Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Agenda Packet 5.04.2022PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Wednesday, May 4, 2022 Formal Meeting – 6:00 PM Emma Harvat Hall Iowa City City Hall 410 E. Washington Street Agenda: 1.Call to Order 2.Roll Call 3.Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda Development Items 4.Case No. CREZ21-0004 Location: North of Kountry Ln and west of Sycamore Greenway, Unincorporated Johnson County An application for a conditional use permit to allow an electrical substation on approximately 5.82-acres of land zoned County Residential (R) in unincorporated Johnson County within the City’s growth area. 5.Case No. REZ22-0005 Location: South of Lehman Avenue An application for a rezoning of approximately 4.7 acres of land from Interim Development Multi-Family Residential (ID-RM) to Neighborhood Public Zone (P-1). 6.Case No. SUB22-0002 Location: South of Wetherby Park and east of Covered Wagon Drive An application for a preliminary plat for Sandhill Estates – Part Five, an 8.88-acre subdivision containing 18 residential lots. 7.Consideration of Meeting Minutes: April 20, 2022 8.Planning and Zoning Information 9.Adjournment Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting May 4, 2022 If you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact Anne Russett, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5251 or anne-russett@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings Formal: May 18 / June 1 / June 15 Informal: Scheduled as needed. Date: May 4, 2022 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Emani Brinkman, Planning Intern & Anne Russett, Senior Planner, Neighborhood & Development Services Re: CREZ21-0004 Conditional Use Permit for MidAmerican Electrical Substation in Unincorporated Johnson County Background Information: MidAmerican Energy Company has submitted a conditional use permit application to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment for the allowance of an electrical substation located on the Southeast corner of parcel 1026176002 located directly north of Kountry Ln and west of the Sycamore Greenway, in unincorporated Johnson County. The subject property is located within City’s Growth Area in the City/County Fringe Area. The Johnson County Unified Development Code requires that cities be allowed to review conditional use permits within their extraterritorial jurisdiction (the area covered by the City/County Fringe Area Agreement). It is the role of the Planning and Zoning Commission to make a recommendation on the conditional use permit to the City Council. The City Council will then make a recommendation to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment. Conditional use permits in Johnson County require a 4/5 majority vote of the Board of Adjustment to approve if the use is opposed by a vote of the City Council. The subject property is zoned County Residential (R). Adjacent properties to the immediate north, east and west are also zoned County Residential (R). Properties to the immediate south are within City limits are zoned Low Density Multi-Family (RM-12). Proposed Land Use: The proposed substation is intended to provide electrical distribution infrastructure to serve new development in Iowa City’s south, central, and downtown planning Districts. The proposed substation site is approximately 5.82 acres. Current and Future Land Use: The subject parcel will likely be included in the future expansion of the City’s limits. The County’s Future Land Use Map indicates that the subject parcel is appropriate for Agricultural land uses. There are no structures currently located on the site. The subject property is located inside of the City’s Growth Area and the City’s updated South District Plan identifies this area as part of the South District Form Based Code (adopted 10-05- 2021). The South District Plan Future Land Use Map identifies this area as appropriate for Neighborhood Small (T4NS) related uses and also envisions an expansion of the Sycamore Greenway in this area. The intent of a T4NS land use category is to create a walkable neighborhood environment with a small-to-medium footprint, moderate-intensity housing choices, and short walking distances to neighborhood serving retail and services. Basic utility uses, like the substation, are provisionally allowed in T4NS zones provided they are completely enclosed within a building. Substations cannot be enclosed within a building. The County’s Future Land Use Map land use category for this area is Agricultural (A). However, this area is currently zoned County Residential (R). May 4, 2022 Page 2 City Analysis: Although the land to the north and west of the proposed substation is existing farm fields, the Sycamore Greenway is immediately to the east and there is an existing multi-family residential development directly south. The Sycamore Greenway is an open space area maintained by the City with public trails accessible to residents for recreation. Staff has concerns related to the proposed transmission lines that would completely encircle the existing residential area and run along the Sycamore Greenway. Specifically, the proposed transmission lines would run along the north, east, south, and west of the existing residential uses. Additionally, the proposed driveway/access to the substation is in a location that the City would not typically approve since it is parallel to an existing street (Kountry Ln). Furthermore, the proposed layout will make it difficult to integrate the substation into the vision established by the South District Plan. Staff understands that electric substations are needed in order for the city to grow. With the adoption of the updated South District Plan and the associated form-based code this area is intended to develop over the next several years. The City has been working with MidAmerican Energy Company on locating a substation further south closer to the City’s wastewater treatment facility. MidAmerican has also submitted a rezoning application for this alternative site. Staff would like to continue to work with MidAmerican on locating a substation on this site since it will not impact existing residents and the Sycamore Greenway Trail. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of an application submitted by MidAmerican Energy Company for a County conditional use permit to allow for an electrical substation located north of Kountry Ln and west of the Sycamore Greenway in unincorporated Johnson County. The Johnson County Board of Adjustment is the ultimate decision maker regarding County conditional use permits. Therefore, if they approve the application, staff recommends the approval include the following conditions: 1. Dedication of the extension of the Soccer Park Rd right-of-way to the City of Iowa City subject to review and approval of construction drawings by the City Engineer and in a fee simple form subject to review and approval by the City Attorney’s Office. 2. City review of the site plan per the City/County Fringe Area Agreement and to ensure the location of the transmission lines do not impact the trail network and are located on the north side for the portion that runs along the Lehman Ave right-of-way. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Fringe Area Map 4. Application Information Approved by: ________________________________________________ Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services BLAZINGSTAR DRSYCAMORESTSYCAMORE ST SE MOIRA AVE SE SYCAMORESTSE KOUNTRY LN KOUNTRYLNSELEHMANAVEMAUREEN TER SEDANIEL PL SEDANIEL PL SOCCERPARKRDJohnson County PD & S CREZ21-0004North of Kountry Ln. east of Sycamore St. µ 0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles Prepared By: Joshua EngelbrechtDate Prepared: October 2021 An application submitted by Mid-American Energy Company, for a conditional use permit for an electrical substation on 5.57 acres of property located north of Kountry Ln. and east of Sycamore St. Iowa City Corporate Limits Existing Parcel Substation Site BLAZINGSTAR DRSYCAMORESTSYCAMORE ST SES Y C A M ORESTSEMOIRA AVE SE KOUNTRY LN KOUNTRYLNSELEHMANAVEMAUREEN TER SEDANIEL PL SEDANIEL PL SOCCERPARKRDID-RM ID-RS P1 RM12 RR1 RS12 RS8 Johnson County PD & S CREZ21-0004North of Kountry Ln. east of Sycamore St. µ 0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles Prepared By: Joshua EngelbrechtDate Prepared: October 2021 An application submitted by Mid-American Energy Company, for a conditional use permit for an electrical substation on 5.57 acres of property located north of Kountry Ln. and east of Sycamore St. Iowa City Corporate Limits Existing Parcel Substation Site BLAZINGSTAR DRSYCAMORESTSYCAMORE ST SE MOIRA AVE SE SYCAMORESTSE KOUNTRY LN KOUNTRYLNSELEHMANAVEMAUREEN TER SEDANIEL PL SEDANIEL PL SOCCERPARKRDJohnson County PD & S CREZ21-0004North of Kountry Ln. east of Sycamore St. µ 0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles Prepared By: Joshua EngelbrechtDate Prepared: October 2021 An application submitted by Mid-American Energy Company, for a conditional use permit for an electrical substation on 5.57 acres of property located north of Kountry Ln. and east of Sycamore St. Iowa City Corporate Limits Existing Parcel Substation Site STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ22-0005 Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Date: May 4, 2022 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Civil Engineering Consultants, Inc Marty Dostalik dostalik@ceclac.com Contact Person: Lillis O’Malley Chris Pose cpose@lolaw.com Owner: Lake Calvin Properties, LLC & Sycamore Apartments Requested Action: Rezoning to Neighborhood Public (P-1) Purpose: Development of an electric substation Location: South of Lehman Ave and west of the Sycamore Greenway Location Map: Size: Approximately 4.7 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Undeveloped / Agriculture, Interim Development-Multi-Family (ID-RM) Zone Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Undeveloped / Agriculture, ID- RM South: Undeveloped / Agriculture, ID-RM East: Undeveloped / Agriculture, ID- RM West: Undeveloped / Agriculture, Interim Development Single-Family (ID-RS) 2 Comprehensive Plan: 2-8 Dwelling Units per Acre District Plan: South District, Form-Based Land Use Neighborhood Open Space District: N/A Public Meeting Notification: Staff posted rezoning signs and send out neighbor letters to property owners and individuals residing within 500’ of the proposed rezoning File Date: 3/31/2022 45 Day Limitation Period: 5/15/2022 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicant, MidAmerican Energy Company, has requested a rezoning of approximately 4.7 acres of undeveloped land in the South District to Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone in order to develop an electric substation for the area. MidAmerican Energy Company has been searching for an appropriate location for an electric substation in south Iowa City and has identified the property south of Lehman Avenue and west of the Sycamore Greenway. In addition to the proposed rezoning, the applicant has also submitted a County Conditional Use Permit application for a different location north of Lehman Avenue (CREZ21-0004). While the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council will review that application and provide a recommendation to the County Board of Adjustment, the final decision is made by the County. At the Planning & Zoning Commission’s April 20, 2022 meeting, the Commission considered a text amendment to the P-1 zone. The proposed amendment would allow basic utility uses, such as an electric substation, by special exception in the P-1 zone. The Commission recommended approval of the text amendment. The City Council will likely hold a public hearing on May 17, 2022 to consider the text amendment. The applicant chose not hold a Good Neighbor meeting, but did reach out to neighboring property owners (Attachment 5). ANALYSIS: Current Zoning: The property is currently zoned Interim Development-Multi-Family (ID-RM). The purpose of the ID-zones is to provide for areas of managed growth in which agricultural and other nonurban uses of land may continue until such time as the city is able to provide city services and urban development can occur. The interim development zone is the default zoning district to which all undeveloped areas should be classified until city services are provided. Upon provision of city services, the city or the property owner may initiate rezoning to zones consistent with the comprehensive plan. The ID-RM zone allows a limited number of land uses, including but not limited to single-family residential, plant related agriculture, animal related commercial uses, religious institutions, and communication transmission facilities. Basic utility uses are not allowed in the ID-RM zone. 3 Proposed Zoning: The P-1 zone has historically been used to identify land owned by public entities. However, staff has proposed an amendment to the P-1 zone (REZ22-0002) in order to focus less on ownership and more on land use. With the proposed amendment basic utility uses would be allowed subject to a special exception, which would need to be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Staff is recommending a condition of the rezoning that prior to site plan approval, the owner shall prepare an Auditor’s Plat of Survey to align with the rezoning boundaries. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The South District Plan future land use map identifies the subject property as being appropriate for form-based land uses, primarily Transect 3: Suburban Neighborhood General and a small portion of Transect 4: General Urban Neighborhood Medium. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map shows the area as residential development at 2-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre. The South District Plan also includes a conceptual vision of a highly interconnected trail and street network. Due to the nature of this development, the large site required and the proposed use, the street network identified in the area of the proposed rezoning is not practical. That said, if the area surrounding the proposed substation is developed under the form-based zone regulations a highly interconnected street network will emerge around the substation. The Comprehensive Plan contains policies for growth and infrastructure that guide development, including how public funds for infrastructure and improvements should be invested. The focus of the City’s growth policies is to prioritize development in areas best served by current and planned infrastructure. Doing so provides the highest levels of service at an efficient cost. Goals throughout the plan reflect these policies, such as the housing strategy to “Concentrate new development in areas contiguous to existing neighborhoods where it is most cost effective to extend infrastructure and services.” While most strategies do not speak directly to infrastructure provision, they emphasize the importance of well-planned utilities, without which the City could not continue to grow and thrive. The South District Plan also includes policies related to the development of new neighborhoods, including the need for compact development that features a mix of housing types and small neighborhood nodes. While the proposed location of the electric substation is not contiguous with existing development, the location is more suitable for a basic utility use because it is near existing transmission lines and is adjacent to the 1,000-foot buffer from the wastewater treatment plan. The plan notes that future growth near the wastewater treatment plant buffer area should “take its proximity into consideration prior to development.” It is also located within City limits and provides a critical piece of infrastructure that paves the way for future growth in the South Planning District. In addition, installing a substation prior to the surrounding neighborhood, those moving to the area are aware of its presence in advance, rather than locating an electric substation near or within an existing neighborhood. Compatibility with Neighborhood: The proposed rezoning is in a location that has not yet been developed. The land immediately surrounding the site remains undeveloped. The closest residential development is to north of Lehman Avenue. Environmentally Sensitive Areas: Based on the information provided by the applicant it is staff’s understanding that the site contains hydric soils. Staff has requested that the applicant submit a sensitive areas development plan along with a wetlands delineation report. It is staff’s understanding that the wetland report will be available prior to the May 4th Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. 