HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-05-2017 Planning and Zoning CommissionIowa City
Planning & Zoning Commission
Formal Meeting
` Thursday, October 5, 2017
7:00 PM
Emma Harvat Hall - City Hall
w
*
RM$1
t"A ■- R5ft
R
M IM.2o
�r
174
\M
t , 11
� •L�
� ,
• iy
CC 2
LL
'
CIF
CC2
P CI!
CIt C6
Department of Neighborhood
and
Development Services
1 P �
dr
1II, h
CITY OF IOWA CITY
UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE
It
_.c$"A.
f'1 t�
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, October 5, 2017 - 7:00 PM
Formal Meeting
Emma Harvat Hall
Iowa City City Hall
410 E. Washington Street
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
D. Code Amendments
I. Discussion of Amendments to Title 14, Chapter 2, Article G. the Riverfront Crossings form -
based code related to upper floor stepback and minimum building height in the South
Downtown Subdistrict
2. Discussion of an amendments to Title 14, Zoning, Chapter 4, Use Regulations and Article
14-2D, Industrial and Research Zones, to restrict sales of consumer fireworks to Industrial
Zones.
E. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: September 21, 2017
F. Planning & Zoning Information
G. 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
Formals October 191 November 21 November 16
Informal, Scheduled as needed.
y �hr 4 CITY OF IOWA CITY
`'� MEMORANDUM
Date: October 5, 2017
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Karen Howard, Associate Plann r
Re: Follow-up regarding amendments to a Riverfront Crossings form -based code related to
upper floor stepback and minimum building height in the South Downtown Subdistrict.
At your last meeting, Commission members expressed concerns about eliminating the upper floor
stepback requirement in the South Downtown Subdistrict as proposed in the staff memo dated
September 21, 2017. Concerns were expressed about allowing monotonous building facades with little
visual interest, especially for the taller, block -scale buildings that are common in Riverfront Crossings.
You requested alternative code language that would allow administrative flexibility for granting
reductions or waivers of the stepback requirement in certain circumstances, but only if an acceptable
alternative design solution was proposed to break up the vertical mass of taller buildings.
As we discussed, there are a variety of ways to visually distinguish the upper floor facade from the
lower floors. Use of a raised cornice or other horizontal string course or banding above which changes
in building material, texture, color, or window pattern can all be used effectively to create more
interesting building facades and break up the vertical mass of a taller building. These techniques are
often used on buildings that have a stepback, but can also serve as alternative design solutions on
buildings where there is no significant break in the vertical plane of the building. There are many
options that would work for both modern and traditional designs. During your discussion, the University
of Iowa School of Music building was cited as an example of a modem building where there is not an
upper floor stepback, but where other design techniques were used to visually reduce the vertical mass
of the building wall along Clinton Street. A historical example mentioned was the Jefferson Hotel, where
the top floors of the eight story building are distinguished from the middle floors through an elaborate
raised cornice. Walking or driving around the city, you will find many similar examples on buildings of
various architectural styles.
Recommendation: As stated in the previous staff memo, there are instances where it would not be
appropriate to waive or reduce the stepback requirement, but if circumstances warranted a reduction or
waiver, the alternative design techniques mentioned above may be effective in meeting the intent of the
standard. To that end, staff recommends the following amendments to the minor adjustment section of
the form -based code. Staff also recommends allowing a waiver of the minimum building height
standard as discussed in the previous staff memo and as outlined below.
Page 2
Amend 14-2G-7H, Minor Adjustments, paragraph 1, as follows:
H. Minor Adjustments
1. The FBC Committee may approve deviations from the building placement, facade stepbacks,
buildiagprojections, and parking, loading, and service area placement standards set forth in
Section 14-213-3, Subdistrict Standards. Standards greater or lesser than the ranges allowed may
be approved in the following circumstances provided the approval criteria listed below are met:
a. For publicly -accessible outdoor plazas,-
b. For irregular lots that make meeting the requirements impractical or infeasible;
c. For buildings along Ralston Creek;
d. For liner buildings, civic, or institutional buildings where unique building needs or site constraints
make it difficult to fully comply with the standards;
e. For buildings along pedestrian streets designed to maximize access to and views of the Iowa
River; or
f. For other special circumstances, provided that the intent of the standard and the Downtown &
Riverfront Crossings Master Plan or Central District Plan, whichever is applicable, is met.
g. Approval Criteria:
(1) There are unique characteristics of the site or neighboring properties that lend to alternative
design approaches, or that make it difficult or infeasible to meet the requirements; and
(2) The proposed design and placement of the building, parking, and service areas fit the
characteristics of the site and the surrounding neighborhood, are consistent with the intent
of the standard being modified and the goals of the Downtown & Riverfront Crossings
Master Plan or Central District Plan, whichever is applicable, and will not detract from or be
injurious to other property or improvements in the vicinity.
