Special exception
required For hours of operation that
exceed limits stated below.
• Commercial Recreational Use or Eating
Establishment! —Allowed as a Provisional
Use if occupancy is 30 or less. Special
exception required to exceed this
occupancy or hours of operation limits
stated below.
• Drinking Establishment or other principal
use not listed above— special exception
required
Hours of Operation limited to:
10:O0AMto10:00PM -Sunday—Thursday
10:00 AM to 12:00 Midnight —Friday.
Saturday
If located within 100 feet of a residential zone,
maximum occupancy is 30 and hours of
operation. limited to 10:00 AM to 10:00 PM
daily or when the kitchen is closed, whichever
is earlier, with no special exception option
allowed to exceed these limits.
If accessory to:
• Hospitality -Oriented Retail allowed as a
provisional use.
• Commercial Recreational Use or Eating
Establishment —Allowed as a Provisional
Use, provided the RSA has an occupancy
of 50 or less. Special exception required
for proposed RSAs that exceed this
occupancy limit.
• Drinking Establishments or other principal
uses not listed above, a special exception
is required,
If located within 100 feet of a residential zone,
maximum occupancy is 30 and hours of
operation limited to 10:00 AM to 10:00 PM
daily or when the kitchen is closed, whichever
is earl;er, with no special exception option
allowed to exceed these limits.
approval criteria listed below. For RSAs
that require a special exception, the
general special exception: approval
criteria set forth in 14-4B-3 also apply.
Amplified Sound: Allowed for Hospitality -
Oriented Retail Uses in the RFC -SD
subdistrict, subject to noise and nuisance
ordinance and the standards set forth
below. Amplified sound is not allowed in,
RSAs for other uses or in other zones.
For RSAs serving alcohol, see applicable
regulations for outdoor service areas in
Title 4, Alcoholic Beverages.
See applicable provisional and special
exception approval criteria listed below.
For RSAs that require a special
exception, the general special exception
approval criteria set forth in 14-46-3, also
apply.
Amplified sound: See applicable
provisions below.
For RSAs serving alcohol, see applicable
regulations for outdoor service areas in
Title 4, Alcoholic Beverages.
Approval Criteria for Rooftop Service Areas
a. Accessibility
The RSA shall meet all building and fire code requirements, be ADA accessible,
include elevator service, and have accessible restrooms provided.
b. Design
The RSA shall be designed in an attractive manner that will not detract from adjacent
uses, and wiil prevent nuisance and safety issues. The applicant shall submit a
design plan with the application for an RSA that at a minimum specifies and illustrates
the proposed size, dimensions, setbacks from adjacent buildings and roof edges,
occupancy load, layout, landscaping elements, access routes, elevator, and
accessible bathrooms. RSAs shall meet the following minimum standards. If a special
exception is required, the Board of Adjustment may impose additional or more
restrictive conditions to mitigate any anticipated externalities, including but not limited
to restrictions on hours of operation, lighting, size, occupancy load, and setback and
screening requirements.
1) The RSA shall be located directly adjacent to or above the use to which it is
accessory and there shall not be other uses located on floors in between the
RSA and the use to which it is accessory.
2) The RSA must be setback from adjacent upper floor uses and the edge of the
roof and screened and completely enclosed within a decorative fence or wall
built of high quality, durable materials. Landscaping elements, such as
planters and green roofs, may be used to soften views or provide a buffer. The
setback and screening must be established in a manner that will not unduly
block light, air, or outdoor views from upper floor windows on abutting
buildings.
3) The RSA must be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the street -facing edge
of the roof. A smaller buffer between the RSA and the roof parapet or guardrail
may be allowed, provided the buffer is determined to adequately address
public safety. The buffer and screen wall shall be of a sufficient depth and/or
height and constructed of attractive, durable materials that may also include
landscaping elements to prevent persons from leaning or dropping things over
the parapet or guardrail that encloses the terrace or rooftop. A design of the
proposed buffer and screen wall shall be submitted with the application.
4) The lighting must comply with Article 14-5G, Outdoor Lighting Standards.
Except for any lighting required by the building code, lights must be turned off
when the outdoor service area is not in operation. A lighting plan shall be
submitted that illustrates compliance with these standards.