4 Access and Street Design: Access to the site will be provided via Lehman Avenue. Lehman Avenue is currently unimproved at the access point to the proposed substation. Therefore, staff recommends a condition that prior to site plan approval, the owner extends Lehman Avenue to the access point of the substation with chip seal materials approved by the City Engineer. Staff also recommends as a condition of the rezoning that the owner demonstrates to the City access to the subject property from Lehman Avenue, which may be in the form of a Temporary Public Access Easement agreement. The access easement shall be released upon dedication of right- of-way when the land is final platted. Such access area shall be in a location approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Neighborhood Open Space: The proposed rezoning will not result in residential development; therefore, the neighborhood open space provisions do not apply. Storm Water Management: Compliance with the City’s storm water management ordinance will be determined upon review of a site plan. If the applicant decides that it does not want to provide storm water management on-site, they will be required to obtain an easement over and across adjacent land to allow overland flow of storm water to the Sycamore Greenway, which acts as a regional stormwater detention facility. NEXT STEPS: Upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council will set a public hearing to consider the rezoning application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: At this time staff is still awaiting receipt of a wetlands delineation report. In order to recommend approval of the rezoning as proposed the wetlands report must make a determination that no wetlands are present and be approved by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. If the applicant can demonstrate these items are satisfied, staff recommends approval of REZ22- 0005, an application to rezone approximately 4.7 acres of land south of Lehman Ave and west of the Sycamore Greenway to the Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to site plan approval, Owner shall cause Lehman Avenue to be extended through any access point established for the subject property with chip seal materials, subject to approval of the construction plans by the City Engineer. 2. Prior to site plan approval, Owner shall have prepared, approved by the City, and recorded an Auditor’s Plat of Survey to align with the rezoning boundaries. 3. Prior to site plan approval Owner shall demonstrate to the City that it has vehicular access to the subject property from Lehman Avenue, which may be in the form of a Temporary Public Access Easement agreement, which shall be released upon dedication of right-of- way when the servient land is final platted. Such access area shall be in a location approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney’s Office. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Aerial Photograph 3. Applicant Statement 4. Applicant Sketch of Site 5. Applicant Neighbor Meeting Summary 5 Approved by: _________________________________________________ Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services S Y C A M ORES T SESYCAMORE ST SE KOUNTRY LN KOUNTRYLN SELEHMANAVE HARMONY L N SE IO W A CI TYTREATM E N T PLANTRDLLOYD AVE SE ANDERSON AVE SE SO C C E R P A R KRDREZ22-0005MidAmerican Energy Company Substationµ 0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles Prepared By: Emani BrinkmanDate Prepared: April 2022 An application submitted by submitted by Civil EngineeringConsultants, Inc., on behalf of MidAmerican Energy Company for approval of a rezoning of approximately 4.7 acres of property located at Lehman Avenue from Interim Development Multi-Family Residential(ID-RM) to Neighborhood Public Zone (P-1). CECCivil Engineering Consultants, Inc.2400 86th Street . Unit 12 . Des Moines, Iowa 50322515.276.4884 . mail@ceclac.comQ:\E-FILES\E-8000\E8314\_C3D Drawings\Base Design Files\Layout\E8314 Option Plan.dwg, 3/29/2022 12:04:17 PM, mdostalik, 1:2 STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: SUB22-0002 Sandhill Estates – Part Five Prepared by: Parker Walsh, Associate Planner Date: May 4, 2022 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Hall & Hall Engineers Inc. Susan Forinash susan@halleng.com Contact Person: Hall & Hall Engineers Inc. Brian Vogel brian@halleng.com Owner: Prairie Heights Land, LLC Jason Walton (319) 499-8836 jwalton@southgateco.com Requested Action: Approval of preliminary plat Purpose: Construction of Sandhill Estates – Part 5; a residential subdivision Location: South of Wetherby Park and east of Covered Wagon Drive Location Map: Size: 8.88 Acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Undeveloped/Vacant Open Space, Low Density Single-Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: OPD/RS-5, Low Density Single- Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay P1, Neighborhood Public South: OPD/RS-5. Low Density Single- Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay East: RS- 8, Medium Density Single- Family Residential West: OPD/RS-5, Low Density Single- Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay P1, Neighborhood Public Comprehensive Plan: 2-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre District Plan: South District Neighborhood Open Space District: S-1 Public Meeting Notification: Property owners south, east, and west of the subject property in the Sandhill Estates development received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. Subdivision signs were posted on the site at the end of Covered Wagon Drive. File Date: March 24, 2022 45 Day Limitation Period: May 8, 2022 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicant Hall & Hall Engineers Inc. is requesting approval of the preliminary plat of Sandhill Estates – Part 5, an 8.88-acre plat containing 18 single-family residential lots located south of Wetherby Park and east of Covered Wagon Drive. The plat shows the extension of Covered Wagon Drive and Sand Prairie Drive and the creation of Frontier Loop. A planned development overlay rezoning and preliminary plat was approved in 2004 for Sandhill Estates that included a 379 lot, 146.48-acre residential subdivision, 119.94 acres of which would be rezoned to OPDH-5, now referred to as OPD/RS-5. Sandhill Estates required a Planned Development Overlay rezoning due to the need for clustered, conversation design in order to preserve open space and sensitive areas, including the approximate 17.4 acres of open space (now referred to as Sand Prairie). The OPD allowed for narrower lots than what is permitted by an RS-5 zone, allowing the necessary design approach to preserve land and sensitive features. The rezoning included the following conditions: A. A separate left turn lane on Gilbert Street for southbound to eastbound traffic must be constructed before more than 25 units are constructed. This can be added to the existing roadway as a temporary feature or can be constructed as part of the permanent improvements, including a four-lane PCC roadway with left turn lane. B. Vehicular access to lots 161-204, 204-330 shall be from the alley. C. The design of the homes on lots 161-204, 304-330 shall be from the alley i. A variety of facades and variation on rooflines, such as the use of gable and hip roofs, to minimize a cookie cutter appearance and a different façade at least every third unit is required. ii. The sidewalks of lots 161, 177, 178, 190, 191, 204, 304, 315, 317, and 330 that face the street, should include elements of the front façade, such as windows and fenestration, doorways, trim and moulding, and roofline. It is not contemplated that porches will be required to wrap around to the side of the dwelling. iii. Front porches that are at least six feet in depth shall be included. iv. Slightly staggered footprints, also to avoid a monotonous appearance are required. v. Ten feet between buildings to meet normal setback requirements between buildings is required, and to allow for eaves or overhangs at the side of buildings. vi. Planning and Zoning Commission review of the building elevations and footprints as a condition of approval of final plat is required. D. For lots less than 60 feet in lot width with no alley access, the front yard setback shall be 25 feet. Of the conditional zoning requirements outlined above, only condition D applies to Sandhill Estates Part 5 as proposed development would include lots with less than 60 feet lot width and must be setback at least 25 feet. Condition A has already been satisfied and conditions B and C do not apply to the subject area. Sandhill Estates has been developed in parts starting in 2004 after the approval of the 379 lot, 119.94-acre rezoning and preliminary plat. The timeline of development is as follows: 1. 2004 – The Sandhill Estates Part 1 final plat was approved for 56 single-family residential lots over 59.33 acres. Outlot M, containing 17.74 acres of public open space, was dedicated to the City. This was , well over the 2.6-acre requirement and satisfying the neighborhood open space requirements for all future Sandhill development. 2. 2004 – The Sandhill Estates Part 2 final plat was approved and created 21 lots on approximately 4.75 acres and resulted in the construction of Keel Boat Loop. The 2004 approved preliminary plat expired in 2006 after the final platting of Sandhill Estates Parts 1 and 2. 3. 2014 – The Sandhill Estates Part 3 preliminary and final plats were approved for a 25 lot, 7.76-acre development. 4. 2014-2016 – The Sandhill Estates Part 4 preliminary plat was approved in 2014 and the final plat was approved in 2016 for a 22 lot, 7.74-acre development. 5. 2022 – Sandhill Estates Part 5 seeks approval of an 18 lot, 8.88-acre development. The applicant held a Good Neighbor Meeting on April 12, 2022. ANALYSIS: Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan and the South District Plan encourage urban growth through compact and connected neighborhoods. They also have similar goals to enhance streets, sidewalks, and trails, while also providing safe and pedestrian friendly street systems. The preliminary plat demonstrates a commitment to these goals by providing wide interconnected sidewalks, as well as a roundabout to calm traffic that as noted in the South District Plan, “offers an opportunity to enhance the appearance and identity of public streets”. The subject plat proposes to further incorporate an interconnected street system through the extension of Covered Wagon Drive and Sand Prairie Drive. As Sandhill Estates continues to develop, the interconnected street and sidewalk systems will further provide the community with a walkable neighborhood a short distance from Wetherby Park and Grant Wood Elementary School. The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map identifies the subject property as appropriate for development at 2-8 dwelling units per acre. With the South District Plan amendment from 2021, the subject property is identified as appropriate for development consistent with the Transect 3 Neighborhood Edge (T3NE) form-based land use category. T3NE is described as “A walkable neighborhood environment of detached, small-to-large building footprint, low-intensity housing choices from House Large, Duplex Side-by-Side to Cottage Court, supporting and within short walking distance to neighborhood-serving retail, food and service uses. Buildings are house- scale and detached in nature. Both design site widths and building footprints are small - to-large with medium-to-large front setbacks and medium side setbacks. Homes are up to 2.5 stories tall, and frontage types include Porch, Dooryard and Stoop”. Although the proposed development will not incorporate a variety of housing types, the preliminary plat is consistent with the current zoning designation. It also incorporates sidewalk and street connections envisioned by the comprehensive plan and South District Plan. Subdivision Design: The proposed subdivision contains 18 single-family residential lots and Outlot A, which is intended for storm sewer and storm water conveyance. The preliminary plat proposes to further incorporate an interconnected street system through the extension of Covered Wagon Drive and Sand Prairie Drive. Each will provide a stub for future development connectivity and intersect at a roundabout. The applicant also proposes Frontier Loop, a loop street extending off Sand Prairie Drive to the east. Frontier Loop has 9 residential lots, including 3 lots with less than 60’ lot width, requiring the 25’ front setback outlined in the Conditional Zoning Agreement . The sidewalk system proposed extends from existing stubs and no sidewalk is fewer than 5’ wide, with the extension of an 8’ sidewalk along the north side of Covered Wagon Drive. The proposed sidewalks would end in stubs at the end of Covered Wagon Drive and Sand Prairie Drive, providing connectivity opportunities for future development. Block length remains consistent with the city’s subdivision regulations, a collector street, is broken up with blocks intersecting between the 300-600 feet preferred range. The roundabout would also provide a traffic calming feature. The stormwater management basin, Outlot A, will be the source of offsite retention for storm water conveyance for Sandhill Estates – Part 5. Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The applicant has submitted a sensitive areas development plan due to the presence of sensitive features. The site contains 0.01 acres of steep slopes. No critical or protected slopes are located on the site. The proposed development will impact 100% of the steep slopes. The site also contains 0.32 acres of hydric soils. Due to the presence of hydric soils the applicant submitted a wetland delineation report. The wetland delineation report identifies approximately 0.55 acres of wetlands located within a manmade stormwater detention basin. 