Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Packet 8.17.17 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Thursday, August 17, 2017 - 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Emma Harvat Hall Iowa City City Hall 410 E. Washington Street AGENDA: A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda D. Rezoning / Development Item Discussion of an application submitted by Build to Suit for a rezoning of approximately 2.4 acres from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone to Planned Development Overlay – Medium Density Single Family Residential (OPD-8) zone and a preliminary plat of Focus First Addition, a 1-lot, 2.4-acre residential subdivision with 7 townhouse style dwelling units located on Dodge Street Court. (REZ17-00010/SUB17-00007) E. Development Items 1. Discussion of an application submitted by Watts Group Construction for a preliminary plat of Country Club Estates Seventh and Eighth Additions, a 27.95-acre, 81-lot residential subdivision located north of Rohret Road and west of Lake Shore Drive. (SUB17-00009) 2. Discussion of an application submitted by Linda Lovik for a preliminary plat of Lovik First Addition, an 11-acre, 2-lot residential subdivision located at 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway SE. (SUB17-00012) F. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: August 3, 2017 G. Planning & Zoning Information H. Adjournment If you will need disability-related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Bob Miklo, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5240 or at bob-miklo@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings Formal: September 7 / September 21 / October 5 Informal: Scheduled as needed. MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 3, 2017 – 7:00 PM – FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVATHALL,CITYHALL MEMBERS PRESENT:Ann Freerks, Carolyn Dyer Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs MEMBERS ABSENT:Jodie Theobald STAFF PRESENT:Sylvia Bochner, Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT:Brita Russell, Kristi Waite, Chelsea Eldeen Alex Waite, Jenny Carhoff, Tanya Myers, Andrew Deivernois, Chris Harvena, William Knabe, Diane Hamer, Angelique Johnson, Paula Ingalls, Susan Burlingame, Russell Johnson, Ted Potter, Richard Campagna, Andrew Hamer, Annie Potter, Roxanna Curto, Judith Knabe, Rodney Lanaghan, Duane Musser, Barry Matsumoto, Roxanne Walder, Ginalie Swaim, Kristin Wildensee , Alicia Trimble, Grant Finch , Kim Broadhurst RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-0 (Theobald absent) the Commission recommended denial of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the Southwest District to change the land use designation of property located at 1160 Highway 1 from Single Family/Duplex Residential to General Commercial. By a vote of 6-0 (Theobald absent) the Commission recommends to approval of REZ17-00013 an application submitted by Jesse Allen with Aspen Ventures, for a rezoning of approximately .20 acres from Central Business Support (CB-5) zone to Central Business Support with a Historic Preservation Overlay (CB-5 I OHP) zone located at 10 South Gilbert Street. By a vote of 6-0 (Theobald absent) the Commission recommends to approval of SUB17-00013, the preliminary plat of Brookwood Pointe Fifth Additions, an 18-lot, 4.92-acre residential subdivision located on Terrapin Drive and Covered Wagon Drive. CALL TO ORDER: Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM (CPA17-00002): A public hearing on an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to amend the Southwest District Plan to change the land use designation of property located north at 1160 Highway 1 from Single Family/Duplex Residential to General Commercial. Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 2 of 15 Miklo began the Staff Report noting that the property is north and west of Highway 1, east of Weeber Street and at the end of Edingale Drive. Miklo showed some photos of the area. The property is located within the Southwest District and is covered by the Southwest District Plan. The applicant is requesting that the Plan’s land use designation be changed from residential to commercial. Other properties along this side of Highway 1 are zoned residential (either single- family duplex or multi-family). Miklo noted there is some open space designated to the north of the property. Miklo explained that the residential land use designation recognizes the current use of the property as a single family dwelling and the potential for the property to be subdivided into additional residential lots. When the Apple Ridge subdivision, which is located directly to the west, was developed Edingale Drive was platted to provide access to this property so that it could be divided into lots in the future. Miklo stated that the intent of the Plan and the subdivision design was to allow a cul-de-sac to be extended onto this property with residential lots built around it. The developer of Apple Ridge Subdivision created an escrow to pay for the future construction of Edingale Drive. Miklo said that the applicant notes that since the Southwest District Plan was adopted in 2002 several mostly commercial developments have been built along Highway 1, the Hawks Ridge student housing complex has been built to the east of the subject property, and commercial traffic has increased along the highway. Additionally there have been improvements to Highway 1 to help traffic flow and a bike and pedestrian trail has been built along the Highway. Miklo said that staff agrees that considerable development has occurred along the highway. However, staff does not believe that the development that has occurred along Highway 1 is sufficient reason to change the designation of the subject property from residential to commercial land use. The commercial development that has taken place was in areas designated for such