5) No signs shall be allowed in or on the exterior wall or fence of the RSA that
are within public view.
c. Management
1) For RSAs that are also outdoor service areas, as defined in Title 4, there must
be a RSA management plan in place and at least one employee must be
designated to monitor the safety and compliance of the RSA during hours of
operation. The proposed management plan shall be submitted with the
application. If nuisance or safety issues arise, the City may require changes to
the management plan and/or the number of monitors to remedy the situation.
2) In the CB-10 Zone, where the building containing the RSA abuts or is directly
across a public alley from a property containing upper floor residential uses or
hotel rooms that have windows facing the RSA, the hours of operation of the
RSA are limited to 10:00 AM to10:00 PM Sunday through Thursday and 10:00
AM to 12:00 midnight Friday and Saturday.
d. Food Service
While the primary function of the business might not be food service, if alcohol is
being served, food service must be provided when the RSA is in operation. Evidence
shall be provided indicating how the applicant will meet this requirement.
e. Noise
The applicant must demonstrate that the design of the RSA will minimize carry of
noise across property boundaries. Use of specialized screen wall materials, sound
deadening techniques, or similar may be required. In addition, after a RSA is
established, the City reserves the right to require additional measures to remedy any
violation of the City's noise or nuisance ordinance, as determined by the City.
Amplified Sound
Due to the potential nuisance to neighboring properties and the general public in the
surrounding neighborhood, amplified sound is not allowed, except for RSAs
associated with hospitality -oriented retail uses in the RFC -SD subdistrict and for
RSAs in the CB-10 Zone according to the provisions of this paragraph. For uses other
than hospitality -oriented retail uses, applicants must obtain a seasonal temporary use
permit for use of amplified sound in an RSA. Permits for amplified sound are subject
to the standards and restrictions set forth below and the general approval criteria for
temporary uses as set forth in Article 14-4D. A temporary use permit may be denied
or rescinded at the discretion of the City if noise becomes a nuisance or terms of the
temporary use permit or the special exception conditions are violated. Hospitality -
Oriented Retail Uses are not required to obtain a temporary use permit, but are
subject to the City's noise and nuisance ordinance and to the standards stated below.
1) If a RSA is located within 300 feet of a residential zone, amplified sound is
prohibited;
2) The City may restrict the hours when amplified sound may be used. However,
in no case shall amplified sound be permitted between the hours of 12:00
midnight and 10:00 AM;
3) No live entertainment using amplification shall be allowed;
4) Amplified sound may be restricted or prohibited during public events, festivals
or concerts;
5) The applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the design
of the RSA will minimize carry of noise across property boundaries. Use of
specialized screen wall materials, sound deadening techniques, control of
volume, or similar may be required.
2. Additional Special Exception Approval Criteria for Nonconforming Drinking
Establishments
A RSA that is accessory to a nonconforming Drinking Establishment may be allowed by
special exception provided it meets the general approval criteria for special exceptions set
forth in 14-4B-3, the approval criteria stated above for all RSAs and the additional approval
criteria listed below:
a. The RSA shall be located directly above and contiguous to the licensed drinking
establishment. Contiguous means there may not be other uses located on floors in
between the drinking establishment and the accessory RSA.
b. There shall be no horizontal expansion of the licensed drinking establishment;
c. There shall be no increase in interior floor area or interior occupant load of the existing
drinking establishment, except if necessary for required bathrooms, elevator, stairs,
kitchen equipment, or other essential elements necessary to meet accessibility, building
code requirements or to meet the requirements or conditions of the special exception.
Amend 14-4D-2, Temporary Uses Allowed, by adding a new subparagraph as follows:
• Seasonal permit for any proposed amplified sound for rooftop service areas (RSAs)
located in the Central Business District (CB-10), subject to the standards and
restrictions set forth in Section 14-4C-2V, Rooftop Service Areas, and any other
conditions deemed appropriate by the City to ensure the general comfort, welfare
and safety of the public.