0.06 acres is considered emergent wetland and the remaining 0.49 acres are manmade wetlands. The sensitive areas ordinance outlines situations where development is exempt from the requirements of the sensitive areas ordinance , including stormwater facilities. According to 14-5I-2C-4 “normal and routine maintenance of existing drainage and stormwater management facilities are exempt from the requirements of this article. This exemption includes vegetative maintenance for access and stormwater/flood control purposes within and adjacent to drainageways. Except for temporary storage outside a wetland or water body, placement of fill or dredge spoils is not exempt under this subsection C4. Groundwater monitoring wells, when constructed to standards approved by the city, are exempt . Per the preliminary plat, the existing stormwater basin will be used for stormwater management for this plat. Staff has reviewed the wetlands delineation report and determined that the stormwater management facility is exempt from the sensitive areas ordinance. Per the wetland report the wetlands are located within a manmade stormwater management facility and the sensitive areas ordinance exempts stormwater management facilities for the purposes of stormwater management and flood control purposes within and adjacent to drainageways. The stormwater management facility is located within a drainageway. Per the wetlands report, the wetlands drain to the southeast into a storm sewer culvert. As the area continues to develop, the storm water management facility will need to be maintained to ensure the proper management of storm water. Archaeological Studies: The applicant commissioned an archaeological study in 2002, completed by the Lewis-Berger Group in October 2002. No previously unrecorded prehistoric or historic archaeological sites were found on the property. Artifacts from one previously recorded site were recovered, the site had previously been determined to be not eligible for listing within the National Register of Historic Places. The conclusion of the archaeological study is that no further exploration can be recommended. Neighborhood Open Space: Approximately 17.74 acres of open space was dedicated in 2004 as Sand Prairie Park. The dedication was well over the 2.6-acre requirement and satisfies the requirements for all future Sandhill Estates development, including the proposed preliminary plat. Storm Water Management: Storm water management will be provided via the proposed regional retention basin, Outlot A. Public Works has reviewed and requires the proposed regional retention basin include sediment forebay or another acceptable pre-treatment practice at drainage outlets, as well as additional measures be taken to prevent pond stagnation. Due to the applicant providing an updated preliminary plat that includes the proposed regional retention basin being platted as Outlot A, City Engineering requires a revised stormwater report. The retention basin must also have at least 25% of the surface area of the pond exceeding a depth of 8 feet after construction. Infrastructure Fees: Required fees include a water main extension fee of $503.57 per acre and a sanitary sewer tap on fee of $1,796.50 per acre for the entire subdivision. NEXT STEPS: Upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the preliminary plat will be considered for approval by the City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of SUB22-0002, an application submitted by Hall and Hall Engineers for a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Sandhill Estates – Part 5, an 18-lot, 8.88-acre residential subdivision located south of Wetherby Park and east of Covered Wagon Drive. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan Approved by: _________________________________________________ Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services WAGONWHEELDRARMST RONGDRDICKENSON LN TERRAPIN DR S A N D P R A IR IE DRC O V E R E D W A G O N D R RUSSEL L DRKEELBOATLOO PLANGENBE RG AVE SUB22-0002Sandhill Estates - Part 5µ 0 0.035 0.070.0175 Miles Prepared By: Emani BrinkmanDate Prepared: April 2022 An application submitted by Hall and Hall Engineers Inc. on behalf of SG & M Properties, LLC for a preliminary plat of 8.88 acres located south of Wetherby Park and east of Armstrong drive. IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA(SCALE: 1"=500')LOCATION MAP PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS PLAN FORSANDHILL ESTATES - PART 5 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWAUTILITY AND EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBERSHALL AND HALL PROJECT NUMBER:CITY FILE NUMBER:WASTEWATER DIVISION COLLECTIONS MID-AMERICAN ENERGYIOWA ONE CALL (UTILITIES)WATER DEPARTMENTPOLICE DEPARTMENTENGINEERING DEPARTMENTFIRE DEPARTMENTEMERGENCYEMERGENCY(319)-339-1156(800)-292-8989911911PLAN APPROVED BY:CITY CLERK DATE(319)-356-5138(319)-356-5275(319)-356-5260(319)-356-5162(319)-631-1144NOTESTHE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED IN THESE DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED INACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF IOWA CITY ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL AND SUDAS.PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS PLAN FOR SANDHILL ESTATES PART 5 SG & M PROPERTIES, LLC%DAVE OYLER755 MORMON TREK BOULEVARDP.O.BOX 1907IOWA CITY, IA 52246PH:319-337-4195FAX:319-337-9823EMAIL: DAVE@NAVIGATEHOMESIOWA.COMBRIAN VOGEL, PE1860 BOYSON RD.HIAWATHA, IA 52233PH: 319-362-9548FAX: 319-362-7595EMAIL: BRIAN@HALLENG.COMC. JOSEPH HOLLAND123 NORTH LINN STREETSUITE 300IOWA CITY, IA 52245EXISTING: VACANT LANDPROPOSED: LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIALOWNER'S ATTORNEYENGINEERUSEOWNERAPPLICANTREVISION DATE:INITIAL SUBMITTAL DATE:CAD File: I:\projects\20000\20034\20034-17-5-Sandhill Estates-Part 5\DWG\Plats\20034-17-5 PP v6.dwg Date Plotted : Apr 20, 2022 - 3:52pm Plotted By : BDVSHEET P1.0)COVERP2.0)SITE LAYOUT AND UTILITIESP3.0)OVERALL SITE GRADING & EROSION CONTROL AND SWPPP PLANP4.0)SENSITIVE AREASSHEET INDEXHORSESHOE CATCH BASIN W/FLUMEHORSESHOE CATCH BASIN W/O FLUMECABLE TV-OVERHEADCABLE TV-UNDERGROUNDCABLE TV PEDESTALTELEPHONE MANHOLEFLARED END SECTIONCLEANOUT, STORM OR SANITARYTRAFFIC SIGNAL W/MASTUTILITY/CONTROL CABINETTELEPHONE PEDESTALSANITARY MANHOLELIGHT POLE W/MASTLIGHT POLE W/O MASTTELEPHONE-UNDERGROUNDFIBER OPTIC-OVERHEADFIBER OPTIC-UNDERGROUNDELECTRIC-UNDERGROUNDTELEPHONE-OVERHEADELECTRIC-OVERHEADFORCE MAIN W/SIZEWATER MAIN W/SIZESTORM SEWER W/SIZESANITARY SEWER W/SIZEGAS VALVEORRA-5 INTAKERA-8 INTAKERA-6 INTAKESTORM MANHOLERA-3 INTAKEGRATE INTAKEGUY ANCHORGUY POLEPOWER POLETELEPHONE POLESTEAM800SILT FENCEFENCE LINECONTOUR LINEGASSUBDRAINFOUND RIGHT OF WAY RAILSECTION CORNER FOUND AS NOTEDSECTION CORNER SET AS NOTEDPLAT OR SURVEY BOUNDARYDECIDUOUS SHRUBTREE STUMPTREE LINE DRIP EDGECONIFEROUS SHRUB1/4-1/4 SECTION LINEDECIDUOUS TREECONIFEROUS TREEBUILDING SETBACK LINEEXISTING LOT LINE( )EASEMENT LINESECTION LINE1/4 SECTION LINEPLAT LOT LINECENTERLINECUT "X" IN CONCRETERECORDED ASFOUND SURVEY MONUMENT AS NOTEDSET ___ REBAR W/CAP NO.____WATER SHUTOFFWATER VALVEWATER BLOWOFFFIRE HYDRANTBOLLARDSTREET SIGNSOIL BORINGWELLBENCHMARKNOTE: THIS IS A STANDARD LEGEND. SOME ITEMS MAY NOT APPEAR ON DRAWINGS.SS8FM6W12ST18SANITARY SEWER W/SIZESTORM SEWER W/SIZEFORCE MAIN W/SIZEWATER MAIN W/SIZESANITARY MANHOLESTORM MANHOLEGRATE INTAKERA-3 INTAKERA-5 INTAKERA-6 INTAKERA-8 INTAKEHORSESHOE CATCH BASIN W/O FLUMEFLARED END SECTIONCLEANOUT, STORM OR SANITARYFIRE HYDRANTWATER VALVEWATER SHUTOFFWATER BLOWOFFORFLOODWAY LIMITSCITY CORPORATE LIMITSFLOODPLAIN LIMITSCITY CORPORATE LIMITSCORPwww.halleng.comLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURELAND DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGHALL & HALL ENGINEERS, INC.1860 BOYSON ROAD, HIAWATHA, IOWA 52233PHONE: (319) 362-9548 FAX: (319) 362-7595LAND SURVEYINGCIVIL ENGINEERINGPLANS SCALE CORRECTLY WHEN PLOTTED ON 22"x34" PAPERS GILBERT STMcCOLLISTER BLVDLANGENBERG AVERUSSELL DR BURNS AVEBRIAR DRTAYLOR DRWETHERBY PARKP - 1OP D - 5 OPD-5O P D - 5 OPD-5R S - 8 RS-5RS-12RS-5RS-5R S - 5 R S - 5 ID-RSI D - RM ID-RMP - 1 P - 1 P - 1 O P D - 5 RS-8RS-8OP D - 5TOTAL SITE AREA:387,024 SQ.FT.(8.88 AC)NET SITE AREA (EXCL. R.O.W. & OUTLOTS): 107,758 SQ.FT.(2.47 AC)TOTAL BUILDING LOTS: 18 (SINGLE FAMILY)TOTAL DWELLING UNITS: 18GROSS AREA PER UNIT: 21,501 SQ.FT.(0.49 AC)NET AREA PER UNIT:5,987 SQ.FT.(0.14 AC)AREA CALCULATIONSDIMENSIONAL STANDARDS (OPD/RS-5)DETACHED SINGLE FAMILYMINIMUM LOT SIZE: 8,000 SFAREA PER UNIT: 8,000 SFMINIMUM LOT WIDTH: 45'MINIMUM FRONTAGE: 45'FRONT YARD SETBACK: 15' (25' IF LOT LESS THAN 60' WIDE)SIDE YARD SETBACK: 5' + 2' PER STORY OVER TWO STORIESREAR YARD SETBACK: 20'MAXIMUM HEIGHT: 35'MINIMUM BLDG WIDTH: 20'MAX BLDG COVERAGE: 45%MIN OPEN SPACE: 500 SFSANDHILL ESTATES - PART 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTIONLEGAL DESCRIPTION - PRELIMINARY PLAT:PART OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2001045 AS RECORDED IN BOOK 43, PAGE 94 IN THE OFFICE OF THE JOHNSONCOUNTY, IOWA RECORDER AND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (S.W.1/4) OF SECTION TWENTY- THREE(23), TOWNSHIP SEVENTY- NINE (79) NORTH, RANGE SIX (6) WEST OF THE FIFTH (5TH) PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IOWACITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE NORTH 1°04'17" EAST ALONG THEWEST LINE OF SAID S.W.1/4, A DISTANCE OF 876.63 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°55'43" EAST 475.34 FEET TO THENORTHEASTERLY MOST CORNER OF SANDHILL ESTATES PART FOUR, IOWA CITY, IOWA AS RECORDED IN BOOK60, PAGE 118 IN THE OFFICE OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA RECORDER AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING ANDTHE BEGINNING OF A 914.90 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A LONG CHORD OF101.12 FEET, BEARING NORTH 52°22'40" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ON THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, 101.17 FEETTO THE BEGINNING OF A 1117.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A LONGCHORD OF 109.51 FEET, BEARING NORTH 46°41'05" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ON THE ARC OF SAID CURVE,109.55 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 29.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY AND HAVING A LONGCHORD OF 42.74 FEET, BEARING NORTH 3°35'41" WEST; THENCE NORTHERLY ON THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, 48.04FEET; THENCE NORTH 51°03';20" WEST, 36.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 38°56'40" EAST, 70.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH51°03'20" EAST, 35.43 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 34.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY ANDHAVING A LONG CHORD OF 47.91 FEET, BEARING NORTH 84°08'57" EAST; THENCE EASTERLY ON THE ARC OF SAIDCURVE, 53.16 FEET; THENCE NORTH 39°21'11" EAST, 33.35 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 50°25'42" EAST, 66.00 FEET; THENCESOUTH 39°21'11" WEST, 37.23 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 34.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY ANDHAVING A LONG CHORD OF 47.54 FEET, BEARING SOUTH 5°00'07" EAST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ON THE ARC OF SAIDCURVE, 52.64 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 180.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY ANDHAVING A LONG CHORD OF 93.01 FEET, BEARING SOUTH 34°23'00" EAST; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ON THE ARCOF SAID CURVE, 94.08 FEET; THENCE NORTH 39°23'07" EAST, 463.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67°42'47" EAST, 129.16FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2001045; THENCE SOUTH 0°42'15" WEST ALONG SAID EASTLINE, 404.49 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0°38'50" WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 348.92 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTCORNER OF SANDHILL ESTATES PART TWO, IOWA CITY, IOWA AS RECORDED IN BOOK 47, PAGE 260 IN THEOFFICE OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA RECORDER; THENCE SOUTH 89°30'47" WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OFSAID SANDHILL ESTATES PART TWO, 356.24 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 0°27'46"EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SANDHILL ESTATES PART TWO, 220.00 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNEROF LOT 102, SAND HILL ESTATES PART 3, IOWA CITY, IOWA AS RECORDED IN BOOK 59, PAGE 51 IN THE OFFICE OFTHE JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA RECORDER; THENCE SOUTH 63°29'43" WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT102, A DISTANCE OF 76.28 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 121OF SAID SANDHILL ESTATES PART FOUR;THE FOLLOWING SEVEN COURSES ARE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID SANDHILL ESTATES PART FOUR.THENCE NORTH 25°32'47" WEST, 169.28 FEET; THENCE NORTH 15°24'15" WEST, 67.67 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42°36'55"WEST, 65.44 FEET; THENCE NORTH 21°48'44" WEST, 68.15 FEET; THENCE NORTH 3°28'41" WEST, 71.50 FEET; THENCESOUTH 70°03'53" WEST, 60.28 FEET; THENCE NORTH 36°41'19" WEST, 190.48 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 8.88 ACRES.OP D - 5 EXISTING:OPDH-5 (ORDINANCE NO. 04-4110)PROPOSED:OPDH-5ZONINGSG & M PROPERTIES, LLC%DAVE OYLER755 MORMON TREK BOULEVARDP.O.BOX 1907IOWA CITY, IA 52246PH:319-337-4195FAX:319-337-9823EMAIL: DAVE@NAVIGATEHOMESIOWA.COMPROJECTLOCATION W8W8W8 W8W8W8LOT 123LOT 120LOT 119LOT 113LOT 111LOT 114LOT 117LOT 108LOT 104LOT 103LOT 102SS8 S S 8 S S 8 SS8SS8SS8SS8SS8S S 8 LOT 125LOT 124LOT 122LOT 121LOT 112LOT 115LOT 110LOT 109LOT 116LOT 106LOT 105LOT 75LOT 74LOT 73LOT 72LOT 71LOT 70LOT 69LOT 68LOT 67LOT 66LOT 69LOT 70LOT 71LOT 72LOT 73LOT 74LOT 75LOT 15LOT 16LOT 17LOT 18LOT 2OUTLOT 'B'OUTLOT 'M'R150'R34'R250'W1 2 W1 2 W1 2 S S 8 S S 8 S S 8 S S 8 SS18SS18SS18SS828'B-B60'R/W66'R/W35' STORM SEWERAND DRAINAGEEASEMENT28'B/B70'R/W5' WALK22'B-B114'R/W20' STORM SEWERAND DRAINAGEEASEMENTW8 W8 W8 W8W8W8W8W831'OUTLOT A SHALL BE FOR STORM WATERCONVEYANCE AND MANAGEMENT TO BEMAINTAINED BY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONR20'R10'R50'20'LOT 1328,692 SF0.20 ACLOT 1278,655 SF0.20 ACLOT 13010,151 SF0.23 ACLOT 1299,980 SF0.23 ACLOT 1288,176 SF0.19 ACLOT 1268,788 SF0.20 ACLOT 1318,142 SF0.19 ACLOT 1359,121 SF0.21 ACLOT 13311,950 SF0.27 ACLOT 14014,300 SF0.33 ACLOT 13412,371 SF0.28 ACLOT 14110,074 SF0.23 ACOUTLOT A110,003 SF2.53 ACLOT 1428,008 SF0.18 ACLOT 1438,618 SF0.20 ACLOT 1368,030 SF0.18 ACLOT 1378,038 SF0.18 ACLOT 13820,550 SF0.47 ACLOT 13913,199 SF0.30 AC127'128' 40'67'124'60'9'62'68'65'61'3 5 '169'76' 220'356'336'140'64' 6 0 ' 6 0 '48 '131'6 7 ' 6 8 ' 1 0 '34'22'115'37'134'127'52'103'2 6' 68' 26' 95'21'14 '61'65'50'15'49 ' 50'49'15'50'65'61'14'20' 124'86'65'65'158'98'166'49'46'95'20'79'65'50'121'140'62'123' 123'60'94'53'4 6 ' 124' 125'136'1 1 0 '48'36'7 0 ' 3 2 ' 5'101'LOT A (ROW)89,090 SF2.05 ACST42ST42S T 3 6 S T 3 6 S T 3 6ST36S T 1 5 ST18 ST18ST18 ST15ST15EXISTING STORM WATERRETENTION AREAEXISTING STORM WATERRETENTION AREA66' STORM SEWER AND SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT(FUTURE ROW FOR PRAIRIE HEIGHTS DRIVE ANDCOVERED WAGON DRIVE)189'PROPOSED REG IONALRETENTION BAS IN46'5' WALKR57'R23'R23'74 ' @ S E TBACK 68' @ SETBACK 67' @ SETBACK7 7 ' @ S E T B A C K R45'4 1 8 '129' 417'28'B/B66'R/WCOVERED WAGON DRIVEWAGON WHEEL DRIVEARMSTRONG DRIVECJZBDV04/19/22XXXFIELD BOOK:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:DATE:NO.REVISION DESCRIPTIONBDVAPPROVEDDATE / / / / / / / / PROJECT NO: 20034-17-5P2.0SHEETPRELIMINARY PLATSITE LAYOUT & UTILITIESCAD File: I:\projects\20000\20034\20034-17-5-Sandhill Estates-Part 5\DWG\Plats\20034-17-5 PP v6.dwg Date Plotted : Apr 20, 2022 - 3:52pm Plotted By : BDVwww.halleng.comLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURELAND DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGHALL & HALL ENGINEERS, INC.1860 BOYSON ROAD, HIAWATHA, IOWA 52233PHONE: (319) 362-9548 FAX: (319) 362-7595LAND SURVEYINGCIVIL ENGINEERINGPRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS PLAN FORSANDHILL ESTATES PART 5IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITYJOHNSON COUNTY IOWATYPICAL 28' B-B STREET CROSS SECTION(NOT TO SCALE)14'28' B-B1/2 R.O.W. - 30' (SE OF TRAFFIC CIR.)1/2 R.O.W. - 35' (NW OF TRAFFIC CIR.)1/2 R.O.W. - 30' (SE OF TRAFFIC CIR.)1/2 R.O.W. - 35' (NW OF TRAFFIC CIR.)STANDARD6" CURB14'2.0%2.0%NOTES:1. REFER TO PLANS FOR LOCATION OF SUBDRAINS AND/OR STORM SEWER LINES. WHERE PLANS SHOWTHESE LINES UNDER PAVEMENT LONGITUDINALLY, SUBGRADE SHALL BE SHAPED TO DRAIN TO TRENCHES FORTHESE LINES. THIS WORK IS ALSO REQUIRED FOR LINES UNDER INTERSECTION RETURNS. DEPTH OFSUBBASE SHALL BE INCREASED AS REQUIRED FOR THIS WORK.2. SUBBASE SHALL BE EXTENDED OVER STORM SEWER AND/OR SUBDRAIN TRENCHES WHERE REQUIRED TOMAINTAIN PROPER SUBBASE DRAINAGE. SUBBASE SHALL BE EXTENDED TO CENTERLINE OF STORM SEWERTRENCH AND COMPLETELY OVER SUBDRAIN TRENCH.3. SEE