HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-04-2024 Planning & Zoning CommissionPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Wednesday, September 4, 2024
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
4. Case No. REZ24-0006
Consideration of an amendment to Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", to address tobacco
sales oriented uses.
5. Consideration of meeting minutes: June 26, 2024
6. Planning and Zoning Information
7. Adjournment
If you will need disability -related accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact
Anne Russett, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5251 or arussettcc),iowa-city.org. Early requests are
strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs.
Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings
Formal: September 18 / October 2 / October 16
Informal: Scheduled as needed.
i r
c sit. t
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 2g, 2024
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
From: Eric R. Goers, City Attorney
Re: Zoning Code Amendments to create a Tobacco Retailer use, and create limitations
on where they can be located
Introduction
At their April 2"d, 2024 formal meeting, the Iowa City Council denied several tobacco permit
applications and expressed a desire to give thought and study to what could be done at a local
level to address the proliferation of tobacco retailers within City limits. At their May 71", 2024
formal meeting, Council passed a moratorium on the issuance of new tobacco permits while
they studied more about what could be done. The moratorium runs until January 1st, 2025.
Council then engaged in several work sessions to discuss how to better address the tobacco
retailers, and the harmful health effects they bring to the community. At their July 16", 2024
work session they direction the City Attorney to bring forth three draft ordinances for
consideration. Those included the following:
1. A zoning code amendment to impose 500' separation distance requirements between
tobacco retailers and other tobacco retailers, k-12 schools, and university property.
2. A cap on tobacco permits at the present 63.
3. A ban on kratom products.
At their August 61" and 201", 2024 work sessions, Council discussed the ordinances, ultimately
deciding to proceed with the zoning code ordinance amendment and the creation of the kratom
ban, but not the permit cap. They tweaked the draft zoning code amendment on the topic of
grandfather rights, but otherwise accepted the draft ordinance as presented as appropriate to
send to Planning and Zoning for your consideration. I have attached that draft hereto
(Attachment 1.) Because it is a text amendment initiated by the City Council, the submittal
requirements of Iowa City Code 14-8D-5C do not apply.
Current Reaulations
At present, there is no "Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses" under the City's zoning code. Nor are
there any restrictions specific to where tobacco retailers can operate, other than general
provisions related to commercial retail uses.
Proposed Amendments
The proposed amendment (Attachment 1) helps to enhance land use regulations related to
tobacco retailers in an effort to improve public health. This is consistent with advancing the
City's strategic value of safety and well-being for our community members.
The CDC has long concluded that there are significant health concerns related to public
consumption of tobacco, tobacco products, alternative nicotine products, and vapor products.
They report that smoking tobacco causes cancer, heart disease, stroke, lung diseases,
diabetes, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which includes emphysema and
chronic bronchitis.
In Ordinance No. 15-4634 (codified at Section 6-10-2 of the City Code), the City Council found
that the use of e-cigarettes presents a serious and unknown public health threat and that in the
interests of protecting the health of the public and providing a healthy work -place environment
for its employees the City of Iowa City and prohibited the use of electronic cigarettes in all areas
where it is illegal to smoke tobacco products. Research shows that greater access and
availability of tobacco, tobacco products, alternative nicotine products, and vapor products leads
to greater use of those products, and thus greater public harm.
Iowa Code Chapter 453A governs the sale of tobacco, tobacco products, alternative nicotine
products, and vapor products within the state of Iowa, all of which are covered by retail tobacco
permits issued by the City. Chapter 453A grants cities the authority to issue retail tobacco
permits located within their city limits. Chapter 453A further grants cities the discretion to issue,
or not issue, tobacco permits within their city limits, pursuant to the city's own policies. For
these reasons, managing the location of tobacco retailers is an appropriate subject of zoning
law.
The proposed amendment contains seven parts, presented in the order in which they appear in
the ordinance, as follows:
1. Amends the table of allowable uses in commercial zones.
2. Amends the table of allowable uses in industrial and research zones.
3. Amends the table of allowable uses in form -based code areas.
4. Creates anew use category —"Tobacco sales oriented", for use in later sections.
5. Provides a definition tracking that use category.
6. Imposes a 500' separation buffer between tobacco retailers and other tobacco retailers,
k-12 schools, and colleges and universities, including all University property. These
provisions are modeled after our separation distance requirements for drinking
establishments.
