HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-03-2018 Planning and Zoning CommissionIowa City
Planning & Zoning Commission
' Formal Meeting
` Thursday, May 3, 2018 -
7:00 PM
T
Emma Harvat Hall - City Hall
�, L NG �s• y, ,RMAElf
Nampo
IS i, J
j,
��>♦ � i� � y � �M1Y t � /�1-
tCL C I I ( C11
I ci
Department of Neighborhood
and
f Development Services CITY OF IOWA CITY
/ UNESCO CI (Y OF LITERATURE
I /
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, May 3, 2018
Formal Meeting — 7:00 PM
Emma Harvat Hall
Iowa City City Hall
410 E. Washington Street
AGENDA:
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
D. Rezoning / Development Item
Discussion of an application submitted by application, submitted by North Dubuque, LLC for a
rezoning of approximately 73.15 acres of land from Interim Development - Low Density Single -
Family (ID-RS) zone, Low Density Single -Family (RS-5) zone, and Planned Development
Overlay / High Density Single -Family Residential (OPD/RS-12) zone to Planned Development
Overlay / High Density Single -Family Residential (OPD/RS-12) zone for approx. 50 acres of
property and Planned Development Overlay / Highway Commercial (OPD/CH-1) zone for
approx. 23 acres of property. The applicant is also requesting approval of the preliminary plat of
Forest View, a 73.15-acre subdivision, located north of Foster Road, south of 1-80, west of N.
Dubuque Street, east of Mackinaw Drive. (REZ18-00013/SUB18-00006) The applicant has
indicated that a revised plan will be submitted for review at the May 17 meeting. This
item will be deferred to the May 17 meeting.
E. Comprehensive Plan:
Setting a public hearing for May 17 on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, Annexation
Policy, to add a section pertaining to affordable housing.
F. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: April 5, April 16, and April 19, 2018
G. Report from National American Planning Association Conference
H. Planning & Zoning Information
I. Adjournment
If you will need disability -related accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact Bob Milko, 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: May a 1 May 17l June 7
Informal: Scheduled as needed.
r
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEM4RANDuM
Date:
April 27, 2018
To:
Planning and Zoning Commission
From:
Bob Miklo, Senior Planner
Re:
(REZ1 8-0001 3/SUB1 8-00006) Forest View
The applicant has indicated that they are working on a revised plan, but it will not be ready in
time for the May 3 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Therefore, the applicant has
requested deferral to the May 17 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 3, 2018
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Bob Miklo, Senior Planner
Re: Comprehensive Plan — Affordable Housing Annexation Policy
The City Council has asked the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider an amendment to
the Comprehensive Plan's Annexation Policy to add a section pertaining to affordable housing.
The proposed policy states:
If the annexation is for residential development that will result in the creation of
ten (10) or more new housing units, the development will support the City's goal
of creating and maintaining the supply of affordable housing. Such support shall
be based on providing affordable units equal to 10% of the total units in the
annexed area with an assurance of long term affordability, preferably for a term
of not less than 20 years. Income targets shall be consistent with the City's
existing program requirements. How the development provides such support will
vary depending on the particular circumstances of the annexation, and may
include, but is not limited to, transfer of lots/units to the City or an affordable
housing provider; fee -in -lieu paid to the City's affordable housing fund; and/or
participation in a state or federal housing program. In determining the most
desirable option consideration shall be given to the interest of both the City and
the Iowa City Community School District in not exacerbating the burdens on
neighborhoods and elementary schools experiencing challenges related to
concentrations of poverty. An agreement committing the Owner/Developer to
the affordable housing obligation, shall be required prior to annexation, and shall
be further memorialized, if necessary, in a conditional zoning agreement.
The current Annexation Policy is contained on page 17 of the Comprehensive Plan (copy
attached — the full Comprehensive Plan can be found at https://www.icaov.orglcompplan). The
attached memorandum from Geoff Fruin, City Manager, provides more details regarding the
proposed policy.
On May 3, the Commission will set a public hearing for May 17 to receive public comment on
the proposed amendment.
Attachments:
1. February 26, 2018 Memorandum
2. Comprehensive Plan excerpts including current Annexation Policy
3. Map of annexations
City of Iowa City
03-0-f.-4$
IP3
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 26, 2018
To: City Council
From: Geoff Fruin, City Manager
Re: Affordable Housing Action Plan — Annexation Policy
Background: The Affordable Housing Action Plan includes a recommendation that
consideration be given to an annexation policy that provides for affordable housing
contributions. The City's current annexation policy is found in section 2 of the
Comprehensive Plan.(https://www.icgov.org/comoolan). Text and maps of interest are
found at pp.16-18 and Sections 10 and 11 (Future Land Use and Fringe Area Map), and
are attached. In Iowa City the practice has been to consider only voluntary annexations,
i.e. a petition by the owner of the land requesting to be annexed as opposed to an
application by the City to involuntarily annex property into the City. Under the City's policy,
a voluntary annexation is generally viewed positively when 3 conditions exist: 1) the area
under consideration falls within the long-range planning boundary; 2) Development in the
area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need, without imposing an undue
financial burden on the City; and, 3) Control of development is in the City's best interests.
The broad parameters of the annexation policy serve the City well for several reasons.
First, the City has no obligation to annex property. Its actions need only be reasonable
and consistent with the annexation policy found in the Comprehensive Plan. Second,
annexations are infrequent. Attached is a map showing the annexations to Iowa City
since 2005. Only 7 have been for residential development of more than 10 units. Finally,
each annexation presents variable issues that are often the subject of negotiation
between the City and the landowner (e.g. infrastructure and public facility needs and
costs, sewer and water fees, tax phase in).
In researching this issue, City staff has found little in the way of annexation policies from
other cities that specifically address affordable housing. For the most part, what is found
is express or implicit requirements that any land which is annexed must comply with a
city's inclusionary housing ordinance. For example, the City of Boulder has an
inclusionary housing ordinance (Chapter 9-13, Boulder City Code) that applies to all
residential development but does not address annexations. Staff contacted Boulder's
Housing Division and was told by the Deputy Director that while they strive for certain
benchmarks they intentionally do not have a written policy on annexations because each
annexation is the subject of a negotiated agreement with the city, and each can bring
different "community benefits."