Amend 14-2G-7H, Minor Adjustments, paragraph 5, as follows:
5. The FBC Committee may approve deviations from the facade stepback requirements set forth in
Section 14-2G-3, Subdistrict Standards or building design standards set forth in Section 14-2G-7F,
provided the following approval criteria are met:
a. The applicant must propose an alternative design solution that equally or better meets the intent
of the specific standard being modified; and
b. The proposed building design is uniquely designed to fit the characteristics of the site and the
surrounding neighborhood, is consistent with the goals of the Downtown & Riverfront Crossings
Master Plan or Central District Plan, as applicable, and will not detract from or be injurious to
other property or improvements in the vicinity; and
c. The proposed building demonstrates excellence in architectural design and durability of
materials; and
d. There are unique characteristics of the site or neighboring ro erties that lend to alternative
Page 3
design approaches, or that make it difficult or infeasible to meet the requirements! and/or the
proposed building is designed true to a specific architectural style and adherence to the building
design standards would be impractical and/or compromise the building's architectural integrity.
e. For requests for waivers of an upper floor stepback requirement an alternative means of
visually breaking u the vertical plane of the building must be proposed,
Amend 14-42G-7H, Minor Adjustments, adding a new paragraph 6, as follows:
6. In mid. -block locations, the FBC Committee may waive the minimum building height standard to
allow for a 2nd story pedestrian courtyard (an area surrounded by building facades on at least 3
sidesProvided a screen wall that is at least as tall as the second sto building facade is
constructed co -planar or recessed a maximum of 3' from the street -facing facade The screen
wall must be constructed of high quality building materials that faithfully imitate an architecturally
finished exterior facade of the building with complementary window openings and articulation.
Alternatively, it may be designed as a decorative screen wall that has a semi -transparent open
Pattern, Provided the top of the screen wall aligns generally with the to of the second storv. For
purposes of this provision, the screen wall will be considered a building wall for purposes of
regulating signage.
� r
� 11lIMtn���
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 5, 2017
To: Planning and Zoning Commis
From: Karen Howard, Associate Pla
Re: Proposed amendments to the
Background:
larding sales of consumer fireworks
Recently enacted State legislation allows for the sale of first- and second-class consumer
fireworks in Iowa during certain time periods during the year. While local jurisdictions are still
allowed to restrict or prohibit use of fireworks within their communities, they are not allowed to
prohibit the sale of such fireworks. Zoning restrictions, however, may be adopted to restrict the
location and conditions under which these types of fireworks may be sold. Based on experience
from the first sales period last summer, the City Council requested more information regarding
how fireworks sales might be better managed and controlled.
Discussion of Solutions:
The memo from the City Manager's office to the City Council on this matter is attached, which
provides background information on the recent State legislation and outlines staff recommended
changes to City policies and codes. After receiving this information, the City Council directed
staff to prepare amendments to the zoning code that would restrict the sale of fireworks to
Industrial Zones. These changes will improve safety and allow for more efficient and effective
oversight of the sale of fireworks. In addition, restricting sales to Industrial Zones will reduce
impulse purchases that may have contributed to the widespread police calls for service
regarding the use of fireworks within city limits during the first sales period in June and July.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends creating a new use category for consumer fireworks sales and restricting
such uses to the Industrial Zones (1-1 and 1-2). The amendments also clarify that temporary
sales outlets for consumer fireworks, such as tent sales, are also restricted to Industrial Zones.
Specific zoning code language is added as outlined below:
Amend 14-4A-7, Other Use Categories, adding a new use category, Consumer Fireworks
Sales, as follows:
D, Consumer Fireworks Sales
1. Characteristics: Sales of first-class and/or second-class consumer fireworks as defined
by the American Pyrotechnics Association.
2. Examples: seasonal sales outlets
3. Accessory Uses: None.
Page 2 of 2
Amend 14-4A-41, Retail Uses, paragraph 4, Exceptions, by adding a new subparagraph j., as
follows:
L. Sales of first-class and/or second-class consumer fireworks is classified as an "Other Use"
as set forth in 14-4A-7.
Amend Table 2D-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and Research Zones, by adding the
category, "Consumer Fireworks Sales,"as a use category tinder the "Other Uses" section, and
indicating that such use is allowed as a provisional use (PR) in the I-1 and 1-2 Zones.
Amend 14-48-4E, (provisions applicable to) Other Uses, by adding a paragraph 7, as follows:
Amend 14-4D-2, Temporary Uses Allowed, by adding the following paragraph:
Temporary sales of first-class and/or second-class consumer fireworks as defined b
the American Pvrotechnics Association, according to the restrictions and dates of sale
set forth in Title 661 Iowa Administrative Code Chapter 265 Consumer Fireworks Sales
Licensing and Safety Standards. Temporary sales of such fireworks are only allowed in
Industrial Zones.
Attachment.
• Memo from the City Manager's Office to the City Council dated August 31, 2017
t r r
_r=
lot�
CITY OF I O WA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 31, 2017
To: City Council
From: Simon Andrew, Assistant to the City Manager
Re: Consumer Fireworks Sales
Introduction:
During the 2017 State of Iowa legislative session, legislation was enacted that allowed for the
sale of consumer fireworks in the State of Iowa. Local communities maintained the ability to
prohibit the use of fireworks within their jurisdictions; however, cities do not have the ability
completely prohibit the sale of consumer fireworks. During the summer sales period of 2017,
Iowa City continued a ban on use while several sates locations were permitted, both in
temporary tents and existing brick and mortar establishments. Court decisions have clarified
cities' rights in defining allowable zones in which sales may occur, after evaluating these cases
and our experience during this year's sales period staff recommends the zoning code
amendment identified below in addition to changes to temporary use permit requirements.
