HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-19-2017 Planning and Zoning CommissionPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, October 19, 2017 - 7:00 PM
Formal Meeting
Emma Harvat Hall
Iowa City City Hall
410 E. Washington Street
AGENDA:
A. Call to Order
C. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
D. Rezoning Item
Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Developers for a rezoning of
approximately 21.79 acres from Interim Development -Multi -family (ID-RM) zone to Low
Density Multi -family (RM-12) zone located north and south of the intersection of South
Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard. (REZ17-00001)
E. Discussion of amendments to City Code Sections 14-513-4E, Illumination
Requirements, City Code Section 14-5B-8A&B, Signs permitted in Interim Devlopment,
Overlay Planned Development, and Residential zones and 14-513-8E to increase the
size and type of signs for institutional uses and to allow interanal iilumintation in the
Planned High Density Multifamily zone, and Sign Standards in the Centeral Business
zones, and the South Downtown, University, Central Crossings, Park, South Gilbert
and East Side Mixed Use subdistricts to allow plastic trim cap letters for signs above
the fifth story
F. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: October 5, 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 November 21 November 151 December 71 December 21
Informal Scheduled as needed.
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Sarah Walz
Item: REZ17-00001 Date- October 19, 2017
Preserve at Sandhill
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant: Southgate Developers
775 Mormon Trek Blvd.
Iowa City, IA 52246
319-339-9320
Contact:
Mark Seabold
Shive Hattery
2839 Northgate Drive
Iowa City, IA 52245
319-354-3040
mseabold@shivehattery.com
Requested Action:
Rezoning from ID-RM to RM-12
Purpose:
To allow a mix of attached housing and multi -family
housing
Location:
Property east of South Gilbert Street, north and
south of McCollister Boulevard
Size:
21.79 acres
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant, ID-RM
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Single -Family Residential (OPD-5)
and Sand Hill Park (P-1)
South: Vacant, County
East: Single -Family Residential OPD-5
West: Vacant (CC-2) and City Public Works (P-1)
File Date: September 14, 2017
45 Day Limitation Period. October 30, 2019
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant, Southgate Developers, has requested a conditional rezoning for 21.79 acres of
land from Interim Development Multi -family (ID-RM) to Low -Density Multi -family (RM-12) at the
intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard. The applicant has indicated a
desire develop the properties with a mix of row house and townhome-style multi -family units and
small to medium size multi -family buildings --four-, eight- and twelve-plexes. The submitted
concept plan shows a total of 196 dwelling units.
I%
Open space to accommodate stormwater management and a small park is located between the
single-family neighborhood on McCollister Court and the new development with Preserve Way
proposed as a single -loaded street north of McCollister Blvd. An extension of Covered Wagon
Drive, south of McCollister Boulevard, would also be a single -loaded street with the area to the
north providing stormwater detention for an existing subdivision. A pedestrian street at the center
of the development provides connection between Gilbert Street and the established
The applicants held an open house on October 10 to introduce their concept. Property owners
within 300 feet of the proposed rezoning were invited to attend.
ANALYSIS:
Comprehensive Pran: The subject properties are located in the South Planning District. The
Comprehensive Plan (South District Plan) designates these properties as appropriate for Low to
Medium Density Mixed Residential with Multi -family housing along both the north and south side
of McCollister at the intersection with South Gilbert Street.
The plan describes "Low to Medium Mixed Residential' as follows:
"Intended for medium- to high -density single family residential development, including small
lot detached single family units, zero lot line development, duplexes and townhouses.
Suitable for sites where a single loaded street is desirable to provide visibility and access to
public open space or where clustering is desirable to protect sensitive environmental
features. Low density multi -family structures may also be considered if buildings are
designed in a manner that is compatible in scale and design to the lower scale residential
buildings in the neighborhood (e.g. triplexes, four-plexes, or six-plexes). Higher density
housing should be located at the edges of neighborhoods, principally in areas with good
street connectivity, access to open space or parks, trails, and transit." [page 52, South
District Plan]
The "New Residential Development' section of the plan calls for compact and connected
neighborhoods, integrating a variety of housing types to serve residents at the various stages of
life, with a mix of multi -family and attached housing in areas along busier street frontages or in
areas bordering open space. The additional density is, in part, intended to improve the feasibility
of transit service and enhance market potential for nearby commercial areas. The plan refers to
"Missing Middle" housing types that are similar in scale and character to single-family detached
housing —ranging from duplexes and triplexes to smaller multi -family apartment buildings. The
plan calls for blocks and buildings of exceptional design to maintain an attractive residential
character along streets and provide safe and inviting living environments for residents. The plan
encourages and landscaped front yards or courtyards with parking located to the rear of building
to enhance the park like setting and to encourage walking and biking.
The applicant has proposed a concept plan that includes a variety of attached and multi -family
housing types arranged in a block pattern that is walkable in scale and integrated with adjacent
streets. The concept includes a pedestrian street that connects into the neighborhood trail system
and preserves open space and includes common green space within the central blocks to serve
as an amenity for the residents. The concept shows transitions from lower density —a mix of
townhome style units and four-plexes at its north end to eight-plexes just north of McCollister
Boulevard, leading to twelve-plexes along the south property line.
An east -west pedestrian street is proposed midway between where Preserve Way and
McCollister Blvd. intersect with Gilbert St. The pedestrian street provides access from the
existing neighborhood trail through the center of the proposed development to Gilbert Street.
The pedestrian street will be treated as a public street in terms of setback and orientation of
buildings, location and screening of adjacent parking areas, and required lighting and
landscaping. The pedestrian street must conform to standards for pedestrian streets provided in
the Riverfront Crossings Plan.
Current Zoning: The purpose of the Interim Development Zone (ID) is to provide for areas of
managed growth in which agricultural and other non -urban uses of land may continue until such
time as the City is able to provide City services and urban development can occur. The Interim
Development Zone is the default zoning district, to which all undeveloped areas should be
classified until City services are provided. Upon provision of City services, the City or the
property owner may initiate rezoning to zones consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as
amended. The current ID zoning allows only limited uses, such as agricultural uses by right, so
a rezoning is necessary to allow development of this property.
Proposed Zoning: The purpose of the Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RIM-12) zone is to
provide for the development of high density, single-family housing and low density, multi -family
housing. This zone is intended to provide a diverse variety of housing options in neighborhoods
throughout the city. Careful attention to site and building design is important to ensure that the
various housing types in any one location are compatible with one another.