Amend subsection 14-4E-5G, !Nonconforming Drinking Establishments and Alcohol Sales -
Oriented Retail Uses, by adding a new paragraph 4, as follows:
4. Non -conforming Drinking Establishments may expand to include a rooftop service area
provided it meets the standards and is approved by the Board of Adjustment according to the
approval criteria set forth in 14-4C, Accessory Uses, and the general special exception
approval criteria set forth in 14-4B-3, Special Exceptions.
Amend 14-3C-2A, adding a paragraph 11, as follows:
11. Rooftop Service Areas as set forth in 14-4C, Accessory Uses.
Amend 14-3C-3A-1 a, adding a paragraph (12), as follows:
(12) Rooftop Service Areas as set forth in 144C, Accessory Uses.
Amend 14-3C-38, adding a paragraph 10, as follows:
10. Rooftop Service Areas allowed as provisional uses according to approval criteria set forth in
14-4C, Accessory Uses.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: July 16, 2015
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Robert Miklo
RE: item CZ15-00002 3051 Buchmayer Bend NE
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The applicant, Michael Furman, is requesting a rezoning from Agriculture (A) to Residential
(R3) for forty (40) acres of land located off Jenn Lane NE, a private subdivision road off
Buchmayer Bend NE in Newport Township. Buchmayer Bend is a gravel Road. While the
subject property is outside the city limits of Iowa City and the City growth area, it is within the
area covered by the Fringe Area Policy Agreement.
The applicant has submitted a concept plan illustrating his intent to subdivide the 40-acre
parcel into twelve lots with three outlots. The existing house will be set on a one of the lots
which would also have an associated outlot (Outlot B).
A similar rezoning request to allow five residential lots on this property was withdrawn in 2009
after the County and City expressed concerns about the design of the subdivision and the
condition of Buchmayer Bend, a gravel road, which provides access from this subdivision to
Highway 1.
ANALYSIS
Existing Land Use and Zoning
The subject property is zoned for agricultural uses but is currently not in production. All
adjacent properties, excluding property to the east, are zoned Agricultural (A) and most land
that is not wooded appears to be in production. Properties to the east are zoned Residential
(R) and are developed as a ten -lot residential subdivision. There is limited development in
the area between Highway One and Newport Road (to the west). Instead, most of this area
is agricultural fields or woodland.
Compliance with Comprehensive Plan
The Fringe Area Agreement states that any rezoning for property outside Iowa City's Growth
Area will be considered "on the basis of conformity with the Johnson County Land Use Plan
and other related policies." The area is identified as being within the North Corridor growth
area. Consideration of other policies regarding road conditions and street design should also
be considered. If the County does determine that this rezoning is to be approved, staff
recommends that it be conditioned on Buchmayer Bend being improved to meet County road
performance standards, the subdivision be designed to create an appropriate street pattern
and to preserve open space, and that that the applicant address stormwater management.
The Fringe Area Agreement, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, is intended to provide
guidance regarding the development of land located within two miles of Iowa City's corporate
limits. The agreement's stated purpose is to provide for orderly and efficient development
patterns appropriate to a non -urbanized area, protect and preserve the fringe area's natural
resources and environmentally sensitive features, direct development to areas with physical
characteristics which can accommodate development, and effectively and economically
provide services for future growth and development.
The development standards in the Fringe Area Agreement "encourage cluster development,
which preserves large tracts of open space including environmentally sensitive areas and
farmland, results in compact development that requires less infrastructure, and is more
efficient for provision of services." Staff has reviewed the subdivision concept with County
Planning Staff and is concerned that the concept plan does not comply with this policy of the
Fringe Area Agreement. The current proposed plan would create a situation in which future
subdivision of property for infill development might not be possible. Rather than a cul-de-sac
staff recommends that Jenn Lane be connected to the existing Jenn Lane Court and that a
road easement be reserved to provide access to the property to the south to allow
interconnected development.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that if the County choses to approve this rezoning it be conditioned on the
following:
1. Buchmayer Bend being improved to meet County road performance standards.
2. The subdivision being designed to to preserve open space and create an appropriate street
pattern with Jenn Lane and Jenn Lane Court being connected to provide a loop street.