development by the Comprehensive Plan and it has taken place in areas where it is designed not to interrupt nearby residential areas. Miklo said that the subject property is surrounded on three sides by residential development and wooded open space. The highway right-of-way of 320 feet provides considerable separation from the commercial development located to the south and east and the residential located to the north and west. There is no commercial development along the north side of Highway 1, from Sunset Street to Hawk Ridge Drive, a distance of approximately 3,400 feet. Allowing commercial development on the subject property has the potential to disrupt this residential section of the city, and would likely have some negative effects, such as noise and lighting, for the adjacent single- family residential properties. Miklo said that commercial development in this location may also be a counter to another goal of the Comprehensive Plan, which is to improve and enhance the entranceways to the city. The City has attempted to enhance the commercial development along the southeast side of Highway 1 through conditional zoning agreements requiring landscaping and limiting signs. Although that has had some success, most would agree that residential development generally has more trees and green space when compared to commercial development. He showed photos of the current landscaping along this portion of Highway 1. Staff finds that the proposal to change the land use designation of this property from residential to commercial does not meet the criteria that should be met before an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is approved. The criteria state that (1) circumstances have changed and Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 3 of 15 the proposal is in the public interest. Staff finds that even though there has been commercial development elsewhere on Highway 1, on the northwest side there has been no commercial development and are concerned that introducing it may have negative effects on the adjacent neighborhood. (2) The proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. In staff's view, development of this property for commercial uses could be counter to the principle of preserving and stabilizing neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan’s policies for commercial development states: x Use the District Plans to identify appropriate commercial nodes and zone accordingly to focus commercial development to meet the needs of present and future population. x Discourage linear strip commercial development that discourages walking and biking and does not contribute to the development of compact urban neighborhoods; x Provide appropriate transitions between high and low-density development and between commercial areas and residential zones. x Continue to protect our community's historical, environmental, and aesthetic assets. x Preserve and enhance the entranceways to the city. Consider the appearance of new development from major entranceways at the time of rezoning. Staff recommends that an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, Southwest District Plan, to change the land use designation for property located at 1160 Highway 1 from Single Family/Duplex Residential to General Commercial be denied. Hensch asked if the open space to the north of the subject property is public or private property. Miklo stated that is currently private property but could possibly be made public in the future. The current property owner has stated an interest in keeping it as a natural area. Freerks opened the public hearing. Brita Russell (3150 5 th Street, Marion, Iowa) is the new owner of 1160 Highway 1 West. Her father passed away in 2011 and her mother passed in March 2017. The reason she is bringing this rezoning to the table is because her parents had always wanted to have this property developed as some sort of restaurant or bank or small office building and have that be accessible to the neighbors. She has talked with the neighbors and they do not a want to have Edingale Drive extended because it would disrupt the neighborly flow and they currently have a very nice view of trees and privacy. Russell submitted a concept plan that showed structures away from the neighbors and also stated she would sign an agreement to say there would be no convenience store or strip mall. She would not want something that high traffic in that area. She has been approached by some banks and restaurants that are interested in the area. She noted that there is a stoplight at the intersection of Highway 1 and the property to help with traffic flow. Miklo clarified that the plan that was developed when the Apple Ridge Subdivision was approved, was for Edingale Drive to be extended for residential development of this property, and the driveway onto Highway 1 to be closed so this property would not have access to Highway 1. This would prevent traffic coming through the neighborhood from Highway 1. The traffic signal was put in to accommodate the traffic to Walmart on the other side of the Highway. Kristi Waite (1688 Burns Avenue) is supporting the rezoning of 1160 from residential to commercial. Chelsea Eldeen (18A East Street, Tiffin, Iowa) also supports the rezoning. Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 4 of 15 Alex Waite (1688 Burns Avenue) supports the rezoning. Jenny Carhoff (440 Lilac, Tiffin, Iowa) supports the rezoning. Tanya Myers (510 N. Ohio Avenue, Oxford, Iowa) supports the rezoning from residential to commercial. Andrew Deivernois (3150 5 th Street, Marion, Iowa) supports the rezoning. Chris Harvena (400 1 st Avenue, Coralville, Iowa) supports the rezoning. William Knabe (1101 Weeber Circle) said that he owns the four acres that are adjacent to the subject property. He sent in a letter, which was shared with the Commission, stating the objections he has regarding this proposal. First he would like to voice his appreciation for the Commission to take these matters into consideration, and would like to say a few things about the Weeber-Harlocke neighborhood. It is one of the oldest established neighborhood associations in Iowa City. They have tried as a neighborhood to maintain their boundaries and their neighborhood as a single-family neighborhood. Over the years they have faced many serious problems trying to keep people aware of the fact that they are trying to operate as a single-family neighborhood. There have been many offers of multi and high density dwellings in the neighborhood and on Benton Hill. The neighborhood was very thankful that in 2002 the City saw fit to ask all the people of the west side to join together in the development of what is now called the Southwest District Plan. There was a series of meetings concerns were hammered out and one of the things that came out very clearly was the commercial development should be restricted to the south side of the highway. There has been a long concern regarding traffic issues in their neighborhood with a lot of high density on Benton Hill. The cooperative housing is now being built on Benton Hill, which will add to the challenge of getting up and down Benton Hill in the winter time. Nevertheless the main concerns are that they are trying to preserve their neighborhood. His wife and he have always had this four acre tract of land and have kept it green and hope to someday make that into park for the neighborhood to always have. Many people in the neighborhood expect them to keep that space green and they will do so. The subject property is also heavily wooded, even though it has a house on it. They would like to continue to preserve the green space on that hill, they are open to discussions with the City along those lines, and this is an opportunity to keep the proposed property also green and not commercial. The objections listed in the letter submitted speak for themselves however Knabe wishes to say in closing that it is nice that Russell had many of her friends come here tonight to support her, but none of them live in the neighborhood. There are problems in the neighborhood already with traffic and don’t feel this idea of spot zoning is for the best interest of the neighborhood. They hope the Commission will vote with the recommendation from Staff and oppose this particular rezoning. Hensch asked about the four acres and if Knabe’s intention was to not develop it anytime in the future. Knabe confirmed that would never be developed. He said that it is in a trust. Diane Hamer (1140 Weeber Street) lives on the corner of Edindale and Weeber Street and have a large vested interested to not have that street extended. She respects that her neighbor should have the ability to do with her land what she wishes, It would be better to not affect the Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 5 of 15 rest of the neighborhood with traffic coming through the neighborhood, and absolutely opposes the proposal before the Commission today. Angelique Johnson (1024 Weeber Street) stated her home is one of the single-family homes at the end of the portion where the green space is located. She has a teenage daughter and has already noticed with the construction on Benton Street they are experiencing a heavy amount of traffic on Weeber Street. Johnson also opposes the request to rezone this area, she feels like it will create excess traffic. If the commercial area was a restaurant she is concerned about what might occur during football season, if there were to be drinking during football games and her teenage daughter driving in the area. Paula Ingalls (936 Weeber Street) stated her opposition to the proposed change to zoning and thinks it would be devastating to the neighborhood, especially for the nearest neighbors. She would like to see the neighborhood stay a single-family neighborhood and does not want any commercial buildings where she lives. Susan Burlingame (1200 Edingale Drive) she is also opposed to this plan and feels it would be the beginning of the neighborhood turning from single-family owned homes to rentals. She said that it is currently one of the few moderately priced close-in neighborhoods where one could afford to buy a home. Russell Johnson (1024 Weeber Street) stated he moved into this neighborhood because it was a quiet neighborhood and one night when he heard someone talk about a restaurant and he worried about drinking and football games. He used to live at 800 Longfellow Place and one night his doorbell was ringing crazily and when he opened his door it was a drunk student who started fighting him at his door trying to get into the house. He was in a panic, calling for his wife to call the police. Eventually he was able to remove the guy from the door and called the police and found the guy sleeping in Johnson’s truck out front. Johnson went told his neighbors about what had happened as he was very fearful of this type of thing happening again. He then moved over to Weeber Street because it is a quiet area and is opposed to redeveloping the area and feels the people who live in the area should have more say than those who don’t. Ted Potter (1124 Weeber Circle) stated that after reading through the report that was with the meeting agenda the arguments that are related to the Comprehensive Plan, he feels this proposal is very much opposed to the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. It makes no sense to him to change this particular parcel. The neighborhood has a really good feel to it and is a great single-family neighborhood and it ought to be kept that way. Richard Campagna (1135 Weeber Street) stated he has lived in his home about 18 years. They have lived in many parts of the US and all over the world and is happy to say this is the place they have lived the longest. He believes the reason for that is particularly the neighborhood, it is what