The applicant is seeking a conditional rezoning from Interim Development Multi -family (ID-RM)
zone to Low Density Multi -family (RM-12) zone in order to allow for the development of a
concept plan with a mix of multi -family uses, including 12-plexes, 8 plexes, 4-plexes, and
townhouse style multi -family buildings. The area north of McCollister Blvd. contains 13.9 acres
(12.8 acres net) with 109 units of housing (9 units/acre net). The area south of McCollister Blvd.
contains 7.9 acres (6.4 acres net) with 87 dwelling units shown (11 units/acre net). The
applicant has indicated a desire to limit the number of units north of McCollister Blvd to no more
than 115 units. No such density restriction is proposed for area south of McCollister.
More than one fifth of the units (22%) north of McCollister Blvd. are one -bedroom units with the
remaining being two -bedroom units. South of McCollister Blvd. more than a quarter of the units
are one -bedroom units (27%). Given the growth in the student housing market, even in locations
some distance from the university campus, staff recommends limiting the development to one -
and two -bedroom units, which provide more affordable housing type and adds to the diversity of
housing options available in this part of the South District.
The applicant has indicated that the concept plan relies on waivers of the principal building
setback standards along McCollister Blvd. (reducing the 40 ft setback from arterial streets to 25
ft.) and along Preserve Way and Covered Wagon (reducing the setback for multi -family
structures from 20 ft to 15 ft). Waivers will be requested through Planned Development
(OPD/RM-12).
Compatibility with the Neighborhood: The proposed development is set at a slightly lower
elevation than existing single-family homes on McCollister Court. The concept plan shows a
single loaded street that, in combination with the open space area set aside for stormwater
detention, provides more than 100 feet of separation between the existing single-family
development the proposed development. South of McCollister Blvd., a stormwater basin to the
east of Covered Wagon provides additional separation between single-family and multi -family
uses.
Townhome and row house style multi -family buildings along with three four-plex buildings line
Preserve Way, facing toward the existing single-family housing on McCollister Court. Higher
density multi -family units are placed near the intersection of Gilbert Street and McCollister
Boulevard, and at the interior of the development, along the pedestrian street. Row house type
multi -family buildings line both sides of McCollister Blvd. transitioning to eight- and twelve-
plexes to the south.
The proposed row house style units have detached garages located immediately to the rear.
4
Surface parking for the townhomes and other apartment buildings is located at the center of the
each block and must be set behind the front face of the buildings and screened from view of the
public street or pedestrian street. The concept plan shows compliance with these requirements
except for two small areas of parking on lots 1 and 2, where parking areas do not appear
screened from Gilbert Street. These areas would need to be screened from view, a low wall or
fence is recommended in order to define the private space.
The proposed concept shows some detached garages within each parking area, however these
are not immediately adjacent to the dwelling units. The applicant has indicated that the concept
focuses on the property's location close to Trueblood Recreation Area, access to the regional
bike trail system along with the ample open space within and surrounding the development to
attract residents who, perhaps, are less reliant on cars or for whom open space is a higher
priority than sheltered or attached parking.
Both the RM-12 zone and the South District Plan call for careful attention to site and building
design. In order to achieve higher density development and acceptance of higher density housing
types, the plan calls for "exceptional building design." This is emphasized in areas that provide the
entrance to the central neighborhoods along McCollister Blvd. and in areas adjacent to Trueblood
Recreation Area. The plan notes the substantial public investment in the surrounding trail system,
parks, and the new south elementary, which have set the stage for higher quality development in
this area of the South District.
While the applicant has proposed a "modern farmhouse" style, neighbors have expressed
concern with the design of the buildings in terms of their lack of variation and articulation across
so many buildings and blocks. The uniformity in design of the various buildings types across the
5-block development area reduces the sense of diversity of housing envisioned in the concept and
does not, in the view of staff, complement the character and diversity of housing styles in the
adjacent neighborhood.
Staff has not reviewed detailed plans for the buildings as part of, however concepts are shown
with the application and were presented at the neighborhood open house. All buildings are
required to meet the multi -family design standards.
Staff recommends the following additional standards to ensure that the proposed multi -family
housing types are similar in character to single-family detached housing and provide a thoughtful
transition to the existing single-family neighborhood.
• Building entrances: Buildings must be oriented to the street (including the pedestrian
street) with the street facing fagades featuring a main entrance. The multi -family
standards recommend that the main entrance be designed a with a canopy, pilasters
and pediments, or transom windows. Staff recommends that all building entrances
include awnings or other protection from weather as the concept plan does not provide
attached or covered parking for all units. This will also provide additional articulation to
the buildings (see below).
• Building articulation: In the RM-12 zone, street facing walls that are greater than 50 feet
in length must be articulated with bays, recesses, or projections. For attached single-
family housing, the code stipulates that when 4 or more units are attached, the units
must be articulated through various changes in building material (brick, stone or other
masonry material) and/or by distinguishing each unit architecturally through a change in
street facing wall -plane with a corresponding job in the roofline. Given the number of
multi -family buildings proposed for the site, greater articulation seems appropriate to
mimic or complement the diverse character of nearby single-family housing. Staff
recommends that townhome and row house -style units meet the design feature
standards in the zoning code.
• Building design: The design standards for attached single-family units require eaves of
no less than 12 inches. This articulation would complement the adjacent single-family
neighborhood and reduce long-term maintenance for roofs and siding material in our
climate. Staff recommends that all buildings follow the standards for eaves as well as the
Central Planning District guidelines with regard to trim elements. These elements in
combination with the requirements for entrance awnings can help to provide additional
articulation and are not inconsistent with the agrarian vernacular that is inspiration for the
development.
• Building designs to be approved through design review.
Buildings should be constructed of durable, high quality building materials. The standards
in table 2G-8 of the Riverfront Crossings Form -based Code will serve as a reference.
Given the location of the property, adjacent to Sand Prairie Park and Trueblood
Recreation Area, staff recommends that landscape screening be designed to
complement the prairie landscape that characterizes these open spaces. The applicant
should rely on guidelines provided by the Johnson County Recommended Plant List
provided by the Bur Oak Land Trust. We have relied on this standard in other areas
adjacent to permanent natural open space.
Traffic Implications: South Gilbert Street is a north -south arterial street, designed to
accommodate high traffic volumes across the city, providing a connection to the Downtown and
University campus. McCollister Boulevard is also designated as an arterial, providing
connections to Mormon Trek Blvd. and Old Highway 218/Riverside Drive to the west. A planned
eastward extension of McCollister Blvd, to S. Sycamore Street is schedule in the 2018-2019
Capital Improvement Program, with construction in 2019.