3. An easement being reserved to provide for future road access to the property to the south.
4. The subdivision include stormwater management.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map
2. Aerial photograph
3. Concept plan ,(
Approved by:
......1. • _rr, .......,..,r...............___ ___._..._._.,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
CITY OF !0XA CITY O
El
'!
y'j/\f\t�
I
// attmi Hatt care XUWM `.
1 co
ORP
SITE LOCATION:
3051 Buchmayer Bend NE
77 �A
PLAT PREPARED BY, APPLICANTJREQUESTED BY:
MMS CONSULTANTS INC. MICHAEL L. B SHERRI P. PURMAN
1917 S. GILBERT 5Di P.O. BOX IBW
MA CITY, IA5 K) IMA CITY, IMA 5226E-16W
e
EXISTING ZONING: A- AGRICULTURAL
PROPOSED ZONING: R - RESIDENTIAL
EXISTING ZONING: A- AGRICULTURAL
PROPOSED ZONING: R - RESIDENTIAL,
AREA = 40.00 ACRES
OUTLOT A
Ple�e[�til[
1( OUTLOTB
REBAP
am�r o
REZONING EXHIBIT
JOFINSON COUNTY, IOWA
6Wm¢wgt MR4G ifA Oe q
9AFA N 44N,%YJ, M
1D1111PT'. Y9N11C, R Or1H @F 9RW.8 1168g9LGO8RD1A FiAr
�Y UY,MbW M14iAWi WU`I'n LAa�x.mF tvuu.R,xYnuq WY1V.YW8&
REZONING EXHIBIT
a
• v
- i.000I
S
l.ori�
}
a.. CRY
CIVIL ENGINEERS
LAND PLANNERS
LANDSRVEYORS
IANOSCA%ARCHBECTS
ENWYOWMALSPECKUSTS
1917&Ga RTSE.
pWAGN.IVHP 59110
(J191 J81-8M2
LOCATION
I
LEGEND
AND NOTES
IIBB
gg
��
K
X
- am'.TN.
1�•x°mb .I.auw
q
�wrtnTAY
,Minills'
un¢ OM#m
I
_ �=xnWry ��wlm,uetttlN,
b S =
REZONING EXHIBIT
JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA
�Pp
.9w enewa, uoxomxe.a
xrv+uo mnmre
MAP
L80IL6
--
AUDITOR'S PARCEL
94071, LOCATED IN THE
S 1/2 NE 1/4 OF
LOf a
SEC. 25-T80N-R6W
lo
g
OF THE 5Tf1 P.M.
JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA
-'
MMS CONSULTANTS, INC.
4' ma Mw.
G. 30
NO. SGL TWE SLOPES
18H FA,m SILT LG R
���
Ytld
S-5
1SX�T�M.:
'IM3 FA`.' M SLLT tMM 5-9 S
183D3 FA`.2TlE L. 9-IA S
°vet GW!
,
%T "
183F FAYETTE $ T LOAN iB-35
1543 FPtEIiE SRT
IU,Y0.C(IY
0881-048
,,. 7
CITY OF IOWA CITY
UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE
CITY OF IOWA CITY
AlEiviu ANDU�V1rrnn
Date: July 10, 2015
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Sarah Walz, Associate Planner
Re: South District Plan Update
At your June 4 meeting, the Commission voted to defer a hearing on the South District Plan to
July 16 in order to allow time for Staff to meet with area landowners and developers to discuss
their concerns about the plan. Since that time we have held two discussions, the most recent of
which took place on July 7.
In response to input from the development community, staff is now working through a set of
options that could provide additional opportunities for density —both multi -family and townhome
style development —particularly along arterial streets. We are also looking at a range of
regulatory measures to assure quality site and building design standards so that added density
can serve as an asset to overall neighborhood, such as providing a healthy mix of housing and
enhancing streetscapes and entry points to the district and access to parks and trails.
Staff recommends deferring the public hearing to August 20 to allow staff time to develop these
ideas for consideration by the Commission and presentation to the community.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 2, 2015 — 7:00 PM —FORMAL IOWA
CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY — MEETING ROOM A
PRELIMINARY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max
Parsons, Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT: Charlie Eastham
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo
OTHERS PRESENT: Ed Cole, Joe Hughes
• ,•: •. 1:2][SX9111•
The Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of VAC15-00002 an application submitted
by Southgate Companies for a vacation of an existing un-paved street right-of-way known as
Auditors Parcel #2008020 and two utility easements adjacent to Lot 10 of Highlander
Development Third Addition and north of Northgate Drive.