SUDAS DETAIL 7030.104 FOR GRADING BEHIND CURB.4. LONGITUDINAL JOINTS SHALL BE THIRD POINT JOINTING PER SUDAS DETAIL 7010.9012.5'TYP1.0'TYP5.0'-8.0'10.0'-15.0'4.0%1.5%SEE NOTE 2JOINT SEENOTE 4PROFILEGRADESUBDRAIN (TYP) AS SHOWN ONPLANS SEE NOTE 1COMPACTED SUBGRADE AS SPECIFIED6" MIN. SUBBASE AS SPECIFIED7" PCC PAVEMENT DEPTHSTORM SEWER WITH GASKETEDJOINTS AS PER PLANS SEE NOTE 1COMPACTEDFILLPROFILE LINE, ℄ ROW, AND SURVEYBASELINE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE31(MAX.)10.0'-12.0'5.0'15' UTILITY EASEMENT15' UTILITY EASEMENT1 5 ' U T I L I T Y EA S EM EN T PROPOSED GASKETEDSTORM SEWER (TYP)EXISTING WATERMAIN (TYP)EXISTING SANITARYSEWER (TYP)BROOKWOOD PO INTEFIFTH ADD IT IONSANDHILL ESTATESPART 4SANDHILL ESTATESPART 4SANDHILL ESTATESPART 1 C O V E R E D W A G O N D R I V E ( F U T U R E )SAND PRAIRIE DRIVE (FUTURE)SAND PRAIRIE DRIVE TYPICAL 66' R.O.W. 31' B-B STREET CROSS SECTION(NOT TO SCALE)15.5'31' B-B1/2 R.O.W - 33'1/2 R.O.W. - 33'STANDARD6" CURB15.5'2.0%2.0%NOTES:1. REFER TO PLANS FOR LOCATION OF SUBDRAINS AND/OR STORM SEWER LINES. WHERE PLANS SHOWTHESE LINES UNDER PAVEMENT LONGITUDINALLY, SUBGRADE SHALL BE SHAPED TO DRAIN TO TRENCHES FORTHESE LINES. THIS WORK IS ALSO REQUIRED FOR LINES UNDER INTERSECTION RETURNS. DEPTH OFSUBBASE SHALL BE INCREASED AS REQUIRED FOR THIS WORK.2. SUBBASE SHALL BE EXTENDED OVER STORM SEWER AND/OR SUBDRAIN TRENCHES WHERE REQUIRED TOMAINTAIN PROPER SUBBASE DRAINAGE. SUBBASE SHALL BE EXTENDED TO CENTERLINE OF STORM SEWERTRENCH AND COMPLETELY OVER SUBDRAIN TRENCH.3. SEE SUDAS DETAIL 7030.104 FOR GRADING BEHIND CURB.4. LONGITUDINAL JOINTS SHALL BE THIRD POINT JOINTING PER SUDAS DETAIL 7010.9012.5'TYP1.0'TYP8.0'11.5'4.0%1.5%SEE NOTE 2JOINT SEENOTE 4PROFILEGRADESUBDRAIN (TYP) AS SHOWN ONPLANS SEE NOTE 1COMPACTED SUBGRADE AS SPECIFIED6" MIN. SUBBASE AS SPECIFIED8" PCC PAVEMENT DEPTHSTORM SEWER WITH GASKETEDJOINTS AS PER PLANS SEE NOTE 1COMPACTEDFILLPROFILE LINE, ℄ ROW, AND SURVEYBASELINE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE31(MAX.)8.5'5.0'FRONTIER LOOPPRAIRIE HEIGHTS DRIVE (FUTURE)FUTURESOUTH D ISTR ICTFROM BASED CODEADDIT IONS FRONTIER LOOP TYPICAL STREET CROSS SECTION(NOT TO SCALE)11.0'22.0' B-B11.0'2.0%NOTES:1. REFER TO PLANS FOR LOCATION OF SUBDRAINS AND/OR STORM SEWER LINES. WHERE PLANS SHOWTHESE LINES UNDER PAVEMENT LONGITUDINALLY, SUBGRADE SHALL BE SHAPED TO DRAIN TO TRENCHES FORTHESE LINES. THIS WORK IS ALSO REQUIRED FOR LINES UNDER INTERSECTION RETURNS. DEPTH OFSUBBASE SHALL BE INCREASED AS REQUIRED FOR THIS WORK.2. SUBBASE SHALL BE EXTENDED OVER STORM SEWER AND/OR SUBDRAIN TRENCHES WHERE REQUIRED TOMAINTAIN PROPER SUBBASE DRAINAGE. SUBBASE SHALL BE EXTENDED TO CENTERLINE OF STORM SEWERTRENCH AND COMPLETELY OVER SUBDRAIN TRENCH.3. SEE SUDAS DETAIL 7030.104 FOR GRADING BEHIND CURB.4. LONGITUDINAL JOINTS SHALL BE LOCATED AT THE CENTERLINE AND 3' OFF THE BACK OF CURBS PERSUDAS DETAIL 7010.901SEE NOTE 2KT-2 OR L-2 JOINTSEE NOTE 4PROFILEGRADESUBDRAIN (TYP) AS SHOWN ONPLANS SEE NOTE 1COMPACTED SUBGRADE AS SPECIFIED6" MIN. SUBBASE AS SPECIFIED7" PCC PAVEMENT DEPTHSTORM SEWER WITH GASKETEDJOINTS AS PER PLANS SEE NOTE 1COMPACTEDFILLPROFILE LINE, ℄ ROW, AND SURVEYBASELINE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE6.0'1.5%5.0'4.0%1.0'TYP23' TO ROWSTANDARD6" CURB2.0%8" DIAMETER CL52 DIPWATER MAIN (TYP)15' UTILITY & SANITARY EASEMENT 0. 7 %0.7%0.7% 0.7%MAILBOX CLUSTER LOCATION(TO BE CONFIRMED WITH POSTMASTER)GASKETED RCPSTORM SEWER (TYP)8' SIDEWALK (NORTHSIDE OF COVEREDWAGON DRIVE ONLY)EXISTING TEMPORARY TURNAROUNDEASEMENT TO BE RELEASED WITHIMPROVEMENTS TO SANDHILL ESTATES PART 512" DIAMETER CL52DIP WATER MAIN20' STORM SEWER ANDDRAINAGE EASEMENTREMOVE EXISTINGPCC TURNAROUND3 . 1%1.0%0.7%1.0%MEDIAN SHALL BEMAINTAINED BY HOASTORM WATERCONVEYANCE ANDMANAGEMENT EASEMENTEXISTING STORM SEWERAND STRUCTURES (TYP)EXISTING STORM SEWERAND STRUCTURES (TYP)30' STORMSEWER EASEMENTOUTLOT A SHALL BE FOR STORMSEWER AND STORM WATERCONVEYANCE TO BE MAINTAINEDBY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONPROPOSED REGIONALRETENTION BASIN TO BECONSTRUCTED WITHSANDHILL ESTATES PART 5IMPROVEMENTSPROPOSED 8" DIA PVCSANITARY SEWER (TYP)INSTALL STORM INTAKEBASES ONLY, TOPS TOBE INSTALLED WITHROADWAYIMPROVEMENTS FORFUTURE ADDITIONSFUTURESOUTH DISTRICTFROM BASED CODEADDITIONS FUTURESOUTH D ISTR ICTFROM BASED CODEADDIT IONSPROPOSED GASKETEDSTORM SEWER (TYP) 700705690675680685690680685675680685695695700700705705 SS18SS18SS18688687686 678679 669 670675680679 679670669 672672 6 7 2670675680682683684689 680 6886906866 7 06846846876856856876906896986906856856 8 6 LOT 1328,692 SF0.20 ACLOT 1278,655 SF0.20 ACLOT 13010,151 SF0.23 ACLOT 1299,980 SF0.23 ACLOT 1288,176 SF0.19 ACLOT 1268,788 SF0.20 ACLOT 1318,142 SF0.19 ACLOT 1359,121 SF0.21 ACLOT 13311,950 SF0.27 ACLOT 14014,300 SF0.33 ACLOT 13412,371 SF0.28 ACLOT 14110,074 SF0.23 ACOUTLOT A110,003 SF2.53 ACLOT 1428,008 SF0.18 ACLOT 1438,618 SF0.20 ACLOT 1368,030 SF0.18 ACLOT 1378,038 SF0.18 ACLOT 13820,550 SF0.47 ACLOT 13913,199 SF0.30 ACLOT A (ROW)89,090 SF2.05 ACST42ST42S T 3 6 S T 3 6 S T 3 6ST36S T 1 5 ST18 ST18ST18 ST15ST15685 6906 9 5 7 0 0 6806806856856756756806706756806906876856 8 5 672672669659 6656 6 9 670 669 6 7 5 672COVERED WAGON DRIVE WAGON WHEEL DRIVE ARMST R O N G D R I V ECJZBDV04/19/22XXXFIELD BOOK:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:DATE:NO.REVISION DESCRIPTIONBDVAPPROVEDDATE / / / / / / / / P3.0SHEETPRELIMINARY PLATOVERALL SITE GRADING & EROSION CONTROL AND SWPPP PLANCAD File: I:\projects\20000\20034\20034-17-5-Sandhill Estates-Part 5\DWG\Plats\20034-17-5 PP v6.dwg Date Plotted : Apr 20, 2022 - 3:52pm Plotted By : BDVwww.halleng.comLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURELAND DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGHALL & HALL ENGINEERS, INC.1860 BOYSON ROAD, HIAWATHA, IOWA 52233PHONE: (319) 362-9548 FAX: (319) 362-7595LAND SURVEYINGCIVIL ENGINEERINGSANDHILLESTATESPART 5<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>PROJECT NO: 20034-17-5SANDHILL ESTATESPART 1 C O V E R E D W A G O N D R I V E ( F U T U R E )SAND PRAIRIE DRIVE (FUTURE)FRONTIER LOOP<><><><><><>INSTALL STABILIZEDCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCE PER SUDASDETAIL 9040.20 (TYP)CONCRETEWASHOUTAREAPORTA-POTTYAREAWASTECONTAINER/CHEMICALSTORAGEAREAEQUIPMENT/ MATERIALSTORAGE & STAGING AREAINSTALL SILT FENCE, FILTERSOCK OR EQUIVALENT PERSUDAS DETAILS 9040.19 &9040.20 AND AROUND ALLINTAKES.SEDIMENT FOREBAY(FOREBAY TOP BERM= 672.50)WITH RIP-RAP APRON OUTLETPROTECTION (TYP)<><><><><><><><><>< > <><><><><> <><><>TOPSOILSTOCKPILEAREA<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>< > < > < > < > < > < > < >PRAIRIE HEIGHTS DRIVE (FUTURE)SAND PRAIRIE DRIVEPRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS PLAN FORSANDHILL ESTATES PART 5IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITYJOHNSON COUNTY IOWA<><><>4:1 MAX SLOPEPROPOSED GRADING LIMITS< > < ><>15:1 SAFETYBENCH @ 670.0NORMAL WATERELEVATION 671.85<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <><> <> <> <><><><><>DICKENSON CTSANDHILL ESTATES PART 5BOUNDARY LINEEROSION STONEBETWEEN 671.0AND 673.00THIS PORTION OF EXISTINGTEMPORARY STOCKPILE TOREMAIN UNTIL FUTUREADDITIONS ARE DEVELOPEDFUTURESOUTH D ISTR ICTFROM BASED CODEADDIT IONS NOTICE:OVERALL NPDES AND SWPPP FOR THE DEVELOPMENT ARE CURRENTLY ONSITE AND CURRENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) SHALL BE KEPTON THE CONSTRUCTION SITE AT ALL TIMES FROM THE DATE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES BEGIN TO THE DATE OF FINAL STABILIZATION. ALL OPERATORS/CONTRACTORS WORKING ONSITE MUSTSIGN THE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT PROVIDED AND WILL BECOME CO-PERMITTEES ON THE NPDES GENERAL PERMIT NO. 2 FOR THIS SITE. ALL OPERATORS/CONTRACTORS WORKING ONSITESHALL BE SUPPLIED A COPY OF THE SWPPP AND MUST BE FAMILIAR WITH ITS CONTENTS. THE SWPPP MUST BE PERIODICALLY UPDATED TO SHOW CURRENT EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.UPDATED VERSIONS OF THE SWPPP WILL BE PROVIDED TO ALL OF THE OPERATORS/CONTRACTORS WHOM ARE AFFECTED BY THE CHANGES MADE TO THE SWPPP. IT WILL BE THE DUTY OF THEPERMITTEE (OWNER OR GENERAL CONTRACTOR) TO SEE THAT THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.GRADING NOTES1.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL APPRENTICES.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL SILT FENCE, HEAVY WOOD FIBER FILTER SOCK, OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT AROUND ALL INTAKES PER SUDAS DETAILS 9040.19 & 9040.20.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY DEPTH AND LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES AND STRUCTURES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.4.CARE SHOULD BE TAKEN TO PROTECT ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES AND UNDERGROUND FACILITIES.5.ALL SITE WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT OF RECORD FOR THE SITE6.CONTRACTOR SHALL STRIP ALL ORGANIC MATERIAL WITHIN GRADING LIMITS. A MINIMUM 6” DEPTH. REFER TO IOWA CITY AND SUDAS FOR All OTHER GRADING REQUIREMENTS.7.PRIOR TO ANY SITE GRADING ACTIVITIES, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A CSR PERMIT FROM THE CITY OF IOWA CITY.8.ALL DISTURBED AREAS NOT PAVED OR HARD SURFACED ON THE SITE SHALL RECEIVE MINIMUM 6" TOPSOIL.9.WHEN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ARE COMPLETE, CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE STABILIZING CROP SEED MIX PER APPLICABLE STANDARDS.10.MAINTAIN SUBSTANTIAL VEGETATED AREA AROUND ENTIRE PROJECT PERIMETER TO ACT AS VEGETATED FILTER STRIP. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE OREQUIVALENT TO ENSURE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GENERAL PERMIT NO. 2.11.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL ADJOINING PROPERTIES FROM DISRUPTION DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.12.FILL AREAS WITHIN STREETS AND AREAS OF 4' 0R GREATER FILLS WlTHIN BUILDING AREAS AS SHOWN ON THE GRADING PLAN REQUIRE SOIL TESTING BY AN APPROVEDGEOTECHNICAL FlRM. THESE AREAS TO RECEIVE STRUCTURAL FlLL AND TESTING PER LOCAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS. PROVIDE TESTING RESULTS TO OWNER ANDENGINEER OF RECORD.13.PROPER PERMITS SHALL BE IN PLACE FOR ANY GRADING ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE CITY RIGHT OF WAY.14. COORDINATE CLEARING AND GRUBBING LIMITS, DEBRIS STOCKPlLE LOCATIONS AND DEBRIS DISPOSAL WITH OWNER.15. VERIFY STOCKPILE LOCATION AND VOLUME WITH OWNER PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK.16. EXCESS TOPSOIL TO BE UTILIZED AS FILL OUTSIDE OF BUILDING/ROADWAY AREAS TO HELP ACHIEVE A BALANCE ON EARTHWORK.17. THE PROPOSED CONTOURS SHOWN FOR THE SITE REPRESENT THE TOP OF FINISH GROUND.18. APPROXIMATELY 11.0 ACRES WILL BE DISTURBED WITH THE SITE IMPROVEMENTS.19. SCARIFY EXISTING SUBGRADE TO A DEPTH OF 12" AND RECOMPACT TO 95% OF STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY (ASTM D698) CONTENT PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL. ALL FILLS TO BEPLACED AT LIFTS OF 9" OR LESS. FILLS PLACED BELOW LAWNS SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 90% OF MATERIALS MAXIMUM STANDARD PROCTOR DRY DENSITY (ASTM D698). FILLS PLACEDUNDER ROADWAY AND BUILDING AREAS SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 98% STANDARD PROCTOR DRY DENSITY (ASTM D698) AND SHALL BE FREE OF ORGANIC MATTER, DEBRIS, AND OTHERDELETRIOUS MATERIAL.20. SCARIFY AND RE-COMPACT THE TOP 9" OF SUBGRADE IN ALL CUT AREAS AFTER ROUGH GRADING IS COMPLETE. COMPACT THE ENTIRE PAVING AND BUILDING SUBGRADE TO 95%STANDARD PROCTOR DRY DENSITY. FOLLOWING UTILITY INSTALLATIONS, THE UPPER 12" OF SUBGRADE WITHIN ROADWAYS AND BUILDING AREAS SHALL BE STRIPPED ANDRE-COMPACTED TO 98% STANDARD DRY DENSITY (ASTMD698) IN TWO 6" LIFTS.21. IT IS THE OWNERS RESPONSIBILITY TO HAVE A GEOTECH REVIEW GRADING PLAN AND DESIGN TO VERIFY SLOPE STABILITY AND ANY OTHER POTENTIAL GRADING ISSUES.22. THE HOME BUILDER SHALL GRADE REAR AND SIDE YARDS TO ULTIMATELY DRAIN AWAY FROM THE HOUSE TO THE STREETS, BACK YARDS, OR DRAINAGE SWALESEROSION CONTROL NOTES1. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED PER THE IOWA CITY AND SUDAS STANDARD DETAILS/SPECIFICATIONS, PER THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN AND AS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE JURISDICTIONAL ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE PREPARED TO INSTALL ADDITIONAL MEASURES THANTHOSE SHOWN ON THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN IF SITE CONDITIONS WARRANT.2. EROSION CONTROL METHODS SHALL BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO AREAS BEING DISTURBED.3. EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE CHECKED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL EVENT EQUAL TO 1/2" OR GREATER TO ENSUREWORKING ORDER.4. REPAIRS TO SOIL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES DEEMED NECESSARY SHALL BE COMPLETED IMMEDIATELY UPON NOTIFICATION OR WITHIN 24 HOURS IF WEATHER DELAYS.5. MINIMIZE SOIL EROSION AND TRANSPORT BY MAINTAINING ALL EXISTING VEGETATION GROWTH WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE TO SERVE AS A NATURALBUFFER. CONTRACTOR TO PROTECT ALL ADJACENT PROPERTIES FROM DISRUPTION AT ALL TIMES.6. WHEN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ARE COMPLETE, RESPREAD TOPSOIL OVER THE DISTURBED SITE AT 4 TO 6 INCHES.7. PROVIDE TEMPORARY SEEDING IN DISTURBED AREAS WHERE OPERATIONS WILL NOT COMMENCE OR PERMANENT SEEDING WILL NOT BE COMPLETED FOR A PERIOD OF 14 DAYS ORMORE.8. ALL SLOPES GREATER THAN 4:1 SHALL BE MULCHED OR APPLY WOOD EXCELSIOR MATTING.9. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS PER SUDAS UNTIL FINAL GRADING AND SEEDING HAS BEEN PERFORMED ON THE SITE. CONTRACTOR SHALLREMOVE ALL SEDIMENT FROM THE BASINS ONCE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN COMPLETE.10. SILT FENCES SHALL BE INSTALLED PER SUDAS AS SHOWN ON THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN. ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED AS NECESSARY BY THE CONTRACTOR.MAINTENANCE AND/OR REPLACEMENT OF THE SILT FENCE IS ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.11. SITE CLEAN-UP SHALL BE PERFORMED ON A DAILY BASIS. SIDEWALKS, PARKING LOTS, ROADWAYS, ETC. SHALL BE KEPT CLEAN AT ALL TIMES.12. ALL OPEN EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE PROTECTED.13. CONTROL DUST SPREADING FROM ALL WORK AND STAGING AREAS.14. MAINTAIN POSITIVE DRAINAGE ON THE SITE THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT DURATION.15. THE LAST 20 FT OF EACH END OF ALL SILT FENCE OR FILTER SOCKS THAT IS INSTALLED SHALL BE TURNED UPHILL ("J"-HOOK METHOD).16. THE BOTTOM AND SIDES OF ALL SWALES SHALL BE COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL MATTING.17. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TEMPORARY SILT FENCES AROUND ALL INTAKES. EROSION CONTROL SOCKS OR EQUIVALENT SHALL BE USED AT STREET INTAKES ONCE THE STREETPAVING HAS BEEN COMPLETED. EROSION SOCKS SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL THE SITE HAS BEEN STABILIZED.ANTICIPATED GRADING SEQUENCE AND PHASINGPHASE 1 MASS GRADING1.BRING ENTRANCE UP TO GRADE AND INSTALL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE2.INSTALL PERIMETER SILT FENCE PRIOR TO MASS GRADING3.COMPLETE ANY NECESSARY DEMOLITION4.COMPLETE MASS GRADING OF SITE INCLUDING TOPSOIL STRIPPING AND STOCKPILING.5.INSTALL SILT FENCE THROUGHOUT THE SITE AND AROUND TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS TOCONTROL EROSION, ADD SILT FENCE AROUND ALL STOCK PILES6.INSTALL DITCH CHECKSPHASE 2 CONSTRUCT UTILITIES AND PAVING7.INSTALL CONCRETE WASHOUT8.INSTALL STORAGE AREAS, PORT-A-POTTIES, AND TEMPORARY PARKING/STAGING AREAS9.INSTALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND WATER MAIN WHERE IT CROSSES UNDER PAVING10.INSTALL INLET PROTECTION AS INTAKES AND INLETS ARE CONSTRUCTED11.COMPLETE PAVING12.INSTALL REMAINING WATER MAIN13.MAINTAIN CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEPHASE 3 FINAL GRADING AND STABILIZATION14.CLEANOUT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS AND COVERT TO INLETS15.REMOVE STOCKPILES AND RESPREAD TOPSOIL16.REMOVE CONCRETE WASHOUT17.INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING ON ALL SLOPES 5:1 OR STEEPER AND DRAINAGE SWALESTHAT ARE TO BE SEEDED.18.AFTER FINAL GRADING IS COMPLETE AND THE EROSION MATTING IN THE DRAINAGE SWALES ISINSTALLED, SILT FENCE MUST BE INSTALLED (ACTUAL SILT FENCE, NOT FILTER SOCK) ALONG THEBOUNDARIES OF DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND OVERFLOW SWALES19.SEED OR SOD ENTIRE SITE20.REMOVE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE21.AFTER SITE IS COMPLETELY STABILIZED REMOVE SILT FENCE AND OTHER TEMPORARY EROSIONCONTROL MEASURESMINIMUM LOW OPENINGS (MLO'S) FOR LOTS 61-65 SHALL BE 1.75' ABOVETHE BOTTOM OF THE REAR DRAINAGE SWALE AT A LOCATION ADJACENTAND PERPENDICULAR FROM THE OPENING TO THE DRAINAGE SWALE. MLOFOR LOT 66 SHALL BE 730.50 AND 1.75' ABOVE THE BOTTOM OF THE REARDRAINAGE SWALE AT A LOCATION ADJACENT AND PERPENDICULAR FROMTHE OPENING TO THE DRAINAGE SWALE.CONSTRUCTIONLIMIT LINESWPPP AND DETAILED PHASED GRADING PLAN WILL BE INCLUDEDWITH THE DETAILED PLAN OF IMPROVEMENT DRAWINGSRETENTION POND TOBE AERATED WITH AFOUNTAIN OR OTHERAERATOR TO ENSUREAEROBIC PONDCONDITIONS W8W8W8 W8W8W8695 695700700705690695 675680685690680685675680685695695700700705705 SS 8 S S 8 S S 8 SS8SS8SS8SS8SS8S S 8 W1 2 W1 2 W1 2 S S 8 S S 8 S S 8 S S 8 SS18SS18SS18SS8W8 W8 W8 W8W8W8W8W8688687686 678679 669 670675680679 679670669 672672 6 7 2670675680682683684689 680 6886906866 7 06846846876856856876906896986906856856 8 6 LOT 1328,692 SF0.20 ACLOT 1278,655 SF0.20 ACLOT 13010,151 SF0.23 ACLOT 1299,980 SF0.23 ACLOT 1288,176 SF0.19 ACLOT 1268,788 SF0.20 ACLOT 1318,142 SF0.19 ACLOT 1359,121 SF0.21 ACLOT 13311,950 SF0.27 ACLOT 14014,300 SF0.33 ACLOT 13412,371 SF0.28 ACLOT 14110,074 SF0.23 ACOUTLOT A110,003 SF2.53 ACLOT 1428,008 SF0.18 ACLOT 1438,618 SF0.20 ACLOT 1368,030 SF0.18 ACLOT 1378,038 SF0.18 ACLOT 13820,550 SF0.47 ACLOT 13913,199 SF0.30 ACLOT A (ROW)89,090 SF2.05 ACST42ST42S T 3 6 S T 3 6 S T 3 6ST36S T 1 5 ST18 ST18ST18 ST15ST15685 6906 9 5 7 0 0 6806806856856756756806706756806906876856 8 5 672672669659 665669670 669 6 7 5 672COVERED WAGON DRIVEWAGON WHEEL DRIVE ARMST R O N G D R I V ECJZBDV04/19/22FIELD BOOK:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:DATE:NO.REVISION DESCRIPTIONBDVAPPROVEDDATE / / / / / / / / P4.0SHEETPRELIMINARY PLATSENSITIVE AREASCAD File: I:\projects\20000\20034\20034-17-5-Sandhill Estates-Part 5\DWG\Plats\20034-17-5 PP v6.dwg Date Plotted : Apr 20, 2022 - 3:52pm Plotted By : BDVwww.halleng.comLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURELAND DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGHALL & HALL ENGINEERS, INC.1860 BOYSON ROAD, HIAWATHA, IOWA 52233PHONE: (319) 362-9548 FAX: (319) 362-7595LAND SURVEYINGCIVIL ENGINEERINGPROJECT NO: 20034-17-5SANDHILL ESTATESPART 1 C O V E R E D W A G O N D R I V E SAND PRAIRIE DRIVE (FUTURE)FRONTIER LOOPPRAIRIE HEIGHTS DRIVE (FUTURE)SAND PRAIRIE DRIVE HYDRIC SOILS (33 TO 100% HYDRIC)-1.53 ACRES OF EXISTING HYDRIC SOILS ONSITE-1.53 ACRES TO BE DISTURBED (100%)SENSITIVE AREAS LEGEND AND NOTESPRELIMINARY PLAT AND SENSITIVE AREAS PLAN FORSANDHILL ESTATES PART 5IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITYJOHNSON COUNTY IOWADELINEATED EMERGENT WETLANDS-NO DELINEATED WETLANDS LOCATED WITHIN SANDHILL ESTATES PART 5 PLAT BOUNDARYDELINEATED MAN-MADE WETLANDS-TEMPORARY WETLAND DISTURBANCE IS AN EXISTING STORM WATER FACILITY THAT IS BEINGEXPANDED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, THEREFORE EXEMPT FROM CITY WETLAND ORDINANCEEXISTING WOODLANDS-NO WOODLANDS LOCATED WITHIN SANDHILL ESTATES PART 5 PLAT BOUNDARYEXISTING TREE LINEEXISTING STEEP SLOPES (18% TO 24%)-0.01 ACRES OF EXISTING STEEP SLOPES LOCATED ONSITE-0.01 ACRES TO BE DISTURBED (100%)EXISTING CRITICAL SLOPES (25% TO 39%)-NO CRITICAL SLOPES LOCATED WITHIN SANDHILL ESTATES PART 5 PLAT BOUNDARYEXISTING MAN MADE TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILESSANDHILL ESTATESPART 4SANDHILL ESTATES PART 5BOUNDARY LINECONSTRUCTION LIMITSNOTE:ALL SENSITIVE AREAS (IF ANY) LOCATED OUTSIDE OF SANDHILL PART 5 PLAT BOUNDARY WILL BEADDRESSED WITH FUTURE SENSITIVE AREAS PLANS AND PRELIMINARY PLATS FOR THOSE AREAS.FUTURESOUTH D ISTR ICTFROM BASED CODEADDIT IONS FUTURESOUTH DISTRICTFROM BASED CODEADDITIONS FUTURESOUTH D ISTR ICTFROM BASED CODEADDIT IONS MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 20, 2022 – 6:00 PM – FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Mark Nolte, Maria Padron, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Kirk Lehmann, Anne Russett Chris Pose RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends that the zoning code be amended to allow basic utility uses in Neighborhood Public (P-1) zones provisionally or by special exception, as illustrated in attachment one of the staff report. By a vote of 6-0 (Nolte absent) the Commission recommends approval of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning to allow a door connecting a drinking establishment to a sales-oriented retail use and not consider it an expansion if certain criteria are satisfied. By a vote of 6-0 (Nolte absent) the Commission recommends that the Zoning Code be amended as illustrated in Attachment 1 to address numerous code clean up items with the exception to strike the provisions relating to this Historic Preservation exception at 14-2A-7B, 14-2B-8A and 14-2C-11A with the intent to address that in a later code cleanup. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. CASE NO. REZ22-0002: Consideration of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning to allow basic utility uses in the Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone. Lehmann began the staff report noting this amendment is to allow private basic utility uses in the P-1 zone but there are some other changes that are part of this amendment as well, such as some changes to the way the public zone section is set up. Currently, it's a little different than other zone sections and staff wants to try and make it as similar as the others to make it easier for legibility for the public and staff and it also includes some modified criteria for basic utility uses. Beginning with background, Lehmann stated the public zones historically have been used to denote public ownership of land such as the County, the School District, or the City, any of Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 2 of 19 those would be zoned P-1. Lehmann noted there are some private uses already allowed either provisionally or by special exception in public zones but historically it has been used to denote ownership and staff is trying to move away from that a little bit with this amendment since there are some private uses already allowed. Staff looked at private basic utility uses such as public or private infrastructure services, and noted they have to be near the area where the service is being provided. Some examples are electric substations, communication hubs, switching and relay facilities, water and sewer lift stations, water towers, reservoirs, etc. and those could be public or privately owned. Currently they are only allowed in public zones if they are publicly owned. They are also allowed in most commercial zones, not a mixed-use zone, in industrial, research, Riverfront Crossings zones, and the T4 form-based zones, in addition to some nonresidential interim development zones. Staff is hoping to expand that and has discussed this for the past several years when a situation arises. Most recently it’s been because of discussions with MidAmerican Energy as they're looking for substations in growing areas, and ImOn as they're also looking to expand services within their territory in existing neighborhoods. Iowa City is growing, and it needs these services. Services are changing over time, and it can be challenging to place these services in areas for necessary infrastructure. Lehmann explained in terms of the approval criteria that apply to basic utility uses, in some cases it's provisionally allowed in Commercial Interim Development zones, Commercial Research Development zones, Riverfront Crossings zones, and the T4 form-based zones. It's allowed provisionally if it's enclosed within a use and has to contain another use that is allowed in the zone. Another use that is allowed provisionally are water and sanitary sewer pump stations that are approved as part of site plan or as subdivision review. Lehmann stated there are some odd caveats with that such as if it's a standalone utility use enclosed within a building, it triggers the special exception because it doesn't have another use allowed in the zone and in T4 zones that does have to be enclosed, there's no special exception option. Within those zones, if it does doesn't meet those provisional criteria, then it has to go through a special exception, which was reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Some of the approval criteria are that it has to be screened from public view or view of adjacent residential zones to the S3 standard, it has to be compatible with surrounding structures and uses based on safety, size, height, scale, location and design, and then there's also general approval criteria that apply to any special exception. The general criteria are things such as it won't hurt neighboring properties, won’t impact property values, has adequate utilities, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, etc. Lehmann noted all those general criteria that apply to special exceptions apply here, but there's also some ability for the Board of Adjustment to modify some standards but doesn't really apply to the subject today. Private utilities are also allowed in industrial zones and interim industrial zones provisionally if 200 feet from any residential zone and screened from view of public right-of-way to the S3 standard. Lehmann stated that is a lesser standard than what is seen in the other zones. Lehmann explained what the proposed amendment looks to do is to treat private basic utility uses in public zones as if it was in a commercial zone. All the criteria that was just mentioned would apply, if it's enclosed, then it would be allowed provisionally, if it's not enclosed, then it would be subject to a special exception. One of the other changes staff is recommending with this is to strike the standard that enclosed utilities require another allowed use within the building Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 3 of 19 and allow an administrative review of standalone enclosed utilities. He noted staff has a lot of requests for enclosed utilities such as ImOn communications hubs in the last five years. He showed an image of what an ImOn utility communications hub looks like and noted it is something that doesn't have another use in it and applying that special exception criteria to an enclosed building is a little strange. Staff feels they can rely instead on existing site development standards to prevent that additional Board of Adjustment review and just do an administrative review. Finally, staff is also proposing some changes to the public zones section generally, such as adding any use table, and then modifying language regarding the purpose and regarding public ownership with the goal of trying to make it more similar to other zones where it’s based on the use and not based on ownership. In terms of analysis for this proposed amendment, currently areas that allow basic utility uses generally are located in commercial and industrial areas, near downtown, along major corridors, like the highways and interstate, or near railroads. Those defined commercial nodes are like Towncrest, Old Town Village, and Walden Square so they do exist in quite a few areas in the City. However, there are some notable gaps, especially in developing areas to the south, the southwest and to the east and that can become an issue when trying to locate utilities for those growing areas. Some residential areas are far from those neighborhood commercial nodes or far from those commercial areas and can make it hard for the expansion of ImOn, for example, or any future network provider that wants to come into the community. However, public zones are better dispersed throughout the community such as fire stations, schools, parks, etc. Lehmann showed a map indicating the relatively concentrated areas where the basic utility use areas are currently allowed and again pointed to the gaps in growing areas. He next showed the P-1 areas and noted they're better dispersed throughout the City and would allow the utilities to meet some of these areas where there might be gaps. Lehmann noted staff looked at some other comparable large communities in Iowa (Des Moines, Cedar Rapids and Davenport) and they do allow private basic utility uses in a wider variety of zones. They often allow it in residential zones and differentiate between major and minor utilities, similar to how Iowa City looks at enclosed versus not enclosed. Staff shared a summary of those comparisons in the agenda packet noting generally in Des Moines, substations are considered major that do require a board of adjustment approval, but in Cedar Rapids, they're considered minor, so it's provisional approval. Generally, they're allowed in pretty much all zones, either as a permitted use or as a conditional approval, however in some cases, such as Davenport, they're pretty much allowed if they're in an easement or within the right-of-way, so all private utilities are also considered public utilities. Lehmann explained with the proposed amendment, Iowa City can address some of these gaps and hopefully have less substantive changes that might be required to be more like comparable communities. In general, this amendment allows a broader area where these utilities can be placed which includes around public uses that might be suitable such as lift stations or other City or County owned properties because they're treated similarly to other basic utility uses in commercial zones. Staff does not anticipate any substantial issues with the proposed changes and also believes this prevents a risk of requiring rezoning to commercial designations in developing areas where if that utility use leaves in the future, they are left with a Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 4 of 19 zone that could be redeveloped as something that might not be as compatible with surrounding uses. Using the public zones allows a bit more control over what uses might be there. In terms of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Lehmann stated there are growth and infrastructure policies that are included in the Plan. Typically, they're not focused so much on where utilities should be placed but focused more on how there should be growth in existing areas or how areas will be best served by existing and proposed infrastructure that provides high levels of service with efficient costs. He noted there are several strategies throughout the Plan that talk about this, such as identifying opportunities for infill development and concentrating new development in areas contiguous to existing development. The Plan doesn’t directly address infrastructure but addresses the mindset about how well-planned utilities are essential and ensuring that it's cost effective. Therefore, providing basic utility uses in P-1 zones does have benefits such as it allows improved coordination between public and private utilities and also provides greater flexibility in placing those to ensure cost effective services. Lehmann stated staff did receive some public comment which was forwarded to the Commissioners. MidAmerican Energy submitted some revised language that they recommend, one is to explicitly state that private