Most vehicle traffic from the proposed development will likely travel on Gilbert to and from the
Downtownlcampus area and commercial areas on Highways 6 and 1 or west on McCollister to
218 or Riverside Drive. Until such time as the McCollister Blvd. extension is completed, some
portion of east -west vehicle traffic will rely on Langenberg Avenue, a residential street for which
traffic calming measures (speed humps) have been installed. Transit service is not currently
available to this location, though the extension of McCollister may increase the opportunity for
service.
A 2016 traffic study determined that a traffic signal or roundabout is warranted at the
intersection of South Gilbert St. and McCollister Blvd, due to crash history and peak hour
delays. The City has also received numerous complaints from regarding pedestrians having
difficulty crossing the intersection to access Trueblood Recreation Area. An improved
intersection will be included in the McCollister extension project.
An ongoing study of the Gilbert Street corridor also indicates that the portion of the roadway,
south of Highway 6, may be appropriate for a road diet. A four- to three- lane conversion could
improve the overall safety of the roadway and provide opportunity for pedestrian refuge islands
making it easier for pedestrians to cross.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of REZ17-00001, to conditionally rezone from Interim Development
Multi -family (ID-RM) to Low Density Single-family (RM-12) for 21.79 acres of property located
adjacent to the intersection of South Gilbert Street and McCollister Boulevard, subject to the
following conditions:
Substantial compliance with the concept plan submitted with regard to street and block layout
(including pedestrian street), building types, building locations, location of surface parking
areas and covered parking, location and size of open spaces, and sidewalk and trail
connections.
0 The proposed pedestrian street must meet the standards for pedestrian streets provided in
[.
the Riverfront Crossings Plan.
• Townhouse and row house style multi -family buildings must comply with the attached single-
family housing standards for entrances and design in the zoning code.
• Eaves and window and doorway trim will be required on all buildings according to the
attached -single family housing standards.
• Building designs to be approved through design review.
• Buildings shall be constructed of durable, high quality building materials.
• Landscaping must comply with recommended plant list provided by the Johnson County
Recommended Plant List provided by the Bur Oak Land Trust.
• Overall density of the development should not exceed
• 115 units north of McCollister Blvd., 20% of which should be one -bedroom units —the
remainder being 2-bedroom units.
• 90 units south of McCollister Blvd., 25% of which should be one -bedroom units —the
remainder being 2-bedroom units.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Concept Plan
3. Correspondence
Approved by:
John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
f
Q v
Q
C) V)
Q 4�
tu
N
W �
v
v
rz
o
l
oil
�
N
Irfi'1 1
14
r alfa
w
Sarah Walz
From:
glennlynn2006@yahoo.com
Sent:
Thursday, October 05, 2017 5:53 PM
To:
Sarah Walz
Cc.
kalpa12@brentopalmer.com; ahachtman3@yahoo.com;joleah-show@uiowa.edu
Subject:
Re: Sandhill Estates Rezoning
Hi Sarah. The "Good Neighbor" meeting will be our3rd or4th that has been held. I can speak for the neighborhood
because we have had so many meetings already.
we were told by Southgate after the first round of meetings that they would entertain duplex/zero lot style housing
which was well received by the neighborhood. At the last meeting, an entirely different concept was proposed. Not well
received, I was told by Southgate that the city is pushingthls development style.
No one here wants this type of development. No one. Not sure what the meetings accomplish other than to tell us what
you plan to do. It will negatively impact our property values. The townhouse concept will be cheap homes that attract
neighbors we don't want. And when they don't sell, they will be rented attracting the same,
I will certainly be at the meeting and wilt be front and center in fighting this development any way I can.
Glenn
Sarah Walz
From: Shaw, Joleah A <joleah-shaw@uiowa.edu>
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 10r00 AM
To: Sarah Waiz
Cc: kalpal2ftrentopalmer,com; ahachtman3@yahoo.com; glennlynn2006@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: [External] Re: Sandhill Estates Rezoning
Hello Sarah....
My name isJoleah Shaw. -and I am the secretary of the Sandhill Estates Homeowners Association. i was unable to
attend the re -zoning meeting. However, I can assure you that Glenn is speaking for our entire neighborhood, The last
presentation of condos/townhouses did not go over well at the last "good neighbor" meeting and that Is to put it quite
mildly. The residents have been even more vocal about their oppos[tion during HOA meetings and general
conversations between the residents/nelghborsofSandhill Estates.
It's to our understanding that all of the other "parts" of Sandhill Estates will be single family homes and we were all
originally presented with the idea that the newest additions to Sandhill Estates near Gilbert Street would be the same or
would be zero lot/duplex units. The most recent plans of condos/townhouses/apartment buildings seems to be a very
"UN -INVITING" entrance t0 our neighborhood with large parking lots, large garages, and garbage dumpsters. As you can
imagine we are having a difficult time in figuring out how these multi -unit buildings would fit into our homeowner's
association. Clearly our HOA rules and covenants would not "fit" these new add ltions..,.especlally if they are multiunit
buildings and eventually become rental property. I am confident in saying that I speak for most of our HOA that we are
wanting the new development near Gilbert Street/McCollister Blvd to remain uniform with the rest of our neighborhood
as single family homes ... or at the very least zero lot/duplexes.
I too will make every effort to attend the "good neighbor" meetings.
Thank youl
-Joleah Shaw
785 McCollisterCt
Iowa City, IA 52240
319-321-9025
Sarah Walz
From: Sue Gnewuch <lsgnewuch@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2077 9:25 AM
To: Sarah Walz
Subject: Preserve@ 5andhill
Hi, Sarah.
Thanks for the information you were able to provide at our neighborhood meeting last night. We realize that this
project will go forward in the nearfuture, but were wondering if we have any input in the asethetics of the design of the
buildings. We think that in order to preserve our property values, that is a concern for us. The pictures appear to show
very inexpensive units and don't seem to us to represent the neighborhood look. Any recommendations about what to
do with our concerns?
Thanksin advancel
Sincerely,
Sue and Loren Gnewuch
720 McCollister Ct
Iowa City, IA 52240
2
i
y
SSj
SS�o�E
a
A
g
a
z
6
c
E
•L
E
O
N
i
�z
`a
th
MUM
V)u'1I;
3
m
v
4
a
c
0
N
s
3
m
3
a
'c
J
J
C
c!
b.
z
H
C
Z
U
1
S
V�u 1�1_
!C=
N�
1
a
L
C
L
i
Z
JJ
W;
V?-
/�=
L1. <
'L
J
�i
Ln
I
E
i
J
1.
. ,d �jlpq •yy
L�Sy
�
Ail
LCJ
� 1.