In crafting a policy, it is important to keep in mind that affordable housing measures that
impose restrictions on the income of tenants and/or homeowners require income
monitoring and verification. (e.g. Development Agreement with CA Ventures for units at
Linn and Court; rental units provided in accordance with the Riverfront Crossings
Inclusionary Housing ordinance). While the Developer is responsible for verifying income,
oversight by the City is necessary both to educate Developers/Landlords with no
experience in affordable housing, and to assure compliance. With the intensification and
diversification of the City's affordable housing requirements, we have concerns about
staff's ability to effectively provide such oversight with existing staff resources. The
February 26, 2018
Page 2
literature suggests that this is a common concern. In the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy's
Working Paper entitled Achieving Lasting Affordability through Inclusionary Housing
(2014) the authors' findings from their nationwide inventory include the following:
Stewardship Practice
The case study analysis provides unprecedented insight into the ways
local jurisdictions handle stewardship as part of their inclusionary housing
programs. Monitoring inclusionary housing units and engaging residents,
developers, lenders and other partners are essential for ensuring lasting
affordability. Despite evidence of best practices from other housing
programs, such as CLTs [community land trusts], there is wide variation
in local jurisdictions' approaches to stewardship —both the value placed
on stewardship and the specific stewardship activities used. A common
theme across programs was a lack of sufficient resources to sufficiently
monitor and steward properties and homeowners. Local jurisdictions have
also seen their inclusionary housing inventory evolve and become more
diverse —with more rental units, varying affordability terms, and multiple
partners —which makes stewardship more challenging to implement.
While many jurisdictions retain monitoring and stewardship activities in-
house, trends indicate more programs are partnering with external
organizations to provide these services. (p.30)
Recommendation:
The following parameters have guided staff's development of an affordable housing
criteria for annexations:
1. Allow for flexibility in addressing the issues presented by any particular annexation
while at the same time giving land owners/developers notice of the basic
parameters.
2. Make it consistent with our existing programs (e.g. 10% of units for developments
with over 10 units in RFC; 15% TIF requirement; affordable defined as housing
affordable to tenants at or below 60% area median income (AMI) and homeowners
at or below 80% AMI)
3. Emphasize types of affordable housing contributions that will not require City
income monitoring of private developments while allowing the flexibility to consider
other options in appropriate situations.
4. A preference for long term affordability that does not require income monitoring by
City staff.
By providing basic parameters that clearly define affordable housing as a critical
component to annexations we can give the City and the developer the flexibility to
negotiate based on the variables of each annexation request. In some cases, it may be
that fee -in -lieu of is desired, while in others it could be that partnerships with affordable
housing providers or the donation of land for a future LIHTC project is most appropriate.
Getting too specific with the policy may inhibit otherwise creative approaches to future
annexations.
With these parameters in mind, staff recommends adding the following to the criteria that
must be satisfied in order for annexation to occur:
February 26, 2018
Page 3
If the annexation is for residential development that will result in the creation of ten
(10) or more new housing units, the development will support the City's goal of
creating and maintaining the supply of affordable housing. Such support shall be
based on a goal of providing affordable units equal to 10% of the total units in the
annexed area. Income targets shall be consistent with the City's existing program
requirements. How the development provides such support will vary depending on
the particular circumstances of the annexation, and may include, but is not limited
to, transfer of lots/units to the City or an affordable housing provider; fee -in -lieu
paid to the City's affordable housing fund; and/or participation in a state or federal
housing program. An agreement committing the Owner/Developer to the
affordable housing obligation, shall be required prior to annexation, and shall be
further memorialized, if necessary, in a conditional zoning agreement.
After direction from Council, any proposed revision to the annexation policy will be
presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its recommendation and then come
back to Council in the form of a resolution amending the comprehensive plan.
16
McCollister Bridge, completed in 2009, is the
first new roadway to be constructed over the
Iowa River since the early 1960s. The bridge is
part of McCollister Boulevard, an east -west
arterial that will provide relief for Highway 6
to the north, connecting South Gilbert Street
west to Mormon Trek Boulevard. Eventually
the road will be extended east to Scott Boule-
vard, opening up residential development
throughout south Iowa City.
Growth and Infrastructure
Iowa City's growth policy is an integral part of the Comprehensive Plan in the following ways:
• It defines a long-range planning boundary for Iowa City;
■ It establishes when annexations should occur; and
■ It establishes where the investment of public funds for infrastructure and improvements should oc-
cur (namely roads, water, and sewer).
The Growth Boundary defines the city's potential corporate limits —land that, for the purposes of long-
range planning, is projected to serve the city's growth need for 30-40 years. Sanitary sewer and streets are
the most expensive items of public infrastructure that must be provided to all new development within the
City.
Land included in the growth area must have the potential to be connected to the sewer system, which is
based on watershed boundaries. Guiding new developments to watersheds that can be served by gravity
flow to the City's sewage treatment plant facility enables the most cost effective provision of this essential
City service. The growth boundary is used when making decisions regarding the extension of infrastruc-
ture, the approval of subdivisions, the approval of agreements with other governmental jurisdictions re-
garding growth, and in response to annexation requests. In addition, the City coordinates with private utili-
ties to ensure that areas proposed for development can be fully served.
A Public Works land inventory completed in 2008 indicates that Iowa City had more than 1,496 acres of va-
cant residential land within city limits, mostly in the South and Northeast District The designated growth
area contains an additional 3,095 acres of vacant residential land. Assuming that future residential develop-
ment occurs at densities similar to recent development patterns, Iowa City could reach build out capacity in
2034. However, if residential development were to maximize current zoning capacity, Iowa City would not
reach build out capacity until 2055. Neither of these assumptions accounts for the potential of infill develop-
ment in areas like Riverfront Crossings and Towncrest. Infill development at higher densities would absorb
some housing demand, thus conserving farmland and maximizing the use of infrastructure.