History/Background:
On May 9, 2017 the Governor signed Senate File 489, effective upon enactment, which
established a licensing scheme for sellers of consumer fireworks and required the State Fire
Marshall to adopt rules regarding fire safety, insurance coverage, and licensing that permits the
sale of fireworks at: a) a permanent building between June 1 and July 8 and between December
10 and January 3; and b) at a temporary structure between June 13 and July 8. SF489 provides
that a city council may prohibit or limit the use of fireworks and that if it does so a violation of
said prohibition is a simple misdemeanor with a fine of not less than $250. The City Council
amended City Code to remove portions inconsistent with the new state law, continuing the
prohibition on the use of fireworks within City limits in June of 2017,
Local enforcement of the prohibition against the use of fireworks was incredibly challenging. The
Iowa City Police Department responded to 453 calls for service during the period of June 1 to
July 8, compared to only 27 calls during the same dates in 2016. In the majority of these calls
officers were not able to identify the individuals using fireworks. When contact was made by
officers, the individuals using fireworks were generally unaware that use was prohibited. The
Iowa City Fire Department also responded to seven calls related to the use of fireworks. It is the
hope that changes to the temporary use permit, fewer locations in which fireworks are sold, and
additional public education measures will have some impact on the number of use violations
within the City. As public education efforts and signage requirements are enhanced, staff
expects to issue fewer warnings and more violations in the future.
September 29, 2017
Page 2
Discussion of Solutions:
Zoning Code: Staff recommends restricting the sale of fireworks to industrial zones. This would
apply to both temporary tents and existing brick and mortar locations. The City of Des Moines
faced a legal challenge when enacting a similar zoning code amendment and the court upheld
Des Moines' ability to restrict sales to industrial zones.
Temporary use permit requirements: Temporary use permits are the mechanism through which
temporary sales tents are authorized. These are commonly used for lawn and garden sales in
parking lots, Melrose Avenue football game day vendors, and similar temporary sale uses. A
condition of the temporary use permit during the summer sales period was that signage must be
posted indicating that the use of fireworks within the City is prohibited. Staff intends to enhance
this requirement with larger signs placed in consistent locations at the point of entry and point of
sale. Staff also intends to require that flyers be distributed with merchandise to further inform the
consumer about the prohibition against use. The requirements would only apply to temporary
tent sales, which are only allowed by state law during the summer sales period.
Permit and inspection fees: the Iowa City Fire Department conducted inspections of temporary
sales tents due to the fact that the State Fire Marshall was not able to inspect all locations
statewide prior to the beginning of the sales period. Staff intends to incorporate an inspection
fee into next year's process. Fees will be payable at the time of obtaining a temporary use
permit. The amount of the fee will reflect the costs of inspection and the production of the
required signage.
Public information: the City communicated the prohibition against use through many different
channels during the summer of 2017. Given that there was approximately one month between
the signing of SF489 and the beginning of the sales period, communicating to residents that use
was prohibited despite numerous sales locations within the City was difficult. Different local
ordinances across the state added to the public's confusion, It is staffs hope that an earlier,
concerted media campaign will alleviate some of this confusion, though there will undoubtedly
be individuals who remain unaware of the prohibition against use. Again, as these education
efforts are enhanced, we expect to issue fewer warnings and more violations.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends the changes to the zoning code and temporary use permit process outlined
above. With agreement from Council, staff will begin the process of preparing the Code
amendment for Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council consideration.
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 21, 2017 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING
EM MA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max
Parsons, Mark Signs, Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Karen Howard
OTHERS PRESENT: Jerry Waddilove
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ1 7-00014/SUB1 7-00015
rezoning of 28.03 acres of land from Interim Development - Research Park (ID -RP) zone to
High Density Single -Family Residential (RS-12) for 5.35 acres, Low Density Multifamily (RM-12)
for 3.3 Acres and Rural Residential (RR-1) for 19.38 acres, and the preliminary plat of Cardinal
Point West - Part 2, a residential subdivision with 9 single-family lots, 6 duplex lots and 1
multifamily lot with 33 dwelling units, subject to general compliance with the concept for lot 32
with the private drive being limited to a maximum of 18 feet wide, and staff approval of a
landscape plan for lot 32 including provision of usable outdoor space with features such as an
outdoor dining area and lawn for informal recreational use.
CALL TO ORDER:
Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ17-00014/SUB17-00015):
Discussion of an application submitted by The Crossing Development, LC is for a rezoning of
28.03 acres of land from Interim Development - Research Park (ID -RP) zone to High Density
Single -Family Residential (RS-12) zone for 5.35 acres, Low Density Multifamily (RM-12) zone
for 3.3 acres and Rural Residential (RR-1) zone for 19.38 acres and a preliminary plat of
Cardinal Point West - Part 2, a residential subdivision with 9 single-family lots, 6 duplex lots and
1 multifamily lot with 33 dwelling units located west of Camp Cardinal Road and south of
Kennedy Parkway.