A2i31CdH7NHS
� 1114i0NtlS ltl 3Aa3S3Hd
�
�wo�
Q
r
`��4 CITY OF IOWA CITY
'� � MEMORANDUM
Date: October 13, 2017
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
From: Jann Ream, Code Enforcement Specialist
Re: Consider approval of amendments to City Code Sections 14-5B-4E, Illumination
Requirements, City Code Section 14-5B-8A&B, Signs permitted in ID, OPD and Residential
zones and 14-5B-8E to increase the size and type of signs for institutional uses; and Sign
Standards in the CB zones, and the South Downtown, University, Central Crossings, Park,
South Gilbert and East Side Mixed Use subdistricts to allow plastic trim cap letters for signs
above the fifth story
Introduction:
Residential zones: Over the past several months, several Religious Group Assembly uses in various
residential zones have applied for sign permits or inquired about what type of signage their church would
be allowed to install. Review of the sign code has revealed that signage for these uses in residential
zones is limited both in size and number of signs permitted. So much so that a majority of churches in
residential zones have existing signage that does not comply with our current code. Staff finds that both
the existing signage and the requested signage is not unreasonable, and therefore recommends
approval of the amendments.
CB and certain Riverfront Crossings zones: In October of 2016, the Planning and Zoning Commission
considered and approved several amendments to the Iowa City Sign Regulations in order to better
implement the recommendations of the Downtown District Storefront and Signage Guidelines and to
bring the sign code into compliance with a U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the regulation of
signage. This was a significant revision of the sign code regulations and, with any significant revision, the
application of those changes can reveal unforeseen consequences and unwarranted limitations for
certain situations.
History/Background:
Residential Zones: Currently, in residential zones, signage for an Institutional Use such as a church
(Religious Group Assembly) is limited to one (1) sign from the following sign types: facia (wall sign),
awning, canopy or monument. In the single-family zones, facia signs are limited to four (4) square feet
and monument signs are limited to twelve (12) square feet per side. In multi -family zones, facia signs are
limited to twelve (12) square feet and monument signs are limited to twenty-four (24) square feet per
side. Churches in single family zones are not uncommon and most have both a monument sign and a
sign on the building wall which is not in compliance with the current code. (Note: the symbol of a cross is
not considered signage.) An exterior wall of a church sanctuary is generally a large wall of more than one
story. Most churches in residential zones are non -compliant with the sign code and already have larger
signs.
October 13, 2017
Page 2
Additionally, design trends for newly built churches include larger sites that incorporate retaining walls or
masonry walls at the entrance to the site. Masonry wall signs are currently not permitted in residential
zones but could be an appropriate sign type in certain situations.
Illumination Requirements: Internal illumination for signs is not permitted in residential zones. This makes
sense for single family zones and even for most multi -family zones. An internally lit cabinet can be
distracting and out of place in most residential zones.
The PRM zone is a high -density multi -family zone. There are just a few areas in Iowa City with this
zoning designation: along the N. Clinton—N. Dubuque street corridor between Davenport and Jefferson,
south of Highway 6 West near Carver Hawkeye arena and small pockets south of Burlington Street in the
Riverfront Crossing district (likely to be rezoned to a Riverfront Crossings zoning designation upon
redevelopment). Two recent sign permit applications were for Religious Group Assembly uses in the
PRM zone in the N. Clinton—N. Dubuque corridor. In both instances, the religious uses found the
maximum allowed size (24sf) for a new monument sign to be acceptable but were unhappy to learn the
new sign could not be internally illuminated — especially since the new signs were replacing existing
internally illuminated monument signs. Internal illumination for a sign for an institutional use in a PRM
zone would most likely only occur in the N. Clinton-N. Dubuque street corridor. Given the proximity of
commercial uses and the fact that these institutional uses have had internally illuminated signs for many
years without any complaints, it seems reasonable to allow Institutional Uses internally illuminated signs
but only in PRM zones.
CB and certain Riverfront Crossings Zones: The new sign code amendments have been in place for
several months and, as with any broad change to zoning regulations, deficiencies are revealed when
applied to real world situations. The regulation under consideration is the prohibition of plastic trim cap
channel letters. Attached is a specification sheet that demonstrates what constitutes a plastic trim cap
letter. The prohibition of this type of channel letter was a recommendation incorporated in the Downtown
District Storefront and Signage Guidelines and then amended into the city's sign code. The design and
fabrication of plastic trim cap letters necessitates that they are a large letter and geared toward vehicular
traffic. This type of letter was considered inappropriate for the pedestrian oriented downtown storefronts.
Both staff and the design firm hired to create the storefront and sign guidelines for the downtown district
believed that prohibiting this ubiquitous sign type downtown would stimulate better and more creative
signage for downtown storefronts. However, not every building in the CB zones is a small pedestrian
oriented storefront. Additionally, the sign regulations for the CB zones also apply to several Riverfront
Crossings subdistricts (South Downtown, University, Central Crossings, Park, South Gilbert and East
Side Mixed Use subdistricts). Development in the Riverfront Crossings- South Downtown includes two
high rise hotels and a high rise condominium building. Additionally, the Sheraton Hotel on City Plaza will
be re -branding itself in the coming year. These uses lend themselves to a larger sign appropriate to the
building size and the use. Attached are examples of proposed signs for these uses — all of which include
plastic trim cap channel letters. The proposed signage is appropriate to these taller buildings and is
typical of what is allowed in other jurisdictions. Given that the size of the signs is now controlled by the
facade width, staff believes allowing trim cap channel letters in these limited situations is acceptable.
Recommendation: Staff recommends amending the sign code as follows.
For Residential, ID and OPD zones: 1) allow two (2) signs for Institutional Uses in ID, OPD and
residential zones; 2) Add masonry wall signs to the type of sign allowed for Institutional Uses; 3) increase
the maximum fascia sign size for Institutional Uses in single family zones to twelve (12) square feet; 4)
allow internal illumination for one (1) sign for an Institutional Use in PRM zones.
October 13, 2017
Page 3
For CB zones and certain Riverfront Crossings Zones: Allow plastic trim cap letters for signs above the
fifth floor in CB zones and those Riverfront Crossings that are regulated in the same manner as the CB
zones, but only when the building is more than 5 stories.
�7 4.,4 / 72 --
John Yapp, Development Coordinator
A. Sign Standards For ID And OPD Zones:
1. Permitted Signs'
a. Single-family uses and two-family uses are not allowed to install permanent signs, except for one
small identification building sign and one integral sign, as specified in table 5B-1 of this section-
b. Signage for nonresidential uses in the ID-RS and ID-RM zones are permitted one Identification sign.
The identification sign may be one of the following types: fascia, awning, canopy or monument sign.