Prioritization of Investment in Infrastructure
When the City prioritizes public investment in infrastructure and public amenities, improvements that
serve properties within the corporate limits of Iowa City that further the City's policy of compact and con-
tiguous growth, including urban infill development, should be given priority. This policy will guide deci-
sion -making for the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP is one of the most effective tools
the City has to affect the timing and direction of growth, quality of life, the growth of basic industry, and
the cost of housing. Historically the City invested in infrastructure to accommodate moderate growth ra-
ther than building infrastructure prior to development. In the future, City Council will use the CIP to effec-
tively guide the location and timing of growth in the community through an annual review and prioritiza-
tion of the CIP prior to the budget process.
While continued development of new neighborhoods and employment areas are anticipated in the City's
growth area, a significant policy focus for the City is to accommodate growth to the extent possible by fa-
cilitating higher density urban infill development, such as in the Riverfront Crossings District, and through
stabilization and revitalization efforts in existing neighborhoods and commercial areas, such as Down-
town, Towncrest, and Sycamore Mall.
Annexation Policy
Growth and development outside the corporate boundaries, within the long-range planning area and be-
yond, is influenced by the City through annexation and the Iowa City/Johnson County Fringe Area Agree-
ment. Annexations occur primarily in response to petitions filed by the owners of property requesting to
be annexed. Voluntary annexation is generally viewed positively when the following conditions exist:
1. The area under consideration falls with the long-range planning boundary;
2. Development in the area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need without imposing
an undue financial burden on the City; or
3. Control of development is in the City's best interest.
Annexations will typically be achieved through voluntary means. Involuntary annexations, which are initi-
ated by the City against a property owner's wishes, are considered only in extraordinary circumstances.
As part of any proposed annexation or development, the City must evaluate the capacity of existing infra-
structure, including streets, water, and sewer.
v
A community cannot grow without major in-
vestments in infrastructure, including water
purification and waste water treatment. In
2011, Iowa City's water treatment facility pro-
vided an average of 5.54 million gallons of water
per day to customers.
is
An aerial view of the eastem edge of Iowa City,
An important goal of Iowa City's Comprehen-
sive Plan is to manage urban growth by en-
couraging compact and contiguous develop-
ment. Contiguous development is more effi-
cient since building on land that is adjacent to
existing development and connecting into
existing road and utility networks is cost and
resource efficient and ensures that neighbor-
hoods are not isolated. This saves money for
developers, property owners, and taxpayers.
Fringe Area Agreement
State enabling legislation permits a city to regulate the subdivision of land within two miles of the City's
corporate boundaries. This area is known as the urban fringe area. Counties that enact ordinances control
the land uses permitted in this same area through zoning.
In the interest of managing growth and development in Iowa City's two-mile fringe area in a mutually ac-
ceptable manner, Johnson County and Iowa City have agreed on the appropriate land uses and standards
for development. As Johnson County considers rezoning applications and Iowa City reviews subdivisions,
their decisions will be governed by the Iowa City/Johnson County Fringe Area Policy Agreement.
The Agreement focuses exurban development in the area north of Iowa City, encourages development in
Iowa City's growth area only upon annexation, and provides some incentive for the preservation of open
space and environmentally sensitive features. The agreement has been working well to achieve the goals
of both the City and County. Although it will be reviewed periodically for updates, the implementation of
the Fringe Area Agreement will likely continue without significant changes. [See Fringe Area Map in the
appendix to this document]
Growth and the Environment
Iowa City's vision for the future includes environmental protection as a basic tenet. This includes strong
community support for the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO). Growth and development should be man-
aged such that the environmental quality of the community is not sacrificed. Measures should be taken in
all private and public projects to ensure that any impacts on regulated environmental features are mini-
mized.
The Cites Sensitive Areas Inventory identifies the general location of woodlands, wetlands, regulated
slopes, hydric soils, prairie remnants, stream corridors, and archaeological sites (See the appendix). Based
on the information provided in the inventory, an ordinance was adopted in 1995 to provide protections
for the identified environmentally sensitive areas. The ordinance requires consideration of environmental
features during the development process and encourages construction that respects and protects natural
areas. As the City continues to grow and redevelop, natural areas that contribute to the health and charac-
ter of the city will be protected. The City should encourage subdivisions that not only preserve environ-
mental areas but that incorporate them as assets in the overall development as private or public open
space.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
A P R I L 5, 2018 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING
EM MA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
PRELIMINARY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark
Signs, Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT: Carolyn Dyer,
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo, Sarah Walz
OTHERS PRESENT: Brian Vogel, Jason Walton, Ross Nusser, Ray Anderson, Laureen
Ipsen, Bob Guyer, Marsha Anderson, Nancy Purington, Curt Moore,
Sara Barron
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ18-00002 an application submitted
by Ross Nusser for a rezoning of approximately 1.89 acres from Planned Development
Overlay/High Density Single Family (OPD/RS-12) zone to Low Density Multifamily (RM-12) zone
for the property located at 1705 Prairie Du Chien Road with the following conditions: (1)
Relocation assistance minimum of $1000 and nine months to find new housing; (2) two story limit
on buildings; (3) design review; (4) outdoor amenities and; (5) Cap on three bedroom units of 30%.
By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of SUB18-00007 an application submitted
by The City of Iowa City for a preliminary plat of Iowa City Industrial Campus, a 173-acre, 3-lot
industrial subdivision with 3-outlots located at 420th Street, west of Taft Avenue.
Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
REZONING ITEM (REZ17-00015):
Discussion of an application submitted by Cardinal Pointe West, LLC for a rezoning of
approximately 7.84 acres from Interim Development Research Development Park (IDRP) zone to
Low Density Multifamily (RM-12) zone for the property located west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard
and east of Deer Creek Road.