Howard presented the staff report by first showing images of the area. This area was annexed
into the City between 1969 and 1972 and has been zoned Interim Development - Research
Park (ID -RP) but subsequent development of the Oakdale Research Park reduced market
demand for office park development. Therefore in May 2002, the City Council signed a
Memorandum of Understanding for the Clear Creak Master Plan including a concept that
envisioned a "conservation -type" development including residential and commercial uses in the
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 2 of 11
area surrounding Camp Cardinal Boulevard. The City has not yet completed a specific District
Plan for this area so the Master Plan is what they look to for guidance.
The current zoning of the property is ID -RP and various other zoning designations are
proposed. The Rural Residential Zone (RR-1) is intended to provide a rural residential character
for areas in the city that are not projected to have the utilities necessary for urban development
in the foreseeable future or for areas that have sensitive environmental features that preclude
development at urban densities. This is an appropriate designation for Outlets F and G, which
contain steep slopes and woodlands that limit development potential.
The High Density Single -Family Residential Zone (RS-12) is intended to provide for
development of single-family dwellings, duplexes and attached housing units at a higher density
than in other single family zones. The RS-12 zone allows for single family lots with a minimum
lot area of 5,000 square feet, and a minimum lot width of 45 feet. Duplexes are allowed on lots
with a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet and lot width of 55 feet. All lots within the proposed
subdivision meet the minimum requirements of the RS-12 zone. Although lots 33 to 41 are
sufficient in size for duplexes, the applicant indicates that they will be reserved for single family
dwellings. Lots 42 to 47 are intended for duplexes. The purpose of the Low Density Multi -
Family Residential Zone (RM-12), which is proposed for Lot 32, is to provide for the
development of high density, single-family housing and low density, multi -family housing. In this
case, townhouse -style multi -family buildings are proposed.
Howard pointed out that the RM-12 Zone calls for attention to site and building design to help
produce a pleasant residential environment for multi -family living. To prevent excessive
pavement along the rear lane, improve stormwater drainage and provide some minimal space
for trees or landscaping, staff recommends that the rear lane include plantings between the
driveways. The site plan should include a landscaping plan with plantings appropriate for the
area between the driveways. Staff also notes that the proposed 21 foot wide private drive is
wider than necessary (standard alley pavement is only 16 feet wide). The extra width results in
excess paving and may invite speeding. Staff recommends that the private rear lane be a
maximum of 18 feet wide. Reduction of paving will help minimize stormwater runoff and improve
the aesthetics of the area. Howard showed photos of other similar developments and the
landscaping between driveways. Also on the north side of Lot 32, the garage -side of the
townhouse units would be visible from Dubs Drive. The applicant has agreed to screen the west
side of the garages with evergreen trees and design the area as usable open space available
for the residents of the townhouses on lot 32. Options include seating areas, covered picnic
areas, or small playground area.
With regards to the Comprehensive Plan it is covered by the Clear Creek Master Plan and in
staffs view the requested rezoning and subdivision design conforms to the conservation design
envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan for this area. It also conforms to the housing policy of
ensuring a mix of housing types within each neighborhood and the land use policy to keep
development away from environmentally sensitive areas, such as woodlands and steep slopes.
Howard pointed out the sensitive areas on the site plan with the steep slopes and noted that
with the exception of grading proposed on two of the lots to facilitate stormwater management
and to create suitable building areas, there will be minimal disturbance of the slopes. The
developer is also preserving a significant amount of the woodlands as well. These disturbances
are below the threshold allowed in the sensitive areas ordinance.
Howard stated noted that outlots G and F will be conservation areas maintained by a
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 3 of 11
Homeowner's Association, and outlot H will be reserved for future development. The concept
plan shows extension of Dubs Drive and Preston Lane onto Outlet H where Preston Lane will
intersect with Camp Cardinal Boulevard in a future phase of Cardinal Pointe West. Also due to
the sensitive areas there are no street intersections in area proposed east of Preston Lane and
therefore the block length will exceed the 600 feet maximum in the subdivision code. In staffs
view the proposed design helps to minimize the disturbance of the wooded ravines located on
the property, so the longer blocks are warranted to reduce disturbance of sensitive areas.
However, due to the long blocks staff recommends that traffic calming be designed into Preston
Lane. To address this concern the street will be 26 feet wide beginning at the north intersection
with Dubs Drive. At the intersections, neck downs will narrow the pavement to 22 feet. Staff
believes this will help reduce speeds on this residential street.
Howard noted that the neighborhood open space required for the subdivision is 30,056 square
feet of land dedication or fees paid in lieu. The Parks and Recreation Department has indicated
that fees should be collected in lieu of dedication of land. This requirement will need to be
addressed in the legal papers at time of final plat approval.
The stormwater management basin located in Outlet D of Cardinal Pointe West Part 1 has been
designed to provide stormwater management for this new phase of the development. The City
Engineer has confirmed that the existing basin is adequate to serve the stormwater
requirements for Part 2.
