Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Packet 1.21.16.pdfMINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 7, 2016 – 7:00 PM – FORMAL EMMA HARVAT HALL – CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Jodie Theobald MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Karen Howard, Bob Miklo, Martina Wolf OTHERS PRESENT: Duane Musser, Greg Hamilton, Frank Mitros, Doug Schnoeblen, Monica Maloney-Mitros, Michael Smith RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval VAC15-00008, a vacation of approximately 12,884 square feet of Herbert Hoover Highway right-of-way. 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 REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ15-00023/SUB15-00031): Discussion of an application submitted by Steve Kohli tor a rezoning of approximately 9.33- acres from Low Density Single Family (RS-5) zone and Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) zone to Planned Development Overlay (OPD-8) zone and a preliminary plat and sensitive areas development plan for Pine Grove, a 12-lot residential subdivision with 10 single family lots and 44 multi-family dwellings located south of Lower West Branch Road between Scott Boulevard and Hummingbird Lane. Miklo began the staff report showing images of the property, there are currently three structures on the property, a house, garage and stable. Those three structures will be removed as part of this project. The western portion of the property is currently zoned Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) and the eastern portion is zoned Low Density Single Family (RS-5). The proposal is to rezone the entire property to Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) and then apply a planned development overlay to the property and the also to subdivide the property into 12 lots. The eastern portion of the property would contain 10 single family lots, and the western portion is would cluster the development into three buildings. Two townhouses style buildings with four units in each and one 36 unit apartment building with parking below. The eastern portion would be developed at a lower density than allowed by the current RS-5 zoning, but the density would Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 2 of 13 be transferred to the western portion where clustering of the units will allow the preservation of the woodlands. Miklo showed images of the proposed buildings in the cluster development area. Miklo said that the Planned Development Overlay Zone is utilized to permit flexibility in the design, placement, and clustering of buildings. The OPD zone is also intended to allow creativity and the preservation of unique features (historic properties, environmental features, etc.). In this situation the northwest corner of the property would be preserved and turned over to a homeowners association and maintained as open space. There are also other trees that would be preserved with this development along Lower West Branch Road. Miklo pointed out the various trees throughout the development that would be preserved. Some of the trees along Hummingbird Lane would need to be removed to allow the construction of Pine Grove Lane, as well as some trees to allow for house construction and driveways. The bulk of the trees in the middle of the property would be removed for the construction of the multi-family buildings. Parsons asked when this property was annexed into the City. Miklo believes it was annexed sometime after 2000. Miklo noted there are a series of criteria the Commission should consider for Planned Development zones. Probably the most important is the Comprehensive Plan for this area. The Northeast District Plan does depict single family along Hummingbird Lane and then transitioning to some sort of multi-family along Scott Boulevard. So it is Staff’s opinion that this does comply with what is shown in the Comprehensive Plan. The other aspect of this development is the sensitive areas plan. Because this property is over two acres of woodland there is a requirement that 50% of the woodland be preserved or if more than 50% is disturbed than replacement trees must be planted. In this case the proposal is to remove 52% of the trees. Those additional 2% trees would need to be replaced at a ratio of 1 tree per 200 square feet of land woodland disturbance. Staff does believe this does comply with the objectives of the sensitive areas ordinance and the planned development criteria. Staff originally recommended that this item be deferred, given an issue with stormwater management that hadn’t been resolved with the City Engineer, however that has since been resolved. The majority of the property drains to the south and west and there is a large detention basin that the engineers confirmed will suffice for a bulk of this property. The lots that front onto Hummingbird Lane will drain to the north and east and the stormwater sewers along Hummingbird Lane have the capacity to accommodate the proposed development. Staff is recommending approval of REZ15-00023/SUB15 -00031, a rezoning of 9.33 acres from Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5) and Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to Planned Development and Overlay Zone (OPD-8), and a Preliminary OPD Plan and Plat of Pine Grove, a 12-lot residential subdivision with 10 single family lots and 44 multi-family dwellings located south of Lower West Branch Road between Scott Boulevard and Hummingbird Lane. Eastham asked for clarification about the sidewalks within this subdivision connect with the external sidewalks, and if additional sidewalks could be constructed within the subdivision to connect with Scott Boulevard. Miklo replied that there is currently a sidewalk on Scott Boulevard, another on Lower West Branch Road and one on Hummingbird Lane. The new street, Pine Grove Lane, will have sidewalks on both sides connecting into that network. The building that fronts onto Scott Boulevard will have sidewalks to Scott Boulevard and the individual townhouses will also have individual sidewalks back to the street. There are also sidewalks from the Pine Grove to the 36-unit building along Scott Boulevard. Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 3 of 13 Eastham asked if there was any consideration by Staff to installing some kind of paved path into outlot A so that it would be an accessible outlot. Miklo said that was not discussed, the concern would be not disturbing the root systems of the trees. He said he would check with the City Forester to see if a sidewalk might be possible without damaging the trees that are to be protected. Freerks asked if there was bus service out to this area. Miklo said there is on Rochester Avenue and Scott Boulevard. Eastham asked which elementary school attendance area this subdivision would be. Miklo believes it would be Lemme Elementary. Freerks opened the public hearing. Duane Musser (MMS Consultants) noted they were approached by Steve Kohli (Kohli Construction) in October and began working on some concepts and working with City Staff. They also held a good neighbor meeting. One of the original concepts did have a cul-de-sac design rather than a through-street hooking Hummingbird Lane to Lower West Branch Road. Staff said that a cul-de-sac design could not be supported so they went with the through-street design. The applicant did want to make the lots sizes compatible with the lot sizes along Hummingbird Lane instead of using the smaller RS-8 or RS-5 sized lots. Therefore a small single family lot is around 12,000 square feet, and the largest is 25,000 square feet. Musser noted all the public utilities are already in place in the area (water, utilities, etc.). The stormwater retention basin was sized in agreement with the seller and the City when Scott Boulevard was installed and sized for this type of infill project to be developed. The City Engineer has determined that the drainage to the north and east is adequate. As far as the proposed uses, the townhouses will be approximately 1600 square foot units, two story, three bedrooms with rear loaded two car garages. The 36-plex unit will be approximately 1200 square feet units, two to three bedrooms. Perhaps the upper level being larger more custom units, penthouse style. The garage is underground, below the building. Musser said they are trying to do minimal grading to protect the existing trees. Each single-family home will be custom designed to protect the trees on each lot. Freerks asked if there would be fencing around the protected areas, for the trees, during construction. Musser confirmed that yes, an orange safety fence will be constructed to protect the trees during construction. Miklo recommended a note be added to the plat requiring City Forester approval of the tree protection plan prior to construction. Freerks also asked about the single family lots and the trees along the back lot lines and along Hummingbird Lane, where would the homes be placed on these lots to not disturb the trees and perhaps if shared driveways were considered. Specifically lots 7-10 on the plan. Freerks noted that in the past with planned development overlay requests they have required maximum home footprints for each lot before approval. Theobald asked about the topsoil, there has been a change at the State level on four inches of topsoil being replaced. Musser said they have no intention of grading any of the single family lots more than to just to build the city street. Any topsoil disturbed would be replaced and will make that part of the construction plan bid design. Theobald questioned what the definition of penthouse was for this development. Musser said that he is unable to give details at this point. She also said the building is all vinyl siding and Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 4 of 13 asked if there was a possibility of some other upgrade such as fiber cement board. Musser said he could entertain that idea and pass it along to the applicant. Eastham noted a comment received via email from a neighbor regarding considering Pine Grove Lane connecting to Lower West Branch Road and then to Scott Boulevard. Could that be done? Musser said that in some of the earlier meetings with City Staff they were told there wouldn’t be access to Scott Boulevard for this development. Miklo confirmed, noting the policy is minimize the number of streets that intersect with Scott Boulevard. He also said it would be problematic given the grade in that area. Greg Hamilton (260 Hummingbird Lane) attended the good neighbor meeting. In this proposal he is happy to see the larger single family lots, particularly on the Hummingbird side, and the greater density of development towards Scott Boulevard. He does have a couple concerns with the proposal as stated, and a couple suggestions on how to resolve them. One concern is regarding the density of the development and rezoning the whole area into RS-8. As the Staff Report noted all of the single family lots are considerably larger than either RS-8 or RS-5 would require but rezoning the entire 9 acre property to RS-8 is used then to justify a greater density on the Scott Boulevard side for a 36 unit apartment complex. He said the staff report notes that if the RS-8 zoning is approved then you have essentially a density of 5.8 units for each of those 9 acres which is greater than the 5.2 density that is historical. Using historical numbers