Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-05-2018 Planning and Zoning CommissionIowa City Planning & Zoning Commission r Formal Meeting ` Thursday, July 5, 2018 7:00 PM Emma Harvat Hall - City Hall IJ RS 8 A ` W l�� XM� 12 J- M IA l Y� Clll , U C11 uw.. / CC2 P Cit ilia tf r Department of Neighborhood, and Development Services CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Thursday, July 5, 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. Election of Officers D. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda E. Rezoning / Development Items: Discussion of an application submitted by Bedrock, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 18.03 acres from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID-RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/ RS-5) zone (5.8 acres) and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD- 12) zone (12.23 acres) and a preliminary plat of Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17-lot, 18.03-acre residential subdivision with 93 multifamily dwellings, 2 duplex lots and 15 single family lots located east of S. Gilbert Street & west of Sandusky Drive. (REZ18- 00005 / SUB18-00005) F. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: June 21, 2018 G. Planning & Zoning Information H. 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: July 19 / August 2 / August 16 / September 6 / September 20 Informal: Scheduled as needed. r CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: July 5, 2018 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Bob Miklo, Senior Planner Re: REZ1 8-00005/SUB1 8-00005 Cherry Creek Subdivision The applicant has submitted a revised plan in response to concerns discussed at the May 17 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. For comparison the previous plan and staff report are attached. The minutes of the May 17 meeting are also attached. Density: The Commission expressed concerns about the overall density of the proposal. The revised plan has replaced lot 17, which was previously proposed to contain 10 townhouse -style multifamily dwellings, with two single family lots (lots 17 and 18) and two corner duplex lots (lots 19 and 20). Lots 17 — 20 are now proposed to be zoned Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5), rather than the previously proposed Low Density Multifamily Residential (RM-12). This will result in a more consistent zoning pattern for the lots located on Toby Circle south of Cherry Avenue (see attached Zoning Exhibit). With the replacement of 10 multifamily units with 2 single family and 4 duplex units, the overall density has been reduced from 7.5 to 7.18 units per acre. The proposed density is within the 2-8 dwelling units per acre shown on the Comprehensive Plan for this area. 36-unit Buildings: Concerns were expressed about the scale of the two 36-unit buildings proposed on lots 1 and 2, and the relationship of these buildings to the nearby single family properties. The applicant has modified the grading plan and redesigned the parking and driveways to create usable open space near these buildings. On lot 1 the parking and driveways have been moved away from the south property line and additional trees are proposed between the building and the south lot line. However, the size of the two 36-unit buildings has not changed. The applicant has indicated that he will present drawings showing how the construction of these buildings in relationship to the hillside, will help minimize their apparent scale and visibility from the existing residential properties in the neighborhood. Usable Open Space: The Commission indicated that there is a need for usable open space in close proximity to the multifamily dwellings. The revised plan includes two areas with playground equipment and outdoor dining areas featuring paved patios, pergolas, grills and picnic tables. These areas are located on Lot 1 in the southeast corner (east of the building and parking area) and on Lot 2 southwest of the building. The grading plan has been revised to provide flat areas for these features. Landscape Plan: The landscape has been revised to include additional trees along the south property line of Lot 1 and lots 8 — 13, as requested by the neighboring property owners. Street trees have been added between the sidewalk and curb within the right-of-way. As noted in the May 17 staff report, staff recommends that approval be subject to City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement and protection plan prior to final plat approval. Traffic: The Commission questioned whether traffic calming should be designed into the rear driveway for the townhouse style units on lots 1 and 3. The alley will be narrow (20 feet wide), will be lined with trees and a retaining wall on the north side, and is divided into two segments with three driveways back to Cherry Avenue. Based on these conditions staff finds that additional traffic calming devises will not likely be necessary. June 29, 2018 Page 2 The Commission asked if an additional traffic calming island would be beneficial on Cherry Avenue where it intersects with the driveways to lots 1 and 2. The City's Transportation Planner found that traffic calming islands are currently proposed at adequate distances. An additional island is not necessary. A question was raised about the site distance for the driveway on lot 2. Staff has confirmed that drivers using this driveway will have sufficient site distance. Sidewalks: The Commission asked about the condition of sidewalks on Gilbert Street and if an 8-foot wide sidewalk would be appropriate. City inspectors found that current 4-foot wide sidewalk is in good condition and do not recommend replacing it at this time. Any damaged locations will be repaired by the applicant. A wide side walk and trail already are located on west side of Gilbert Street. The City's Transportation Planner will investigate whether it would be appropriate to provide a pedestrian crossing from the east side of Gilbert Street to the west side. If it is determined to be a safe location, curb ramps could be added at the time Cherry Street is installed. Stormwater: Concerns were raised about stormwater runoff onto adjacent properties. At the time of final plat approval, the development agreement will specify that the roof drains and gutters for lots 5 — 16 will be required to drain toward the storm drains on Toby Circle. In addition, a conservation easement for tree protection will be located along the south lots lines of lot 8 — 13. These requirements will minimize stormwater runoff onto adjacent properties. The City Engineer has approved the preliminary stormwater management plan. Archeologic Study: The applicant has contracted with a professional archeologist, who has completed an initial survey of the site and presented a report the State Archeologist. The initial study found that much of the property was disturbed in the 1990s with grading activity associated with the adjacent Pepperwood subdivision. Because of fill on the property, parts of the site were not accessible and need further study once the fill has been removed. The applicant has agreed to have an archeological monitor present during further excavation. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of REZ18-00005/SUB18-0005, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID-RM to OPD/RS-5 (5.8 acres) and OPD/RM-12 (12.23 acres) and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17-lot, 18.03-acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to 1) City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement and protection plan prior to final plat approval, 2) at the time of final plat approve the development agreement will specify that the roof drains and gutters for lots 5 — 16 will be required to drain toward the storm drains on Toby Circle, and 3) the applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the State to complete a study or excavation plan prior to any additional grading on the property. Attachments: 1. Revised Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan 2. Revised Zoning Exhibit 3. Previous Staff Report 4. May 17 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes Approved by: Danielle Sitzman, Development Services Coordinator, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services [Ito, 66FFFRif,if it(��iim���� �„njilm ti Wwz m ` P g� S as a as � �a a sa• F� i 6� 'ig ��r If €@'gig �ii€iif lip s= I is 3p3 Fmm W O W O )U W > Q�g (n s I. i Q }ww VJQ 110;2 l i O K �? EwLU V — Q Q W �kkpp gggg zi i uj a�a AMA §|f © L �: l p/ j /> u ! $ \h /} -g § , b(L § / ( | ƒ h§§wwHnm « §gj§wal4_ Will @ .. \ �/ §•�� . k- J| _eji Z Q J a zZ w > w w Q E 0C�¢"; w Q w 1 L 1 8d HWQ �a W U O� U) } ry Q ry wW a � aU U r) Z J (PfgF€SFSii c wZ � UN aHill lIII sh UN iggeg �Eg 9 @9999 @ a.999 g Pi i 9 e i e @ b p g [ ppp@ Rho F GGi � EE@'a i FFi a Si i( g �§gyp ,yy A !p@��}eS6 y : 5 @ @jE I Ilk S9 � e a PSS�€IQ� e=� gp@ �iY ve +p °@^'�@@ " Y3 eli9• @ �� @ F + 4 �� e F e � iaaFap {0g g{pP � � 8 11! s s 1 cr) 31 1ai.lvfmn-M:vrerh � cpebtl rsnePN 1JS061 vv--tt `' Vss�� 1a31SN3>1009 . .S'1N9�YSl7 •NSK'94• laNV mziaemo �aLva o-i-.an nvx N0i10nJ.LSN00 NOS ION .1-lNO N V1a{ .kN VNIWI-I3Nd R ON � 9 t3 J �`�I e`ituRe. {ppf "77111%N d w ®a � ©I, Y•'31t�.�.LYi � 41 eeu vmxx:uoe exozrevz s.vnmrooeon iwraanwso V m - J j �S�a� Es qZ3 _Zm U� y� � E ✓4 S cai rc m3 E E n� O FZ = F Q Noo Z= UO Lu �p Y Wm Q=Q g& NW a rn plop Z o ;i q° BI WI -"S^s Oq x b9_"Sm EE'� �1 Q < o �� Syl Z o o E o.E 4�8€ 00 U ��z '1 3° s a E E O �_ X W Y }� 'n w £� lJ o o tiw 111 z � 4 3 ,ert.�os Z W Q n > N § a� iaE a �R 4Eg6 ES RN ZLI O w°ate b. a x as S.Es ys 48 i OU Qcla a �d e W ➢ e _- . �'- ax w^. I 1 1 / is,a9 N o �yQ r �a6g E a,�g E yEa 4a 3e ry ___L._i + $_ X\ ry 6 1 �v9 d8 6CiE �X 4S8R 63a EP4.Y, aR� R ���� 1 I I 1I `d�4i1 g-E W. e'� =ill 11'� MFIN Ilk c�L) � r• d. i Cn �" 3 ,. Ali O - - ag�— r ' j k •1'1. I� O A e a _ I �dl �"♦ Al �- -•. M1 /. -'� wo To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ18-000051SUB18-00005 Cherry Creek Subdivision GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Contact: STAFF REPORT Prepared by: Bob Miklo Date: May 17, 2018 Bedrock, LLC 3500 Dolphin Drive Iowa City, IA 52240 Kelly Beckler MMS Consultants 1917 S. Gilbert Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Requested Action: Rezoning from ID-RM to OPD-5 and ODP/RM-12 and preliminary sensitive areas development plan and plat approval. Purpose: To allow development of 13 single family lots, 31 townhouse style multifamily dwellings and 2 36-unit multifamily buildings. Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning; Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: Neighborhood Open Space District File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: S. Gilbert Street and Cherry Street 18.03 acres Undeveloped North: residential and agricultural - ID-RM South: residential — RS-5/OHD East: residential — RS-5 West: Napoleon Park — P1 South District Plan — residential 2- 8 dwelling units per acre S1- Wetherby May 7, 2018 June 20, 2018 This property was annexed into the city between 1960 and 1966. Since 1983 it has been zoned Intern Development — Multifamily (ID-RM). The applicant has requested that the property be rezoned to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5) for 4.02 acres and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (RM-12) for 14.01 acres. A Level I I Sensitive Areas Review, the Planned Development Overlay zone, is required due to proposed disturbance of previously altered protected slopes, construction of stormwater management facilities with a protected slope area, removal of more than 50% of the woodlands in the proposed RS-5 area and more than 80% of the woodland in the proposed RM-12 area. The applicant is also requesting approval of Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17-lot, 18.03-acre residential subdivision. The applicant recently removed trees from the property prior to approval a Sensitive Areas Plan. The proposed Sensitive Areas Plan proposes to plant replacement trees as part of this development. The applicant has indicated that they have conducted a Good Neighbor Meeting. ANALYSIS: 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. Upon provision of City services, the City or the property owner may initiate rezoning to zones consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended. General Planned Development Approval Criteria: Applications for Planned Development Rezonings are reviewed for compliance with the following standards according to Article 14-3A of the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance. The density and design of the Planned Development will be compatible with and/or complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and scale, relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout. Density — RS-5: The applicant has requested that 4.02 acres located on the south and east side of the development be rezoned from ID to Low Density Single Family with a Planned Development Overlay for sensitive areas (OPD/RS-5). The Low Density Single -Family Residential Zone (RS- 5) is primarily intended to provide housing opportunities for individual households. The minimum lot size in the RS-5 zone is 8,000 square feet with a minimum lot width of 60 feet. The proposed lots range in size from 8,164 square feet to 15,404 square feet. All lots meet the minimum 60-foot lot width. The density of 3.24 acres is comparable to typical RS-5 subdivisions and is similar to the density of the Pepperwood Subdivision, which is located to the east. In staffs view, the proposed OPD/RS-5 plan is compatible with the adjacent development and provides for a transition to the higher density multifamily development proposed to the west. RM-12: For the remaining 14.01 acres, the applicant is proposing Low Density Multifamily with a Planned Development Overlay for sensitive areas (OPD/RM-12). The purpose of the Low Density Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM-12) 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. Within the proposed OPD/RM-12 zone the applicant is proposing two 36-unit multifamily buildings to the east of Gilbert Street, with driveway access to the proposed extension of Cherry Avenue. An additional 31 townhouse style multifamily dwellings are proposed to be located on 3 Cherry Avenue and Toby Circle. The proposed townhouse style dwellings provide a transition between the single-family neighborhood and the two proposed apartment buildings adjacent to Gilbert Street. The larger apartment buildings would be approximately 800 feet to the west of the existing single-family homes. After removing street right-of-way the overall density of the proposed RM-12 area is 8.35 units per acre. When combined with the RS-5 area the overall density of the proposed development is 7.5 units per acre and is within the 2-8 dwelling units per acre shown on the Comprehensive Plan for this area. As discussed below, the South District Plan element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the clustering of development on this property. Land uses proposed and general layout - The planned development process encourages a mix of housing types and allows the flexibility to locate those housing types in