Staff recommends approval of REZ1 7-00014/SUB1 7-00015 rezoning of 28.03 acres of land
from Interim Development- Research Park (ID -RP) zone to High Density Single -Family
Residential (RS-12) for 5.35 acres, Low Density Multifamily (RM-12) for 3.3 Acres and Rural
Residential (RR-1) for 19.38 acres, and the preliminary plat of Cardinal Point West - Part 2, a
residential subdivision with 9 single-family lots, 6 duplex lots and 1 multifamily lot with 33
dwelling units, subject to general compliance with the concept for lot 32 with the private drive
being limited to a maximum of 18 feet wide, and staff approval of a landscape plan for lot 32
including provision of usable outdoor space with features such as an outdoor dining area and
lawn for informal recreational use.
Theobald asked if there was a sidewalk across the street from this development to connect this
development to Camp Cardinal Boulevard. Howard noted this development would go through
connecting sidewalks in Cardinal Point West - Part 1 to access Camp Cardinal Boulevard.
Theobald then asked if there were plans for a cross walk across Camp Cardinal Boulevard from
this whole area. Howard is not aware of specific plans for a cross walk, but something of that
nature would be assessed based on need over time.
Freerks asked about the outlots with the wooded areas and since they will be maintained by the
Homeowners Association if there was any plan for protection that needed to be put in place.
Howard said in the final plat stage in the subdivision papers it will be noted as conservation area
and provisions should be included in the subdividers agreement to preserve that area.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Jerry Waddilove (President and CEO, Southgate Companies) stated they are looking to provide
a residential subdivision to the City with a mix of housing types as it is consistent with their
concept plan when they did Cardinal Point West - Part 1. Regarding the private drive for the
townhomes they felt 21 feet gave homeowners ample space to drive through the alley and
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 2017 - Formal Meeting
Page 4 of 11
navigate driveways. To have the alley be 18 feet would be typical to the average driveway and
their thought was to make it a little bit wider so people can get through there. He doesn't agree
with the thought there would be a lot of speeding through the alley, it won't act as a "cut -
through" to anywhere. Waddilove stated regarding the sidewalks it is the plan to connect to the
south side of Kennedy Parkway and there is already a sidewalk on the Coralville side of
Kennedy Parkway. He added they would be in favor of some type of traffic control at the corner
of Kennedy Parkway and Camp Cardinal Boulevard especially since there is a school there and
likely will have children crossing.
Hensch asked about the private road and when there is future development to the south would
the private road extend into the future development. Waddilove confirmed it would. Hensch
feels at that time he can see people then using the private alley as direct access to Camp
Cardinal Road and feels there should at least be a traffic calming device installed to slow people
down. Waddilove agreed and noted their preference would be to keep the alley at a wider width
and add in a calming device. Freerks still feels the 18 foot alley is best as children will be riding
bikes in the alleyway, and also it could prevent parking along the alleyway. Signs agreed with
the parking challenge, if there is the extra space and people park along there it will be harder for
others to get through.
Dyer asked how many parking spaces will be in each driveway for the townhomes. Waddilove
said there should be room for 4 vehicles, two in the garage and two in the driveway.
Freerks closed the public hearing.
Hensch moved to recommend approval of REZ17-00014/SUB17-00015 rezoning of 28.03
acres of land from Interim Development - Research Park (ID -RP) zone to High Density
Single -Family Residential (RS-12) for 5.35 acres, Low Density Multifamily (RM-12) for 3.3
Acres and Rural Residential (RR-1) for 19.38 acres, and the preliminary plat of Cardinal
Point West - Part 2, a residential subdivision with 9 single-family lots, 6 duplex lots and 1
multifamily lot with 33 dwelling units, subject to general compliance with the concept for
lot 32 with the private drive being limited to a maximum of 18 feet wide, and staff
approval of a landscape plan for lot 32 including provision of usable outdoor space with
features such as an outdoor dining area and lawn for informal recreational use.
Parsons seconded the motion.
Freerks acknowledged it is nice to see a development with mixed uses and is in a nice area.
Signs added that the single family and duplexes will be backing up to the natural areas which
will make it even more attractive to buyers.
Theobald agreed but noted her concern is with the sidewalks and hopes that there really are
sidewalks on both sides otherwise it will be difficult for pedestrian travel. Hektoen said that
usually it is a public improvement requirement that is required before a building permit is
approved. Howard noted however it is along the outlot so the issue will need to be clarified.
Freerks noted that this is something that can be addressed by City Staff at the final plat stage.
Howard confirmed that Subdivision Code requires sidewalks along all lots unless waived, so it
should be addressed in the legal papers and on the final plat.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 5 of 11
CODE AMENDMENT:
Discussion of Amendments to Title 14, Chapter 2, Article G. the Riverfront Crossings form -
based code related to upper floor setback and minimum building height in the South Downtown
Subdistrict
Howard stated this Amendment was requested by the developers of the Hieronymus property,
the undeveloped parcel at the corner of Burlington and Clinton Streets. They are requesting a
code amendment to allow a waiver of the upper floor stepback requirement and the minimum
height requirement for a portion of the building. Howard showed some images of the proposed
building. It is a seven -story building with commercial on the ground floor, offices on the second
floor, and then apartments above. There will also be a second tower that is adjacent to the Hilton
Garden Inn that will be an extended stay hotel (The Element). Between the two towers is a second
story plaza space. In the South Downtown District there is a two-story minimum height
requirement but in this situation they are proposing a second story screen wall that would give the
appearance of a two story building. Behind this screen wall there would be an open air plaza. In the
South Downtown there is a requirement for a fagade stepback of 10 feet above the 5`" story, except
at street corners tower elements or other similar corner emphasis treatments may be exempted
from the stepback.