€eFilnstitutional uses are Permitted two identification signs from the following es: fascia awning
canc�py, monument or masonry wall si n. The -One sign for an institutional use may also include
copy announcing its services or activities. (Ord. 08-4319, 11-3-2008; amd. Ord. 16-4685, 11-15-
2016)
c. Signage for nonresidential uses in the ID-C, ID -I, and ID -RP zones must comply with the sign
regulations contained in subsection C, "Sign Standards in CO-1, CN-1 And MU Zones", of this
section.
d. Residential uses in any OPD zone are permitted signage in accordance with the requirements of the
underlying residential zone. Nonresidential uses approved as part of a planned development are
permitted signage in accordance with the sign regulations contained in subsection C, "Sign
Standards In CO-1, CN-1 And MU Zones', of this section.
2. Sign Specifications And Provisions'
a. All signs for residential uses in the ID and OPD zones are subject to the standards specified in table
5B-1 of this section.
b, All signs in the ID-RS and ID-RM zones are subject to the standards specified in table 5B-1 of this
section.
c. All signs for nonresidential uses in the ID-C, ID-1, and ID -RP zones are subject to the standards
specified in table 5B-2 of this section.
d. In the OPD zone, all signs for nonresidential uses approved as part of a planned development are
subject to the standards specified in table 5B-2 of this section. (Ord. 08-4319, 11-3-2008)
B. Sign Standards For All Residential Zones:
1. Permitted Signs:
a. Principal uses, other than single-family uses and two-family uses, are permitted one identification
sign. The identification sign may be one of the following types: fascia, awning, canopy or monument
sign. Foe, Institutional uses are permitted two identification signs from the followinq sign types: fascia
awnina. canooy, monument and masonry wall sign. the One sign for an institutional use may also
include copy announcing its services or activities.
b. Parks and open space uses are permitted entranceway signs as specified in table 513-1 of this
section.
c. Single-family uses and two-family uses are not allowed to install permanent signs, except for one
small identification building sign and one Integral sign as specified in table 5B-1 of this section.
d. One monument sign is permitted at each street entrance of a subdivision or development of two (2)
acres or more. The maximum sign area is thirty two (32) square feet per side - may be double faced
for a total of sixty four (64) square feet - maximum height is five feet (5'). All other monument signs
are permitted as specified in table 5B-1 of this section.
2. Sign Specifications And Provisions: All signs in residential zones are subject to the standards
specified in table 513-1 of this section.
Table 5B-1: Sign Specifications And Provisions
In Residential And The ID And OPD Zones
Permitted
Maximum
Signs
Zone
Sign Area
Awning
ID-RS, RRA,
12 sq. ft. or 25% of
signs'
RS-5, RS-8,
awning surface,
RS-12, RNS-
whichever is less
12,ID-RM,
RM-12, RM-
20, RNS-20,
RM-44,
PRM
Canopy ID-RS, RR-1, Sign cannot exceed 90%
signs MO-5, RS-8, of street -facing canopy
RS-12, RNS- length and no more than
12, ID-RM, 15 inches in height
RM-12, RM-
20, RNS-20,
RM-44,
PRM
Maximum Height And
Special Provisions
Maximum height: Top of
first story
Limited to identification
only
Not allowed for single-
family and two-family
uses
Signs may be mounted on
the face of the canopy,
upright on the top of the
canopy or underneath the
canopy. Signs mounted
on the face of the canopy
may not extend beyond
the edges of the canopy.
Directional
signs
Entranceway
signs
ID-RS, RR-1,
RS-5, RS-8,
RS-12, RNS-
12, ID-RM,
RM-12, RM-
20, RNS-20,
RM-44,
PRM
Allowed for
parks and
open space
uses in any
residential
zone, ID
zone, or OPD
zone
2 sq. ft. per face
May be double faced for
total area of 4 sq, ft.
For signs located above
or across the top of the
subject archway, the
area of the sign may not
exceed 25% of the area
delineated by the subject
archway
For a sign located on the
side of the archway, the
area of the sign may not
exceed 33% of the
surface area of the side
of the archway support
on which the sign is
located. (See section 14-
513-7, "Measurement
Standards", of this
article.)
Signs mounted on the top
of the canopy or
underneath the canopy
must consist of individual
letter forms and may not
extend more than 15" in
height above or below the
canopy. The bottom of the
canopy or any letter forms
attached underneath the
canopy must be, at
minimum 8' above the
level of the adjacent grade
Canopy signs may not be
illuminated
Maximum height: 20'
Up to 1 sign per facade of
the subject archway
The sign may not contain
changeable copy
Sign copy may not extend
beyond the edges of the
entranceway structure
Minimum clearance height
is 10' for entranceway
signs across driveways
and 8' for entranceway
signs across walkways
Entranceway signs are
not allowed if the subject
lot or tract already has a
Fascia ID-RS, RR-1,
signs' RS-5, RS-8,
RS-12, RNS-
12
ID-RM, RM-
12, RM-20,
RNS-20, RM-
44, PRM
Integral signs ID-RS, RR-1,
RS-5, RS-8,
RS-12, RNS-
12, ID-RM,
RM-12, RM-
20, RNS-20,
RM-44,
PRM
Masonry Wall ID-RS, RR-1
signs RS-5 RS-8,
RS-12, RNS-
12, ID-RM,
RM-12, RIM
-
20,RNS-
20, RM-44,
PRM
Monument ID-RS, RR-1,
signs1 RS-5, IRS-8,
RS-12, RNS-
12
ID-RM, RM-
12, RM-20,
RNS-20, RM-
44, PRM
4 sq. ft.
Institutional uses are
allowed 12 sq. 4.
monument sign located at
the subject entrance
Maximum height: Top of
first story
Limited to identification
only, except as allowed
12 sq, ft, for institutional uses
2 s% ft.
12 sa. ft.
12 sq. ft. per sign face
May be double faced for
a total area of 24 sq, ft.
24 sq. ft. per sign face
Not allowed for single-
family and two-family
uses
Up to 1 of these signs is
allowed per building
No permit is required
�I
1ft less than the heiaht of [I
the masonry wall.
Limited to institutional
uses.
Maximum height: 5'
Limited to identification
only, except as allowed
for institutional uses
Not allowed for single-
family and two-family
uses
Maximum height: 5'
May be double faced for Limited to identification
a total area of 48 sq. ft. only, except as allowed
Small ID-RS, RR-1,
identification RS-5, RS-S,
signs RS-12, RNS-
12, ID-RM,
RM-12, RM-
20, RNS-20,
RM-44,
PRM
for institutional uses
Not allowed for single-
family and two-family
uses
2 sq. ft. The sign must be a
building sign
Up to 1 of these signs is
allowed per building
No permit is required
Note,
1. Only 1 sign is permitted; 1 fascia sign, 1 awning sign, 1 canopy sign, or 1 monument sign except
for institutional uses. (See subsections Al b and B1 a of this section.)