first attracted them to the area. He reiterates everything the others in the neighborhood have said. He particularly likes when his New York family comes to visit and always comment on the same aspects of this neighborhood, the tree lined area, the friendly feel of the neighborhood, and the basketball court at the end of Edingale. They love the neighborhood just the way it is and hopes no changes of this nature are introduced. Andrew Hamer (1140 Weeber Street) stated his home is the triangle property that pretty much butts up to property that the proposal for. They bought their property in 2004, it is a lot with a huge detention basin in it, and they worked with the City closely because there were certain Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 6 of 15 limitations to what they could do with the lot but they wanted to be in this neighborhood. They take care of the detention basin and the surrounding area. He is opposed to this proposal because they moved into this area because it was a nice quiet area. Annie Potter (1124 Weeber Circle) stated she is very sensitive to security issues and the idea of this area being rezoned and more people being in the neighborhood is intimidating her. The thought of people going through the neighborhood to get to a bank or restaurant is too much. She has raised her children in this neighborhood, people are out walking their dogs, people can be outside and not feel intimidated and she is concerned this change would make it more difficult for them. Additionally rezoning may be a gain to somebody but believes those in the neighborhood would lose property value. Miklo clarified that if this property were zoned commercial, which Staff is not recommending, Staff would recommend against Edingale being extended so the only traffic would be to Highway 1. Staff still feels this area is not appropriate to zone to commercial, but wanted to clarify the traffic concerns. Roxanna Curto (1034 Weeber Street) is the mother of a five year old and a two and half year old and bought their house when her five year old daughter was still a baby. The reason they chose this street was because it was so quiet and there wasn’t a lot of traffic and it seemed like a really nice neighborhood and a great place to raise kids. Curto stated they are extremely concerned about these changes because they are fully expecting to stay in this home and raise their kids there and want them to be able to play safely outside. She is very much opposed to these changes. Judith Knabe (1101 Weeber Street) remarked about one comment that was made she found interesting, the comment about not being concerned about people in their neighborhood because if this proposal was allowed the entrance would be from Highway 1. She wanted to say that even if people aren’t driving through their neighborhood there would be increased foot traffic around the area if it were commercial. Rodney Lanaghan (1215 Edingale Drive) noted that even just in the last few months the transition of traffic on Edingale Drive has become much more dramatic than it used to be simply because Benton Street has been closed. It has forced a lot of the apartment dwellers to come down our way and many do not adhere to the speed limits in the area. When Lanaghan backs out of his driveway onto Edingale he needs to watch out because he could be run into. What needs to be recognized in this situation is the fact of where are we forcing all the traffic if they are to go to Highway 1. They will take Edingale down to Sunset to Highway 1. Duane Musser (MMS Consultants) is representing the applicant and wanted to touch on a few points. As Miklo stated if this proposal was approved the access would be off Highway 1 and only off Highway 1, so concerns about increasing traffic in the residential neighborhoods are not really valid. If this proposal is denied and the development goes through as residential that would increase the traffic in the neighborhood because the access would be off the end of Weeber Street. Duane asked Miklo what kind of residential development could occur on this property. Miklo explained the options available under the current Comprehensive Plan and zoning. The property is zoned RS-5, so Edingale could be extended to end in a cul-de-sac on this property. He estimated that five or six single-family lots could be built there. Another option would be for Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 7 of 15 the applicant to apply for a planned overlay zone, which would still be residential but would allow the dwellings to be clustered, perhaps into townhouses or a small apartment building. Miklo noted that would be a zoning process however that would go through the Commission for approval. Another option might be to up-zone it to a multi-family zone, but again that would have to go before the Commission for approval and a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Miklo reiterated that as of today, without going through a zone change, this property could only be developed with single-family homes. Musser added that any of the options that Miklo stated would use the existing access of Weeber and Edingale, none of those options would have Highway 1 access. Musser then showed a concept they drafted to preserve the trees and have the commercial building up close to the highway with parking behind. He stated they are open to a conditional zoning agreement with regards to hours of operation, etc. If this commercial use is not approved, to develop the land into five or six single-family lots will cause removal of trees and grading to allow for the construction of new homes. Parsons asked how many square feet does Musser anticipate a commercial space being. Musser said without an actual tenant it is hard to say for sure, but he drafted the concept on a standard business size with adequate parking and fire truck turnaround. Miklo noted that Staff didn’t spend time reviewing the