Miklo noted the Commission received a revised plan in the packet mailing as well as revised
elevation drawings via email. The plan has been modified to increase the setback from Duck
Creek Road and Highway 218. The setback was previously 35 feet and it is now 65-67 feet which
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 2 of 13
makes the closest point from the buildings 230 feet from the edge of the right-of-way of Highway
218. In order to accomplish the greater setback, the applicant has added a floor to each of the two
northern buildings. Miklo explained the Zoning Code does allow additional height for greater
setback to a point, however this building as proposed would still be 10 feet above what would be
allowed by that exception. Therefore the applicant has amended the application to include a
Planned Development Overlay, which does allow the City Council, upon the Commission
recommendation, to waive dimensional standards including height.
Miklo noted the applicant also amended the plan to include four deck areas that are adjacent to the
pond on the north side of the property. Larger decks, with the greatest dimension of 40 feet on the
two corners and then two smaller decks. Miklo did share with the applicant the Commission
concerns regarding more details or amenities for those areas and the applicant then submitted an
illustration showing a gazebo -type structure that would be included on the larger decks. Miklo also
shared the Commission concerns about the elevation drawings and need to address this
development as the first thing one would see when entering Iowa City off Highway 218. Miklo also
discussed with the Fire Marshall the possibility of using grass creek or pervious pavers in the areas
for fire access only. The Fire Marshall is open to that possibility but would want to see a specific
plan showing how it would be engineered to accommodate the load of an emergency vehicle.
Miklo also shared with the applicant the idea of prairie plantings in some of the area of the right-of-
way. He discussed that with the Public Works Department, and they were receptive of that idea.
There was also discussion of the possibility of larger trees at the time of planting being mixed in,
not all of them because a smaller tree will grow faster and be healthier for the long term. Finally,
as discussed all along, Miklo stated there would be a Conditional Zoning Agreement that would
specify use of sound deadening materials (such as laminate windows and masonry construction).
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Brian Vogel (Hall & Hall Engineers, Inc.) stated that for all the additional requests the Commission
asked for during the work session the applicant is willing to make those changes.
Freerks said that part of the changes was building design.
Vogel said they are willing to make some modifications to the building, they will work with the
architect. Perhaps they did not understand the magnitude of design changes the Commission was
expecting or requesting. As far as the trees, the applicant is willing to plant larger mature trees,
they will do pervious pavers where the fire access locations are, and do the prairie plantings in the
right-of-way.
Theobald reiterated her concerns from a previous meeting regarding some of the evergreens
species that were selected. Vogel replied that the applicant is open to any species that are
requested.
Freerks noted the Commission is focusing in on this application due to the request for additional
height. There is already a waiver and now there is an additional exception of 10 feet of added
height beyond the waiver. She added that the new setbacks are further than before, but still not
300 feet from the right-of-way of Highway 218. She noted that a buffer from the highway is in the
Comprehensive Plan but not a zoning requirement, however since they are requesting a Planned
Development Overlay the 300 foot setback can be required. She feels that this development is
trying to push in a density of units into a space not suited for that density. Quoting from the OPD
section of the zoning code if waivers are to be granted, there needs to be a facilitation of desired
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 3 of 13
neighborhood amenities or open space; to preserve or protect natural, historic, or cultural features;
to achieve compatibility with surrounding development; or to create a distinctive or innovative
neighborhood environment. Those reasons are why the Commission is requesting an improved
building design. She noted the problem is when they don't have anything set regarding design
standards, they have seen other cases where overtime design gets watered down and developed
and built at a lower standard. Freerks is hesitant about this application without seeing any
guarantee.
Miklo stated that with a Planned Development Overlay a building plan is approved along with the
site plan. Miklo said there is a building plan, but Freerks acknowledged that the Commission
doesn't have the building plan shows the building design elements the Commission has discussed
Vogel stated the building is designed with high standard materials, expensive stone work and other
materials, it will be a nice building. With regards to the height, the three-story building will actually
look taller than the four story buildings due to landscape elevations. Vogel noted the owner is
willing to work with the City on every request, as they have been doing so. Freerks noted the
applicant has not given them everything they asked for, commissioners had requested a better
building design and have not seen that. Vogel said there needs to be more specifics on what a
"better building design" entails.
Theobald noted that this current design looks like every other apartment building in town, they are
trying to embrace the "distinctive and innovative" key words from the Code. Martin added that this
development is along a major highway and an entrance to Iowa City so they are looking for
something that makes a positive statement or impact.
Hensch acknowledged that the applicant is trying to do everything the Commission is asking, and
he feels they are very close but in exchange for the approval of the height variation there are
criteria that need to be met. Yes, the building looks like it will be made with quality materials, but
the "distinctive and innovative" design is not being shown.
Freerks stated that another option is for the applicant to lower the density of the development, then
they wouldn't need the variation on height and the Planned Development Overlay criteria.
Vogel noted a frustration because with the first plan there wasn't the added height, but it was
requested to try to get further away from Highway 218. Therefore, they have comeback with a
design with the added distance, but to do so they also needed to add height.
Hektoen stated there has been an articulated public need to negate the sound and pollution effects
of being close to the interstate. The Commission has the right, the power, granted by State law to
impose conditions that are in addition to the Zoning Code that are intended to meet those public
needs. So even though the 300-foot setback requirement isn't a Zoning Code requirement, it
doesn't mean it isn't very important or that there aren't public needs created by putting a building
up this close to the interstate.
Vogel stated the applicant understands and agrees that the distance and the need to negate
issues is important and that is why they agreed to using the higher end, sound deadening,
materials.
Miklo asked for a clarification on what materials will be used.
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 4 of 13
Jason Walton (Walton Builders) stated the building is 2x6 constructed with a masonry product, they
will also use a blow-in insulation product that will be of greater sound deafening, the windows are
spec'd out for sound mitigation, the same windows that were used in the Hodge building on Rohret
Road. The stone is a manufactured stone, there is a building in Coralville constructed of the same
product. For the interior, it will contain the sound protection between walls and floors and all the
fire code items met. On the exterior there is a vinyl siding on the upper floors and some of the area
around the windows is a mason panel.
Freerks appreciates this is slowly moving along however wants the applicant to understand what
they are trying to achieve here.