ownership is allowed in P-1 zones for basic utility uses and the other is a change from will to may in describing what designates a P-1 zone and whether it has to be a P-1 zone, but staff does support that change and generally doesn't think that explicitly stating private utility uses is necessary at this time. Staff does recommend that the zoning code be amended to allow basic utility uses in Neighborhood Public (P-1) zones provisionally or by special exception, as illustrated in attachment one of the staff report. Hensch asked for clarification that previously it was only allowed for publicly owned utilities, and this will transition it to all basic utilities. Lehmann confirmed that was correct. Hensch asked if this would replace the purchase of easements by utilities and could they just go to a public area rather than have to negotiate with a private property owner to purchase an easement at market rate. Lehmann stated what this amendment allows is for if there is an existing public facility that would be appropriate for a basic utility use next to it the private utility could build their basic utility use on that public land, or portion off a part of it, and subdivide and purchase that portion. Hensch asked if a privately held utility or an investor held utility could place their property on public land at no cost to that utility. Hekteon replied, no what this amendment allows is for the private utility to purchase land. Hensch asked how that price will be determined, would it just be market, would the property need to be appraised. Hekteon replied it would just depend on their private negotiations. Hensch noted since this approval is provisional, is that done then at the administrative level, and sometimes go to Board of Adjustment. Lehmann confirmed that is correct, if it is enclosed within a building, it would be provisional and administratively reviewed. If it is not enclosed, such as an electric substation, then that would be Board of Adjustment reviewed. Lehmann noted when discussing placing a use with another use allowed in the zone, in the past there have been utilities that have built a warehouse which is a use allowed in the zone, and then just attached their utility used to it and then it's provisionally allowed, rather than going to the Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 5 of 19 Board of Adjustment. This amendment is trying to circumvent some of those odd quirks that come with the code in terms of that revision to the provisional use standards. Martin asked if there is a maximum size they can build if they're on public land, does it have to be a percentage of the overall land. Lehmann replied they'd be subject to standards that anyone building on public land would and there are some site development standards, it's less strict on public land than other zones but there's no size requirement involved as currently proposed. Craig noted one of her major questions is she doesn’t understand the minor/major difference in some of the other cities discussed and also keeps thinking of easements and all the green boxes that are in the easement of the public right-of-way and in many people's yards so how did they get there. Hekteon stated there would be a utility easement. if they're in someone's yard. Lehmann noted there is a distinction between mechanical equipment versus utility uses and mechanical equipment is more likely what Craig is thinking of, which is the smaller stuff needed in the day to day like power lines. The larger utility uses, pump stations, gas regulars, gas relay stations, electric substations, communications hubs, those are in easements. Nolte asked for Staff’s reasoning as to why this is necessary. Hekteon stated by definition basic utility use is a public or private utility. The City doesn’t typically zone based on who owns the land but rather on how the land is used and that's why they feel like it's pretty clear that it can be public or private utility uses. Craig agreed but noted staff is referring to the land here not to what is going to be put on the land in the amendment. The purpose of the public zones is to provide reference to public ownership and use of land. So this amendment is awarding private ownership for use of land for basic utility. Lehmann explained that is the amendment language MidAmerican proposed. What staff has proposed is the purpose of the public zones provide reference to public ownership and use of land, or to the use of land for infrastructure services that need to be located in or near the area where the service is provided. Craig thought staff supported the change that MidAmerican had requested. Lehman stated staff supports the second change in paragraph 14-2F-1B-1 that it may be uses otherwise controlled and necessary infrastructure may be designated as P-1, instead of will be designated as P-1 and Lehmann explained that's because these uses are allowed to be in other zones so it makes sense that they say may and not will, that all infrastructure or utilities have to be in P-1 zones because they could be in these other zones, too. Lehmann noted what they see in public zones is land gets purchased by the City and then down the line they rezone it to P-1 because it's an ownership designation right now, because there are private uses that are already allowed or trying to shift back towards the general use of zoning to control uses rather than ownership. Craig asked about the part staff doesn’t support and how they are talking about the public zone, and suddenly talking about private ownership, how can there be private ownership of land in the public zone. Lehmann explained because the public zone is the name of a zoning designation. Hektoen stated this is discussing the uses allowed on public zoning designations, which include basic utility uses. She referenced table 2F-1 that discusses uses not ownership and basic utility uses. Lehmann added looking at the existing lists, not the table, the City already allows privately owned communication transmission facilities in public zones and don't specify whether utility Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 6 of 19 scale ground mounted solar energy systems need to be publicly or privately owned. Also plant related agriculture can be public or private, so there are already some nonpublic uses that are allowed in public zones. Craig asked if private ownership in that proposed change is referring to the actual thing not to the land. Hektoen said it is referring to the land and this doesn't say that only public entities can own the land. It says if a public entity owns the land, it should be designated public. Craig countered to take that further, the definition of public zoning is a public entity owns the land. Hekteon stated that's one part of it. Lehmann pointed out there's an “or” statement that says or it doesn't specify or private ownership. Staff believes that because the way that zones work that wasn't necessary. Hektoen stated that's the purpose statement and then they go to the uses so together, all of it acknowledges the private ownership of the land in use for basic utilities. Signs asked about striking the language under the P-2 section where it talks about the designation “it serves as notice a function of owning and buying land in proximity to public land, etc,” and the reason he is questioning that is he didn’t know the state and federal government were exempt from ordinances until he joined this commission and so to take that out, from public information seems unwarranted. Hektoen stated this language doesn't inform the public because when one goes to buy a piece of land, they get an abstract for the piece of land. They don't get an abstract that tells them what their neighboring property is designated. She emphasized it will still be publicly available information, but they were trying to kind of get away from the emphasis on the ownership as it didn't seem particularly helpful information. Signs asked if there is anyplace else in the code or where it explains to the public that state and federal governments are exempt. Hektoen does not believe so, removing this doesn't change anything, the uses that are allowed in the P-2 zones are still the same and it is subject to City regulations, they just tend to be less onerous. The language is sort of misleading so that was why staff is recommending striking that language. Townsend asked what prompted this change. Lehmann stated the most immediate was MidAmerican requested an amendment for a South District substation and basically staff has had this conversation anytime ImOn has come for utility cabinets as well. This has been an ongoing discussion, staff found drafted language for this from probably four or more years ago and so decided it was time to act on it. Martin asked if staff feels this verbiage helps navigate that conversation with more efficacy. Lehmann conferred they think that it opens up opportunities for different locations for public use, or for utility uses and prevents those issues where if they need a utility use they would have to have commercial zoning to have that which leaves some risk that in the future if that use leaves there will be commercial zoning that doesn't mesh with a lot of Plans and creates some complications. Therefore, staff thought that P-1 zones might be a good alternative because if that basic utility use leaves, there's pretty limited uses allowed within that P-1 zone and it would probably have to be rezoned to be reused for anything other than those absolutely required infrastructure expenditures or for city or county use. Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 7 of 19 Martin asked if staff feels like this allows for significant or an appropriate amount of protection for the neighboring community as well, like for example if the new subdivision by Hickory Hill needs a substation or a pumping station is that then going to take up the entirety of an acre of land. Could this have a negative impact on those surrounding developments or residential uses. Lehmann stated when thinking about possible impacts, a public utility like a pump station or sewer lift station are already provisionally allowed, they're approved either through subdivision or through site plan review and are allowed to use public zones. If there is private infrastructure, they're looking at commercial or industrial zoning that they have to use and in some cases those things are needed, electric substations, utility hubs, etc., and so looking at providing ways to do it, still requires a rezoning which would allow an opportunity for the public to be informed and address it at that time. If it's in an existing public zone, it wouldn't go through a rezoning process because either the City or the County or the School District would control that land already, but it still has to go through approval on some level. It would be similar to if they are going to rezone it commercial, it would still go through the same process. The difference is at the end of the day when it's rezoned it’s a public zone and there are pretty limited uses in what's allowed there, versus a commercial zone where there's a lot broader variety of uses that are allowed. Therefore, staff saw this as a better alternative, especially for developing areas. Russett added if it didn't require a rezoning and it was something like an electrical substation, it would require a special exception and the neighborhood would be notified and the Board of Adjustment would hold a public hearing on that. Hektoen noted if it was an existing public zone, presumably that means that a public entity owns the land, so either that would involve the sale of land to the private utility company, which would require public hearing at least at the Council level, or a lease, which again, would require public scrutiny, to allow that entity to come in and use the land, and they would have to get fair market value for it and wouldn't just be giving away publicly owned land for this private use. Craig asked if cell towers are considered with this, they're not public utilities. Lehmann said cell towers are considered communications transmission facilities and are already provisionally allowed through special exception. Craig asked what does the County do compared to the City. Lehmann did not look at the County's regulations regarding utilities. Craig was wondering if they could just surround the City with utilities, not that they would do so. Lehmann stated sometimes they require conditional use permits, but that’s not in every County zone. Russett added the County does allow electrical substations in residential zones through a conditional use permit process so similar to the City’s special exception where it has to go to their Board of Adjustment so just based on that they're probably a bit more lenient than the City is in terms of their regulations. Lehmann reiterated most other larger communities do generally allow these uses in residential zones, but Iowa City tends to be pretty restrictive and that’s been a good thing and they don’t want to allow blanket utility uses wherever, but rather trying to provide it in areas where it might be appropriate seems to make sense. Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 8 of 19 Signs stated going back to what MidAmerican is suggesting, it is not a negative and theoretically they could have a piece of public land and could request to purchase a piece of that land at which point it becomes private land. Lehmann confirmed the amendment would allow that to occur. Townsend asked how safe these basic utility stations in residential areas are, especially the big electrical hubs that seem like they're right next to residential areas, what's the safety factors involved with that and is there anything that can be written into the zones that they're not so close. 