E. Illumination Requirements: Illuminated signs must conform to the following requirements: (Ord.
08-4319, 11-3-2008)
1. Except for signs in the ID and residential zones, all permitted signs may be internally or externally
illuminated. All signs permitted in the ID and residential zones may only be externally illuminated
with white light except that, in the PRIM zone, one sign for an institutional use may be internally
illuminated (Ord. 08-4319, 11-3-2008; amd. Ord. 16-4685, 11-15-2016)
2. Illumination through the use of exposed lamps or inert gas tubes is allowed, provided the exposed
lamp does not exceed eleven (11) watts or that an inert gas tube does not draw more than sixty (60)
milliamps. When Inside frosted lamps or exposed lamps with a diffusing screen are used, no lamp
shall exceed twenty five (25) watts.
3. Illumination through the use of LEDs is allowed only as specified for electronic changeable copy. All
signs using LEDs must have installed ambient light monitors and must at all times allow such
monitors to automatically adjust the brightness level of the electronic sign based on ambient light
conditions. At no time shall the sign be operated at a brightness level greater than the
manufacturer's recommended levels. The electronic changeable copy must be monochromatic. It
must utilize a dark background with only the message or image lit in a single color.
4. Artificial external light sources used to illuminate a sign face must be located and shielded such that
the bulb is not directly visible from any adjacent residentially zoned property or public right of way
and must use a narrow cone of light that does not extend beyond the illuminated sign face.
5. Illumination on a property, including illumination from signs, must not exceed 0.5 initial horizontal
foot-candle and 2.0 initial maximum foot-candles as measured at any point along a property
boundary that is adjacent to or across the street from properties that are zoned residential, CN-1, or
CO-1.
6. All illuminated signs are subject to the provisions of the electrical code, including any permit fees.
7. Permit applications for electronic changeable copy signs must include a copy of the manufacturer's
operating manual, including any recommended standards for brightness and other display
operations.
8. For electronic changeable copy signs, whether the sign is programmed from the site or from a
remote location, the computer interface that programs the sign shall be made available to city staff
for inspection upon request. If the computer interface is not immediately available, the sign shall
cease operation until such program can be provided. (Ord. 08-4319, 11-3-2008)
E. Sign Standards In C13-2, C13-5 And CB-10 Zones:
1. All signs in the C13-2, CB-5 and CB-10 Zones are subject to the standards specified in table 5134 of
this section.
2. The maximum sign area for each type of sign, special provisions, and any restrictions on the number
of signs allowed are specified in table 58-4 of this section. Unless specifically limited in table 5134 of
this section, any number of signs may be installed.
3. Signage for residential uses must comply with the requirements for residential uses in the RM Zones
as stated in table 58-1 of this section.
4. Cabinet signs where the entire face of the cabinet is internally illuminated are prohibited. and
ilnternally illuminated plastic trim cap letters are prohibited except as specifically allowed for fascia
signs in Table 513-0. (Ord. 16-4685, 11-15-2016)
Table 513-4: Sign Specifications And
Provisions In The CB-2, C13-5 And CB-10 Zones
Permitted Maximum
Signs Sign Area
Awning 25% of awning surface
signs
Banner Same allowances as
projecting upper level projecting
signs signs
Maximum
Height Provisions
Top edge of first Each storefront is
story awning allowed up to a total of 3
signs from the following
sign types: canopy
signs, awning signs, and
projecting signs. Awning
signs are only allowed
on first story awnings
Same
restrictions as
upper level
projecting
signs
Note: See subsection
14-3C-3C of this title for
awning and canopy
design standards
Only permitted on
multiuse buildings where
access to uses is
primarily through a
common lobby from the
street such as an indoor
shopping mall or where
a single use occupies a
large multi -story building
Standards", of this
across walkways
article.)
An entranceway sign is
not allowed if the
property has a masonry
wall sign, monument
sign, or freestanding
sign
Fascia signs
Square footage equal to
No longer than 90% of
1.5 times the length of
the length of the sign
the sign wall
wall, sign band or
storefront, whichever is
most applicable to the
location of the sign
Back lit cabinet signs,
where the entire face is
illuminated, are
prohibited
Internally illuminated
plastic trip cap letter
forms are prohibited
except for buildings of
more than 5 stories
when the sign is above
the 5 story.
Limited to identification
OWL
(Flags
--
1 additional flag may be
displayed in conjunction
with any city, county,
state or federal flags
No permit is required
Freestanding
2 sq. ft. per linear foot of 20'
Allowed only in the CB-2
signs
lot frontage, not to
Zone
exceed 40 sq. ft. per
sign face
Only 1 freestanding sign
is allowed per lot
Allowed only through
approval of a minor
Channel Letter Trim -cap
Channel Letter Trim -cap
CHANNEL LETTER TRIM- CAP is the most widely
used signage material in the world. It is first-class
aluminum coated with plastic, which enjoys the
features of firm, elastic and seamless.
It can be easily made into any channel letter and
logo. It has thoroughly changed the static effect of
traditional crone signs, cutting down the cost and
time involved and improving the level of signage
making. 20mm(J shape/ and 26mm(Arrow shape)
are available.
Width 20r6mPW/ 45MII501ee0Ro11
JT-301A
Slack
JT-305A
Red
JT.306A
Blue
JT-30TA
Green
JT-308A
JT-309A
Chrome
Gold
JT-312A
Purple
ILI
JT-313A
Y,11,v
JT-314A
Orange
JT-315A
White
JT316A
Brown
JT-317A
Gray
Wiihh 26mm11'1 45Mf1501eet11aa11
LM-301 &apk
LM$05 ReC
LM-306 Blue
LM30T Green
LM308 Chrome
LM309 Gc13
LM-312 Whine
LM-313 YeSaw
LM-314 Orange
LM-315 Purple
LM-316 Brown
LM31] Grey
R
M
>4�
r X
\ y
Trim -cap roll
Trim cap samples
Are you looking for wider than 26mm trim cap? Our Channel Letter Coil - Letteasy®
should be suit to your needs for channel letter making.
0
4b
Aluminum Channel Letter Coil - Letteasy®
Find out the products at httpalwww. pansign.comlproducts_49. htm for more details
Ei .
lit
e
��tle
�.t
LL� = .-fill
# I
a
P
�o HYATT PLACE
EXTERIOR SIGNAGE
BRANDING
Site ID / Center NO.: Iowa City , IA
Location Name: Hyatt Place ai Iowa City
Street: 435 South Linn Street
City, State: Iowa City, IA
Zip: 62240
El A E C IS D
MI- i 44 l--f fi
w -
1-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- U-A T.