proposed concept plan as they felt the first step is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and decision on whether this property should even be commercial and Staff felt it should not. Freerks asked if this area would be considered a grove of trees and if so the replacement rate for clearing the trees is very different for residential and commercial. Miklo said they currently do not have enough information about the quality or character of the trees to determine if it would be a grove. Barry Matsumoto (1027 Weeber Street) is speaking in opposition to the proposed zoning change and is concerned about the access to the property and impact to Edingale. Additionally if this proposal goes ahead, there will be an adverse effect on the residential properties that abut the commercial property. Matsumoto noted in a former life he was a lawyer and represented developers and probably would have been on the other side of this issue. He has participated in rezoning projects that did put commercial properties abutting residential and there was always concern by the neighbors of the impact. It is an understandable concern. Roxanne Walder (1027 Weeber Street) has lived in her home for over 22 years and the reason she chose that house was location, location, location. It is one of the nicest west side neighborhoods that is in close proximity to the University and (at that time) to Roosevelt School and Horn Elementary School. On football Saturdays there is an increase in traffic already due to the location. Walder stated she has enjoyed this being a residential area and would like to see it remain residential. Alex Waite (1688 Burns Avenue) noted he was just informed that a Comprehensive Plan never expires, it just gets amended and changed as time goes on. He admits he doesn’t live in the neighborhood but has been in the neighborhood many times. He noted a lot of us want to keep our neighborhoods the way they are and have been forever but that is not realistic, cities grow and change. It seems to him that the land right along Highway 1 is going to become immensely valuable as Iowa City grows and changes. People are going to want to exploit the value in that Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 8 of 15 land and who has the right to tell them they can’t. The fact is someday that land is going to be developed and the little forest along Highway 1 will not be there for eternity. Some neighbors at some point are going to have to be willing to make that change. Russell’s parents left her that land for the purpose of allowing her to exploit the value of it as their legacy. Waite questions why the public has the right to tell her she can’t and she just has to sit on it and keep it a forest because her neighbors want to keep their neighborhood the way it is right now forever. That is not fair and it is not right. Therefore he supports rezoning the land to commercial. Kristi Waite (1688 Burns Avenue) listened to everyone speak and understands. Iowa City is categorized into neighborhoods but as a resident of Iowa City she likes to look at the town as a whole. Listening to the residents talk about just the west side is a bit off-putting. She understands their concerns but doesn’t think they were listening well enough because there will be no traffic going through their neighborhood. Russell is not a developer that is planning to go onto the land and rip out all the trees, this area is her land and her legacy, and she has the best intentions for this project. Diane Hamer (1140 Weeber Street) had a question about how close the driveway to this property was to her property line. Miklo stated he estimated that it was at least 100 feet from her house, but he did not know how far from the property line. Susan Burlingame (1200 Edingale Drive) noted that even if this were approved and the access was on Highway 1 it would still add traffic to their streets because people would go through their streets to get to Highway 1 to get to the restaurant or whatever business it is. She feels a lot of neighborhoods have been ruined by having this type of thing incorporated into them. She feels there aren’t that many moderately priced, well-kept up neighborhoods like this left in the City. If this proposal is approved, people will sell and it will become student rental properties and there will be a lot of development along Highway 1. Chelsea Eldeen (18A East Street, Tiffin, Iowa) understands the concern about commercial property being close to residential properties however questions that literally right across the highway from this location is one of the biggest department stores. So if there isn’t currently a bunch of traffic going through the neighborhood to get to Walmart she doesn’t understand how a tiny little bank or tiny little restaurant would increase the traffic flow through this nice neighborhood to such a degree it would be unbearable. She does not understand that logic. Paula Ingalls (936 Weeber Street) stated that she believes the landowner is not a fault for trying to exploit this land for her purposes however doesn’t believe it should be exploited at the expense of the neighbors. While many have lived in that neighborhood for a long time (she has been there almost 25 years herself) the developer cannot even say what type of industry might be going into the property if this is approved. It could be a gas station, a bar, a half-way house or anything else and while it might seem very benign to approve something like this it could have very adverse effects that are unforeseen at the present time. Signs asked for clarification that the proposal for the commercial use would have access solely off Highway 1. Miklo stated that is what Staff would recommend. So the alternate is if it stays as residential is to extend Edingale into a cul-de-sac for residential purposes. Freerks confirmed that it could be up to five or six single-family homes. Martin asked if there were any good neighbor meetings held. Miklo believes the Brita Russell did visit some of her neighbors but there was no written report about a good neighbor meeting. Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 9 of 15 Duane Musser (MMS Consultants) said they discussed holding a good neighbor meeting and were going to set one up but based on the Staff report decided not to do so with anticipation if they have to go a different route and rezone it for a possible higher residential density a good neighbor meeting would be held then. Richard Campagna (1135 Weeber Street) stated that the point made by Signs was that neither of these proposals are desirable because the residential plan almost definitely seems to have more access from Weeber and off Edingale. He also noted that over the years since Walmart and other commercial developments came in on the other side of the highway home insurance and auto insurance for their residents are slowly but consistently creeping up and he is told it has to do with the commercial development in the area. Ted Potter (1124 Weeber Circle) added one more point that if this property is developed into single-family homes they will have a vested interest in keeping the property kept up and keeping the neighborhood quiet and desirable. He added there is nothing against neighborhoods on the east side, but noted others have said when commercial came in close to neighborhoods on the east side it changed the character of those neighborhoods. Due to the proximity to the Hospital and University it is very desirable to keep this as a single-family neighborhood. William Knabe (1101 Weeber Circle) noted in the letter he wrote the Commission he discussed spot rezoning, and this is definitely an example of spot rezoning, and the definition states that one engages in spot rezoning only for the purpose of improving or gaining the neighborhood support. That is very important. Even though it was mentioned that Walmart is across the highway, it is not adjacent property and this is a single isolated piece of property. He also pointed out that the only proposal before the Commission has to do with commercial development even though the conversation has been clouded by talk of multi-family and high density that will require another day and another speech from him. Chelsea Eldeen (18A East Street, Tiffin, Iowa) added that having been a property casualty insurance agent, licensed in ten different states including Iowa, she can confidently say that insurance rates go up for multiple different reasons, not just want is around someone, including inflation. So having a small bank in one’s backyard is likely not going to contribute to rates going up. Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to approve the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the Southwest District to change the land use designation of property located at 1160 Highway 1 from Single Family/Duplex Residential to General Commercial. Parsons seconded the motion. Hensch noted that the Commission just spent several meetings discussing the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the Dubuque Street area and focusing on having an entry to the city that is beautified and takes a positive advantage of the natural resources. During those discussions it was noticed a shortage of attractive entryways that express the positive view of Iowa City. For decades he has driven down Highway 1 and admired the trees along the road and wished that would be extended and lamented the fact that was destroyed to create certain neighborhoods and feels they shouldn’t allow any more loss. Freerks read through the application carefully and with Comprehensive Plan items it is important Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 10 of 15 to look at them carefully because lots of discussion, thought, and community interaction went into creating these Plans originally. To create a change, what they really need to look at is if circumstances have changed. She doesn’t feel that any of the requirements that are outlined for a Comprehensive Plan change have been met. Yes there has been some additional development in the area but if we say that is enough to create a change like this then such a change could happen anywhere. The Commission has to look at what is right for this particular space. Of course the owner has the right to develop their property, but for now she agrees with what the Comprehensive Plan has outlined and to keep this area residential. Signs stated that this is a small piece of land surrounded by residential. He is unsure if this crosses the threshold of spot zoning but it certainly is a small piece surrounded by residential and the Comprehensive Plan calls for it to be residential. However he always cautions people who move into areas that back up to green space that unless you own that green space you have no control over what is going to happen to space. The reality is whether it is commercial or something else this piece of property is going to be developed. That being said, his inclination is that this is a small piece of property surrounded by residential and should stay residential. Martin agreed with Signs and added that once zoning is changed to be commercial, no one can really dictate what goes on that property as long as it falls into what is allowed in the commercial zone. There has been so much thought by staff and the community on the Comprehensive Plan and these issues are not taken lightly. Martin feels there would need to be some very compelling argument as what would happen to this area with a commercial zone, what the benefit would be, is it for the good of Iowa City. Dyer stated there is very little close-in property on the west side that can be developed for residential and to give it up is something she feels they are not prepared to do at this time. There are large multi-family developments in that neighborhood and this