he believes 48 units rather than 54 would be more appropriate which would mean that even if an apartment complex was approved it would be downsized. If the existing zoning is kept with an RS-8 strip along the Scott Boulevard side and the rest kept at RS-5 the density would be more consistent with the rest of the neighborhood with 38 units, if RS-5 density is similar to the lots already in the area, about 11,000 square feet. Overall he does not have a problem with the single family houses in an RS-5 area, and no problem with the four-plexes and he wouldn’t have a problem in principle with a larger unit along Scott Boulevard, but something more sized around 20 units rather than 36. The current proposal for the large building is 280 feet long and three stories high so it is a substantial building and the Comprehensive Plan did not contemplate such a large building. While there are other apartment complexes in the area, for diversity he feels they do not need strips and strips of apartment complexes up and down Scott Boulevard. There is no lack of apartment complexes on the east side of Iowa City. Hamilton noted the other problem he has is with Pine Grove Lane, he could rather have a cul-de-sac and the Northeast District Plan contemplates that cul-de-sacs are appropriate and they see them all over the eastside. The District Plan talks about conventional subdivision design and says those are often used to make extensive use of cul-de-sac street design. In the design standards it states a cul-de-sac should be less than 900 square feet from the bulb to the adjoining street and this would be significantly less than that. The Northeast Neighborhood plan includes conservation design and talks about protection of sensitive and environmental features by development of things like cul-de-sacs and single-loaded streets (where development is on one side of the street and sensitive areas are protected on the other). The very first principle in the Northeast District Plan talks about preserving the natural beauties and one of the strategies they mention for that is to encourage single-loaded streets. What is essentially on Hummingbird Street is a single-loaded street with development on the east side and a fence line preserving trees right behind it. Hamilton believes there could be the potential in the open space design to protect many of those. Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 5 of 13 The Staff Report noted that for a development of this size, a little over 15,000 square feet of open space would need to be provided or a fee comparable to that value of that property provided. The eastern border along Hummingbird Lane is 565 feet so if 27 feet of depth was protected that would protect the mature trees. The problems he has with Pine Grove Lane going through is a practical problem in terms of other opportunities it creates for construction. According to the zoning code, duplexes become appropriate on a corner lot and there now becomes a corner at lots 6 and 7 so those could become eligible for duplexes. That would not be consistent with uses on either side of the street. The lots are all large enough that if there is a corner there could be duplexes with either a RS-5 or RS-8 zoning. He also feels there is a safety issue with traffic flow, the Staff Report noted that the Comprehensive Plan suggested that higher density housing should be at an intersection of something like an arterial road (like Scott Boulevard) and collector road (like Lower West Branch Road). In this situation, having high density traffic to the high density units would have to go through Hummingbird Lane, Pine Grove Lane and the lower density housing area. Hummingbird Lane is only 24 feet wide, current design standards suggest 29 feet would be preferable for a subdivision local road. Miklo noted that design standards state 26 feet. Hamilton noted that some of the homes on Hummingbird Lane that are set closer to the street use the street for parking and therefore two-lane traffic is unavailable in those areas. The City Planners anticipate 390 car trips a day and Hamilton feels it will be much greater during the busy times of the day, especially when it is more difficult to make a left hand turn off Lower West Branch Road. He noted that there are many events that take place in this area of town, runs, bicyclists, etc. that would be endangered by the additional traffic. He reiterated that he does not agree with access to a 54 until subdivision to be from Hummingbird Lane. He supports either a cul-de-sac or to have Pine Grove Lane connect to Scott Boulevard. Frank Mitros (290 Hummingbird Lane) agrees with Mr. Hamilton’s points and they know this area was going to develop and in many ways this alleviates his fears, but there are still some concerns. He likes the single family dwellings along the eastern part of the boundary. He sent an email yesterday stating his concerns of safety, drainage, and esthetics. The two intersections he is most concerned about where Hummingbird Lane meets Scott Park Drive, it is a very awkward angle, especially with as narrow as Hummingbird Lane is and there are people who will park there. With increased traffic that will be increasingly difficult to maneuver. Likewise the intersection of Lower West Branch Road and Scott Boulevard is difficult. It is an odd angle, especially if you are headed south onto Scott Boulevard and turning onto Lower West Branch Road. At points during the week with traffic due to St. Patrick’s Church it can be extremely difficult there. Mitros noted he would have also preferred the cul-de-sac plan. In terms of drainage when he first moved to Hummingbird Lane (and it was chip seal road) during heavy rains his sump pump would be running so much he had to put in a back up to create sufficient drainage. When Hummingbird Lane was improved, that initially improved his drainage but with continued development they are almost back to where they began. He is worried about the drainage from this new subdivision to the north and east and the runoff. Finally, in terms of the esthetics he appreciates the plan is to try and preserve as many trees as possible however it is unfortunate that the most beautiful trees are the ones that run along the eastern boundary. Perhaps there is not a way to preserve those. Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 6 of 13 Mitros also noted his concern the neighborhood hasn’t really had a chance to react as this came up at a time of year when people are traveling and busy. He knows that the regulation is anyone within 300 feet gets a letter, but anyone living on Hummingbird Lane is going to be significantly affected by this. The last two houses on the east side and ten houses on the west side further down of Hummingbird Lane were not notified. Doug Schnoeblen (210 & 240 Hummingbird Lane) owns the property with the two lots directly across from the proposed development. He missed the good neighbor meeting so appreciates the opportunity to talk to the Commission this evening. He appreciates the work done on this proposal to save some of the trees and the character of the neighborhood. When he purchased his land and divided it into two lots he could have divided it into much smaller lots but rather than do that he wanted to preserve the character of the neighborhood which is very unique. The road to the new subdivision is a concern for him because it dumps right in front of his lot and the trees along there are very beautiful. He also would have preferred a cul-de-sac and agrees with his neighbors Hamilton and Mitros. He is a hydrologist by profession and very cautious about the environment and hopes the Commission takes these concerns into mind. Monica Maloney-Mitros (290 Hummingbird Lane) stated that she watched Lou Frank plant the trees on the property in question and it is just gorgeous in the fall and spring, really all year long. She feels his intent was to have a preserve in that area. She appreciates the applicant looking at saving as many trees as possible, but has a question on the percentage of trees that will be destroyed. Miklo stated it would be 52% and her question is if that includes anything along Hummingbird Lane. Miklo clarified that there are two types of trees according to how the sensitive areas ordinance treats them on this property. The woodland (a grouping of trees 2 acres or larger): the ordinance requires that 50% of woodland be preserved. If a developer requests to go over the 50% it requires City Council approval and replacement for anything over the 50% being removed. This property also contains groves of trees (small groupings of trees) including the trees along Hummingbird Lane. There is not a percentage requirement for groves of trees, the ordinance encourages protection of groves to the extent possible. The percentage that is referred to in the Staff Report is the larger woodland area. Maloney-Mitros asked if that was where the apartment building was to be located and Miklo confirmed that was correct. Maloney-Mitros then wanted to address the safety issue and asks that the Commission not make any immediate decision but to look at Hummingbird Lane. If one drives south on Hummingbird Lane it curves considerably to the west so that when it meets the curve of Scott Park Drive it is a curve meeting a curve and from any direction it is difficult to not go into another lane. So to increase the traffic using that intersection daily would be a real safety hazard. Additionally Maloney-Mitros noted that her recollection as to why Hummingbird Lane was planned the way it is was in an effort to preserve it as a neighborhood, low density traffic area. That was part of the negotiation that went into the annexation. She also suggests there needs to be an exit from the new subdivision onto Scott Boulevard to alleviate traffic issues. A similar example is the new development at the corner of Scott Boulevard and Muscatine Avenue. She reiterated her husband’s concerns of safety, environment, and drainage and asks that the Commission not rush into a decision on this proposal. Michael Smith (3620 Lower West Branch Road) stated he lives across where Pine Grove Lane will exit onto Lower West Branch Road and is also concerned about traffic and would prefer Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 7 of 13 another exit as well, ideally onto Scott Boulevard. He would prefer not to have 350 cars coming directly at his house every day. Musser replied to a couple of the concerns raised in the public comment. With regards to duplexes, there was some access restriction requirements by the City for the corner lots so for example lot 10 can only have access to Pine Grove Lane, no vehicular access to Lower West Branch Road. The same for lot nine, only access to Hummingbird Lane, lots 6 and 7 can only have access to Pine Grove Lane so there is no intent by the developer to build zero-lot duplexes and those restrictions would be part of the final plat. Public open space is out of the control of the developer, the City Parks Department will determine that. Musser reiterated that one of the first proposals they took to the City was a cul-de-sac design and was deterred from that. However it is the developers concern to preserve trees and minimize the grading of the public street and it will not “balance” as many streets are required to do, however that will maximize the number of trees preserved. They are trying