FLIAL
C------------------------ e--------------------------- { --------
alI
FRONT VIEW
MODEL-2
"COLOR DETAIL"
■ BLACK:
SERIES 250o-22
3M 3650-22
YELLOW:
SERIES 2500,2244A
3M VT-u719
® LAVENDER:
SERIES 260o-3148
AVERY A94S0-T
■ BLUE a
SERIES 2SBo-2529
3M 3630447
PISTACHIO:
SERIES 26UO-2157
3M 363DA49
ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LOGO & LETTERS
Fl ORANGE 1 SERIES 2600-84
3M 3630-B4
LIVE GREEN: SERIES 2100-940
® SPRING GREEN:
SERIES 25oD.2493 (31613536166) LW Slle 6
SERIES 25062202 (3M V110999) O9M Gun
U um of E'ABMI
LIGHT BLUE ALWAYS APPLIED
AS A DIFFUSER FORTHE LOGO
LARLON BLACK SST SURME 6w PERR VIWA FILLER:PLLMINVMAMO MSAIINI MSN
MODEL #2
ILA 19'
6116'
2 112"
2 374'
3 112"
,
$ 314"
8"
19'-101Z
16 318'
32'
25 3/8'
8 7116.
3 318"
3 518"
4 518'
5"
10 518
26'-6'
22"
56'
lj 3 314'
11 114"
4112'
4 3/4'
6 118"
6112-
14 114'
35'-4'
28718,
10D'
36"
38'
12 518"
5'
51&
6 718"
117
39'-0'
32 314'
126'
42 174'
14"
5112.
6'
7 314'
8116'
17 314
44'-2'
36"
156'
50 518'
1515i16'
6 518"
7 114'
9 306"
10'
21 318
53'-1 W'
44"
224'
56'
IBWlr
7318"
7718"
105116"
10718'
239116
58'-G118
47718"
274'
63 318"
21"
183/8-1
9"
11 ,8'
121 4"
26 5/8
66'.i"
54 118"
I356'
REMOTE
SMALL -LOGO 09" to 4F)
v
a HYATT PLACE
EXTERIOR SIGNAGE
BRANDING
FILLER FIE.IMM Wk
FAEErFDALWNWAN4W 6ATINFWISa
RhE1F910 ED REFRFIW.LUCW1fG
RIAYE RSMrIEO REflECTrvE eHa
IMWSFD FACE W. FROM
.IW TH COEIC ll S
WIRIYMt WFIRSISIWFAGE
SFE COLGR OETALS
IM'WA%1'M I WW SPPlER
mTEIES. M
lm! EWFERFM
YRATERAIOOFIE'fMLC CpENT
A•ID GONFL4GIL5
EMONGFA6 FROMOSEI'1X(. ALIM
WIDFIEi
a XOLG MONCGRROyVEFASTFiER
Site ID ! Center No.: Iowa City , IA
Location Name: Hyatt Place at Iowa City
Street: 435 South Linn Street
City, Stale: Iowa City, IA
Zip: 52240
n
N
ROLNp NF/U SS SCRFN
'N%t®N1]'Ge
�. ! IAfMlEO TORiTCN FILLER
SECTION LOGO SEC1CIt IETEERS
NTS FEs
AND SCREWED TC FILLER
SIB' WHRE P:GMEMTEO II4WS
1 7VfN AFPL1EO DN FIRST
SWi S LG.MDEYAn.
WNITEtED.66pet
IPoLWENSP9I FOOT
.�IR F;wEAmEneFfeaF
WF KVN. vW RWV I
P/JNIED NLMIHLM AHOGB£D 9MIN FI W6N
YNFMp PhEf<D 10
16CKNN WiUNG
IRIpE FI[MlIlD WK1E
TiPL1A: Y.N'TFL
Wu
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 5, 2017 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING
E M 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 Hektcen, Karen Howard
OTHERS PRESENT:
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of amendments to Title 14, Chapter 2,
Article G, the Riverfront Crossings Form -based Development Standards, related to upper floor
stepback and minimum building height as discussed in the staff memo dated September 21 and
in the follow-up staff memo dated October 5, as amended.
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of 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 as described in the Staff report.
CALL TO ORDER:
Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
CODE AMENDMENT:
Discussion of Amendments to Title 14, Chapter 2, Article G. the Riverfront Crossings form -
based code related to upper floor stepbacks and minimum building height standards.
Howard stated this is a continuation of discussion from the last meeting where the Commission
asked Staff to bring forward alternative language for the Code Amendment. The original
proposal was to eliminate the stepback requirement in the South Downtown District except for
buildings receiving bonus height and for building frontages along Gilbert Street. Rather than
eliminating the stepback requirement in the South Downtown Subdistrict, the Commission
requested alternative language that would allow for administrative approval of minor
adjustments to allow stepback reductions or waivers with added approval criteria that would
make it clear that if requesting an minor adjustment an alternative design solution must be
proposed that equally or better meets the intent of breaking up the vertical mass of taller
buildings. Howard shared the proposed changes to the Minor Adjustment section of the Form -
Based Code language and noted in paragraph 1 Staff is proposing to strike the allowance for
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 5, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 2 of 6
minor adjustments for fagade stepback requirements as that section addresses requests for
adjustments to building and parking placement rather than adjustments to the building design.
Instead staff recommends moving the allowance for minor adjustments for fagade stepbacks to
paragraph 5, which addresses requests for minor adjustments for building design standards.
Staff also added some language in paragraph five to clarify situations where the stepback
waiver could be considered and what the approval criteria are.
Howard noted that requests for minor adjustments are review by the Staff Design Review
Committee. For cases located in the Riverfront Crossings District this committee is considered
the Form -Based Code Committee. This committee reviews every project in the Riverfront
Crossings District and reviews all requests for minor adjustments to the form -based code
standards. Currently, in order to qualify for a minor adjustment, the applicant must demonstrate
that there are site characteristics or other conditions that make it difficult or infeasible to meet
the requirement. The proposed change to the code language would broaden the administrative
discretion to consider if there is something unique about the property or neighboring property
that lends to other design approaches. In the case of requests for adjustments to building
design elements, including stepbacks, the applicant must propose an alternative design solute
that equally or better meets the intent of the specific standard being modified. With regard to
requests for a waiver of the upper floor stepback requirement the applicant must propose an
alternative means of visually breaking up the vertical plane of the building. The FBC Committee
reviews all the criteria listed in paragraph five for every application.