Freerks pointed out that the rendering is a bit misleading because it doesn't correctly show how the
upper floors of the proposed building will be forward of the stepped back area on the Hilton Garden
Inn on the abutting property. Howard stated that this appeared to be a function of the perspective in
the drawing, but acknowledged that the stepped back area on the Hilton Garden Inn will not be as
visible from certain vantage points if the upper floors of the new building are not similarly stepped
back.
Howard continued with the staff analysis. She noted the City encourages development and
redevelopment in the Riverfront Crossings District, in part, by allowing higher residential
densities, taller block -scale buildings, and lower parking requirements. To create a high quality
environment for residential living, there are form -based standards that help break up the mass
and scale of larger, bulkier buildings both on the horizontal and vertical plane. On the horizontal
plane, the building fagade has to be articulated with a fagade recess every 50 feet that create
modules. Each of these modules then has to be differentiated in some way from the adjacent
module to create visual interest and break up long building walls. While there are several
different options for how to modulate the horizontal plane, the only standard in code currently to
break up the vertical plane is the requirement for a fagade stepback if the building is over a
certain base height, which differs between subdistricts. This standard has the effect of reducing
the perceived height of a building.
Howard noted the importance of the upper floor stepback standard varies based on the context.
The stepback requirement is of heightened importance in the following instances:
• For buildings that are granted bonus height where the building will be taller than other
buildings in the vicinity;
• For buildings located on streets where compatibility with the historic or
lower -scale neighborhood context is of particular concern;
• For buildings located on narrower street rights -of -way; and
• In cases where preservation of views of iconic buildings or other features are important
to the community, such as views of the Old Capitol.
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 6 of 11
Along a street with a wider right-of-way or where existing buildings in the immediate vicinity
exceed the base height without an upper floor stepback, meeting the standard may not be as
important as achieving other community goals and objectives.
The primary objective in South Downtown is to serve as an extension of the Downtown by
encouraging a mix of high quality residential, office, retail, and civic uses at an urban intensity
similar to downtown. The Central Business District (CB-10) Zone does not have an upper floor
stepback requirement for taller buildings and the University is not subject to local zoning
regulations.
Signs asked what the maximum height of buildings is allowed on the north side of Burlington
Street. Howard said it is zoned CB-10 which doesn't have a specified height limit and is limited
only by the airport clearance needed and the ability to provide the necessary parking if there are
residential units in the building.
Howard continued that along the southern edge of the South Downtown, most properties have
either recently redeveloped or are government buildings (county and federal). Along the east
edge along Gilbert Street, the South Downtown subdistrict abuts the Gilbert subdistrict, which
provides a transition to the lower -scale neighborhoods to the east.
Freerks asked if a current structure was demolished and redeveloped, the new South
Downtown District guidelines would be used, nothing can be grandfathered in. Howard
confirmed that was the case. However, with the proposed amendment, the stepback
requirement would not be required except in cases where bonus height is granted and along
Gilbert Street where there is a transition to a district with a lower height limit. The height limit is
the South Downtown Subdistrict is eight stories and if a building were to be granted bonus
height, or if located along Gilbert Street there would still be a stepback required above the fifth
story. However in other areas of the South Downtown given the context, Staff believes an eight
story building does not need a stepback to achieve the objectives of the Downtown and
Riverfront Crossings Master Plan.
Howard noted in this area many of the buildings have been constructed in the past 10 years, so
redevelopment is not likely in the near future. Freerks agreed but noted most of those building
are not as high. Howard stated that any building over seven stories has to meet additional
building code requirements, which make high rise buildings significantly more costly to build.
This is why most developers stay with seven stories or under. So by eliminating the stepback it
will allow developers to have some additional building floor area without having to add stories
with the greater expense.
Hensch asked if the MidWestOne Bank building was six stories, Howard said it is six stories
with no stepback because it was developed before the Riverfront Crossings Code was adopted.
Signs asked about the added language regarding building facades and what the purpose of that
added language is. Howard said that clarifies that a stepback is only required in the South
Downtown on buildings that have facades facing Gilbert Street or granted bonus height.
Therefore for everything else, a stepback is not required.
Howard stated the second Code Amendment is really to allow the staff Form -Based Code
Committee (that reviews all proposals for development in Riverfront Crossings) to waive the 2
story minimum building height requirement in cases there is a second story outdoor plaza space
planned in a mid -block area and provided a screen wall is constructed to meet the intent of the
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 7 of 11
requirement. She doubts this request will occur very often, since most developments seek to
maximum building area rather than reduce it. She noted that particularly in an urban setting,
where open space is more limited, providing additional usable outdoor space is a benefit to the
residents and commercial tenants of a building.