Walton noted that it is hard to see from architectural drawings, he has built hundreds of houses
that all turn out spectacular even if the drawings weren't. He personally feels this building is
designed nicely and they are trying to keep this development in the affordability range, they have
already gone above and beyond what they were originally anticipating, they have added additional
stonework, beefed up the landscaping significantly, and need to keep some of the budget for other
challenges that may arise. He noted this is a challenging site to work on, and they have internally
been going back and forth on what design looks better (flat roof versus pitched), etc.
Freerks appreciates that and noted that it is not up to the Commission to design the building, which
is not their forte. She stated again if they remove some density to the project, all these issues go
away.
Martin feels they are close and acknowledged the applicant has done some of the things that the
Commission has asked.
Walton stated that their interest (the applicants) is the same, it is in their interest to have a very
nice building so people will want to live there, and he is just struggling with what the Commission
wants specifically.
Miklo asked the Commission about the apartment building that was recently built on Rohret Road,
also adjacent to Highway 218, if they felt that was distinctive. The Commission agreed it is an
attractive building.
Walton stated that one of the concepts the applicant had considered, was similar to that, but it was
changed to have a hipped roof, trying give the buildings more neighborhood feel. Freerks
suggested Walton work with staff and they can help guide them in the right direction. Walton noted
he would like to keep this moving forward.
Signs asked his fellow commissioners if they are down to the design of the building. He wants to
give the applicant the right direction since they have asked at the last three meetings for additional
things. Parsons agreed he is fine with everything except the design of the building. Freerks
agreed. Theobald asked to see more of the detail on landscaping and species of trees.
Miklo asked the applicant if they would agree to defer this until the April 19 meeting and Walton
agreed.
Freerks closed the public hearing.
Hensch moved to defer REZ17-00015 until the April 19 meeting.
Martin seconded the motion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 5 of 13
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
REZONING ITEM (REZ18-00002):
Discussion of an application submitted by Ross Nusser for a rezoning of approximately 1.89 acres
from Planned Development Overlay/High Density Single Family Residential (OPD/RM-12) zone to
Low Density Multifamily Residential (RM-12) zone for the property located at 1705 Prairie Du Chien
Road.
Walz noted that before the meeting Staff distributed a letter they received from one of the
neighbors regarding this development. She stated that the Commission discussed the rezoning
two meetings ago and the Commission had requested a couple of things. First requested was a
better sense of what was being proposed and then also a baseline for a relocation plan for current
residents.
Walz reiterated how they got to this point. The North District Plan, when written, contemplated that
the current mobile home park might one day go away and there was a desire expressed in the
Comprehensive Plan to maintain a diversity of housing so it contemplated a small apartment
building would be appropriate at this location, particularly when Foster Road extension was
completed. The Comprehensive Plan talks about the Foster Road extension making possible a
greater variety and a greater density within the neighborhood. When the Commission reviewed the
Foster Road rezoning it was discussed that the models looked at for transportation would provide
some cross -connectivity that might alleviate the traffic south of Foster Road on Prairie Du Chien.
Therefore, the applicant has proposed a development with a 24-unit apartment building in two
parts, with most of the parking underground, they have provided a setback from the adjacent
single-family property to the south, with an exterior playground area. It was noted in the
neighborhood meetings the desire that this property be somewhere that invited longer -term
residents, including families.
The other issue Walz noted was the proposal for relocation assistance which the applicant will
have to speak to.
Freerks asked if there were any waivers or special issues with this application. Walz replied that it
is not an Overlay Development Plan like the previous application. Freerks asked if the
Commission would see this application again, or if the design would just be approved by Staff.
Miklo confirmed that was the case unless the Commission conditioned the approval.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Ross Nusser (250 Holiday Road, Coralville) is the applicant and can discuss the relocation plan.
They have not worked out all the specific nor been in contact with the residents since the last
meeting, they are willing to commit to $1,000 in relocation benefits to each resident who is in the
trailer park. They are also willing to offer a minimum of nine months for relocation after the
approval of rezoning.
With regards to the design, the plan they are showing tonight is just conceptual as there are still
discussions with regards to the other parcel and what the City or neighboring residents might want
or desire there, perhaps a driveway that connects to Foster Road. He noted that they are trying to
appease so many different people so it is not easy. They did review the North Side District Plan
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 6 of 13
and acknowledged it notes that the area should be reserved for small buildings of multi -family
housing to maintain a mix of housing in the area and with the images they are sharing tonight he
feels they can achieved that but cannot commit to an exact design at this time. He added they just
won't know exactly what will work best until they get through the zoning process. He reiterated that
the first priority is the transition of the current residents and the second priority is how a
development will mix with the neighborhood. They are currently showing a two-story building,
there is the ability to do a three story building within the zoning they are requesting, but they don't
feel that would fit within the neighborhood. Nusser stated that the images shown of possible
buildings were drawn just for the benefit of the Commission, but they do only want to move forward
with the best intentions. Nusser will continue to work with City staff on the best solutions for
moving forward and will meet any restrictions imposed upon them.
Martin asked why this is a work in progress and not a complete design at this time. Nusser said it
is a work in progress because at this time they do not have any title or connection to the area that
is City of Iowa City right-of-way. One of the biggest questions from Nancy Purington and some of
the other neighbors is the connectivity to Foster Road which cannot happen if they do not have title
to the connection area.
Freerks commented on the conversation about curves and right-of-way and she noted that if the
development connects via Foster Road it will be at a curve there too and therefore doesn't see one
option as being better than the other. Nusser noted it is more of an issue that they want to make
accommodation for the people who live in the area and the neighbors have indicated their interest
is to have the connectivity to Foster Road versus Prairie Du Chien. Nusser personally doesn't
have a preference, but this is out of respect to the neighbors. Freerks understands but feels it
would be more difficult of a design to connection via Foster Road.
Parsons asked if they anticipate the buildings being mostly one and two -bedroom units. Nusser
confirmed that is the intention.
Freerks asked about the outdoor amenities. Nusser said they are open to including any required
outdoor amenities. Hensch added that if the goal is to have long term tenants in this development
then having nice outdoor amenities is necessary, such as play areas for families, etc. Nusser
agreed.