1501tim Imam JDAA
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
• 1:4 a I � 01 illl. I I . I,•a
There were none.
Discussion of an application submitted by Ed Cole for a rezoning to amend a Planned
Development Overlay (OPD) Plan to allow the addition of 45 manufactured housing units to
Cole's Mobile Home Community located in the Planned Development Overlay- High Density
Single Family Residential (OPD-RS12) zone at 2254 South Riverside Drive.
Miklo presented the staff report and began by showing photos of the property area and a zoning
map of the area showing industrial zoning to the west and public zoning to the east and south.
The subject property is located in the South Central Planning District, east of Riverside Drive and
north of McCollister Boulevard. Currently, the property contains Cole's Community Mobile Home
Park (formerly known as Thatcher), along with approximately 6.5 acres of undeveloped land
where the expansion is proposed. The neighboring property to the north contains another mobile
home park (formally known as Baculis' Mobile Home Park), which was recently acquired by the
applicant. The applicant has indicated that he intends to combine the existing parks into one
development that will share facilities such as storm shelters and playgrounds. The existing
manufactured home park was created in 1974 for 55 units, and the rezoning would allow for the
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 2 2015 - Formal Meeting
Page 2 of 8
development of an additional 45 mobile homes in the undeveloped area of the parcel. The
current zoning of the property is for a Planned Development Overlay - High Density Single Family
Residential (OPD/RS-12). The overlay zone is required in order for a property owner to construct
a manufactured housing park.
Miklo commented on the standards required for the rezoning. First is compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan. The future land use map shows this parcel as being an intensive or
highway commercial use. There was a concern that the residential uses in this area where
isolated among industrial uses. The District Plan notes that in the long-term to avoid conflicts
with the industrial uses and potential flooding, residential uses should be phased out in this area.
At the time the district plan was written the only access to the area was from Riverside Drive,
which was surrounded by industrial uses. Additionally the Plan was written before the
McCollister Boulevard and the levee were constructed. The application does not up -zone the
area. That is, it maintains the existing base zone. Because the property is maintaining an existing
use, provides a relatively affordable housing alternative, and has good access to the street
network, trails and open space, it is staffs opinion a comprehensive plan amendment is not
necessary in order to approve the OPD plan. If this was a proposal to change the underlying
zoning and establish a new residential use, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would be
necessary.
The next thing the ordinance states for compliance is the density and design of the planned
development and if it is compatible and complimentary to adjacent development in terms of land
use, building mass and scale, relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and
genera/layout. The proposed density of 100 units on 14.36 acres equals approximately 7 units
per acre. The mobile home park to the north also has a density of 7.5 units per acre. In terms of
streets, within the development the current streets are asphalt without curb and gutter or
sidewalks. The applicant has indicated that he will improve the entrance road to the development
with new asphalt paving. All new lots are proposed to have a sidewalk integrated with the curb.
A sidewalk is proposed on the south side of the entrance road that provides access to
Riverside Drive and to the city bus stop. Staff is recommending as a condition of approval that that
sidewalks be provided where possible, and where there is not sufficient room for sidewalks the
asphalt be raised or marked to designate the pedestrian route. In terms of other infrastructure
one area to review is stormwater management. Although there is a levee, it is still in the
floodplain and there is a low area with drainage concerns. The City Engineer has requested a
drainage plan and a grading plan. That information has been received, but is still under review.
The next standard to review is that 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 staff's opinion the application meets this standard as it will be similar to what
is already in the area. Additionally the standard of 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 harmony with the purposes of this Title, and with other building
regulations of the City. Miklo noted there are some specific waivers of the standard the applicant
is requesting. The applicant is proposing to reduce the required 30-foot perimeter setback to
the property lines to the north and east and along a portion of the south property line to 10-feet, a
reduction of the street right-of-way and pavement width, minimum lot size for 33 of the 45
units, and modifications to the City's sidewalk and street tree standards. The purpose of the
setback is to provide some buffer for the residents from street traffic and adjacent development
and provides open space since manufactured housing parks are typically more densely
developed than other single family neighborhoods. The reduction of the 30-foot setback to 10
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 2 2015 - Formal Meeting
Page 3 of 8
feet along the east side of the development appears to be justifiable, as the land to the
east is City -owned open space. The City acquired the land for flood control purposes and it
will remain as permanent open space lessening the need for a setback for the residential units.