Freerks asked who was on the Staff Form -Based Code Committee. Howard noted it currently
includes staff from Neighborhood and Development Services and the City Manager's office.
Dyer stated she does not like the proposed amendment (to eliminate the stepback requirement),
but that City Council has already approved the building for this project. Freerks stated that the
Commission can still recommend changes. Dyer noted that the stepback requirement is there
for a purpose. She feels the builders in this city insist on using every square inch of a lot so
there are just chunks all over the place and changing the stepback will just permit more chunks.
She noted that although the University's Music Building doesn't have a stepback it does have
the curved front so when walking by it the eye only goes up as high as the curved front. She
noted that in cities like Chicago and New York there are so many examples of interesting things
that can be done with buildings than just apartments with Hawkeye things hanging from the
railings. Dyer feels the stepbacks should be required as there doesn't seem to be any
articulation of the buildings.
Freerks noted that the idea of stepbacks was to create a better streetscape and make buildings
more interesting downtown. This seems to be stripping that away. This particular corner has
been an issue with finding something to develop there, but even more so is the fear of what
could be redeveloped someday throughout this area of downtown. She also noted that the
Music Building is lovely, and doesn't have a stepback, so there have to be options. Are there
ways in the Code to enforce some vertical design standards to address larger buildings from
being just large cubes.
Howard stated that in the Riverfront Crossings section of the Design Code there is quite a bit of
language about breaking up the horizontal plane, but the stepback is the only standard for
breaking up the vertical plane. As to the comments about cube -like buildings, she clarified that
the proposed building will be articulated more than is currently shown in the drawing, since the
recesses where the balconies are located will have to be carried all the way to top of the
building at least every 50 feet, so the building will look less flat than is currently shown in the
drawings. This property hasn't been through the Design Review process so it will be addressed
then, but the change in plane does have to be carried all the way to the roof per the Code.
Howard did confirm however that in the Form -Based Code there is nothing required for the
vertical plane of a taller building except for the stepback. Howard agreed there are other ways
to break up the vertical plane than just a stepback. For example, she referred to the drawing of
the UI Music School, there is a slight change in the plane at a certain height with a change in
windows on the upper floor and also a change in texture, color, and materials. Howard said
there are many ways to break up a vertical plane and language could be inserted into the
Design Standards of the Form -Based Code for options required to break up a vertical plane in
cases where a stepback is not as important to reduce the perceived height of the building.
Martin stated that she also doesn't want to see every building on a block have a stepback
because then it is just the same issue — all the same, nothing to make buildings unique. She
agrees that it would be good to add language about options for architectural design to make the
buildings unique.
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 8 of 11
Freerks noted the Commission is not saying they are dictating how buildings are designed, but
want to make sure City Staff have the tools to enforce that the Community is not stuck with ho-
hum building designs filling up every block in this area. The Riverfront Crossings Plan and code
were thoroughly thought through with the intent of creating a unique area with high quality
building designs. She noted that there was a lot of community input on this plan.
Hensch stated for this particular one building he doesn't have a problem with no stepback
because it is nice to have the one story base with the two towers but agrees there should be
something to break it up. If they are going to give up the stepback then there should be some
architectural design in compensation.
Dyer questioned that it is required that there be commercial on the ground floor however so
many of the buildings in the downtown area designed this way (with commercial on ground floor
and apartments above) are vacant — there doesn't seem to be a demand for commercial and all
the pedestrians see is a bunch of empty glass space.
Parsons agreed and said he's seen in many larger cities where it is all residential, no need for
the commercial at the bottom.
Howard stated that the Riverfront Crossings Code doesn't require commercial on the ground
floor, however it is required in the corner space on this particular property because it is on a
major street corner, but wouldn't have to extend all along the block. The code allows the
developer to decide and to gauge the market demand in that location.
Signs stated he is struggling with this issue, the new Hilton Garden Inn building has a stepback
but it is still a boring flat view to be honest. He does agree it would be worse if there was no
stepback. He feels the rendering for Hieronymus property are similar to what is in every other
city but also feels that is not what the residents of Iowa City want, to be like every other city. He
also stated that so much time is spent on creating the guidelines for an area like Riverfront
Crossings and then because one particular project wants something, we change the code. The
Plan in in place, developers know there is a code, but they still design things how they want and
then come to the City and ask for change.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one, Freerks closed the public hearing.
Freerks feels this item should be deferred to allow Staff to come up with the appropriate
language to add per this discussion this evening.
Howard asked the Commission to confirm that the desire of the Commission is to have
language added to the Design Standards regarding vertical plane similar to the design standard
required for horizontal planes and that the vertical plane options could be used in lieu of a
stepback. So it would be to add a paragraph in the minor modification section to talk about the
specific instances where it is reasonable to adjust the stepback requirement, but require some
other design solution instead of the stepback. Howard noted that Staff already have the ability
to waive the stepback standard in cases where it is difficult or infeasible to provide it. For
example at the Sabin Townhomes, since it is a shallow liner building that is only 20 feet deep, if
there were a 10 foot stepback there would only be 10 feet on the top floor, which is not cost
effective or particular useable space.