200 feet doesn't sound like enough distance. Lehmann stated the distance of the 200 feet is in industrial zones and they're allowed provisionally in industrial zones with 200 feet and must be screened for public rights-of-way to the S3 standard, and also be enclosed by a fence if in industrial areas. In commercial areas, if it's enclosed, then it's okay and allowed provisionally and if it's not allowed provisionally, it requires a special exception. One of the criteria is that it has to be compatible to surrounding structures with regards to safety, size, height, scale, location and design. It's reviewed by the Board of Adjustment and they can place any condition with regards to any safety concerns that they have. The Board looks at the health, safety, comfort and welfare of those in the area and then it does require that screening as well, that's part of the criteria. Townsend noted that new apartment complex on Foster Road near Prairie Du Chien and there's a big electrical station right next to the apartment complexes, how did that happen, it seems like it's awfully close to that residential. Lehmann said that is in a commercial zone, and it was approved by the Board of Adjustment, and they were satisfied that it was safe and a valid location for it. Townsend asked do they keep that from happening in the future because it doesn’t look very safe. Lehmann replied amend the zoning code. Padron asked for an example of something that is privately owned currently in a P-1 zone, other than the cell towers. Hekteon said right now, that's all that's really allowed. Russett noted solar is also allowed in public zones and the City was working with MidAmerican Energy to get a solar facility out by the water treatment plant but City Council ultimately said no to that, but that use is allowed in public zones. Padron asked is there a way to know that whatever is built on this P-1 land will serve the area that it is currently in, is there a radius maximum that this equipment that is going to be here has to serve. Lehmann said there is no requirement with that. Padron noted then potentially they could build something that serves an area farther away. Lehmann agreed potentially, but by nature those things that are close to what they need to serve. A pump station is going to have to be close to where it's used because it's being used for that purpose, maybe it helps people way upstream. Russett added in the conversations they've had with ImOn when looking for utility hub sites, they're trying to address gaps that exist in the community and there's a very small area in which they can locate those hubs and fill that gap. So maybe, theoretically, what Padron is suggesting could happen, but staff doesn’t think practically it would. Hensch opened the public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 9 of 19 Chris Pose (317 Sixth Avenue, suite 300, Des Moines) is the attorney on behalf of MidAmerican Energy Company and wanted to state they are in support of the staffs request to amend the P-1 zone. In short, it gives more flexibility to the City to allow land that would otherwise have to be zoned commercial or industrial to be zoned something as public for something that is more permanent improvement. In this case, an electric substation is what drove the discussion. When they did the Foster Road substation, MidAmerican owned a piece of land on the east side of Prairie Du Chien and wanted to use it for a substation and the City said no, they should use a commercial piece, so they went across the street and used that. They were then made aware that the public zoning classification, if it were to be used is very restrictive, it’s only for things that are owned by public institutions, in which case MidAmerican is not. It came about again in the last couple of years as they're looking to put a substation near the south area of the City. Much of that area is undeveloped, but yet has a Comprehensive Plan designation for it. For MidAmerican to take a piece of land that is in the Comprehensive Plan and zone it commercial or industrial just to put a substation seemed too much so this P-1 district solution seemed to be a good solution. In other words, they would zone something P-1 which would enable them to use it for an electric substation. They would still have the same approval requirements that they'd have in a commercial district, to go to the Board of Adjustment with that request and have them review it and make sure it was appropriate and that's what happened with the Foster Road substation a few years ago. Pose did add a technical correction with the staff concerns, section 14-2F-1 and the definitional sections, which still seem to have this vestige of they can only do this if the land is publicly owned. MidAmerican’s discussion with the staff here is a friendly one, they both want the same thing, they want an ordinance that is well written and can stand the test of any legality check. The concern on behalf of MidAmerican is unless they get this right, for what they're doing in the P-1 with the substation they're going to have to go to the Board of Adjustment anyway and if the Board of Adjustment makes a decision that somebody doesn't like it can be appealed to a district court, and a district court could decide whether or not this ordinance says public or private ownership. Pose just wants to get this correct because he thinks the intent clearly is to let something that is owned privately, and MidAmerican wants to own land that it builds the substations on as it's a lot of equipment and they don't want to put that on a leased facility or anything that is City owned, but as the purpose statement reads now, and this is after the City's proposed amendments, the purpose of the public zones is to provide reference to public ownership and use of land or to use of the land for infrastructure services that need to be located in or near the area where the service provided. Public ownership is mentioned, but not private ownership, and the term infrastructure services, use of land for infrastructure purposes, or services, is not defined in the City ordinance. Pose doesn’t know what infrastructure services are, by definition, in the City. On the other hand, basic utility uses are defined in the City Code and includes such things as substations. The second place where this becomes an issue about ownership is in the Neighborhood P-1 statement where it says uses such as schools, parks, police and fire stations and other civic buildings, owned or otherwise controlled by the County, the City or the Iowa City Community School District and necessary infrastructure. Again, this is a Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 10 of 19 term that's not defined, will be designated as P-1 Neighborhood Public zone. Staff has said they would agree with the change of will to may and the reason MidAmerican suggested that is not every substation they would do has to be P-1, it can still go to a commercial zone if that's appropriate. Pose noted the problem he wants to solve is to make sure that a privately owned piece of land can be used for a public utility and used in P-1. Staff’s language states public ownership, Pose wants it to be clear that it could be private ownership too because MidAmerican while they're a public utility company in the broad sense, they are privately owned and they need public ownership referenced in the section. He also added in basic utility use language because that is a defined term in the code and includes such things as substations. In the second paragraph, he added or a privately owned for basic utility services, so that it's included with the County, the City, the School District, and he intended his corrections he submitted again to help the ordinance do what the staff wants it to do and make sure that if they go forward with a substation, because it's going to have to go to the Board of Adjustment anyway, that all of the ordinance provisions indicate that that use can be allowed in the district. Pose doesn’t think this is intended to replace anything in the franchise that the City has with MidAmerican where MidAmerican can go down public streets and cross trails because those all have to be approved by the City anyway. Any kind of construction that's in a public land, they'd have the right to cover it. Pose stated they are wanting to use this so that it solves a problem within the City not creates them. Hensch found it odd how it references particularly the Iowa City Community School District. If Iowa City in the future annexes land and annex into a neighboring school district, then this particular amendment would not apply. Pose would have to defer to how the City would treat that but he would think they'd want to amend it if another school district came in. Pose stressed again there's too much investment of equipment there for that to be something that they would just place on public land. Also some of the things that were happening or that were described are not really likely for MidAmerican but staff is also trying to do some other things here for ImOn and MidAmerican is focused more on the having a chance to solve a problem in the South District and have an ordinance that's well written for the future if they ever have to zone land P-1. The electric substations MidAmerican deals with take power from transmission lines, the bigger lines that run through the community, and they downsize it to from 161,000 volts to 13,500 volts so by definition they need to be near a transmission line. MidAmerican’s general surface area that they want to cover is three miles, they want these about once every three miles and have redundancy so that if some station goes out because of a storm, the other one can cover it. The south area is growing quickly, the north area where Prairie Du Chien and Foster Road are grew quickly too and they had to put a substation into an existing and developing residential area, which is a very different problem than they have down in the south where they want to get it in there before the development happens and allow everyone to see that it's there. Most times when the substation gets in there first, it gets absorbed very quickly and nobody blinks an eye at it. If they try to do this where people can see it when they couldn't before then there's questions, but they're a necessary animal for development of the community and supply the distribution power that's necessary to light the buildings, do the Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 11 of 19 security, lighting, anything that's electrical because it comes from a distribution substation somewhere. This is a big investment and good for the community. Hensch did have a question for staff if saying Iowa City Community School District seems overly specific or if another school district was ever annexed in the future they would simply amend this. Hekteon had not thought about future school districts and annexation, only that a school district is not a subdivision of the federal, state or local government so in order for them to be included in this, they have historically specifically named them. The idea is it's not meant to apply to private schools Craig asked Hektoen why she thinks that the first part of the amendment proposed by MidAmerican is not necessarily. Hektoen replied because it's just a purpose statement and again the meat of the uses that are allowed are in that table. The language that staff has proposed regarding the purpose is broad enough and is more consistent with other purpose statements for other zones. The infrastructure services, that's more or less the definition of basic utility but the transmission, those aren't technically regulated and are considered another use so she didn't want that purpose statement to be too narrow by using a defined term. Hensch closed the public hearing. Nolte moved to recommend that the zoning code be amended to allow basic utility uses in Neighborhood Public (P-1) zones provisionally or by special exception, as illustrated in attachment one of the staff report. Signs seconded the motion. Hensch noted this is a complicated topic, as far as trying to foresee how the public will perceive this and as soon as they hear public lands and private uses, they immediately think about how the public is going to react so they want to make sure they're covering all the bases and getting all the discussion out there. He feels pretty comfortable with what he’s heard now and initial questions have been resolved. Craig noted this is just keeping up with the times and as the City grows the amount of utilities that people need. 30 years ago whoever thought they needed internet service at their house, it's just keeping up with the times. It sounds like the staff has worked well with the suppliers of those utility services and the City needs it. Hensch agrees they can't have a healthy city and a growing city without utilities, he also really likes the idea of trying to get this substation placed early so then development can occur around it, and everybody's completely aware of it, rather than placing it retrospectively. Padron supports the staff version of the amendment, the only thing she has concerns about is the way these structures or these buildings will look and wonder if they can put a requirement of having them be covered with plants or native trees or maybe use the some of the walls of the structures to be public art from local artists or something, that is her only concern. Signs noted there are S3 screening requirements. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 12 of 19 {Nolte left the meeting for another appointment} CASE NO. REZ22-0007: Consideration of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning to allow a door connecting a drinking establishment to a sales-oriented retail use and not consider it an expansion if certain criteria are satisfied. Russett began the staff report noting this is an amendment relating to City standards for drinking establishments. Regarding background, in 2009 the City established a separation distance requirement between drinking establishments of a 500-foot minimum separation distance, and this was due to concerns of over concentration of these uses in the downtown and underage drinking. It was applied City wide in 2009 and then in 2013 another amendment was passed that restricted that separation distance requirement just to the University impact area and Riverfront Crossings. For those existing drinking establishments that didn't meet that 500-foot minimum separation distance requirement, they were allowed to continue if the use did not change and if their liquor license was in good standing, and expansions of that use were only allowed in certain circumstances such as rooftop cafes. Last year, an amendment came forward to the Commission and to Council related to allowing non-conforming drinking establishments to continue where economically viable business substitutes were not found for locally designated historic buildings and that amendment was brought forward due to the Tailwinds project downtown on the Ped Mall. The amendment that is proposed tonight is also a result of that project as the developers would like to modify the structure at 111 East College Street, which will house Reunion Brew Pub and Restaurant to internally connect to a sales-oriented retail use planned for the building to the east at 115 East College Street. Without this proposed amendment, that would be considered an expansion of a non-conforming drinking establishment and not allowed. Staff is proposing tonight an amendment that would amend the definition of enlargement and expansion to note that a door connecting a drinking establishment to a sales- oriented retail use would not be considered an expansion and it also proposes to amend the City's non-conforming provisions for drinking establishments. It outlines specific criteria that must be met if a non-conforming drinking establishment wants to have a door between that use and a sales-oriented retail use. Some of those requirements are that the door have the same fire resistive rating as the wall and be ADA compliant. They must post a notice that alcohol is prohibited in the sales-oriented retail use, and that staffing must be sufficient to monitor patrons to prevent violations. The proposed amendment also gives authority to the Police Chief to close the door if open container violations occur. The proposed amendment is narrowly tailored, it only applies to a door between a drinking establishment and a sales-oriented retail use not another use like an office use or some other type of use next to a drinking establishment. Sales-oriented retail uses are not allowed to have a liquor license, they are allowed to sell accessory alcohol sales for offsite consumption, if it's less than 25% of the gross yearly income. Staff recommends approval of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning to allow a door connecting a drinking establishment to a sales-oriented retail use and not consider it an expansion if certain criteria are satisfied. Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 13 of 19 Martin asked what if that retail shop participates in First Fridays, can they not offer wine to their patrons, does that require a liquor license. Russett noted she is not well versed in what requires a liquor license and what doesn't so can't answer if that's a violation or not. Craig noted this feels like a lot of work for something that she personally can't quite comprehend why they care. Maybe as a fire exit or something and they have to go through that door to get out to somewhere. Signs explained this is because down below they want to have a little shop that sells Reunion merchandise and want people to be able to go from the bar to their little shop that sells their T-shirts and their hats and their stuff like that. Martin asked does that mean then that they're at capacity for the size of establishment that sells booze. Russett explained they're a non-conforming drinking establishment so they can't be considered for an expansion but through adding the door, it would be considered an expansion of the non-conforming drinking establishment. There would be a door connecting the two buildings, and that's where they would sell their merchandise and will also have access to restrooms. Hensch opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Hensch closed the public hearing. Craig moved to recommend approval of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning to allow a door connecting a drinking establishment to a sales-oriented retail use and not consider it an expansion if certain criteria are satisfied. Martin seconded the motion. Hensch noted it seems very similar to things he’s experienced when on vacation going to touristy areas where they have a restaurant/bar area and a gift shop off to the side. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CASE NO. REZ22-0004: Consideration of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning to clarify requirements and ensure compliance with changes to State law. Lehmann began the staff report noting staff keeps an ongoing list of small things that they need to change or clean up, whether that's in reaction to State law, whether it's to codify interpretations that they've made over the years and want to make sure it's clear to the public, whether it's to clarify standards that are laid out in any way that people can figure out, or even to ease staff administration. Staff made a list of 11 and most of them are pretty straightforward. The first one is with regards to circulation for pedestrians in cases of redevelopment. This would add provisions to single family site development standards and site plan review design criteria that would allow the City to require the construction of sidewalks within public rights-of-way. Currently, there are standards that allow it within private property, but not within the public rights- Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 14 of 19 of-way unless there is some sort of zoning code condition. What staff is trying to do is improve connectivity, especially with infill and redevelopment, and this would allow that. The second one is how they interpret the historic preservation exception that's allowed within residential and commercial zones. Lehmann noted it does allow some flexibility in historic preservation properties and staff received correspondence where the chair of the Historic Preservation Commission would like the Historic Preservation Commission to review it so staff recommends striking this as part of the recommendation and staff recommends just addressing it later. The third one is regarding the goal to clarify the applicability of form-based code design review. Right now, the language states form-based code districts have design review, but that really was only meant to apply to the Riverfront Crossings District due to the large scale of development there. The City did recently adopt form-based code for developing areas, most recently in the South District, but possibly expanding that to other parts of the City. Those areas they plan on administering through site plan review and building permit review. So this code amendment for design review is just for Riverfront Crossings and that it does not apply to the other form-based zones. Next is with regards to the approval criteria for variances. Right now, there's five approval criteria that are required for variances and the Board of Adjustment must make the findings that all of these are met in order to grant it. However, those criteria are not exactly aligned with State law nor exactly aligned with case law. There's case law and State law that guides what can have a variance and what can't have a variance and there have been some examples where variances that were granted were overturned by State courts due to these standards. This amendment is to try to align the City’s variance criteria with that State law and the State code and makes it clearer for applicants and for staff and the Board as to what would actually be qualified for a variance based under that State law. Next, with regards to utility-scale ground-mounted solar energy systems, there's a requirement that there's a 200-foot buffer from residential zones. This amendment clarifies how that boundary is measured and it's from the boundary of the residential zone. The next one is with regards to bicycle parking. The City has minimum bicycle parking standards, but it's not clear as to what that means in terms of what bicycle parking looks like, it leaves a lot of ambiguity. Staff has been looking at the Essentials of Bike Parking, which is made by the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals and staff wants to take some of those rules and put them into the code to make it clear to applicants what is expected for bicycle parking. This amendment will add in a minimum bicycle parking space, which would be 1.5 x 6 feet, it adds in a minimum bicycle access aisle width of 4 feet, requires that bicycle racks be installed 2 feet from curbs and/or other obstructions or parking spaces, and it specifies that bicycle parking facilities must be in a visible location. The next section is with regards to a couple of provisions the City has for privately owned signs in public places. Right now there's a section in the sign code that talks about when can privately owned signs be allowed in public places, like in the entrances to subdivision or a sign in a right- Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 15 of 19 of-way. Lehmann explained one of those special provisions provides a cross reference and is redundant and the other gives the city manager authority to allow signs in public places, which may violate State code requirements for conveying an interest in public property for private use. Staff is recommending striking those two conditions as being unneeded in the zoning code. The next change is to clarify the definition for family. This came about when in 2018 the State restricted the ability of the City to regulate the occupancy of homes by familial or nonfamilial relationships. Prior to that time, the City had a definition of family they used to define what is a single family with a very specific use for family but since that time they have pretty much used family and household synonymously and so this codifies this interpretation that staff has been using. Additionally, it will open up housing for a wider variety of household arrangements and is best practice for fair housing to try and define a family this way. Again, this will take family and refer to the definition for households and that would be the definition they would be using but they don't propose striking it is because family is used throughout the code, so they are just going to cross reference it and not have to remove it from every other part of the code. The next one is the definition for tree and the of ambiguity for the definition. A small tree currently is defined as having a height of up to 50 feet, whereas the large tree is having any height of greater than 40 feet which obviously creates a gap in which it's ambiguous as to whether it's a tall or small tree. In recent conversations with the city forester, they had said 30 feet is probably a better height for what's actually a small versus a large tree, so this justification changes a small tree to be defined as with a height of up to 30 feet, and a large tree is greater than 30 feet. Lehmann stated the next item is a more complicated one, that again is reacting to State law changes passed in 2020 with the State restricting the ability of cities to regulate short term rentals. The City made some changes to the housing code, but this cleanup is catching up the zoning code. Short term rental is broadly defined in this State law as basically any residential property that is rented for a fee for 30 days or less, is exempt or can't be regulated, except for in a couple certain circumstances such as they can do inspections and get contact information, but otherwise must treat a short term rental similarly to any other residential use. This amendment seeks to bring the City into compliance with State law and remove references to length of tenancy from the use categories that are seen in residential use categories, commercial use categories, and also in institutional use categories. The new language will also consolidate the definitions for bed and breakfast. The City currently has two, the bed and breakfast inns and bed and breakfast homestay, the current difference is based on the number of people that are allowed to stay. The language change puts them into one category called bed and breakfasts and it's any number of guests up to 30 days, essentially a short term rental, but this is an accessory use category and has to be in addition to some other residential use. With the creation of this new definition they also strike any provisional standards that previously applied to these bed and breakfast categories and only have those things that they can regulate apply to this bed and breakfast category. Lehmann explained the reason they did it this way was because it's the least change approach and there are existing bed and breakfasts that are accessory to single family uses and they didn't want to make those all non-conforming. If a bed and breakfast is a primary use, and not an accessory to a single-family use, it all depends on how it's structured as to how it will be classified. If it is a single-family home and it is rented to a single household unit, Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 16 of 19 which would be the definition of a single family and considered a single family, as long it is rented out for 30 days or less. If they are renting out individual rooms, and they're all independent and not living as a household unit, then they'd be considered group living uses, which is much more strictly regulated and not be allowed in most zoning districts. Lehmann explained this is how staff has been interpreting short term rentals and treating them like every other use, it really depends on the structure of how many people is being rented to and are those people acting as a household unit. He noted one repercussion of this is it would make these accessory bed and breakfast uses more widely available and wouldn't have restrictions on parking because they can’t regulate that. It would also only require housing inspections every two years, and that there's contact information that's updated, and that they have to stay there less than 30 days. These changes meet the State code, and staff thinks it meets the goals of the City. Finally, the last change is for informational purposes where staff wanted to clarify the boundary line adjustment standards in the subdivision code. Those typically don’t come to the Planning and Zoning Commission, but Lehmann wanted to include it with all the others so that when it goes to Council it's a little easier. Currently minor boundary line adjustments are defined if it's less than 1000 square feet and they're transferring property from one abutting property to another abutting property. However, there's no there's no process for if it's larger than 1000 feet. Staff is just creating a distinction between a minor boundary line adjustment, which is the current process, and a major one. The minor one doesn't go through administrative review, but the major one would, and that's what staff has been informally doing anyway. This amendment will just qualify the process so it is clear for those who wish to sell property to abutting property owners. Staff recommends that the Zoning Code be amended as illustrated in Attachment 1 to address numerous code clean up items with the exception to strike the provisions relating to this Historic Preservation exception at 14-2A-7B, 14-2B-8A and 14-2C-11A with the intent to address that in a later code cleanup. Martin asked about the pedestrian circulation and if there are currently no sidewalks somewhere is this saying there needs to be sidewalks added or is it just for new site development. Lehmann explained this is for infill development, but they did add in provisions to improve pedestrian connectivity and in some cases there may be a house that doesn't have a sidewalk for whatever reason so if it's being redeveloped, they would have to put in a sidewalk as part of either site plan review or as part of the building permit review. Lehmann added there are some cases where none of the houses on a side had a sidewalk, so it doesn't make any sense to put in a sidewalk in front of the one house being redeveloped because that doesn't improve pedestrian connectivity. Martin asked for more information on the privately-owned signs in public spaces because she remember being on P&Z when this was a big hullabaloo and it went to the Supreme Court regarding allowing signs on easements and a public rights-of-way. Lehmann noted it came to staff’s attention because they had someone request to use this criteria. One provision stated the city manager could allow a permanent use of public property, so this removes that language. Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 17 of 19 Martin asked regarding the definition of family, is that now going to convey throughout all of the code what family means, even when it comes to rentals because people have had issues with blended families but now this seems to kind of take care of all protected classes and whatnots. Lehmann explained rental permits would be a little different, this would apply to references to family in the zoning code whereas rental permits are based on parking spaces and bedrooms, and it's different, the zoning code that deals with adult occupancy noting children shouldn’t matter for parking. Townsend asked about the bed and breakfast term, isn't that an antiquated term. Lehmann agreed bed and breakfast is probably an antiquated term, but this is just the definition that they've been using for an accessory short term rental. It used to restrict it to 14 days but now that's not compliant with State law. It is essentially a short term rental, they just didn't change the name because it's already in the zoning code. Hensch opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Hensch closed the public hearing. Townsend moved to recommend that the Zoning Code be amended as illustrated in Attachment 1 to address numerous code clean up items with the exception to strike the provisions relating to this Historic Preservation exception at 14-2A-7B, 14-2B-8A and 14- 2C-11A with the intent to address that in a later code cleanup. Martin seconded the motion. Hensch noted they are going to vote yes for this but on item number one, the pedestrian circulation requirements, he is 100% in favor of making everybody put in sidewalks to keep people from walking on the streets. Signs noted Friday is the 150th anniversary of Arbor Day so hopefully everyone can go out and plant a tree, large or small. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: MARCH 2, 2022: Craig moved to approve the meeting minutes of March 2, 2022, with minor edits. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett stated one item to report is the right-of-way vacation at 829 Kirkwood has finally passed and the sign was taken down today. Planning and Zoning Commission April 20, 2022 Page 18 of 19 ADJOURNMENT: Martin moved to adjourn. Townsend seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2021-2022 7/1 7/15 8/5 8/19 9/2 9/16 10/7 10/21 11/4 1/5 2/2 2/16 3/2 4/20 CRAIG, SUSAN X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X HENSCH, MIKE X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X O/E O/E O/E X O/E X O/E X X O/E X X X NOLTE, MARK X X X O/E X O/E O/E X X O O X O/E X PADRON, MARIA X X X X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X SIGNS, MARK X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X TOWNSEND, BILLIE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member