a manner that fits the site. The land uses proposed are single-family units, townhouse style multifamily buildings with 3 to 5 dwellings per building, and 2 larger 36-unit multifamily buildings with lower level parking. The layout of the streets and buildings have been designed to provide a transition from the existing single-family homes in the Pepperwood Addition and the larger apartment buildings proposed near Gilbert Street. Woodlands and slopes provide a buffer between this and the adjacent properties to the north and south. Mass and Scale - The proposed single family lots are subject to the same RS-5 standards regarding setbacks, lot coverage, and building height as the existing lots in the Pepperwood Addition. The townhouse buildings include 4 design options with a variety of building materials and roof lines to prevent a monotonous streetscape. The two larger multifamily buildings have been designed to generally comply with the multifamily design standards, including fagade articulation and variation of the roof line. The stone veneer and wood siding are intended to complement the natural environment. Open space - Lots 2 and 3 will contain over 2 acres of protected open space. However, most of that area contains steep slopes and woodlands and will have limited use for active recreation. The applicant has shown two areas adjacent to the 36-unit buildings on lots 1 and 2 for use of the residents of those buildings. Staff recommends that the plan provide details regard the square footage of those areas, and any amenities, such as outdoor dining space and playground equipment. Traffic circulation - Cherry Avenue will provide street access for the property to Gilbert Street, an arterial street with sufficient capacity for the projected traffic. Based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Handbook (91 Edition), the development(as proposed with 116 dwelling units) will generate approximately 778 vehicle trips per weekday. In 2014, Gilbert Street had an average daily traffic count of approximately 6,700 vehicles per day (Iowa DOT). Given that the capacity of a four -lane minor arterial street is more than 30,000 trips per day, the additional traffic generated by the development alone will not over -burden Gilbert Street. While some of the traffic generated may choose to use Sandusky Drive for access, it is anticipated that a majority of the traffic will access Cherry Avenue via Gilbert Street. Additionally, the connection of Cherry Avenue from Sandusky Drive to Gilbert Street will provide an alternative street access for the Pepperwood subdivisions and will improve access for emergency and service vehicles. As discussed below under #4. traffic calming features are being included on Cherry Avenue. Based on this information, in staffs view the density and design of the Planned Development will IH be compatible with and complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and scale, relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout. 2. The development will not overburden existing streets and utilities. City sewer and water is available to this property. Capacity is adequate to accommodate development of these additional dwelling units. Onsite stormwater management is required. The applicant is proposing to build two stormwater basins in the ravine located along the north property line. Preliminary storm water calculations reviewed by the City Engineer indicate that the capacity of the proposed storm water basins are adequate to handle the projected run-off from the site. The ravine in which the stormwater facilities is proposed, contains protected slopes. Currently the ravine is subject to severe erosion. Construction of the stormwater facilities will be designed to correct current erosion and prevent future erosion. As noted below the sensitive areas provisions of the zoning code allow essential utilities including stormwater facilities to be constructed within with protected areas, if they are designed to protect against erosion, pollution and habitat disturbance, and result in minimal amounts of excavation and filling. After installation of the facilities, the sensitive protected areas and associated buffers must be restored by the developer. Because part of the stormwater facilities will be located on the adjacent property to the north, an off -site easement will be necessary at time of final plat approval. Gilbert Street has capacity to serve the proposed development and Cherry Avenue will improve traffic connectivity for the area. Based on this information, it is staffs view that the development will not overburden existing streets and utilities. 3. The development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values and privacy of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development. While the proposed development will be a significant change to what has been appreciated for many years by surrounding neighbors as open space, staff finds that the proposed development is not a significant departure from what would be allowed for a conventional development with regard to views, light and air, property values, and privacy of neighboring properties. The proposed RS-5 lots (lots 4-16) will provide a transition from the existing single-family homes within the Pepperwood Addition to the townhouse style buildings and the larger apartment buildings to the west. The apartment buildings will be built down slope from the existing neighborhood and this should help ameliorate the visual effect of these larger buildings. The property to the south is the historic McCollister Farm, which contains a historic house and a recently constructed single-family dwelling. These two properties contain a significant amount of open space and woodlands that screen them from the proposed development. Because the McCollister Farm is a designated historic landmark, further development is not anticipated. The property to the north contains Friendly Farm, an organic agricultural use. The ravine on the north side of this property continues onto the Friendly Farm property. The portion of the ravine on this property contains protect slopes and will be within a conservation easement preventing further development. This will provide a wooded buffer between the proposed Cherry Creek Subdivision and the Friendly Farm property. Based on this information, in staff's view the development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values, and privacy of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development 5 4. The combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the underlying zoning requirements or from City street standards will be in the public interest, in harmony with the purposes of this Tale, and with other building regulations of the City. All planned developments must comply with all the applicable requirements and standards of the underlying zoning district and the subdivision regulations, unless specifically waived or modified through the planned development process. Variations to the dimensional requirements of the underlying base zone and subdivision regulations are allowed: • to facilitate the provision of desired 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 for area residents. The application includes a request for reduction of the standard collector street width of 31 feet down to 28 feet on Cherry Avenue. Staff recommended this reduction to provide traffic calming for Cherry Avenue, which will carry traffic from Sandusky Drive to Gilbert Street. Traffic circles are also proposed on Cherry Avenue in two locations where it will intersect with Toby Circle. The intent is allow Cherry Avenue to provide neighborhood street connectivity, but to discourage its use a cut through and to calm speeds of vehicles using the street. Staff finds that the proposal to reduce the pavement width from 31 feet to 28 feet is reasonable given the goal of traffic calming for this street. Pedestrian Facilities: Planned developments must include pedestrian facilities to ensure that residents and visitors have access to public streets and sidewalks, building entrances, parking areas, shared open spaces, natural areas, and other amenities. In addition, providing street trees and a variety of building facades that address the street with visible doors and windows make for a more comfortable environment along the street for pedestrians. Staff finds that the sidewalks, building designs, and street trees proposed will meet the standard described above. Public Open Space Requirement: Based on the 4.02 acres proposed for Low Density Single - Family Residential zone and the 14.01 acres proposed for Low Density Multifamily Residential zone, the applicant would be required to dedicate 1 acre of land or pay fees in lieu of land. The Parks and Recreation Commission will review this application and make a recommendation regarding the dedication of open space or fees. However, given the steep topography of this area it is unlikely that there is land that is suitable for a public park. Staff recommends that fees be collected in lieu of the dedication of open space. The fee can be used for acquisition of new park land or improvements to existing parks within the Wetherby (S1) open space district, including Wetherby Park and Sand Prairie Park. The fee will be equal to the fair market value of the land that otherwise would have been required for dedication. The fee must be paid in full by the developer prior to the issuance of the first building permit for any lot within the development. Private Shared Open Space: Large portions of lots 2 and 3 contain protected slopes and woodlands. A smaller are of woodland is contained on the north portion of lot 4. These areas should be labeled as conservation easements. At the time of final plat approval, the applicant must submit a legally binding instrument setting forth the procedures and financing structure to be followed for maintaining the stormwater facilities and the surrounding conservation easement. The developer has indicated that a homeowner's association will be established to maintain the common areas. The details of this arrangement will need to be addressed in the legal papers submitted when the final planned development plan is submitted. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The South District Plan encourages development of M neighborhoods with a mix of housing types to allow for housing options. Although the predominant land use in the area will remain detached single-family housing, new neighborhoods should provide opportunities for townhouses, duplexes as well as multifamily buildings to serve residents throughout their lifetimes. The South District Plan contemplated locations where opportunities for higher density housing and clustered density should be allowed, noting: "West of the Pepperwood Subdivision, wooded slopes make traditional development impractical. In this area, the 2 to 8 dwelling units per acre envisioned on the land use map on page 53 could be clustered through an overlay planned development. Such development would rely on an extension of Cherry Street, which will provide improved connectivity and circulation for the single- family neighborhood to the east by allowing residents more direct street access to South Gilbert Street." The South District Plan indicates that property along the east side of Gilbert Street, south of the railroad, may be appropriate for town -home or other small lot or duplex development. Additional density may be considered for projects that add a unique housing element or that enhance housing diversity for the South District or that otherwise contribute to the connectivity of neighborhoods or enhance visibility and street access to public parks and other open space. The extension of Cherry Avenue will provide an important east -west connection allowing neighbors more direct access to Gilbert Street and the parks and trails located to the west of Gilbert Street. Sensitive Areas Review: The applicant has applied for approval of a Sensitive Areas Development, a type of planned development. The purpose of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance is to permit and define the reasonable use of properties that contain sensitive environmental features and natural resources, and allowing reasonable development while protecting these resources from damage. The following paragraphs describe the impact this development will have on the sensitive features of this site. Steep, Critical, and Protected Slopes-- The purpose of regulating development on and near steep slopes is to: 1. Promote safety in the design and construction of developments; 2. Minimize flooding, landslides and mudslides; 3. Minimize soil instability, erosion and downstream siltation; and 4. Preserve the scenic character of hillside areas, particularly wooded hillsides. The applicant is proposing to grade protected slopes to allow installation of stormwater management facilities and to grade areas that appear to be humanly altered protected slopes. Disturbance of protected slopes and or protected slope buffers trigger the requirement of this Level II Sensitive Areas Review with Planning and Zoning Commission review and City Council approval required. Development activity is not allowed on protected slopes or in the 50-foot buffer required around protected slopes, unless the slopes were previously humanly altered. In addition, disturbance of altered protected slopes or a reduction of a protected slope buffer may only be approved if a geologist or professional engineer demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the proposed development activity can and will be designed to eliminate hazards and will not undermine the stability of the slope or the buffer area. The applicant has indicated that the protect slopes adjacent to Gilbert Street have been humanly altered and is requesting permission to encroach into protected slope and buffer areas. There is evidence that this assessment is correct. When Gilbert Street was reconstructed several years ago, it appears that grading was done for the street and to provide fill material. Staff from the City Engineer's office visited the property and based on the angle of the slope and the pattern of trees (younger volunteer trees being present on the previously disturbed areas) concurs with this assessment. The applicant is also proposing to remove trees and grade portions of protected slope and buffer areas located within the ravine on the north side of this property and on the adjacent property to allow for the installation of stormwater management facilities. As noted above under #2. the ravine is currently subject to severe erosion. Construction of the stormwater facilities will be designed to correct current erosion and prevent future erosion. The sensitive areas provisions of the zoning code allow essential utilities including stormwater facilities to be constructed within with protected areas, if they are designed to protect against erosion, pollution and habitat disturbance, and result in minimal amounts of excavation and filling. After installation of the facilities, the sensitive protected areas and associated buffers must be restored by the developer. Because part of the stormwater facilities will be located on the adjacent property to