Hensch also noted his concern with traffic and stated with the new Foster Road, it is hard to
anticipate what the traffic will be. Freerks stated with one and two -bedroom units it won't be a
huge increase in traffic to the area.
Signs stated that with some of the input from the last meeting and the letters the Commission has
received, it seems that if there is a traffic problem it is not relevant to this particular piece, if people
are speeding in the area then that needs to be address separately.
Ray Anderson (2155 Prairie Du Chien Road) lives north of this area and has another property on 1
Caroline Court which is on the corner of Prairie Du Chien Road and can't for the life of him see why
the City would want to put an apartment complex in that area, it is a big area of single family
houses, mostly small ranches with nice yards and feels this will change the whole nature of the
property. Anderson states he has lived in the area for 40 years and Prairie Du Chien is a heavily
traveled road with lots of traffic from the developments to the north. He is happy that Foster Road
is being extended but doesn't feel an apartment complex is going to do anything at all for the
residents of the area. Anderson foresees a lot of traffic safety problems with a development of that
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 7 of 13
size in the area. He added that the sidewalks on that side of Prairie Du Chien stop right there,
before the freeway, and it is dangerous seeing people bicycling and walking there and to expand
the number of people in this area is not a good idea.
Laureen Ipsen (1710 Prairie Du Chien Road) said her house is directly across the street from the
proposed driveway of this development. She said that the statement that the driveway would either
spill out on Foster Road on a curve or Prairie Du Chien on a curve is true but the difference is in
the width of the roads. She notices now people trying to make a left turn into the trailer park and
cars can really get backed up and feels that will only get worse with the addition of Foster Road
traffic coming to Prairie Du Chien. She added that Prairie Du Chien is a narrow road already being
shared with bicyclists and Foster Road will be two lanes with added bicycle lanes so if this
development entrance was off Foster Road it would be easier for people to get around the cars
stopped trying to make a left turn into the development. Ipsen has talked with many residents on
Prairie Du Chien and they are already having problems backing out of their driveways onto Prairie
Du Chien. In this proposed development she counted 72 parking spaces and that puts a lot of
pressure on an already narrow, busy street with bicyclists. Ipsen asked if it would be possible to
have the design flipped so the driveway goes to Foster Road and the two story bigger building is
closer to Prairie Du Chien.
Freerks noted what most people want is for these driveways to be further away from major
intersections and the City agrees as it is safer. Ipsen understands but stated it puts a lot of
pressure on Prairie Du Chien. Miklo said they could look at a scenario where the buildings and
driveway are shifted to Foster Road, but that may not be possible with the topography and staff
cannot commit to a driveway onto Foster Road.
Signs added he heard a willingness from the developer to do this if possible, but right now it is
unknown, a lot depends on how Foster Road is developed.
Ipsen asked if the units in the development will be apartments or home -owned condominiums.
Miklo stated that the City is not able to control that with zoning. Ipsen added that in talking with
several other residents there is a concern with the speeding on Prairie Du Chien, it is a problem.
She also asked if it is possible to hold off on the development of this application until it is seen what
the traffic patterns will be once Foster Road is complete. Freerks stated that is not a fair request to
the developer. Currently there are 12 units on this property (mobile homes) and this development
will only be adding 12 more units (total of 24 or so apartments).
Signs added that there is some urgency for this development because the current owner has
concern regarding their sewer collapsing. Ipsen understands and noted she has also lived in trailer
parks and understands the concerns. However, she is wondering if a traffic survey can be done
she feels it would be beneficial.
Bob Guyer (1529 Prairie Du Chien Road) asked if there are plans for a traffic light at the
intersection of Foster Road and Prairie Du Chien. Miklo replied there are no plans for a traffic light
at this time. Walz added there has to be a certain amount of traffic before a traffic light is
warranted but once it reaches that threshold they would contemplate a light. Guyer said having
one would help to slow down the traffic on Prairie Du Chien Road and people on Foster Road will
have a difficult time getting onto Prairie Du Chien Road, especially during prime times. Freerks
acknowledged that a traffic light will likely be in the works at some point. Guyer asked how much
traffic is needed to warrant a light and noted that it took 30 years to get one at the corner of Prairie
Du Chien and Dodge Street. Walz stated that the traffic model that was looked at with the
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 8 of 13
extension of Foster Road showed that some traffic would be taken away from Prairie Du Chien.
Guyer stated it is difficult getting out of driveways on Prairie Du Chien, it can be dangerous. He
has made many complaints to the Police Department. Walz said they can make a request to put
the speed trailer sign up and acknowledged it is an area that probably does experience some
speeding because of the transition from rural to urban areas. Guyer reiterated his whole complaint
is traffic, he understands people are going to build what they are going to build, and adding to the
traffic is a concern.
Marsha Anderson (1543 Prairie Du Chien Road) stated the area is already a hazard, there are
100's of bicyclists, pedestrians and children that try to go over the freeway on a path that has no
area for pedestrians or bicycles. It is not a safe road and traffic on it should not be increased.
There are many types of vehicles on that road, motorcycles, water craft, etc. that all speed and she
can hear tires squealing, it is dangerous and they don't want more traffic there.
Nancy Purington (1706 Prairie Du Chien Road) thanked the Commission for allowing her to speak
and for reading her letter. When listening to the others from the neighborhood this evening she
sees that she is not the only one who has observed and experienced traffic issues, so she is not
going to talk about that. She is curious if this is the night where they will vote in changing it from
RS-12 to RM-12. Walz explained that the Commission will provide a recommendation to be
forwarded to the City Council and the City Council will make the decision. Purington stated that
when reading the information in tonight's agenda packet that dealt with the first applicant, the
criteria for review of a Planned Development Overlay (which Freerks noted this current application
is not a Planned Development Overlay), and this current application still reflects the conceptual
premises used to develop neighborhoods. The density and design of an area will be compatible
and/or complimentary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and scale,
relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout. The development will not
overburden existing streets and utilities, the development will not adversely affect views, light and
air, property values and privacy of neighboring properties and the combination of land uses and
building types and any variation from the underlying zoning requirements will be in the public
interest, in harmony with the purposes and with other building regulations of the City. Purington
said these things should be thought of with any consideration of change of zoning.