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 9 of 11
Freerks agreed that was fine, but they also want the addition of the vertical design standard as
well, so it is not just a waiver without any other design solution to meet the intent.
Signs added that the Commission hasn't address the second story courtyard option, but he likes
the solution Staff has come up with and the rendering does look like it is two stories. Martin
agreed. Dyer feels the language is so specific to just this one building that it might not be
useable for another situation.
Hensch moved to defer the Code Amendment Item to the next meeting.
Signs seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 7, 2017
Signs moved to approve the meeting minutes of September 7, 2017.
Martin seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Dyer gave a report from the National American Planning Association Conference. It was Dyer's
first visit to New York City in 27 years and felt is seemed to be more open, friendlier, and
accessible than in the past. There are parklets in the streets and bike lanes in the streets now
and just seemed to be more diversity everywhere. She noted there is an exceptional amount of
construction going on and it is hard to even recognize the skyline. The skyline used to be just
the World Trade Center, Empire State Building, and Chrysler Building and is so much more
now.
At the convention there were 175 sessions to choose from, including a lot of field trips. The
keynote speech was by the editor of The Wired magazine and he talked about the millennial
generation impact on the workforce and in the world. According to him the millennials are tech -
savvy, collaborative, specific minded, racially diverse, globally oriented, green, and lead to
growth in cities of walkability. Dyer met up with former Iowa City intern Marti Wolfe at the
convention and noted that there were a lot of sessions about millennials, but they didn't include
any millennials as speakers or on the panel. In contrast, Dyer went to a co -housing conference
a few weeks later and there were several sessions about millennials conducted by millennials.
Another speaker at the National American Planning Association Conference made the comment
that with millennials so concerned about urbanization and walkability in central cities he
wonders what will happen when the millennials have kids and there are no longer any schools in
the central cities. Dyer shares that concern with Iowa City. There were also a lot of sessions on
affordability and sustainability. Affordability is an issue absolutely everywhere, especially on the
built -out cities on the coasts. New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut (and other perhaps)
have by law or court ruling require cities to provide affordable housing in new market rate
developments and must demonstrate the government themselves support affordable housing
(financially or by providing land). Cities have done it in a number of ways that Iowa City does
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 21, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 10 of 11
not have access to like abandoned air fields, military bases, brownfields, empty manufacturing
plants, etc. Affordable housing has been done in a lot of places also in partnership with
churches, social service agencies, and foundations. Some of it has been targeted at the same
sort of people we are concerned about here in Iowa City, municipal employees, veterans, and
University employees that can't afford to live in the communities where they work.
Dyer attended a session on Planning for Behavioral Change for Sustainability which she found
really interesting. The point that was made was that it is not true that if you build it they will
come. For example, in Phoenix they built a light rail system but people still drive and don't use
the light rail system. Or having an energy efficient building is not guarantee that the occupants
will behave efficiently. Dyer discovered in New York a sign on a store that New York adopted
an ordinance last year that provides that stores and restaurants could be fined $250 - $1000 if
they keep their doors open while the air conditioning is on. Also in this session it was pointed
out that planning is basically about land use; and technology and sustainability is about people's
behavior. The argument was made by the speaker that for sustainability to be adopted as a
practice the alternatives need to be available, accessible, attractive, affordable, and the public
needs to be aware of them. So things like the signs on New York businesses would make the
public think about closing the door. Other suggestions were to make bike parking easier than
car parking, recognizing that while suburban living is generally cheaper than city living one way
to reduce driving is to make the stations and stops attractive. There needs to be a better
communication on the relative cost of public transportation versus car use, and to regard mass
transit as a public good and not expect it to be self-supporting.
One of the most interesting things Dyer did was visit a community named Radburn in New
Jersey that was founded in 1929 as "a town for the motor age". It was designed to incorporate
modern planning principles, but the project was abandoned in the 1930's because of The
Depression. The community was planned to mimic the principles of British Garden Cities and
be a walkable community with sidewalks everywhere and pedestrian tunnels and overpasses
over busy streets. The houses in the community faced parks and walkways with garages in the
back facing the roads which were actually very narrow alleyways. Radburn has had a
significant impact on city planning with the development of the cul-de-sac and superblock.
Radburn also had some commercial property within the original walking area planned, but never
materialized. Signs noted the feel of Radburn is similar to the Melrose Court area of Iowa City.
ADJOURNMENT:
Theobald moved to adjourn.
Parsons seconded.
A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0.
Z
O
� Q
o O
UW
Z W I,
Z Z N
NQ
0
xs z
WF
Z F
z Q
z
J
IL
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
T
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
X
X
co
O-
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
O
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N
XXXXXXX
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
f0
0
X
X
0
X
X
X
X
N
XXXXXXX
O
X
X
X
X
X
X
LO
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
I
X
X
X
D
X
X
X
CN
X
X
X
0
XXX
X
O
XXXXX
m
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cl)
M
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
N
XXXXXXX
J
Z
W
W
Q
W
O
w
a
Y
a
N
Qwd
o
U
K
U
2
O
m
w
w
zm
w
w
o
a=
2
a
a
F
a
U)
U
W E
au)) U)Q o
d Q 11 Z
u u w u
XOO
}
w
Y