The reduction of the 30-foot setback to 5 feet for lots 2, 3 and 4 (the north property line)
appears to be justifiable as the adjacent property is another mobile home park under the same
ownership. The applicant has indicated that he will join the two properties into one, which will
eliminate the need for the setback provided that the adjacent dwellings to the north are at
least 20 feet away from the proposed dwellings. Staff recommends that the combing of the two
lots into one be a condition of approval. The applicant is also requesting that the 30 foot setback
to 20 feet for lots 43 and 44. The property to the south is zoned General Industrial, and the
Board of Adjustment recently approved a special exception to allow a self -serve warehouse
facility to be built on the adjacent property. The Board placed conditions on the use of the
property (it may be used for self -storage only- no workshops, assembly, or other active uses of
the site will be permitted). The special exception also established requirements for landscaping
and lighting to help assure that it will be compatible with the existing dwelling units in the area.
Given these requirements the 30-setback for the dwellings on lots 43 and 44 may not be
necessary to provide a bufferfor the residents of these two lots. Additionally the applicant is
requesting that the minimum 5,000 square foot lot area be reduced for 33 of the 45 lots. The
smallest lot would be 4,268 square feet or approximately a 15% reduction in the required
minimum. Miklo noted that is typical of the existing manufactured housing lots.
The standard for streets Miklo explained is a right-of-way of 60 feet with a 26 foot wide street. In
this case the proposal is a 32 foot wide easement and a 22 foot wide street with a curb and
sidewalk built adjacent to the street. That was the standard for manufactured housing parks prior
to 2005, and is in line with existing mobile home parks.
Miklo stated that planned developments typically include common amenities and open space to
serve the residents of the development. In this case the applicant is proposing to install
playground equipment and a recreation area (soccer field) in the existing development to the
north, and a trail with in the City owned open space. Miklo showed photos of the playground
equipment that was recently installed. The plan also consists of three existing buildings of which
the lower levels will be devoted to storm shelters. The City is reviewing the plans for the storm
shelters and if they are ADA compliant and will have results of the review by the next
Commission meeting. Planned developments also require a dedication of neighborhood open
space or fees in lieu of in order to ensure that adequate usable neighborhood open space is
provided for residents of new development. When the property to the east was purchased by the
City from the previous owner of Cole's Community Mobile Home Park, the purchase agreement
stipulated that the land satisfies future open space requirements upon expansion of the mobile
home park. The applicant has agreed to install a trail connection to provide residents of the
development with access to the open space.
Miklo stated that in summary, although the South Central District Plan indicates that in the long-
term residential development should be phased out of this area, but with lack of other available
areas for this type of housing it will be a difficult goal to achieve. With recent public
improvements this area more suitable for residential development compared to when the plan
was drafted. Although the levee has reduced the possibility of flooding, this property remains in
the floodplain and careful consideration of flood mitigation and drainage are necessary.
Approval should be deferred pending an acceptable storm water management plan.
Staff recommends deferral of this application pending resolution of deficiencies noted. Upon
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 2 2015 - Formal Meeting
Page 4 of 8
resolution of those issues staff would recommend approval with conditions:
1. The two existing properties (former Thatcher and Baculis parks) being combined into one lot.
2. Resurfacing of the entrance road to the point of the new private street and designation of
pedestrian route where sidewalks are not possible due to existing development.
3. Submittal and approval of a storm shelter plan demonstrating compliance with guidelines
outlined in the staff report.
4. Staff approval of structures to screen dumpster and recycling facilities.
5. A Plan for installation of playground equipment (which has been resolved)
Dyer asked if there was any sidewalk access from the new addition to McCollister Boulevard.
Miklo replied that yes there is a sidewalk that will connect the area to McCollister Boulevard.