the north, an off -site easement will be necessary at time of final plat approval. Staff recommends that healthy, mature trees located in or near the ravine be preserved and protected from construction activity to the extent possible. A tree protection plan should be submitted and approved at the time of the final OPD plan. Provided all conditions are satisfied to prevent erosion, ensure long term stability of the slopes, and the structural integrity of the proposed buildings, staff finds that the proposed encroachment into what appear to be previously altered slopes is reasonable. Woodlands: The property contained approximately 13 acres of woodland (11.28 acres in the area proposed for RM-12 and 1.85 acres in the area proposed for RS-5). The applicant recently removed woodlands portions of the property prior to receiving approval of a sensitive areas plan. The applicant claims that he was unaware of the woodland retention requirements and that trees that were removed were undesirable or unhealthy. Photographs dating back as recent to 1990 show that portions of the the area was once farmed and contained few trees. However more recent photographs indicate extensive tree coverage. The applicants engineer has provided a plan estimating the extent of previous woodlands on the property. The ordinance requires that if more than 50% of a woodland in an RS-5 zone is remove, replacement trees must be planted at a ratio of 1 tree per every 200 feet of woodland disturbance. For properties zoned RM-12, 20% of the woodlands must be retained or replacement trees must be planted. The proposed Sensitive Areas Plan includes a tree replacement plan. Staff recommends that City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement plan prior to final plat approval. Archeological sites: The Sensitive Areas section of the zoning code considers the preservation archaeological sites as well as natural features. The applicant has already initiated some development activity on the site. Meanwhile, the Office of the State Archaeologist has indicated that four archaeological sites have been reported within 100 meters of the development site. Due the density of known archaeological sites in the surrounding area, there is sufficient likelihood that other undiscovered or undocumented site may be present within the development area that the OSA recommends a field investigation by a professional archaeological consultant prior to the commencement of ground disturbing activities (e.g. grading). Staff therefore recommends that as a condition of approval the applicant hire an archaeologist approved by the state to complete a study or excavation plan approved by the State. Water Service: Water mains will need to be extended to serve this development. A water main extension fee of $435.00 per acre is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends deferral of this application pending resolution of the deficiencies and discrepancies listed below. Upon resolution of deficiencies staff would recommend approval of REZ18-00005/SUB18-0005, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID-RM to OPD/RS-5 and OPD/RM-12 and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17-lot, 18.03-acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement and protection plan prior to final plat approval and applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the state to complete a study or excavation plan. DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES: 1. Side elevations are required for the all town house units. 2. Staff recommends that the plan provide details regarding the square footage of the outdoor amenity areas, and any amenities such as outdoor dining space and playground equipment. 3. The protected areas should be label as conservation easements. 4. The percent of steep slope, protected slope and protected slope buffer proposed to be disturbed should be reported on page 4. 5. Percent of woodland to be retained needs to be clarified. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan 3. Zoning Exhibit 4. Building Elevation Drawings Approved by: Tracy Hight"e, Diredtor, Department of -Neighborhood and Development Services ppdadmNsHrepWooumen� Z a ♦— Z LU 2Z 9 g 6 1 S I S P {� ¢ .d e 00 W LLI > —' a Q'^ 0 IM!, m l rn Y r s � ZNQ H LL C i cc Q a W Z_ 40 dtx - Fpy § -- �S[� aa$9 ��° is �s.a � dl s d ➢ I � In c .� n hS�4'{0.P9'f'1^w .`a+V yo I i ;�; !®r[!! oe )) ( \) z F2 af § ! § »§ / ° } (§ \\ /ƒ ^=�C?_Y i���C� Yav .Ae m�O�n ' s.«•ma��aw a» -��'O�i"f� . m ,w Nmam Q .c1N�W�'i9 •N.'�"�a' NOIIOnNlSNOO NOS ION .I,-lNO NV -Id lZVNIWFMNcl , q! o! tit ��x•--- r.e � .x� r,e ., u V�� b ®i� r �� r i Ll "-lim-lirm-1 �taf&l I&A U&N , -,Jl I-L, III L A Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 3 of 16 curious what accountability there will be for her new neighbors to keep the new neighborhood from turning into the same situation they are living in now. Will they be financially able to upkeep yards and homes? Swanson hopes the Commission will take into consideration not only what is concerning to the existing neighborhoods, but also for the new neighbors and to not ask them to do something they are not able to do and not put them in a losing situation and give them a change to thrive. Swanson doesn't believe the current plan she has seen is fair to the people of Forest View. Swanson gave additional questions from neighbors to Miklo so they can become public record and addressed at that next meeting. Sara Barron (1903 Grantwood Street), director Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition, wanted to make note on a couple issues with this rezoning project. One, there are mountains of research showing affordable housing developments do not lower property values (and she will share that with Mr. Cole) and secondly she noted the current residents of Forest View have been instrumental in helping with designing what they want for themselves in the new neighborhood and have been very active in advocating for what they need in their new neighborhood. Therefore Barron said there should be no concern that the current residents of Forest View's voices are not being heard. All they need now is for the other neighborhoods to welcome them in as part of the community. Freerks closed the public dicussion. Signs moved to defer REZ18-00013/SUB18-00006 until the June 7 meeting, Parsons seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0 REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM tREZ18-00005/SUB18 00005)• An application submitted by Bedrock, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 18.03 acres from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID-RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/ RS-5) zone and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD-12) zone and a preliminary plat of Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17-lot, 18.03-acre residential subdivision located east of S. Gilbert Street & south of Waterfront Drive. Miklo noted the property is on the east side of Gilbert Street, west of Cherry Avenue and is pretty heavily wooded. The proposal is to rezone most of the property to RM-12 Low Density Multifamily Residential and a portion to be rezoned to RS-5 Low Density Single Family Residential and both are proposed to have a Planned Development Overlay Zone. The plan also includes a preliminary plat and Sensitive Areas Plan, the plat would include the extension of Cherry Avenue to Gilbert Street and a new local street, Toby Circle, which would provide access to the single family lots and townhouse lots. The Planned Development includes a variety of housing types such as single family lots in the southern and eastern portions of the property, a series of 31 townhouses towards the middle and then two 36-unit apartment buildings on Gilbert Street. Miklo stated the property does contain critical and protected slopes and woodlands, and some of those environmentally areas will, and have been, disturbed. There will be areas of the property that will be protected through the Sensitive Areas Plan even after the grading is complete for stormwater management. Miklo showed photos of the area noting Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 4 of 16 that staff as well as the City Engineers visited this property earlier this year and do feel the erosion in the area needs to be addressed and the stormwater management facilities may be a way of doing that. Miklo stated in terms of the Planned Development Overlay there are several items that must be considered. One is density, he noted the Comprehensive Plan shows this property as appropriate for 2-8 dwellings per acre. With the amount of open space left, this plan will achieve 7-8 units per acre so within the guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan. Another item to consider is if a development will burden existing streets and utilities and it is felt by the transportation planners that most of the traffic will use Gilbert Street, which is an arterial street, with more than sufficient capacity for a development of this size. Miklo acknowledged some of the traffic will likely go to the east and use Sandusky Drive, a collector street that goes to Keokuk Street and both of those have sufficient capacity for this development. One of the goals noted in the Comprehensive Plan is the extension of Cherry Avenue from Sandusky to Gilbert Street to provide some traffic relief and an alternative street access for the Pepperwood subdivisions. This street connection also will improve access for emergency and service vehicles. Miklo noted the sanitary sewer and water service are available to this property, and the proposed stormwater facilities are believed by City Engineers to correct a serious erosion issue existing in the ravine. The next item to consider is if the development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values and privacy of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development. Miklo stated in this particular case, the single family lots will provide a transition from the existing single-family homes within the Pepperwood Addition to the townhouse style buildings and the larger apartment buildings to the west. The buildings proposed in this plan do not exceed the height limits, will comply with the multifamily building design standards and are broken down into smaller modules with balconies and different materials in order to minimize the large scale of the buildings. Next question is if a combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the underlying zoning requirements or from City street standards will be in the public interest, in harmony with the purposes of this Title (meaning the Zoning Code), and with other building regulations of the City. Miklo stated that in this case, unlike other planned developments, the applicant is not asking for any waivers (e.g. setbacks or height), there is a proposal for reduction of the standard collector street width of 31 feet down to 28 feet on Cherry Avenue. Staff recommended this reduction to provide traffic calming for Cherry Avenue, which will carry traffic from Sandusky Drive to Gilbert Street. Traffic circles are also proposed on Cherry Avenue in two locations where it will intersect with Toby Circle. The intent is allow Cherry Avenue to provide neighborhood street connectivity, but to discourage its use a cut through and to calm speeds of vehicles using the street. Staff finds that the proposal to reduce the pavement width from 31 feet to 28 feet is reasonable given the goal of traffic calming for this street. Miklo stated for Planned Developments they must also consider pedestrian networks and facilities. He stated all the buildings will have access to public sidewalks, the sidewalk on Gilbert Street may need to be reconstructed due to erosion over the years. Also public open space must be considered, a development of this size would be required to dedicate one acre of open space or pay fees in lieu of. The Parks and Recreation Commission will review this application and make a recommendation regarding the dedication of open space or fees. However, given the steep topography of this area it is unlikely that there is land that is suitable Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 5 of 16 for a public park. Staff recommends that fees be collected in lieu of the dedication of open space. Private open space is also a consideration and Miklo noted that much of the property will be in a conservation easement with a homeowner's association being responsible for maintenance (including the stormwater facilities). Legal documents addressing these responsibilities and funding for maintenance will need to be in place at time of final plat. In terms of compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Miklo reiterated this proposal is in an area noted for 2 — 8 units per acre but there is additional text in the Plan that specifically mentions this property as being possibly appropriate for well -designed multifamily and stressing the goal of the City of having Cherry Avenue connect to Gilbert Street. Therefore, Staff does find that this proposal does comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the area. As Miklo previously mentioned, this proposal is in a sensitive area and does contain protected slopes adjacent to Gilbert Street, and the applicant is proposing those protected slopes be modified as it has been determined these are altered slopes that have been graded in the past. When Gilbert Street was reconstructed several years ago, it appears that grading was done for the street and to provide fill material. The Ordinance does allow for additional alteration of previously altered slopes. Generally, ravines containing protected slopes should not be altered, however an exception can be made for stormwater management or sanitary sewer or water lines. In this case the City Engineer feels a solution to the erosion problem would be build a series of two damns within the slopes to slow the flow of water and control erosion in this area. The City Engineer with the stormwater management plan for this application. Miklo said that the other sensitive feature on the site would be the woodlands. The applicant recently removed woodlands portions of the property prior to receiving approval of a sensitive areas plan. The applicant claims that he was unaware of the woodland retention requirements and that trees that were removed were undesirable or unhealthy. Miklo showed the Commission a series of photographs to illustrate what the property looked like before the trees were removed. The City has no way to assess the quality of the trees that were removed, they do know there are a considerable number of Locust trees in this area which are not considered desirable, but in any event the Ordinance requires that if more than 50% of a woodland in an RS-5 zone is remove, replacement trees must be planted at a ratio of 1 tree per every 200 feet of woodland disturbance. So approval of this application will require approval of a tree replacement plan and Staff is recommending that plan, as well as a tree preservation plan, be approved by the City Forrester before any more development activity on this site. The applicant has indicated a desire to plant replacement trees on the perimeter of the property as well as additional trees will be planted once the houses are built. Staff also discussed having trees planted in the street right-of-way. The Sensitive Areas section of the zoning code considers the preservation archaeological sites as well as natural features. The applicant has already initiated some development activity on the site. Meanwhile, the Office of the State Archaeologist has indicated that four archaeological sites have been reported within 100 meters of the development site. Due the density of known archaeological sites in the surrounding area, there is sufficient likelihood that other undiscovered or undocumented site may be present within the development area that the OSA recommends a field investigation by a professional archaeological consultant prior to the commencement of ground disturbing activities (e.g. grading). Staff therefore recommends that as a condition of approval the applicant hire an archaeologist approved by the State Archeologist to complete a study or excavation plan approved by the State Archeologist. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 6 of 16 Miklo noted there are a variety of townhouse designs proposed along Cherry Avenue and Toby Circle. With the two multifamily buildings along Gilbert Street there would be underground parking as well as some surface parking. The applicant is proposing two outdoor activity areas, one for each apartment building, and a playground area for the townhouses. When the Staff Report was distributed there were some deficiencies in terms of the materials required, those have been satisfied. Therefore Staff is recommending approval of REZ1 8-00005/SUB1 8-0005, an application submitted by Bedrock LLC for a rezoning from ID-RM to OPD/RS-5 and OPD/RM-12 and a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17-lot, 18.03-acre residential subdivision located east of Gilbert Street subject to City Forester review and approval of the tree replacement plan prior to final plat approval and applicant contracting with an archaeologist approved by the state to complete a study or excavation plan. Theobald asked about the sidewalk on Gilbert Street and Miklo explained it is there however has been covered by erosion over the years and as part of this development the sidewalk will need to be repaired. Freerks asked about the sensitive areas that will not be disturbed and Miklo showed the areas as well as areas that will be disturbed for the needs of stormwater management. Martin questioned the fees in lieu of park space and if the woodlands could become park space. Miklo stated that based on past experiences and the direction of the Parks Director this area is not the type of space the City would want to maintain for parkland, the Ordinance is very specific in requiring neighborhood open space, usable open space for playground equipment, and playing fields. This area is also too steep and could be a liability for the City. There are two other parks in the area, Wetherby Park and Sand Hill Park so the fees collected from this development will be applied to those existing parks. Theobald asked about the two roundabouts or calming circles that will be placed on Cherry Avenue and who is responsible for maintaining them. Miklo replied it will be the responsibility of the homeowners association. Freerks asked about the process for determining if a site may be an archeological site. Miklo said the City will notify the State Archaeologist of the development and they will review their records and if desired could come and review the site prior to development. Freerks questioned how the City can prevent disturbance of areas before a study is conducted. Miklo stated the applicant must have permission from the City before any work on the site is started. Hensch noted the new extension of Cherry Avenue appears to be more than 1000 feet long and he likes that there will be two calming islands placed on the street however feels the third intersection to the west should have some intersection control as there are more units in that area with the two higher density buildings. Miklo noted he discussed this with the transportation planners and engineers and they felt due to the grade and the intersection traffic will naturally slow. Hensch is also concerned about the alley, it is also a long stretch of road without any control. Miklo stated if that is a concern the Commission can require some traffic calming devices to be placed in the alley. Parsons asked if the City will allow on street parking on collector streets such as Cherry Avenue. Miklo confirmed they do, on street parking will be allowed on one side. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 7 of 16 Signs questioned the topography of the area coming off of Gilbert Street and the slope, so he assumes there will need to be grading to put in the street and questions if there will be any retention landscaping in that area. Miklo said that has not been discussed by City Staff however the applicant's engineer may be able to address the concern. Dyer questioned the visibility at the intersection where the two large buildings will be for traffic coming off Gilbert Street. Miklo said the driveway is at a right angle and then turns sharply so should be okay. Freerks asked about the discrepancies listed in the Staff Report. Miklo confirmed all those discrepancies have been resolved. Hensch asked about the north boundary of these parcels and if the boundary was going through the ravine. Miklo confirmed it is, and a portion of the ravine is on a neighboring property and a portion of the stormwater retention work would occur on the neighboring property and will require an easement and consent of the neighboring property. Freerks opened the public hearing Andrew Bockenstedt (3500 Dolphin Drive) is the owner of Bedrock LLC (the applicant). He stated he has done excavation work on developments in Iowa City but this is the first complete development for his company in Iowa City. Freerks noted the sensitive areas of the property and the importance of maintaining the sensitive areas in the Iowa City community, and is questioning the removal of trees and beginning work on the site and ignorance regarding a sensitive areas ordinance in the City. Bockenstedt admitted he made an error in removing the trees. He stated the first house he built was at 560 Cherry Avenue and saw the whole property as a corn field in 1992. Freerks understands that, however since 1992 new rules have been created to protect sensitive areas. She asked if Bockenstedt was working with Southgate Development or MMS Consultants. Bockenstedt said he is an excavation contractor and an ambitious fellow and his ambition got the best of him as he jumped into working the area but was not aware removing trees was in the ordinance, he did not disturb the slopes. He felt that piles of dirt from developments in Pepperwood had been dumped on the property and trees and such were growing in the piles and he felt those could be removed. He doesn't feel he disturbed any of the soil within in the possible archeological areas and the native vegetation under all the mounds of dirt and trees he moved are still intact. Bockenstedt admits he made a mistake in moving the dirt and removing the trees and apologizes. Hensch asked if they harvested any of the trees removed and Bockenstedt said they did harvest the walnut trees that were of any value, they did not destroy them. Dyer asked when the trees were removed. Bockenstedt replied it was after the first of the year, maybe February. Dyer noted there is provision regarding trees that harbor Indiana Brown Bats those trees can only be harvested between October 1 and April 1. Freerks referenced the Comprehensive Plan and the density for this area which states 2-8 units per acre and the proposal is for 7-8 units per acre so very close to the maximum. Therefore Freerks feels there should be a few more amenities in the area for residents. Bockenstedt said he will entertain ideas and be willing to incorporate them if able. Freerks said just added open green space can be attractive, so children can run, kick a soccer ball, etc. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 8 of 16 Hensch asked about the three, four and five-plex buildings and if they were all three bedroom units. Bockenstedt confirmed that is correct. Hensch noted that appears to be attractive to families and because of that there needs to be open space for children to play. Although the development is close to Wetherby Park, it is still a mile or over away depending on which end of the development one lives. Dyer observed the single family lots back up to the parking area for the bigger apartment buildings and wonder if those homes will object to having an apartment building parking lot in their backyard. Freerks agreed and said there will need to be a buffer. Miklo noted the house lots will be at a considerable higher grade than the apartment buildings so there will be a natural buffer for lights and noise from the parking lots. He stated there will also be a large retaining wall there. Freerks questioned the safety issues of having a large retaining wall and there might need to be a fence. Hensch noted the issues of soil erosion and water retention in this area and the easiest way to keep the water on the property is to minimize the amount of concrete. Bockenstedt stated the townhouses are actually drive -under, the garage tucked under the house. Hensch agreed that will be helpful but still feels there needs to be an overall look at any spaces they can minimize the use of concrete. Miklo noted on the latest plan the applicant did add a little landscaping between the driveways of each townhome. Joel Kline (2460 South Gilbert Street) owns the McCollister Historic Farm House to the south of the applicant's property. It was originally the farm house for 800 acres that would have included this property. Kline noted that last time he came before this Commission was when he wanted to build a garage and had to make sure it was built in the style that was appropriate. He added they have been good stewards of the property, they have restored the inside and kept the outside consistent with the original appearance. Kline confirmed the concerns of single family residences next to apartment buildings resonates with him quite a bit. He is not opposed to development but feels it is necessary to be sensitive to the historic neighboring property. Kline raised a number of issues, first with regards to the trees, when you look back at the 1930's it was started this area was open fields but it appears there was a border on the southern edge of mature walnut trees and those trees would have provided a buffer between his property and this development. Kline also noted he never received any invitation to a good neighbor meeting to discuss this development prior to this evening. Kline said one of the benefits is trees will absorb water and over the years Kline noted they have had significant water coming down from the north, they have put in gravel and paved the driveway in an effort to help with runoff. He is concerned with water runoff to the south with this development. The biggest concern for Kline is the 36 unit 3-story building that will abut right up to his property, he would like to see a lower building and perhaps set back. He noted the open space those families will use will be on his property and his neighbors. Another concern is the traffic on Gilbert Street, the traffic on that street continues to increase, a stop sign has just been placed at the intersection of Gilbert and McCollister, but adding 790 additional vehicles from this development will add to the stress of roadway usage. To reiterate, his concerns are about water, trees, light and other forms of intrusion onto his property be considered, perhaps a berm could be created between his property and the development property to minimize intrusion. Freerks asked how close the 36 unit building will be to the property line. Miklo said it would be 23 feet from the property line. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 9 of 16 Parsons asked about the good neighbor meeting. Miklo said the applicant will need to address the discussion at the meeting. Don Cochran (2530 South Gilbert Street) lives on the other parcel that is just south of the proposed development. He purchased the entire 10 lot property approximately 15 years ago and has another owner that wanted the home and to renovate the historic home so they subdivided the property breaking off the house from the other outbuildings. Cochran corrected some items from the Staff Report, specifically on bullet point 3 (not adversely affecting views) and this discussion that the two McCollister Farm properties have their own built-in buffer and there wouldn't likely be any future subdividing of the property. Cochran had submitted a 7 lot subdivision to the City at one point when he first bought the property. He owns 6 acres, he is 57 years old, it is a lot to keep up, there is a lot invested in just the value of the property, and there would be intent in the future to subdivide it. Cochran is not sure he would divide it into 7 lots, maybe only 3 however the opportunity is there. If a subdivision of his property happens, the prime lots will be the ones that will border where the 36 unit building will be. Therefore Cochran would state there is an adverse effect to his property. When Cochran subdivided the property, he specifically subdivided it RS-5 because he didn't want to build a big building there and didn't want another owner to come in a build a big building there either. Cochran is concerned about how close the large 36 unit building will be to his property, however, he does think Bockenstedt has a great vision. Cochran stated he has three concerns, one is the buffer zone, which has been discussed, but would also like to see more specific examples of what plantings will be used along the property lines. He is concerned about the height of the 36 unit building and that it will be seen from all angles. Perhaps the building could be made into an L shape and therefore would be placed further away from his property line. Finally he is concerned about the traffic on Gilbert Street, and the number of people will be crossing the street as the sidewalk on the west side is not complete. Cochran has one other correction to the Staff Report, it sates the apartment building is 800 feet from any other structures, that might be true to the Sandusky area but Kline's house is actually only about 300 feet from the fence line . Miklo clarified that when the Staff Report mentions the 800 feet, it specifically is referencing the Pepperwood subdivision. Shannon Patrick (652 Sandusky Drive) is concerned with this development and not in favor. Patrick said the items wrong with this proposal are community outreach. As stated in the packet there was a good neighbor meeting however he never received notice, and he is within the 200 feet line. The second issue it the trees, he understands it is presented as a mistake, however as a neighboring homeowner you see the bulldozers going in and all the trees removed with no notice of why. Patrick added this does not help with building trust with the developer, he added there is a sense of community in his neighborhood and they should have been contacted. Patrick next discussed the concern with the density of the proposal, the surrounding neighborhood is RS-5 and this will be rows of townhomes and a 20 foot apartment building poking over the hill. This is not with keeping the character of the area, it transitions the area from a neighborhood to just housing. Having lived in Coralville next to HyVee he has seen where those areas of houses become rentals over time as no one wants to buy next to large apartment buildings. Patrick shared the concern regarding density, lack of space, does not achieve the feeling of long-term residents. He does feel housing is needed in the area, especially low-income housing, however trying to shove 400 people into a small area will create housing, not a neighborhood. This level of density does not fit the character of the area. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 10 of 16 Patrick next commented on the extension of Cherry Avenue and with the addition of the traffic circles it will not be any faster for residents on Sandusky to take that way to Gilbert Street than to go the current routes, the road extension is not needed. He feels the road extension will add to traffic concerns not alleviate them. Patrick's final point is regarding the school district and the fact is Iowa City is the 14t' most economically segregated city, and on the school side of things the district has been trying to deal with this problem that effectively has all the high density, more affordable housing, is all in the same part of town. This development will be in the Twain district. In some areas of Iowa City the schools have a 5% reduced or free lunch percentage, which is upwards of 70% reduced or free lunch percentage. Alexander school is similar to Twain as well. Adding this much development will exasperate the situation and work against the School Board's work to try to spread out affordable housing amongst the schools. Patrick noted that Kingsley Botchway, on the City Council, is very aware of the school district concerns and adding several hundred units in this area will not help the situation. Patrick closed by saying he is not against development, he likes and wants more neighbors, the way to achieve it is to have a mixture of multifamily, such as four-plexes scattered within single family, and meet the character of the area. Alex Carrillo (373 Windmill Place) works with Bockenstedt as the director of operations for Bockenstedt Excavating and apologized to the gentleman who didn't receive the good neighbor notice. They did hold a neighborhood meeting and he hand -delivered notices to all the Sandusky mailboxes, mailed notices to the two parcels to the south and the Braverman property to the north. The meeting was held on November 8, 2017, at the Terry Trueblood Park Lodge. The Beardsley's attended, Kyllingstad, Vanderweeds, and Russells also attended and good conversation was shared. Freerks closed the public discussion. Hensch moved to defer REZ18-00005/SUB18-00005 until the June 7 meeting. Martin seconded the motion. Freerks noted there has been good conversation this evening regarding concerns. Signs wanted to acknowledge the point regarding the large size of the single-family lots allows for the higher density in the multifamily areas. Freerks agrees and feels perhaps the multifamily 36 unit buildings could be smaller. Freerks also reiterated the concern about the open space and amenities. She feels they are trying to squeeze so much into this area and perhaps if it were left a bit more open it would be a better environment, and a better long-term neighborhood. Signs stated he normally is all for density but for some reason this proposal does not work for him and is concerned about the two very large buildings on top of a hill overlooking a valley and that exasperates the visual impact of the buildings. He also is very concerned about how close it is to the south property line. He noted the conservation easement disappears at the south edge of the building and that is where it is needed the most. He agrees with the comments that this development is out of character for this area. Martin said when looking at the larger area (Pepperwood, across the street, etc.) a better continuity needs to be explored. Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 11 of 16 Freerks acknowledged it is a tough lot to develop and it likely why it has been undeveloped for so long. She discussed the buffers and possible berms and water flow, especially to the south, and wants to see a tree protection plan. Martin asked for more information about the state archeological findings and the implications. Freerks noted the Comprehensive Plan states for this area to be a distinctive and innovative environment for the neighborhood and a need for facilities and amenities and she is not seeing that in this proposal. Signs added sticking pergolas on the edge of a parking lot next to a retaining wall is not particularly a user friendly alternative. He would agree there is just a lack of usable open space. Hensch stated his concerns are to maintain the integrity of that area, as well as the amenities issues. He added one of the focuses is to keep the neighborhoods walkable, and therefore he feels there needs to be a six foot sidewalk the entire length of Gilbert Street along this property. Within the development there is too much concrete, they need to find ways to keep the stormwater on the property as much as possible, there is a real problem with erosion on the north side and that needs to be addressed on the site as well as remediate the erosion that has occurred. Hench echoed other's concerns that there simply is not enough open space, he is a big fan of density but also feels they need to create neighborhoods and the way to accomplish that is to give people the opportunity to be outside and meet each other. He also voiced his displeasure with the harvesting of the mature trees and that there are no walnut trees specified to be replanted, and the overall landscape plan is inadequate. All the borders to the south and east should have good landscape borders, and wherever they can, even if it's just a small tree, there needs to be trees. With regards to the three, four and five-plexes he does not have an issue with the density, the issue is there is no place for children to play and not place for people to congregate to meet neighbors. Overall there needs to be less density and more open space. Theobald added with regards to trees walnut trees aren't necessarily good for gardeners as it is hard to grow other things around them, but in looking at the plants listed, there are some issues that need addressed. With the roundabouts she suggests they look at what is planted outside City Hall. Parsons added with regards to the large buildings perhaps looking at different materials or colors, just seems like a lot of brown and grey. He said the project they recently approved on Camp Cardinal Boulevard used colors to create a good design. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: A public hearing of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, Annexation Policy, to add a section pertaining to affordable housing. Miklo noted the proposed amendment text was distributed to the Commission in their agenda packets, the goal of the amendment is to address affordable housing. Miklo explained when the City annexes property it is when they have the most leverage, even more so than with a rezoning, so the thought is given the concerns about affordable housing in Iowa City this would Planning and Zoning Commission May 17, 2018 Page 12 of 16 be an opportunity to include it in all annexations that are residential and hopefully in all neighborhoods eventually. The proposal states that at the time a property is annexed, without prescribing exactly what will happen, there is a goal set for 10% of the overall residential use to be affordable over a period of 20 years. The proposal lists some possible methods on how that will be done in terms of having the affordable housing controlled by the City or by a nonprofit affordable housing agency, Miklo stated there would be some locations where there may already be affordable housing, or an abundance, and the City would want to keep options open to provide affordability elsewhere which raises the possibility of a developer paying fees so that affordable housing could be located in another portion of the city. Staff is recommending the Comprehensive Plan be amended to include the affordable housing language in the annexation policy. Hensch noted one of the problems with these types of policies is staff having to manage it over time and is concerned about the added burden on staff. Miklo stated the first option is to have oversight by a nonprofit provider, for example the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship, or the City's Public Housing Program and those providers would be in control and oversee the monitoring of the units. Miklo acknowledged each annexation would need to be dealt with differently and negotiated to see what the best plan is for the developer and City. Hektoen noted that with annexations this is just a policy but the City has more discretion at the annexation stage than at the rezoning stage. Freerks stated she is not comfortable telling a developer that they must give a certain number of lots to the City if they are willing to oversee the affordable housing themselves. Hektoen stated that there will be options and the City is open to other ways of achieving the affordable housing polity, as why each annexation will be dealt with on a case -by -case basis. Parsons asked if this policy would cover all annexations, both voluntary and involuntary. Miklo said it would cover voluntary and noted it is not the City's practice to do involuntary annexations. Hensch asked Hektoen if she was comfortable with this policy as it would not be additional burden on City Staff. Hektoen said the policy is written in a way to allow for flexibility to avoid the problem of burden. Dyer feels if the policy started at 60% or 80% of AMI that is not really likely to be gentrified housing. Freerks asked if there are definitions of what is considered a housing unit? The 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." Miklo said a unit is a dwelling, it can be in the form of single family or multifamily. Parsons asked if the policy would be enforced all at once, if someone were to build eight units and then later decide they want to build four more on, would one of the four added ones need to be affordable. Miklo said with the annexation process there is also a zoning process and subdivision process and at the subdivision process the City will know how many units will be proposed. If there is an outlot held aside for future development it would then have to come back to the City at a later time for rezoning and subdivision plat approvals and the City and developer would follow whatever agreement was reached at the time of annexation. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION J U N E 21, 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 MEMBERS ABSENT: Carolyn Dyer, Jodie Theobald STAFF PRESENT: Luke Foelsch, Sara Hektoen, Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: Sharon DeGraw, John Beasley, Allan Hogue, John Roffman, Emily Legel, Zack Builta, Cecile Kuenzli, Ryan O'Leary, Richard Carlson RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 4-0 (Signs abstained) the Commission recommends approval of REZ18-00017, an application submitted by the Historic Preservation Commission to designate the Clinton Street and Railroad Depot Historic District as a Historic District Overlay (OHD) zone. CALL TO ORDER: Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. REZONING ITEM (REZ18-00017): Discussion of an application submitted by the Historic Preservation Commission for the rezoning of approximately 2.2 acres of property located at 530, 604, 612, 614, and 624 S. Clinton Street & 109 Wright Street from Community Commercial (CC-2) and Planned High Density Multifamily (PRM) to Community Commercial (CC-2) and Planned High Density Multifamily (PRM) with a Historic District Overlay (OHO). Foelsch presented the staff report and began by showing a map of the area as well as pictures of the individual properties. Foelsch noted that in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan it calls for adopting strategies for preserving the stability and livability of Iowa City's historic and established neighborhoods and a historic district is one such strategy the Comprehensive Plan calls for. Foelsch added the Planning & Zoning Commissions role is to review this proposed overlay rezoning in relation to the Comprehensive Plan. Staff also reviewed the Historic Preservation Plan which called for a study to be done in this neighborhood to identify historic Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 2 of 16 properties. That study was done as an intensive historic architect survey of the Sabin School and Near South Side neighborhood. What is proposed tonight is a result of that study. The proposed district includes properties that are thought to have the highest historic integrity remaining. Foelsch noted the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan is where this district is located and the intent of the Master Plan generally is to encourage growth and development in this area, however it does identify certain buildings with the intention to retain them as part of overall neighborhood. Foelsch showed on a map the buildings that were indicated for retention and the current proposed district were all buildings identified for retention. Foelsch noted that the Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Code provides for incentives to preserve historic buildings. It allows for the transfer of development rights and other bonuses for historic overlay zones. The Historic Preservation Commission discussed this proposed district and held an informal meeting with property owners in November 2017. There was a public hearing and review on April 12, 2018, wherein they voted unanimously for approval of the historic district. Based on staff's analysis the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the existing neighborhood so staff recommends that REZ18-00017, an application to designate the Clinton Street and Railroad Depot Historic District as a Historic District Overlay (OHD) zone, be approved. Hensch asked what the thought process was for reducing the overall size of the area proposed. Foelsch stated the four structures on the west side of South Clinton Street have been substantially remodeled with enough changes made to the facades to find they lack sufficient historic integrity to be included. Therefore, the proposed area was trimmed to the buildings that retained the most historic integrity. Hensch asked about the November meeting and what was the general sense of that meeting. Miklo noted he attended that meeting and they invited the owners of the properties in the proposed historic district, most of them are owned by one individual who attended with his attorney, and he did express concern and objection to the proposed district. Miklo said staff explained to the owner the