parcel has managed to stay relatively undeveloped and should be kept residential. Parsons agrees that he just doesn’t see enough of an argument to make a change to a Comprehensive Plan. A vote was taken and the motion was denied 6-0. REZONING ITEM (REZ17-00013): Discussion of an application submitted by Jesse Allen with Aspen Ventures, for a rezoning of approximately .20 acres from Central Business Support (CB-5) zone to Central Business Support with a Historic Preservation Overlay (CB-5 I OHP) zone located at 10 South Gilbert Street. Bochner presented the Staff report, noting that the property is located at the corner of Gilbert Street and Iowa Avenue and is the former Unitarian-Universalist Church. The zoning is currently Central Business Support (CB-5) and the applicant, Jesse Allen, has applied for Historic Landmark Designation for this building. Designation of the property as a landmark will require Historic Preservation Commission approval of any significant changes to the exterior of the building. It also makes the property eligible for some zoning incentives. Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 11 of 15 Landmark Designation is a zoning overlay and therefore requires a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission to City Council. The Commission's role is to review the proposed designation based on its relation to the Comprehensive Plan. On July 31 the Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the significance of this property and they found that the property met the criteria for Landmark Designation based on its significance to Iowa City, its integrity of location and design, and its distinctive architectural characteristics. The Unitarian Church was built in 1907 and it is a Tudor-Revival style. Following Unitarian-Universalist beliefs, the church is built in a residential style and does not include ecclesiastical exterior elements such as a steeple. A circa1954 addition to the south of the original building was removed in 2016 and the historic part of the building has retained a high level of historic integrity. Bochner showed a couple of photos of the building. This property is located within the Downtown District of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. One of the objectives of this district is to protect its historic character and preserve historic buildings. The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan indicates that density bonuses, waiver of parking requirements, and other incentives may be appropriate to encourage preservation of historic buildings in the Downtown District. Development of the property to the east, currently the City's parking lot, may receive a density bonus in exchange for preservation of the Unitarian-Universalist Church. Staff recommends that REZ17-00013 an application to designate 10 Gilbert Street as an Iowa City Historic Landmark and rezone from CB-5 to CB-5/OHP (Historic Preservation Overlay) be approved. Parsons asked if the Historic Preservation Committee approved this at their meeting and Miklo confirmed that they had. Freerks opened the public hearing. Ginalie Swaim (1024 Woodlawn Ave) is the chair of the Iowa City Historic Preservation Committee and they did vote unanimously for the overlay zone and landmark designation. She added they wished to thank Jessie Allen, City Staff, and City governing bodies for carefully working over many months to find a solution to a problem that is becoming common. What to do when a congregation outgrows their historic building downtown. She feels this is an opportunity and an ability to take pride in this downtown church building at 10 South Gilbert Street. It does not look like a typical church but that is actually its significance. Cynthia Grant Tucker, a professor in Tennessee, has studied this church and has identified a clerical sisterhood of Unitarian-Universalist women ministers including Eleanor Gordon from Iowa City who championed viewing a sacred space from a women’s perspective. They wanted economical buildings, buildings that were not ecclesiastical looking or hierarchical and that would symbolize and support women’s work in the Church. This includes women’s work in church kitchens, guild groups, planning and organizational administrative positions, and deacon and the pulpit as well. Swain reiterated that Iowa City is very fortunate to have this real gem in our city, it is a small building but with a big story and is grateful for everyone trying to preserve it. Kristin Wildensee (1710 Ridge Road) has been a member of the Unitarian-Universalist congregation since the very early 1970’s. Her family has always been very involved in this Unitarian congregation and her parents have a history of leadership and committee work in the Unitarian-Universalist society. The congregation has left this building at 10 South Gilbert Street and is nearing completion on the new congregation building in Coralville. It will be the greenest church in Iowa with many many sustainability features incorporated. She wanted to speak Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 12 of 15 today about the historic character of the building and is thankful there is support to preserve historic buildings in Iowa City. Alicia Trimble (Friends of Historic Preservation) added that some of the earliest settlers in Iowa City were actually Unitarians, which was rare back then, and may be a reason Iowa City has been forward thinking. As Swaim stated there is a long history of women ministers in this Church, some who were the first in the United States, and this Church also architecturally represents a change in Unitarian thought (and other religious thought) or moving from a top- down hierarchy to more of a community setting. This building represents that, it looks like a house and not a church and people began to meet on an equal basis here. This entire development showed great work between the City, developer, the Church, the community and the result will save a historic building and build a great development. Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to recommend approval of REZ17-00013 an application submitted by Jesse Allen with Aspen Ventures, for a rezoning of approximately .20 acres from Central Business Support (CB-5) zone to Central Business Support with a Historic Preservation Overlay (CB-5 I OHP) zone located at 10 South Gilbert Street. Martin seconded the motion. Hensch stated that he has long admired this building and appreciates learning more about its history. Parson noted that last year when the application came through to develop the land around this building had two options, be designated historical or be demolished. He is glad to see the historical designation come to fruition. Signs and Freerks both comment on the cooperative process to make this development and historical designation happen. Dyer voiced her disappointment at the scale of the building being constructed in the new development. She added she was involved in a feminist reunion at this church a few weeks ago and learned that the Unitarian Church was the only place women could gather to dance in the 70’s. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. DEVELOPMENT ITEM (SUB17-00013): Discussion of an application submitted by Steve Kohli Construction, LC for a preliminary plat of Brookwood Pointe Fifth Addition, a 4.92-acre, 18-lot residential subdivision located on Terrapin Drive and Covered Wagon Drive. Miklo stated this is the final addition of the Brookwood Pointe subdivision and was initially approved in 2005. Since then parts 1-4 have been final platted and are mostly developed with single family dwellings. There are a few vacant lots remaining in part 4. The preliminary plat for Brookwood Pointe Fifth Addition, has expired (preliminary plats expire after 24 months unless the applicant seeks an extension from the City Council). The expiration provision is in the subdivision regulations to help assure that subdivisions comply with any significant changes to City policies or regulations. In this particular case there have been no significant changes to the Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 13 of 15 zoning or subdivision regulations that would affect the design of this subdivision. The subdivision would include the extension of Terrapin Drive and Covered Wagon Drive to eventually connect to Sandhill Estates. The preliminary plat is the same as the original submitted and approved in 2005, there may be a few lots that need special attention due to Hydric Soils and drainage (and that may also apply to the streets) but there are no other sensitive areas on the property. There is a stormwater basin in Part 1 that was designed to handle stormwater for the entire subdivision. There are some infrastructure fees that will need to be paid to the City before a building permit is issued, however the neighborhood open space fees were paid with the initial subdivision fees. Staff recommends approval of SUB17-00013, the preliminary plat of Brookwood Pointe Fifth Additions, an 18-lot, 4.92-acre residential subdivision located on Terrapin Drive and Covered Wagon Drive. Freerks opened the public discussion. Grant Finch (VJ Engineering) came forward on behalf of Steve Kohli Construction to answer any questions the Commission might have. Freerks asked how quickly he thought the construction would move along. Finch replied as soon as possible. Kim Broadhurst (1437 Wetherby Drive) stated that the RS-5 portion of section 5 is directly in her backyard and commented on how parts 1-4 have already impacted their neighborhood. With the development of Terrapin Drive on up there has been a dramatic increase in traffic. Additionally with the addition of Russell Drive going all the way down to Langenberg it is a complete throughway - it is a lot of traffic. At the intersection of Wetherby Drive and Russell Drive, there are yield signs on Russell Drive (north/south road) and Wetherby Drive (east/west) has the right-of-way but a lot of people really don’t pay attention to the yield signs. Somebody will get t-boned there someday and it would probably benefit being converted to a stop sign. She also wanted to say she is not opposed to this development and would actually like to see it developed sooner rather than later because now her view is four feet high weeds in her backyard. Miklo commented that Staff received an email earlier in the week also with concern about the intersection and the yield signs. That email was passed along to the transportation planners. Freerks closed the public discussion. Dyer moved to approve SUB17-00013, the preliminary plat of Brookwood Pointe Fifth Additions, an 18-lot, 4.92-acre residential subdivision located on Terrapin Drive and Covered Wagon Drive. Parsons seconded the motion. Hensch noted his disappointment with the cul-de-sac design. Martin commented that it was good the traffic issues and stop sign was brought up. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2017 – Formal Meeting Page 14 of 15 CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JULY 20, 2017 Parsons moved to approve the meeting minutes of July 20, 2017 with edits. Hensch seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: None. ADJOURNMENT: Signs moved to adjourn. Parsons seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 6-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSIONATTENDANCE RECORD2016 - 201712/1 12/15 1/19 2/2 3/2 3/16 4/6(W.S.)4/20 4/20 5/4 5/18 6/1(W.S)6/7 6/15 7/6 7/20 8/3DYER, CAROLYNXXXXXXXXXXO/EXXXXXXFREERKS, ANNXXXXXXO/EXXXXXXXXXXHENSCH, MIKEX X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBEO/E X X X X X X O/E O/E X X X X O/E X X X PARSONS, MAXXXXXO/EXXXXXXXXXXXXSIGNS, MARKX X X X X X X XXXX X X X X X X THEOBALD, JODIEX X X X X X X X X XX X X X X X O/E KEY: X = PresentO = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member