to match the character of the neighborhood, the wooded lots that are across the street on Hummingbird Lane, and save the trees as much as possible. One of the neighbors commented on dividing property into smaller lots, and the developer has that option today under the current zoning however that is not what they are looking to do, they want to preserve the larger lots and be consistent with the neighborhood. Miklo noted there were three questions that came up from the Commission, one Musser answered which was putting an note on the plat stating the City Forrester would approve the tree preservation plan, the other was a request in upgrade for siding on the apartment buildings, and the third was if a maximum footprint could be set for lots 7-10 on the plat. Freerks also wanted to see if shared driveways could be utilized. Musser said lots 6 and 7 will access off of Pine Grove Lane so that will save those trees. Freerks wants to see that on the plat along with the footprints. Musser said that they could look at a shared driveway for lots 8 and 9. Miklo clarified that the zoning code allows duplexes on corner lots but each duplex has to face a different street, so with the driveway access restrictions set on these lots to preserve trees, duplexes would not be possible. Eastham asked that since this is a Planned Development Overlay then what will be built is what is approved on this plat correct. Miklo stated that was correct, the overlay plan is for a specific density. Eastham asked if there was any leeway in Pine Grove Lane and the intersection with Hummingbird Lane in terms of preserving the trees that are there. Musser said they were limited to where the road could be placed due to two existing intakes that are directly south of the proposed access. When they designed the street they did try to line up with where garage access would be on a home built Hummingbird Lane as to minimize headlights on a house. Miklo added that regardless of where Pine Grove Lane intersects it is going to take out a few trees. The City Forrester did visit the site yesterday and he noted that a couple of the larger maples in this area weren’t pruned correctly and so they are susceptible to splitting in a storm. Musser did request the Commission not defer the vote on this proposal due to time constraints on the project. Freerks closed the public hearing. Eastham moved to defer item REZ15-00023/SUB15-00031 until the January 21, 2016 meeting. Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 8 of 13 Dyer seconded the motion. Freerks noted it is always complicated when there are beautiful areas such as this one so the idea is to work together with the applicant and the City standards to come up with the best possible solution. Freerks noted there are many positives, but she is interested in the details such as the footprints, possible shared driveways, and to minimize the impact on the residents of Hummingbird Lane. She noted there was a lot of talk about cul-de-sac but she feels the proposal as drawn is a better solution. Hensch asked what the purpose of the deferral is. He is not interested in having the developer decide footprints of the homes that should be up to the individual home purchasers. Freerks said they are not asking for actual footprints, but the maximum area of the home so they can see how much of the land and/or trees will be disturbed. She recognized that some trees will need to be removed and it is better to know that now rather than approve this plan and have the community surprised at the extent of tree removal when this is built. Identify maximum footprints and driveway locations would help clarify that. Parsons asked if those type of things are negotiated at the time of final plat. Miklo said with and Planned Development Overlay rezoning, what the Commission votes on and sends to the Council becomes the approved plan. So if the Commission is able to come up with wording to address the issues that could be added as a condition of approval. Hektoen said it is more in the condition of the rezoning that those type of issues can be discussed and addressed as public needs. Hensch noted he is in favor of the City Forrester approving a tree protection plan, as well as preserving the topsoil and always concerned about stormwater (which has been addressed). Miklo said that if the Commission wanted to vote tonight with conditions added to address their concerns, possible conditions for approval could be the City Forrester approving the tree preservation plan, and even setting a maximum footprint for each lot, however the issue of the shared driveways will need time address if feasible. He would want the City Forester to look at the driveway locations to see if it is better to have individual drives or shared drives to avoid tree damage, so he would not recommend shared driveways as a condition at this time. Eastham added he would also like to hear a report from the Traffic Engineers on the probable or expected routes people will take for access to this subdivision. Miklo said the Transportation Planners did look at that and given destination points they feel the majority of traffic will go to the west. Parsons asked if Hummingbird Lane was on any of the street improvement plans for the future. Miklo said it was not because it was recently improved. He noted that the concern about the intersection, it is a T-intersection and the Transportation Planners looked through records and in the time they reviewed there had been zero accidents reported. It was designed that someone coming up Scott Park Drive isn’t likely to turn onto Hummingbird Lane, and that is why there is the kink in the design. Freerks did note this was a good example of transitioning the neighborhood. Eastham agreed and says it follows the plan to incorporate multi-family and single-family together. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 9 of 13 VACATION ITEM VAC15-00008: Discussion of an application submitted by CBD, LLC for the vacation of an approximately 15- foot wide portion of Herbert Hoover Highway located adjacent to Churchill Meadows - Part One. Wolf presented the staff report stating the request is for a 15 foot portion along the right of way of Herbert Hoover Highway to the north of Churchill Meadows. The vacation is requested to allow the applicant to combine the 15 feet of excess right-of-way with the adjacent residential lots. Typical arterial street right-of-ways are 100 feet. The right-of-way of Herbert Hoover Highway in this area ranges from 135 feet to 160 feet wide. Vacating the requested 15 foot wide portion will leave sufficient right-of-way for public needs and will also make the width more consistent with adjacent areas. No utility, emergency or service will be impacted due to this vacation. It will not impede on any vehicular or pedestrian traffic. This portion of right-of-way along Herbert Hoover Highway is not utilized for access or circulation. Letters were sent to MidAmerican, Centurylink, and Mediacom to see if utilities are present along this portion of the right-of-way of Herbert Hoover Highway and the City received no notification from any of those companies. Staff recommends approval of VAC15-00008, a vacation of approximately 12,884 square feet of Herbert Hoover Highway right-of-way. Eastham asked who owned this section of Herbert Hoover Highway before it was annexed into the City. Miklo said in most cases in Johnson County the county has an easement over private property for roads, but in this case the County actually owned the portion of the highway. Hektoen said by approving this the City is vacating its property interest. Miklo believes this land was dedicated as right-of-way when Herbert Hoover Highway was annexed. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to approve VAC15-0008, a vacation of approximately 12,884 square feet of Herbert Hoover Highway right-of-way. Parsons seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Miklo noted that in the previous agenda item Eastham had asked about a sidewalk access to the outlot area and wanted to make sure the applicant had that on their list to address at the next meeting. PRESENTATION OF PROJECTS IN THE RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS DISTRICT Howard noted there are quite a few things going on in Riverfront Crossings, many which the Commission may have seen, but since particularly the South Downtown portion of Riverfront Crossings was blanket rezoned early on to get things started there are some projects going on in that area that the Commission may not be aware of. Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 10 of 13 Howard showed a map of the area, with some photos and drawings of buildings. Starting in the north there is the new University of Iowa School of Music building, across Clinton Street will be the new University of Iowa Art Museum. The University of Iowa has not unveiled the design of that building yet, but there are discussions of making that portion of Clinton Street as a festival street, with the possibility of being shut down for special events. That can lead to the streetscape plan for Clinton Street which is supposed to be the “spine” that will run from downtown to the new Riverfront Park. The private development that is occurring there is the Hilton Garden Inn and adjacent to the City’s parking structure there (the Mod Pod building) are plans to redesign that corner. All three properties (UI Museum site, Hilton Garden Site, and Mod Pod site) are owned by the same developer so should be designed in conjunction. Down the hill on Burlington Street there is a potential project for a student housing development. It is perfectly located for student housing, 316 Madison Street, across from the UI Recreation Center. The former St. Patrick’s Church site is now owned by the City and after a request for proposals there is a 15 story apartment building along with a Hyatt Hotel going up there. The MidWestOne building is completed and occupied. The City was very pleased that MidWestOne was willing to keep both their headquarters and mortgage center downtown and not move it out to the edge of town somewhere. Right next to that new building is the proposal for the City’s parking facility and some townhomes that will line that parking facility. On the west side of the river, you can see Kevin Hanick’s building going up and that will transform Riverside Drive. There will also be the new Kum and Go on the corner and Brueggers Bagels across the street. The City is in the process of creating a streetscape for Riverside Drive to try to improve pedestrian traffic and the aesthetics along Riverside Drive. Parsons asked if the City is looking for new occupants for the current Kum and Go site, assuming that will be torn down once the new Kum and Go location is built. Howard said Kum and Go has not revealed what they will do, but she assumes they will not want to have two stores that close together. She what happens there will be up to a private developer provided it complies with the Riverfront Crossings Plan. Eastham asked with the improving of Riverside Drive would the railroad treacle be repainted. Howard said it is in the proposal to paint the railroad overpass. Howard said back over on the east side of the river, she forgot to mention the preservation of the Tate Arms building and transfer of development rights to the adjacent new apartment building. She said it would have nice views of the new park site. Hensch mentioned the new ambulance/medical services building, and Howard noted that yes they have seen some renderings of what that new building will look like (at 800 South Dubuque Street). Martin asked about the old Mumm’s Bar location, and if there was a timeline from when the Commission talks about projects to when they must be implemented. Howard said that particular project was very difficult to engineer, and after it went through the Planning and Zoning Commission and was approved, the applicant withdrew the application before it went to Council. So the rezoning was never approved. The applicant says they are still planning on doing something there however not sure what, but it would have to come through the Commission again since the rezoning was never seen or approved by Council. Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 11 of 13 Howard then showed the Commission some photos and renderings of buildings. First was the proposed building for 316 Madison Street, the student housing building. It was originally going to be a high-rise but after doing some cost estimates on that the applicant decided to redesign it as a seven story building, or possibly a five story building depending on costs. The plan is to have a rooftop patio and the ground floor will have restaurant space. Next Howard showed a drawing of the Hilton Garden Inn that was approved by design review. The hotel will be 12 stories with a nice rooftop venue on top and amenities such as a pool and conference center. Next she showed the student housing complex, which is full of amenities as well. Dyer and Martin commented on the cost of such units for students, and Martin noted that with the changes at Hawkeye Court there is very little affordable student housing now. Howard said this project will contribute $1 million to the affordable housing fund, and 10% of the units in the building will be affordable. Howard then showed the other tower of the project, which would be the Hyatt hotel tower with some retail space as well. On the second or third floor of the student housing tower there will be an open courtyard space facing west that will be for exclusive use of the residents. The Hyatt will also have some outdoor space on their rooftop, possibly with a pool. Howard then showed the MidWestOne Bank photo, which is now complete and open. They were going for platinum LEED certification, but was not sure if they achieved that. All the windows on the south side of the building collect the light and generate electricity. There are also solar panels on the roof. Right next door to that is the City parking facility, which will eventually be a lease to own parking facility. The townhomes that line the parking facility are stacked townhomes with access from the parking facility. Dyer asked if there was concern about so much housing that was inaccessible. Howard said townhouses are not conducive to accessibility. Howard showed a picture of the apartment complex that is going up from the transfer of development rights from the Tate Arms building. They are nice sized units with nice size outdoor space. The developer is uncertain about the market this far south of downtown, may be student housing but could also be family units. She showed a picture of the Tate Arms building. Freerks asked if that had to be at least started before occupancy of the other building could be approved. Miklo said it does, and that the developer is working Tate Arms rehab. Next Howard showed a color rendering of River View Apartments currently under construction on the west side of Riverside Drive. She ended the slide presentation with renderings of Riverfront Crossings Park. There are currently requests for proposals out for final design for the first phase. There has been a lot of interest from across the country on this RFP. The first phase is the wetlands and stream corridor portion. Another portion of the park project will be the restoration of Ralston Creek. The full park project can be viewed on the Park and Recreation website. Freerks asked the timeline on the park, Howard said the first phase will be completed by the end of this year. Martin asked about Ralston Creek noting it has been a polluted creek and is concerned how that will affect the wetlands when it meets up with the river at the park. Howard said they are hoping to create a Friends of Ralston Creek group that will aid in the clean-up and maintaining of a clean creek. Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 – Formal Meeting Page 12 of 13 CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: DECEMBER 3, 2015 Eastham moved to approve the meeting minutes of December 3, 2015 with changes. Theobald seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Miklo said they will discuss stormwater issues at the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT: Martin moved to adjourn. Theobald seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2015 - 2016 FORMAL MEETING 2/5 2/19 3/19 4/2 4/16 5/7 5/21 6/4 7/2 7/16 8/6 8/20 9/3 9/17 10/1 10/15 11/5 11/19 12/3 1/7 DYER, CAROLYN X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X EASTHAM, CHARLIE X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X FREERKS, ANN X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X O/E X X X HENSCH, MIKE -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E O/E X O/E X X X PARSONS, MAX -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X THEOBALD, JODIE X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X INFORMAL MEETING NAME TERM EXPIRES 2/3 3/15 5/18 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 THEOBALD, JODIE 05/18 X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member