Freerks asked if the storm shelter properties were already rented, how access is granted. Miklo
said that is also one of the questions regarding the storm shelters that staff is seeking clarity on.
The applicant should be able to address that question.
Theobald asked if there are standards on construction materials for the storm shelters and how
large of shelter is needed for a certain number of occupants. Miklo said there are State Code
requirements and those are what the City will recommend and what Staff is clarifying with their
review of the storm shelter proposal. He said staff had received that proposal for shelters
recently and has not had time to review it completely.
Hensch asked about the waiver for the minimum lots sizes, it seems by eliminating a lot on each
row would get the lot sizes closer to the 5000 square foot minimum. Miklo said with a planned
development allows the City to consider requests to adjust minimum lot sizes. It is a judgment
call for the Commission to decide if the size should be modified in for this project.
The standard is 5000 square feet but the proposal is a sufficient size to fit a manufactured
dwelling and similar to other manufactured housing developments in the City. Freerks added
that the Commission has approved these types of reductions in the past if there are amenities
and other open spaces in the planned developments.
Martin asked about the infrastructure and if there was public transportation accessible to this
development. Miklo said there is a bus route that runs along Riverside Drive and there is a bus
stop at the development.
Dyer asked if they could suggest removing some of the units along the entry drive to make
sufficient room for an actual sidewalk. Miklo said staff did look at that and the applicant could
address that question.
Freerks opened the public hearing
Ed Cole (1450 Laura Drive) said the old Thatcher and Baculis parks have been combined and
they have created a nice community for families with great green space such as the soccer field
and parks that are used every day.
Freerks asked how long they have owned the properties. Cole said they've owned Baculis for 2
/ years and just closed on Thatcher in December 2014. He noted they have owned Forest View
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 2 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 5 of 8
Park for 20 years.
Freerks asked if Cole wanted to address the question about possibly moving a couple of the
units to allow for a better connecting road and sidewalks to the new addition. Cole said that
would be unfair to the folks living there, they have been in their spots, they are situated and like
where they are.
Theobald asked about the storm shelter situation. Cole said the house that is located at the
entrance to Thatcher is the offices for the management and the night manager stays there so in
the event of a storm the night manager is there and makes sure the building is unlocked and
available for tenants. The other house is rented, but as part of their lease it is stated they must
leave the basement area available for shelter.
Freerks asked if the shelters were within the allowable distance for all the residents. Miklo said it
does fit the requirements of distance. Cole added that the management has golf carts and will
shuttle people to the shelters and that so many of the residents know each other and keep an
eye out for each other to make sure everyone is safe.
Martin asked if the new homes would be purchased or rented. Cole said they would be
purchased, they do not rent any homes.
Hensch asked how the square footage of the lots was decided. Cole said they looked at what
the other two existing parks had and matched those lot sizes.
Freerks closed the public hearing.
Martin moved for deferral of REZ15-00007 and Parsons seconded
Freerks said the staff report outlines the concerns and what issues need to be resolved before
moving forward. She noted that additionally under item 2 on page 7 of the staff
recommendations, when talking about designation of pedestrian route where sidewalks are not
possible due to existing development, she would like that defined in more detail to make sure
that means more than just a sign. It will include paint and raising and texturing road services.
Dyer questioned the levee/berm and what would in protect in a flood situation. Miklo said the
levee is designed to protect that area west of the river including the manufactured housing park.
He said the City in confident that the levee will prevent flooding. However in the past levees have
been breached during floods and the area is still technically in the flood plain so the dwelling
units must be elevated above flood levels and the streets must be designed to be passable to
allow access for emergency vehicles.
Parsons asked when the levee was completed and would it protect the area from a flood like
1993. Miklo said it was just recently completed and are confident it can hold through a flood
event like the flood of 1993 or 2008.
Hensch recommended incorporating the information from the HBK report into item 3 of the staff
recommendations as instructions for the engineers regarding storm shelters and their structural
integrity.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 2 2015 - Formal Meeting
Page 6 of 8
Martin asked if the levee were breached during a flood event are the homes in this development
covered by flood insurance. Miklo said he would find out the answer to that question.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer carried 6-0.