incentives in the Riverfront Crossings District to encourage the retention of these buildings including the transfer of development rights. The owner of the railroad Depot also attended, but that property is already a landmark property so essentially this overlay would not add regulation to that property. The Historic Preservation Commission chose to go forward even after the concern at that initial meeting given the importance of these being a few of the only historic buildings left in the Riverfront Crossings area and the goal of the Plan to provide a variety of buildings and retain the historic buildings to add to the character of the Riverfront Crossings District. Hensch asked if all the properties in the proposal rental properties. Miklo stated he believed they are. Parsons asked if they were all residential properties. Miklo said with the exception of the railroad Depot which is a commercial office. Freerks opened the public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 3 of 16 Sharon DeGraw (Historical Preservation Commission) prepared a description of the six structures they hope to have in this historic district in an effort to give an understanding to the reasons for this proposal. First is the Depot, second is the Hotel O'Reilly and the other four are buildings that were constructed as residence originally. DeGraw feels the Historical Preservation Commission is being conservative in requesting only one half of this one block be designated. It is a unique area as it transitions from the downtown area to the railroad tracks. The Historic Preservation component of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the identification and preservation of properties and neighborhoods that are significant to Iowa City's architecture and culture. Towards achieving this goal, a historic architectural study of the Southside Neighborhood of Iowa City was completed in 2015 by Richard Carlson and Marlin Ingalls of the Office of the State Archaeologist. The study was implemented by the Historic Preservation Commission partially in response to the loss of the brick cottages on Dubuque Street and is supported by the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan goal to identify and proactively protect historic resources. The first building identified is the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Passenger Station, it is commonly known now as the Rock Island Depot. It is located 115 Wright Street and is presently occupied by Neuzil Sanderson & Sigafoose law firm who purchased the Depot in 1981. DeGraw explained this is Iowa City's second passenger Depot, the first Depot was located three blocks away and serviced the city for 40 years until it was considered inadequate. The existing Depot was constructed in 1898 at the urging of Harry Bream, the local Rock Island agent at that time. News articles at the time described the Depot as the "handsomest depot of this size in the United States", and this quote came from an individual that worked for another rail company. The architectural style of the Rock Island Depot is Richardsonian and Victorian Romanesque with two different bricks distinguishing the base from the body of the Depot. Large graceful brackets support the wide overhanging clay tile hipped roof and a round tower is at the top of the building. Very little has changed with the exterior of the Depot, the building is an anchor to this proposed Railroad Depot Historic District both for its function in the history of Iowa City and for its first-class construction and architectural details. The next building is the Hotel O'Reilly at 624 South Clinton Street, across from the passenger depot. This hotel was built by saloon keeper Michael O'Reilly and functioned as a hotel until the 1920's when some of the rooms became apartments. In 1957 the building was converted to 16 apartments. The solid brick hotel building is three stories tall with a long sloping roof, front to back. The front of the building features a two-story almost full -width veranda with a metal half - hip roof. The west facade has a full -width metal cornice. The windows have segmental -arch lintels and stone sills with one -over -one double hung windows. The Hotel O'Reilly is individually eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, for both its relationship to the railroad in Iowa City and as an example of commercial hotel architecture. DeGraw added there is still some ghost signage on the south side of the building that says Hotel O'Reilly and also just thinking about how the building functioned, if someone was a newcomer arriving to Iowa City by train, it would have been such a beautiful social scene to see people on the verandas of the hotel enjoying themselves. Next is the Eugene and Olivia Paine House which his located at 530 South Clinton Street. It was constructed in 1893. Eugene Paine was a coal dealer in Iowa City. He began his business in 1875 and it continued until 1922, three years after his death. The Paine House is a two-story brick Queen Anne with a central hip roof and projecting gables. Ornamental brick patterns and carved panels decorate the exterior and molded concrete or carved stone elements adorn the window lintels. Both front and rear porches have been removed and the siding and window in Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 4 of 16 the front gable have been altered. Despite these changes, because the original design is well documented and these elements could be restored, the house is individually eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places partly for its architecture and as a design from the Barber mail order company. It may also be eligible because of its relationship to Eugene Paine. The house was occupied by Paine heirs until 1952 when it was divided into apartments and then sold in 1959. It has been with the current owner since 1962. The fourth property is the J. Walter and May Parvin Lee House located at 604 South Clinton Street (at the intersection of Clinton and Prentiss Streets). It is the oldest structure in the proposed Railroad Depot Historic District. The Parvin Lee house was built in 1878 and was used by the family for their residence until 1898. J. Walter Lee was a dry goods merchant and furniture merchant in Iowa City. The Parvin Lee House is an elaborate 2'/z story house with two projecting gables and a complex gabled- on hip central roof area. The trim is extensive with brackets and a large frieze band, complex window surrounds and bracketed cutaway corners on the north gable. DeGraw commented that the size of this building and the orientation to the corner makes this building striking and welcoming to look at. With the construction of new buildings in Riverfront Crossings this new Railroad Depot Historic District will tell a story of maintaining this little streetscape and the history of Iowa City. These are mostly middle-class structures, somewhat modest, and nice to preserve. The last two homes were designed by the same architect, Orville H. Carpenter. Both were designed in the Free Classic variant of the Queen Anne Style. Carpenter's own home, which was located nearby at 529 S. Clinton Street, was demolished in the 1970s or 1980s for a parking lot. Carpenter worked as an architect in Iowa City from 1898 to 1938. Trained in architecture and engineering. Carpenter hired builders for his designs instead of building them himself. One of his most well-known designs is the National Register listed Czechoslovakian Protective Society (CSPS) Hall, now the Preucil School of Music on North Johnson Street. The Ellen Donohoe House at 614 South Clinton Street was built in 1899-1900. An announcement of the completed design was printed in a local paper in June 1899 calling it "an elegant new residence." Donohoe only lived in the house a short time when she had Carpenter design a new house at 22 East Court Street. She rented the house at 614 S. Clinton Street to tenants until she died in 1919. The house has remained a rental property ever since. The Donohoe House is a 2'/z story free -classic Queen Anne with a projecting front gable and south - facing gambrel roof wing. The gambrel roof also appears in other O.H. Carpenter designs. The house has seen significant changes including siding replacement and front porch removal but retains its original roofline, window pattern. It would be possible to restore some of the alterations to the exterior. Even though this home is not individually eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, it is contributing to the potential historic district. The second home designed by O.H. Carpenter is the Frank D. and Penena Lindsley House at 612 South Clinton Street. This house was originally built in 1907 at 328 South Clinton Street. Mr. Lindsley moved to Iowa City in 1882 to work as an agent for the railroad. In 1948, the house was purchased by Homer and Mae Beals and moved to 612 South Clinton Street. The Lindsley house at 612 South Clinton retains a high degree of architectural integrity and is perhaps one of the best examples of Carpenter's residential designs. Since it was moved to this location, the house has been a rental property. The Lindsley House is a 2'/z story gambrel roof house with a side -gambrel main roof, a front gambrel projection and a rear gambrel dormer. Decorative elements include the semi -circular shell design in the front gable and a Palladian window in the north bay projection. There have been very few changes to the home after the move and the Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 5 of 16 house may be individually eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places for its architecture. Signs asked why 109 Prentiss Street and 114 Wright Street were left out of this proposed District. DeGraw stated the goal is to maintain a streetscape and they are aware people may want to develop these areas so they are were careful to draw the district boundaries conservatively for what is most essential to be preserved. Miklo added that 114 Wright Street had been altered so much that it is hard to recognize its original design and purpose. John Beasley (attorney, Phelan Tucker Mullen Walker Tucker Gelman LLP) spoke on behalf of John and Joellen Roffman. He noted that the amount of material one has to synthesize in terms of the Master Plan and Comprehensive Plan is overwhelming. All documents are well over 100 pages. John and Joellen Roffman are long time Iowa Citians who are in the business of real estate and construction with residential and commercial rentals. They have spent their working life acquiring this half block of properties being discussed this evening. Beasley noted his research shows the Roffman's acquired an interest in the property at 614 South Clinton Street in 1972/73, they acquired 612 South Clinton Street in 1976, 109 Prentiss Street in 1983, 604 South Clinton Street in 1989, 624 South Clinton Street in 1992, 114 Wright Street in 2001 and the last piece to complete that block, 113 Prentiss Street, was acquired in early 2018. Beasley stated the half block proposed for the Railroad Depot Historic District is currently zoned PRM (Planned High Density Multifamily) which is the highest density for residential use that the City Zoning Code permits, even higher than RM-44, it provides for mixed uses, multifamily residential, certain retail uses, and general community uses (daycares, etc.). These properties in this half block are all PRM and have been zoned that way since 2005. Beasley noted this zoning classification is the best option for parties who are interested in developing residential real estate in Iowa City. Beasley noted the train station, which is included in this proposed district, in his opinion is irrelevant and unnecessary. The train station/depot has already been designated as a local Historical Landmark and already subject to the rules and regulations to the City's rules and polices of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. Adding the train station to this district adds no additional burdens to the owners of the train station. Beasley noted that is important because if the train station is not included in this district the burden of this district then falls mostly onto the Roffmans. There are five properties left, four of them are owned by John and Joellen, so 80% of the burden and restrictions on this district falls on the Roffmans. Beasley believes the City has eight historic districts currently, and it seems those districts seem to be residential neighborhoods, single-family or low density housing zoned areas and those districts the restrictions have to be analyzed differently than the impacts on properties that are in this attractive PRM zoning. Beasley was present at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting where other historic properties were identified and approved for a historic zoning overlay. At that meeting the main question was what was the City's standard and what was needed to be evaluated to create a recommendation to the Council and it came across to him that the consensus was the Planning and Zoning Commission only considers whether the proposed historic property or historic zone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Beasley researched that issue and feels there is more to it than just if it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It reads "The Planning and Zoning Commission will review the proposed overlay rezoning based on its relationship to the Comprehensive Plan as amended". Beasley continued and noted this part was not included in the staff report to the Commission "to the provisions of this title and to any proposed public improvements and other plans for the Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 6 of 16 renewals of the area involved". Beasley highlighted the language "to the provisions of this title", he interprets that to mean Title 14 which is the Zoning Code, which then adds a second prong which he feels is relevant to the analysis which is Article B — Historic District and Conservation District Overlay 14.3B.1 sub C which lays out a second standard he feels the Commission has to evaluate "to qualify for a designation of a historic district the subject area must contain abutting pieces of property under diverse ownership that meet approval criterial of subsection C- 1-A and C-1-B of this section and at least one approval criteria of subsection C-1-C, D, E or F." Therefore, it is Beasley's position that the Commission's analysis it two -fold, it is not simply the relation to the Comprehensive Plan but also this analysis. With regards to the first step, the Comprehensive Plan and the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan of January 2013 identify the Roffman's property as mixed -use which is consistent with the PRM zoning classification. He understands the new Master Plan is critical, he understands they are starting to see the issues percolate and the City and the Roffman's have a different view on this. The City says it (the Master Plan) supports their proposal, Beasely pointed out some differing language. In the executive summary (page 2) it states "each subdistrict has its own chapter which provides an overview of the district and keeps development opportunities that were identified for it". In the summary page of the Central Crossings District it discusses the Master Plan Objectives and he saw nowhere on page 66 where it lists the Master Plan Objectives, development character, development program, identifying that historic preservation is a priority in this district. Freerks interjected she was a part of developing that Master Plan and historic preservation was very much a part of the plan. Beasley noted it wasn't documented correctly then. On page 66 there is no mention of the properties in question this evening, on page 67 properties noted are Sabin School, cottage preservation and Tate Arms. However, the Roffman properties are not identified on the Executive Summary of the Master Plan. Beasley said a contrast of that is the language in the Downtown District Plan, on that summary page it specifically identifies historic preservation and preservation of the character in historic buildings. Beasley stated the Roffman's position is that the proposed rezoning overlay is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan which is to actively encourage redevelopment of properties in this area. Beasley continued and stated the second prong is the idea of diversity of ownership. He would submit there is not diversity of ownership with regards to what the Historic Preservation Commission wants to do here. If the train station is removed, that leaves 80% of the burden on the Roffmans, and therefore diversity of ownership does not exist, which is required for an overlay district as required by the statue. He acknowledged that his view of what is historic probably differs from the Commission, simply because something is old doesn't mean it is significant historically and he has some concerns about some of these properties as being historic. First of all 612 South Clinton Street was not constructed at that site, rather moved there, when the area was already being converted to rental properties as the hotel was no longer a hotel after 1920's when it became multifamily residential. 