Freerks agreed and noted that the Commission must think of a lot of things. Purington then
encourages the Commission to not change the zoning of this area, especially since they have not
seen what could be done with the way it is zoned now. Even though it is a humble street, it is very
consistent in the architecture, there are under five houses that were there at the early part of the
20th century and for the most part post -WWII mid-century modern little bungalows and changing
that area to multi -family dwellings, that are two or three stories, are all things that will not create a
welcoming entrance to the city. This is also an entrance to the city, there is a very nice
development on the county side and it gets more modest as you enter town. This proposed
development is a jarring change, it looks very commercial and this is not a commercial street, and it
is all single family dwellings. The question that arose at the neighborhood meeting regarding a
space for the people that would live in the development as well as for the neighbors to use is not
necessary, all the neighbors have their own yard space. Purington reiterated that this is a jarring
disruption visually to have multi -family buildings, especially two stories, everything else in the area
is single story. There is an opportunity here to keep one long stretch of homes consistent, which
seems to be the goal when looking at changes, to keep things compatible. Purington stated that in
the first meeting they had with Nusser he did show little duplexes and the neighbors that were
there preferred those, these large buildings were not preferred. It doesn't fit with the neighborhood
at all, on either side of the interstate. Purington is questioning what development could be done in
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 9 of 13
this area without changing the zoning and keeping it consistent because that is one pleasant
quality of that street. It is a calming area that is single-family oriented. This development will
disrupt property values, it will change the feel.
Curt Moore (3169 Dubuque Street NE) thanked Signs for addressing that this is two separate
issues, this tonight is about rezoning, and the street issue is totally separate. He came before the
Commission during the discussions of the Foster Road extension and that there would be a
development on the corner with potentially a commercial building and another 100 units down the
road, no one came and said anything at that discussion, and he was the only one. He can
appreciate the issues the residents of Prairie Du Chien may have, he lives on Dubuque Street and
he also cannot back out of his driveway, traffic gets backed up from the interstate to his place and
he's a quarter of a mile away, so he understands what road conditions are. Moore reiterated that
this is a zoning issue and they are bending over backwards. When Moore was at the first
community meeting at the grade school for the Vintage Coops, he probably asked 50% of the
questions and there were probably 50 people in the room. Everyone was all for Foster Road
extension and one of the issues was what would happen to the trailer court and when could it be
gotten rid of. At that meeting it was said that was not the issue of discussion, only to discuss
Foster Road. Now it is time to do something about it, it's time to clean it up, time to make Iowa City
better and for the Commission to look at the big picture and this application is part of it. Moore
added that they are on a time schedule in terms of the sewer and water, it will not last, and they
have a solution for the transition of the current residents. Moore also noted that there are other
areas around this development that have been rezoned and could have apartment buildings put on
them, this is just in the middle of that, but the rest of the area is not always going to be single family
homes.
Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) wanted to express the Coalition's
support for the continued push for relocation assistance as the City is allowing these
redevelopment projects. There was some question on how that was going to come into play and it
was great to hear Mr. Nusser address that tonight with the offer of relocation assistance to all the
residents. The Coalition stresses the need to prioritize the impact it has on residents that are living
in areas that may very well need to be redeveloped, but to keep thinking about the impact it has on
those families.
Hensch asked Barron how she viewed the proposed relocation proposal offered this evening.
Barron said she could not speak for the residents and cannot offer a specific dollar amount but
does think there are some good resources that show costs associated with relocations and if the
$1000 proposed will be sufficient. She added that the yearlong period is more generous than what
is normally required for relocation projects.
Freerks asked what the amount was that the City Council agreed upon for the relocation of
residents displaced from Dolphin Pointe. Hektoen thought $500, noting there were a couple
different pots of money that were available to those residents.
Laureen Ipsen (1710 Prairie Du Chien Road) noted she did get sidetracked with the traffic issues
and did want to say before they change the zoning if they could see if there is an option to keep it
the same zoning and what would the builders have options to do.
Freerks stated that the Commission cannot require that, there is a cost involved in all these things
and to ask a developer to show options for things other than what they are requesting would be a
burden and something the City does not require. Freerks said someone from the City probably
could say how many units could be on this property if the zoning stayed the same. Walz said
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 10 of 13
townhomes could probably be done with the current zoning, likely a dozen to 18 townhomes, but it
would have to be laid out with driveways, etc., to be exact. Miklo added that the Comprehensive
Plan specifically shows this area as low density multi -family versus high -density single family.
Walz added at the intersection of two major streets it is not unusual to see low density multi -family
The other goal with this particular property was the idea if the trailer court went away to replace it
with something that diversified it and gave opportunity for housing that might tend to be more
affordable.
Ipsen understands what they are saying but still feels the density will change the dynamic of Prairie
Du Chien and it may not be as inviting looking depending upon how it is built, it will affect the single
family dwellings in the area. She suggests leaving the zoning as is and see what a townhouse
concept would look like.
Bob Guyer (1529 Prairie Du Chien Road) asked if Planning and Zoning has any input or power as
far as relocation benefits to the people.
Freerks stated it was something the Commission talked about recently. Hektoen stated the State
Code allows the City Council, and Planning and Zoning advises City Council, to impose conditions
on an owner of a property that are in addition to the zoning code requirement. The conditions must
meet public needs that are identified as a result of the rezoning request. In this case there is a
public need because people will be displaced by this zoning and imposing a condition can mitigate
the impact on the displaced persons.
Guyer acknowledged then that the Commission has input. Freerks confirmed they can make a
recommendation to City Council and City Council has already put a stipulation that if there are 12
or more that are being displaced relocation assistance must be included. In this case it is 9 or so,
therefore under the required number, however there are other issues in this case such as low
income, difficulty in moving the trailers, some are owner -occupied, some are rentals, and there are
many concerns. Guyer stated that the $1000 proposed for each family would not go very far
toward moving is expensive.