Martin asked who sits on the FBC Committee. Howard said the membership of the Committee
has varied over the years but typically is staff from the Neighborhood & Development Services
Department and more recently staff from the City Manager's office.
Howard showed the Commission examples of buildings where other means besides fagade
stepbacks are used to visually break up the vertical mass. There is typically some horizontal
element, such as a band, raised cornice, etc, that creates a visual break between the middle
floors and the upper floor or floors of the building, with the upper floors having a different
material, color, texture, window pattern or other design distinction from the floors below the
horizontal break. Howard said in most instances it will be important to maintain the stepback
requirement particularly where reducing the perception of the height of the building is
particularly important.
Dyer noted the addition of the new paragraph six in section 14-2G-7H and that paragraph
seems to be specific to the one proposed building on the corner of Clinton and Burlington
Streets. Dyer questioned if the City should adopt a rule or law that only applies to one building.
In this situation the applicant could design the building as two stories and then ask for a waiver
for the second floor to be open patio space and avoid having to adopt this new paragraph.
Howard explained that a pedestrian plaza on a floor above the second story would be allowed
by right since the minimum building height is 2 stories. Howard believes that while rare, there
may be other similar situations on large sites where a U-shaped building would be proposed
where a second story pedestrian courtyard would be preferred over a courtyard on an upper
floor. It is also important to only allow such an adjustment to a midblock location, since it would
not be desirable to have such a short building anchoring a street corner. That is why the
standard is written so specifically.
Freerks asked a question under paragraph five, sections a. and e. where it states an applicant
must propose an alternative design solution that equally or better meets the intent and in E
visually breaks up the vertical plane. However it doesn't say it must be agreed upon or
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 5, 2017 — Formal Meeting
Page 3 of 6
accepted or adopted so is that how the language is always written. Howard noted that Ms.
Freerks has called earlier in the day asking for clarification to this question. After consideration,
staff agrees the language could be more clearly stated as affirmative approval criteria. Howard
showed a slide with this alternative sentence construction, which would make it clear that the
FBC Committee must determine that all the approval criteria have been met before an
adjustment is approved. If the answer is no to any single one of the items, the application
cannot be approved. The applicant would then have the option to propose an alternative design
solution that would satisfy the criteria. Howard showed the Commission the following alternative
wording of the proposed code amendment.
a. An alternative design solution has been proposed by the applicant and it equally or
better meets the intent of the specific standard being modified; and
e. For requests for waivers of an upper floor stepback requirement, an alternative means of
visually breaking up the vertical plane of the building has been proposed and meets all
the approval criteria stated above.
Freerks thanked Howard for the language update and feels it is much more clear.
Dyer stated that if they are discussing language updates, in item b is states "proposed building
design is uniquely designed" and could just state "the building is uniquely designed". Howard
agreed.
Dyer asked with these adjustments can the building that was presented to the Commission at
the last meeting still be built. Howard said that proposal has not gone through design review so
she cannot comment on the result.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one, Freerks closed the public hearing.
Hensch moved to recommend approval 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 as listed in the Staff report and
amended.
Parsons seconded the motion.
Freerks feels this will set up the framework to put better buildings into the downtown area.
Dyer noted she hopes is will be regarded as applied with the term minor adjustments and not
major adjustments.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-1).
CODE AMENDMENT:
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.
Howard stated that recently State legislation allowed for the sale of first- and second-class
consumer fireworks in Iowa during certain time periods during the year. While local jurisdictions
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 5, 2017— Formal Meeting
Page 4 of 6
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 maybe 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. The City Council
directed staff to prepare amendments to the zoning code that would restrict the sale of fireworks
to Industrial Zones. Howard referred to the code amendments in the staff report that would
restrict sales within existing buildings in Industrial Zones and would also address temporary
outdoor tent sales. Temporary use permits are the mechanism through which temporary sales
tents are authorized.
Hektoen added that in the past legislative session the State enacted a law that was very broadly
worded and meant to tie local municipalities' hands in restricting use of plastic bags etc.
However because it was so broadly worded, Staff is worried that imposing too many restrictions
on a temporary use will run afoul of that other law, even though it is not a fireworks law. The
City of Ankeny got sued because they regulated fireworks as a temporary use with many
different types of conditions and the court ruled it was preempted by this other law that states
Cities cannot adopt ordinances or resolutions setting standards or requirements regarding the
sale or marketing of consumer merchandise that are different than the State regulations. So
that is why there are no other specific standards for either brick and mortar sales or temporary
sales included in the code amendments. Hektoen added that Des Moines also was sued, but
the Court upheld their policy and therefore Iowa City is using a similar approach.
Howard added this policy will assist with safety In that the having fireworks sales in only
industrial areas will keep them away from supermarkets and residential neighborhoods.
Parsons asked what avenues the City will use for public education explaining that use of the
fireworks within city limits is not allowed, even though they can purchase them here. Howard
said that was a challenge, but the City has a communications office the uses a lot of different
methods to get the word out to the public.
Signs stated he hopes part of the education this upcoming summer will be an emphasis on
citations rather than warnings because the abuse was rampant.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one, Freerks closed the public hearing.
Hensch moved to recommend approval of amendments to Title 14, Zoning, Chapter 4,
Use Regulations and Article 14-21), Industrial and Research Zones, to restrict sales of
consumer fireworks to Industrial Zones as described in the Staff report.
Theobald seconded the motion.
Signs is very pleased the City is doing this and reiterated his displeasure with how last summer
went, it felt like fireworks were completely unregulated and the City had a difficult time enforcing
due to the overwhelming use.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 21, 2017
Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes of September 21, 2017.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 5, 2017 — formal Meeting
Page 5 of 6
Theobald seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Theobald moved to adjourn.
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0.
z
O
W
V)
O
OU
U W
Ow
Z W
U
0 Q N
N❑
6s z
Ur W
z ~
r
zQ
z
Q
J
Q
40
oxxXxxxx
Nxxxxxxx
CF)xxxxoxx
r
�xoxxXxx
co
00xxxxxxo
0
E!Xxxxxxx
°xxxxxXX
,Ixxxoxxx
m
X
X
0
X
X
X
X
�xxxXxxx
CO
LU
X
X
X
X
X
X
W
,Xxxxxxx
O
a
X
X
X-
X
X
X
4
x
x
x
LLI
p
x
x
x
m
I
X
x
X
x
X
x
eo
Z
X
X
X
X
x
X
x
0
M
X
X
x
x
O
x
x
J
Z
Y
W
W
W
O
04
—
a
a
Z
uLiZ
�z0
r
WWaa-=
lu
N
X in
C �
CD N m
M 0
N Q Q O
w u
x0o
w
Y