614 South Clinton Street is difficult to justify as historical by the looks of it. He does understand why the hotel is being considered historical, due to its connection with the railroad station, although it only was used as a hotel for 30 years, and has been apartments for much longer. Other than the hotel property, he has objection to the rest of the properties they want to use to create this historical district. Beasley stated the Planning and Zoning Commission has three options, they can approve the Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 7 of 16 proposed historic overlay, deny it, or go back to the Historic Preservation Commission and refigure the hotel and train station as the historic overlay and leave the other properties out Hensch asked for clarification on the train depot and if was currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Beasley believes so as well as on the local landmarks. Hensch requested Beasley elaborate on his statement regarding his opinion there is a greater burden imposed on the high -density properties versus lower density properties. Beasley said if property rights were a bundle of sticks, if you put a restriction on your property you are giving one stick away, when there is a piece of property that has greater developmental potential and a party puts a restriction on that property that restricts the development of the property, you are giving more sticks away. If he were to have a single family home, zoned single family, and this historic restriction is placed on the home, the home can still be used as a single family home. In this situation, the Roffman's have property where they could develop at a high density but with the historic overlay restrictions they can no longer develop the property to its potential. Hensch asked what the Roffman's specific objection to this historic overlay may be or is it the multiple tiered arguments Beasley has presented this evening. Beasley said the overall objection is they cannot develop their land to its fullest potential with this overlay. With regards to the diversity of ownership issue, Hensch asked how many of the properties in question do the Roffmans own. Hektoen said by looking at the assessor's website there are three different owners of the properties in question. Allan Hogue (511 South Dubuque Street) stated he was born and raised in Iowa, attended The University of Iowa where he met his wife, they moved to Washington DC and spent 30 years there. He retired two years ago and moved back to Iowa City and now live on South Dubuque Street. As everyone knows Iowa City has received national recognition for a place that is very livable, a city that is very desirable to live in, and he understands that because he bought into it literally. Some of the reasons are the Ped Mall, the walkability, and historic preservation and he feels as a group he feels the Commission should be congratulated, they have done a greatjob with Iowa City. When his wife and he were considering where to retire they considered a lot of options and decided Iowa City has all the features they wanted. When they first moved back here they rented a place on Jefferson Street for five months and loved the north side of town. They could have bought into the Vetro or Chauncey Towers but felt it was too much concrete and glass, which he is not opposed to, but likes the mix of Riverfront Crossings. He supports the idea of the Railroad Depot Historic District as it will keep Iowa City unique and livable. John Roffman (1314 Burry Drive) is the owner (with his wife) of most of the property being discussed this evening and as Beasley stated they have spent years acquiring these properties together. He noted he does not have a plan in mind on how he will develop it, but it has always been his intent to increase the density based on the zoning allowed. Over the years he has been approached by people wanting to buy some of the properties but he has been reluctant as it is ideal property close to downtown, the university, and has zoning that allows development. Roffman reiterated that they have no objection to the hotel being added to a historic district, they have totally renovated the inside and replaced all the windows and put the outdoor railings back on. He noted by including 612 and 614 South Clinton Street into the district it would cut the value of the rest of the developmental potential and make the remaining properties undevelopable. Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 8 of 16 Freerks asked if Roffman owned other properties in Iowa City. Roffman stated he did own a few as well as some in Coralville. Parsons asked if Roffman could describe the property at 610 South Clinton Street. Roffman said it is his understanding the 612 South Clinton Street was moved into the space, so it was previously a vacant lot, the guy that owned the lot of 612 built a garage first and lived in that for a few years and never ended up building a house. Therefore 610 is really just the converted garage that has been used as a residence. Miklo added this property was being included in the proposed Railroad Depot Historic District because the front building has the historic value. Since it does not have historic value it could be removed and the backs of the properties could be redeveloped. The Riverfront Crossings Plan does allow transfer development rights and would allow development that could have been allowed on the street be constructed on the back of the property or elsewhere in the district. Roffman noted that when analyzing what those transfer rights are, based on the zoning there isn't much of a benefit there. Roffman added they have spent 40 plus years accumulating these properties and now that they may be ready to do something the rules change. Freerks acknowledged Roffman's frustration and noted this area became an issue when the cottages were demolished and Sabin School was removed so it was decided to take a strong look at the area and see what could be preserved that was historic and incorporated into Riverfront Crossings. She stated the transfer of development rights is a positive for this situation. Miklo confirmed the transfer of development rights allows for taller buildings than usually allowed in the PRM zone and lower parking requirement. The transfer rights can also be sold to another developer in the Riverfront Crossings District. Roffman acknowledged those benefits but said at the bottom line they aren't the same as being able to develop the land he has acquired. With regards to the cottages and Sabin School being demolished, Roffman feels he is being punished for those situations that were not of his doing and if only he had torn his buildings down prior to those. He has received historical designation awards for other properties he has renovated throughout the community, it is not as if he is against historical properties. Freerks stated she would like to think there is a way to have the community benefit and the property owner benefit together and that is what the Commission is trying to achieve. The goal is to keep Iowa City special and that is what the Preservation Commission is trying to achieve with this Railroad Depot Historic District. Roffman appreciates what Freerks is saying and is willing to work towards something that is equitable for everyone, but that is not the way it is proposed at this time. Emily Legal is an Urban Planning student at The University of Iowa and has lived in Iowa City for the past two years. She wants to commend the Commission for respecting the historic condition of neighborhoods, not only as historical but also as an important tool to attract young folks who are critical for a thriving city. She notes when she walks her dog around the College Green and Summit Street areas she enjoys the historic feel of the area and feels that mix of historic and multifamily is what a city needs to be visually interesting and attractive. Legal said that in one of her land use classes they discuss the definition of taking of land. As Legal understands this situation the Roffman's feel this new regulation is a taking of their property however they have been purchasing these properties since the 1970's and the zoning law wasn't changed until 2005 and if they had investment back expectations they have been using them as such, they did not purchase these properties with the incentive of building a high- Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 9 of 16 rise structure. Legal feels by granting a property owner the transfer of development rights that is amazing, but even if that was not a right, the idea of a taking of property is laid out in Penn Central v. New York and there is not much of a legal claim of a taking away an investment value when the properties were purchased before the high density zoning was in place. Legal believes the historic character of the neighborhood is important, if one is to walk along South Johnson or South Van Buren (south of Burlington Street) it is not very pleasant, it's college students, its broken beer bottles, its apartment buildings that all look the same. She reiterated it is important to keep a mix of multifamily and mixed -use in with lower density or single family areas to make neighborhoods more pleasant. Zack Builta (Historic Preservation Commission) wanted to review the criteria for a historic district overlay: (a) Significant to American or Iowa City history, architecture, archology and culture (b) Possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials and workmanship (c) The buildings are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history (d) The association with the lives of persons significant in our past (e) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction or represents the work of a master or represents high artistic value or represents significant and distinguishable identity whose components may lack individual distinction (f) It has yielded, or may likely yield, information in prehistoric history or history With respect to what is being discussed today, this historic district meets criterial (a) and (b) as the last remaining intact collection of buildings in the near southside neighborhood that developed as a middle-class neighborhood and further developed an association with the railroad and the passenger depot. As a neighborhood that includes buildings associated with the railroad this district also meets criterion (c) which is event significant in our history. Lastly this district meets criterion (d) in its association with the prosperous coal dealer Paine, a speculator or saloonkeeper O'Reilly, in addition to the architects and builders involved which makes this meet criterion (e). Therefore criteria's (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) are met. Cecile Kuenzli (Historic Preservation Commission) was impressed with Legel's presentation as a graduate student. She remembers these were the same types of comments that were discussed when the Chauncey was proposed. At that time many young people came forward and stated they loved the old Iowa City, the funky buildings, and the historic buildings. Kuenzli noted there is only 2.6% of the land mass of Iowa City in historic districts, so that is not a lot of land mass kept from developers. As Freerks pointed out there is still ample opportunity for development in this area with the transfer of development rights and there are also tax incentives at the state level and even at the federal level for owners of properties in historic districts. As Builta just outlined, there was nothing arbitrary about designating the properties that were to be included in this district, they had to meet a very well-defined list of criteria to qualify to be local landmarks. So the question then before the Planning and Zoning Commission is then why create a historic district. All of these structures together will create a small district, one of the last available in Iowa City, and it is noted by the article in the packet by Mr. McMann that neighborhoods that are established as historic neighborhoods foster social economic and cultural vitality, they are places where people want to be, want to walk, want to spend their free time. As an antidote Kuenzli stated about two weeks ago she hosted a physician from Mexico who married an Iowa City girl and was back in town for family reasons. He hadn't been here in a while so Kuenzli drove him around and asked him what he thought of Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 10 of 16 all the new buildings, he hesitated and said he felt Iowa City was losing its charm. These buildings on South Clinton Street make a neighborhood, there are not many historic neighborhoods left, so she urges the Commission to adopt this area as another historic district, albeit a small one, and save some more of Iowa City's charm. Hensch asked about the site inventory form for 614 South Clinton Street, the statement of significance on item (c) (the buildings are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history) when reading the National Register criteria it states "integrity has been compromised more substantially than is the case for the other contributing buildings in the proposed district" and looking at the picture of 614 South Clinton Street, that building does not