VACATION ITEM (VAC15-00002):
Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a vacation of an existing un-
paved street right-of-way known as Auditor's Parcel #2008020 and two utility easements
adjacent to Lot 10 of Highlander Development Third Addition and north of Northgate Drive.
Miklo gave the staff report stating the property is located north of Northgate Drive and this
property was recently rezoned Commercial Office (CO-1) for an office park development. The
street has not yet been built. The vacation will also include the release of a 10' wide utility
easement located at the Northeast comer of Lot 9 of Highlander Development Third Addition,
and a 15' wide utility easement located at the northeast corner of Lot 10, Highland Development
Third Addition. The vacated street right-of-way and easements will be replaced with a similar
right -of way, called Clear Ridge Road to be located approximately 450 feet to the north, and
similar utility easements between Lots 28 and 29 of Highlander Fourth Addition Part 1. Miklo
stated that the standards for vacation of a right-of-way are detailed in the Staff report and Staff
believes this application meets all those standards and recommends approval.
Hensch asked where the proposed intersection to Oakdale Boulevard would be once that is
extended. Miklo said that it is conceptual at this point, but showed on the map where they
believed it would be.
Freerks opened the public hearing
Joe Hughes (1045 Mesquite Drive, Coralville) representing Southgate Companies said they want
to move the road so it won't create a dead end and can flow traffic through and connect to
properties to the west and east. He noted that Oakdale Boulevard is planned to go through the
very northern edge of this property.
Freerks closed the public hearing
Theobald moved to approve VAC15-00002 an application submitted by Southgate
Companies for a vacation of an existing un-paved street right-of-way known as Auditor's
Parcel #2008020 and two utility easements adjacent to Lot 10 of Highlander Development
Third Addition and north of Northgate Drive.
Martin seconded the motion.
Freerks asked about the language in the analysis of the Staff report. It states the applicant plans
to build the replacement street to the north, but should it be a condition of approval of the
vacation. Miklo said that a preliminary plat that shows the replacement street has been
approved the final plat will soon be before Council, so staff if confident that the replacement
street will be built in the future.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 2 2015 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 8
Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning to add a definition for "rooftop service areas" and
establish standards for such uses.
Martin moved to defer this item to the July 16 meeting.
Theobald seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer carried 6-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES, MAY 18. 2015 & JUNE 4. 2015:
Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes with edits submitted.
Parsons seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
PLANNING & ZONING INFORMATION:
Freerks noted that at the new HyVee store on Dodge Street the screening does not look at all
like what was discussed when this property was rezoned. It should have S-3 screening and what
it has is just some grasses and tiny shrubs. When people come forward and have concerns and
we make promises to address those with screening requirements, it is important that we follow
up on those promises. Freerks asked staff to report back on this. Other Commissioners agreed.
Miklo said the City has received a couple other concerns from the neighborhood. He will pass
this on to the inspection division and report back at the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT:
Parsons moved to adjourn.
Hensch seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2014 - 2015
FORMAL MEETING
8/7
8/21
912
9/18
10/2
10/16
11/6
11/2012/181/15
2/5
2/19
3/19
4/2
4/16
5/7
5/21
6/4
7/2
DYER, CAROLYN
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
I X
I X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
EASTHAM, CHARLIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X.
O/E
FREERKS, ANN
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
HENSCH, MIKE
—
--
--
--
—
—
—
_
_
__
__
__
_
_
X
X
X
X
MARTIN, PHOEBE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
I X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PARSONS,MAX
SWYGARD, PAULA
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
—
—
THEOBALD, JODIE
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
THOMAS, JOHN
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
INFORMAL MEETING
NAME
TERM
EXPIRES
2/3
3/15
5118
DYER, CAROLYN
05/16
X
X
X
EASTHAM, CHARLIE
05/16
X
X
X
FREERKS, ANN
05/18
X
X
X
HENSCH, MIKE
05/19
—
-
X
MARTIN, PHOEBE
05/17
X
X
X
PARSONS, MAX
05/19
--
X
SWYGARD, PAULA
05/15
X
X
—
THEOBALD, JODIE
05/18
X
X
X
THOMAS, JOHN
05/15
X
X
-
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
-- = Not a Member