Nancy Purington (1706 Prairie Du Chien Road) acknowledged that where Foster Road connects to
Prairie Du Chien it will make a corner but surrounding that whole area are single family dwellings.
Up the street there is a trailer court that will be reversed back to four single family lots once any
change happens and that will be consistent with the neighborhood. When Purington called the City
to ask about that several months ago they said it would have to be four single family lots and the
dwellings would have to be consistent with the architecture on the street. Purington questions how
this area is any different.
Freerks reiterated that this area in the Comprehensive Plan was specified for low density multi-
family so that is what the applicant is asking for. The Comprehensive Plan was discussed publicly
at one time. Walz added when Foster Road is constructed there will be that remnant piece land
that is left over that is not developable on its own and therefore this application property becomes
the defacto corner lot. In the case of the other trailer court, it is in the middle of a neighborhood,
surrounded on all sides. Miklo added that the Zoning Code does not require single family houses
to be compatible or in character with the others in the neighborhood. That would only be required if
it were in a historic preservation overlay.
Purington said is seems strange the City would encourage dissentient in design and not harmony.
Regardless the rest of the street is always going to be single family residents and will not change.
Foster Road is different, it will be a different type of street, and there is an opportunity to put in a
bunch of different things at once. This will disrupt the entrance to the city and the harmony of the
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 11 of 13
neighborhood.
Signs stated he feels Purington is driving on a different Prairie Du Chien then he drives on because
as he drives on Prairie Du Chien from Dodge Street north, consistency is not a word that would
come to his mind. There is a wide variety of housing styles and lot sizes. Purington disagreed.
Parsons asked to see the map of all the zonings in that area. He noted there is already RS-12
south of the application property. Miklo said the area is RS-12, the City recently approved a
planned development to allow multi -family attached units in the RS-12 zone for the Vintage Co-op
and adjacent properties. This application would change from RS-12 to RM-12.
Freerks closed the public hearing.
Hensch moved to approve REZ18-00002 an application submitted by Ross Nusser for a
rezoning of approximately 1.89 acres from Planned Development Overlay/High Density
Single Family (OPD/RS-12) zone to Low Density Multifamily (RM-12) zone for the property
located at 1705 Prairie Du Chien Road with the following conditions:
1. Relocation assistance minimum of $1000 and nine months to find new housing.
2. Two story height limit on buildings.
3. Design review being required.
4. Outdoor amenities.
5. Cap on three -bedroom units of 30%.
Parsons seconded the motion.
Hensch noted that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, he is sensitive to traffic
issues, but that is a separate issue that needs to be addressed separately. He added he is
pleased with the applicant's offer for relocation assistance. Yes $1000 isn't a lot anymore, but it is
enough for a rental deposit.
With regards to the conditions, Freerks would like to discuss outside amenities and to make sure
they are only one or two -bedroom units, no larger.
Signs noted that when discussing outside amenities they discussed playground area for children
but typically when thinking of one or two -bedroom units you don't think families.
Miklo suggested that if a goal is to attract some families to this area, in other areas of the Code
there is a restriction to 30% of three -bedroom units, so they may want to provide that flexibility.
Signs feels that would add to neighborhood stability and less turnover in leases. The Commission
agreed to add a condition of a limit of three -bedroom units to 30%.
Freerks noted in the design review stage she likes to see the larger green space areas rather than
multiple smaller green spaces hidden amongst parking spaces.
Signs understands the neighborhoods passion for their area. He just sees the speeding on the
street and traffic as a separate issue, but the neighborhood has every right to be concerned about
it. At this point no one really knows what the Foster Road connection will do to the traffic in that
area, and the neighborhood will have to be vigilant about that and come to the City with concerns.
It just isn't relevant to for this development going from 12 units to potentially 24. He reiterated the
public comment about no one being present to comment on the huge multi -family development
proposed along Foster Road which may impact the traffic way more than this little piece will. Signs
also likes the design of this proposal because it puts the smaller building facing Prairie Du Chien
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 5, 2018
Page 12 of 13
and puts the big building behind with a frontage on Foster Road and that helps maintain the
character of smaller structures along Prairie Du Chien.
Freerks agrees and likes the current layout and the distance of the bigger building from Foster
Road will help minimize its size.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
SUBDIVISION ITEM ISUB18-00007
Discussion of an application submitted by The City of Iowa City for a preliminary plat of Iowa City
Industrial Campus, a 173-acre, 3-lot industrial subdivision with 3-outlots located at 4201" Street,
west of Taft Avenue.
Miklo stated the annexation and rezoning of this property was approved a number of years ago. A
preliminary plat was also approved at that time. However, preliminary plats are valid for two years
so the plat has expired and the City is now seeking reapproval of basically the same design with a
couple of changes. The original design had the area south of 4201" Street broken into smaller lots
and they are now proposing to leave that as one outlot for future development so it would come
back before the Commission if it were to be subdivided. The plan also has an outlot that covers
the wetland area. There would be three industrial lots for development with access to 4201" Street.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one Freerks closed the public hearing.
Signs moved to approve SUB18-00007 an application submitted by The City of Iowa City for
a preliminary plat of Iowa City Industrial Campus, a 173-acre, 3-lot industrial subdivision
with 3-outlots located at 420" Street, west of Taft Avenue.
Theobald seconded the motion.
Hensch asked if the one outlot was wetlands because of the topography. Miklo believes it is due to
the topography but also a drainage way that runs through that area.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
Adjournment:
Hensch moved to adjourn.
Parsons seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2017 - 2018
8/3
8/17
9/7
9/21
10/5
10/19
1112
12/7
12/21
1/4
1/18
2/15
3/1
(W.S)
3/12
3/15
(W.S.)
4/2
4/5
DYER, CAROLYN
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
FREERKS, ANN
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
HENSCH, MIKE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
MARTIN, PHOEBE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
PARSONS, MAX
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
SIGNS, MARK
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
THEOBALD, JODIE
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
2Ld
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member