look very historic. Kuenzli admitted to having the same initial reaction, but when you read about the history and that it was one of the houses built by O.H. Carpenter. Other houses that may look more historical were not added to the district as it would take too much work to bring those houses back to their original historic appearance. The house included in the proposed district could all be easily resorted to their original historic appearance and therefore become again contributing sources to the historic district. Miklo added that in terms of historic districts both the National Register criteria and local criteria is there cannot be a "Swiss cheese" district where some properties are included and then one in the middle is left out, so buildings are classified as being key contributing or non-contributing within boundaries of the district. So 614 South Clinton is probably the weakest in terms of its historic value, but to take it out would then fail to have a contiguous district. Also, one goal of historic districts is that over time the buildings are reinvested in and brought back to their historic appearance. Ryan O'Leary grew up in Iowa City and appreciates both sides to this argument, they are multi- faceted and more than just two sides. O'Leary would like to say he is impartial however Roffman is a very close friend and mentor and they attended Riverfront Crossing meetings together, went on the walking tours with the consultants, he personally participated in helping the City buy UniverCity houses, advocating for the brewer's house next to Brewery Square and consulting with the Wesley Foundation on if they would participate and let that go through. In that case of the property on Market Street, the boundary was clearly drawn, not on the property line but on the area it was intended to preserve. O'Leary would like to have the Commission evoke the idea that 10 or 20 years from now being able to look at the climate of historic preservation of this community and take it very seriously. The pendulum swings back and forth in the court of public opinion and the cottages are not a good justification to over reach in this instance and instead will set a bad precedent, incite property owners to do devious and malicious things to historic properties, and further endanger the general public perception of preservation. There are people who have very strong feelings about historic properties that are very disenfranchised and disenchanted with the historic preservation process. Even people who have served on the Historic Preservation Commission become very frustrated with lack of a broader scope. He feels this designation is punishment for the way the Roffman's have treated these properties over time. They could have taken historic elements off these properties, they could have used inferior materials, and the last acquisition of 113 was unrecognizable as historic with the broken staircases and crumbling exterior. In the future O'Leary would be hard pressed to advise folks to maintain or restore their properties to their original glory if it would only subject them to this type of acquisition. Freerks noted her disagreement and feels that fear of what a property owner may or may not do is not a threat that concerns her. She does not see this proposal as punishment for the Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 11 of 16 cottages, and this proposal does meet the Comprehensive Plan in her opinion. O'Leary added that 604, 612, and 614 South Clinton Street are less qualified to be included in historic. He does feel that preserving 624 South Clinton Street should be a goal based on the criteria listed earlier. Richard Carlson is the co-author of original 2015 report is obviously in favor of the rezoning and of the historic district. He noted this area is in the County Seat Addition of Iowa City which was platted two years after the Original Town Plat. This whole area is as old as Iowa City itself. It has been complete obliterated except for a tiny handful of properties of historic structures, this being the most important one. There are buildings in this area that are unlike anything else in Iowa City. 530, 604, 612 and 624 South Clinton Street are all architecturally unlike anything else you will see anywhere else in the city including the historic districts. As far as 614 South Clinton Street (the Donohoe House) he acknowledges if it were a whole district of buildings that looked like this one it would not be a historic district, it is added mainly because it keeps the continuity from north to south. On the other hand, Carlson did recommend this house as being eligible as a contributing element of the district because it contains the original massing, the roof line, and there are architectural details on the back of the house as well. Miklo noted there has been a lot of discussion on what qualifies for a historic building or not, in the Zoning Ordinance that is outlined as the role of the Historic Preservation Commission to make that recommendation to Council. The Planning and Zoning Commission's role is to make a recommendation as to whether this complies with the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning and Zoning Commission is not being asked to judge whether these buildings are historic. That determination is for the Historic Preservation Commission. Freerks noted the discussion of this topic is different than some as there is not a plan that the Commission can tweak, what is before them is a proposal that has been researched and outlined and the role of the Planning and Zoning Commission is only to review that proposal with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, there is no negotiation or discussion in what the Commission can do here regarding taking some properties out. Signs disagreed and said the Commission negotiates on things all the time. He feels there are opportunities within this block to satisfy the needs of both parties. He added that both the Riverfront Crossings Plan and the Comprehensive Plan are relatively new documents in the scheme of the history of Iowa City and they speak to the desire of the community and residents at that time of drafting. In many discussions it's all about looking forward but he feels there is also an obligation to look back, for example when someone has owned properties for 50 years and now we are making decisions based on a plan that is less than 10 years old. Freerks acknowledged that but reiterated what the role of the Planning and Zoning Commission is for this situation. Hektoen added that the whole notion of zoning is a police power, the Code is changed all the time to respond to public health, safety, welfare concerns and the plans are adopted after a lengthy process, it is a constantly changing area of the law and the courts give great deference to those decisions made by city councils. A property owner doesn't have vested rights in a zoning designation. Changes to the zoning designations are made through processes with due deliberation. Freerks feels the tools are all here for everyone to benefit, she understands the property owners concerns but this process was set into motion some time ago, when Sabin was taken down the Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 12 of 16 mitigation of money was put forward to have this historical study completed. She feels the Historical Preservation Commission has whittled this down to a very small area and it is now reviewed to see if it complies with what was outlined by City Council in the creation of the Comprehensive Plan and Riverfront Crossings Plan, and it is the place of the Planning and Zoning Commission to answer to that. Miklo added that plan that proceeded the current plan was the Near South Side Plan from 1992 and it also identified these as potential historic buildings. Signs recognizes the community response, it started with the cottages, and the City had to take a step back and look at this issue and he does applaud the Historic Preservation Commission and the work they are doing. He stated he is not questioning nor making any judgement on whether these properties are historic or not, he just struggles with the property right issues of land owners, which is the foundation of our country, it is the preamble to the National Association of Realtors mission and motto. Hektoen noted the time for the discussion is when Mr. Roffman decides to develop or someone wants to buy his transfer of development rights. Roffman stated he respectively disagreed with what Hektoen is saying as it has been his experience with every level of the City Government that once it is in a plan there is no changing it. Miklo noted the Riverfront Crossings Zone is a Form -Based Code versus a Use -Based Code and that allows for the Riverfront Crossings area to have either residential or commercial as well as institutional uses. It does dictate the form of the building on the property, the shape of the building, the materials. It is also the one district where the City does have transfer of developmental rights where the square footage that is not available for development (due to the historic designation) could be transferred elsewhere in the District. Freerks added that is not something that is allowed in any other district in the City. Roffman stated he had a property on Iowa Avenue (923 Iowa Avenue) that the tornado decapitated the third floor, the insurance company recommended to demolish the building so they did so and then drew plans on what could be built there based on the zoning codes and throughout planning and meetings all agreed on the proposal until the 11'" hour when one of the Commissioners decided the proposed building was too big. It took a year and a half of additional meetings it was finally decided he could build the building. This is why he has little faith in this situation that it will work out in his favor when he decides he wants to develop his properties on South Clinton Street. Freerks acknowledged that time after the tornado was difficult as there was so many damaged properties. She added she was glad Iowa Avenue had been designated as historic prior to the tornado otherwise the rebuilding of Iowa Avenue would look different. Freerks closed the public hearing. Hensch moved to recommend approval of REZ18-00017, an application to designate the Clinton Street and Railroad Depot Historic District as a Historic District Overlay (OHD) zone. Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 13 of 16 Parsons seconded the motion. Hensch asked why the train station/depot would be included on this application when it is already on the historic register. Miklo stated one of the themes of this District is the association with the railroad so it is part of the neighborhood. Parsons added it speaks to the connectivity of all the properties. Hektoen stated that listing something on a National Register does not mean it has to comply with the local policies, therefore it would need to be on the local registry as well. Martin noted we do not live in a vacuum and what happened with the cottages did shape how these things are handled. When she looked at all the documentation she was actually disappointed that the proposed district was only a small snippet, she liked the Carlson/Ingalls original proposal. Because of where this is, she is actually a fan of historic homes mixed in with high rises and feels the community wants this mix and it is necessary to attract young people and retirees alike to the area. Martin feels this proposal absolutely meets what was put into place in the Comprehensive Plan and it adds richness to Iowa City. Parsons agrees and feels the community does want to see historic areas preserved. He also loves to see the mix of modern and historic while walking through a neighborhood. Hensch stated he wished the proposed District was larger, he noted this is the original part of Iowa City and there is hardly anything left. He feels it is a beautiful portion of the City and the historic nature of the area actually increases the value. Signs also was disappointed that the District was whittled down and that is part of his frustration and questioning of the remainder as it seems a bit arbitrary to him. He feels it should be all or none. He has nothing against historic properties and likes the blending of neighborhoods. He struggles with how developing these plans can significantly alter the value or potential value of properties. Hektoen stated value is only a consideration. It is a concern if the zoning results in no viable economic return on the properties affected. Freerks feels this proposal does meet the Comprehensive Plan and Riverfront Crossings Plan. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0 (Signs abstained). REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ18-00013/SUB18-00006): Discussion of an 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 1 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. Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 14 of 16 Miklo stated staff is requesting this item be deferred indefinitely. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one Freerks closed the public hearing. Parsons moved to defer REZ18-00013/SUB18-00006 indefinitely. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ18-00005/SUB18-00005): The application, submitted by Bedrock, LLC for a rezoning of approximately 18.03 acres from Interim Development Multifamily Residential (ID-RM) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Single Family Residential (OPD/ RS-5) zone and Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multifamily Residential (OPD-12) zone and a preliminary plat of Cherry Creek Subdivision, a 17-lot, 18.03-acre residential subdivision located east of S. Gilbert St & south of Waterfront Dr. Miklo stated the applicant is requesting this item be deferred until the July 5 meeting. Freerks opened the public hearing. Seeing no one Freerks closed the public hearing. Signs moved to defer REZ1 8-00005/SUB 18-00005 until the July 5 meeting. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JUNE 7, 2018 Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes of June 7, 2018. Signs seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Miklo noted they have scheduled a joint meeting with the City Council for Tuesday, July 3 to discuss the rezoning on Burlington, Capitol and Court Streets. Planning and Zoning Commission June 21, 2018 Page 15 of 16 Miklo also acknowledged and thanked Freerks for her service to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Adjournment: Parsons moved to adjourn. Signs seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2017 - 2018 10/19 11 /2 12/7 12/21 1 /4 1 /18 2/15 3/1 (W.S) 3/12 3/15 (W.S.) 4/2 4/5 (W.S) 4/16 4/19 5/3 5/17 6/21 DYER, CAROLYN X O/E X X X X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X O/E FREERKS, ANN X X O/E X X O/E X X X X X X X X O/E X X HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X X O/E O/E X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X X X O/E O/E X X X O/E X X X X X X X X PARSONS, MAX X X X X X X O/E X X X X X 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 X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X X X X X X O/E KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member