Addresses grandfather rights for those tobacco retailers already operating. Under these
provisions, tobacco retailers would lose their grandfather rights if they have their permit
revoked, allow their permit to expire for more than 60 days, cease the sale of tobacco
products for at least 90 days, or change their use.
Analysis
Staff and Council believe controlling the density of tobacco retailers, as well as keeping them at
least 500' from youthful populations such as those found on and near school properties,
including college property (legal age for tobacco products is 21), will reduce the use of tobacco
products and their related substitutes. Current retailers are protected via the grandfather
provisions so as to prevent the forceful shuttering of businesses, or elements of those
businesses.
The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has an abundance of
information available about the detrimental health effects of both tobacco products and tobacco
alternatives. For more information, see their website here:
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/index.htmi. For more information about the effects of greater
tobacco retailer density, see the following article from the Journal Preventative Medicine, from
their January, 2022 volume: Associations Between Disparities in Tobacco Retailer Density and
Disparities in Tobacco Use, by Allison M. Glasser, MPH, Nathaniel Onnen, PhD, Peter F.
Craigmile, PhD, Elli Schwartz, BS, and Megan E. Roberts, PhD.
https:/Iwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8750533/ The journal article also describes an
association between greater exposure to tobacco retailers and their marketing and price
promotions and greater tobacco use.
Anticipated Impact
Staff anticipates that the proposed zoning ordinance will stem the proliferation of tobacco
retailers in areas where there is already high density, such as downtown and along the Highway
1 and 6 corridors. The City has created a map showing the location of current tobacco retailers,
K-12 school property, and property owned by the Regents. Also included are 500' buffers for
both the retailer and school property. The map link can be found here: https://maps.iowa-
city org/portal/apps/instant/basic/index html?appid=ef233a2608104fa48ba72e5bf360acaO Map
layers can be turned on and off via the layer function in the lower right-hand corner. Over time,
density may be reduced by attrition.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that Title 14 Zoning be amended as detailed in Attachment 1 to enhance land
use regulations related to tobacco retailer use and to further implement the City's goals related
to public health.
Attachments
1. Proposed Zoning Code Text Amendments
Approved by:
Eric Goers, City Attorney
ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Zoning Code Text
Attachment 1
Draft Zoning Code Text
Underlined and/or bold text (within tables) is suggested new language. Strike -through notation
indicates language to be deleted.
Section I. Amendments
1. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code', Chapter 2 entitled 'Base Zones', Article C entitled "Commercial
Zones', Table 2C-1, entitled "Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones', is amended by adding the
following bolded text to the "Retail uses' use category:
Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones
Use
Categories
Subgroups
CO-
1
CN-
1
CH-
1
Cl-
1
CC-
2
CB-
2
CB-
5
CB-
10
MU
Retail uses'
Alcohol sales
oriented retail
PR
PR
P
P
PR
PR
PR
PR
Delayed deposit
service uses
PR
Hospitality oriented
retail
PR
PR
P
P
P
P
P
P
PR
Outdoor storage and
display oriented
P
PR
Personal service
oriented
P
PR
P
P
P
P
P
PR
Repair oriented
P
P
P
P
P
Sales oriented
PR
PR
P
P
P
P
P
PR
Tobacco sales
oriented
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
2. Title 14, entitled 'Zoning Code", Chapter 2 entitled "Base Zones", Article D entitled "Industrial and
Research Zones', Table 2D-1, entitled "Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and Research Zones', is
amended by adding the following bolded text to the 'Retail' use category:
Table 2D-1: Principal Uses Allowed In Industrial And Research Zones
Use Categories
Subgroups
I-1
I-2
RDP
ORP
Retail
Sales oriented
Personal service oriented
Alcohol sales oriented
Repair oriented
Hospitality oriented retail
S
S
Outdoor storage and display oriented
Tobacco sales oriented
3. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 2 entitled 'Base Zones', Article H entitled "Form -based
Zones and Standards', Table 14-2H-3B-1, entitled "Uses", is amended by adding the following bolded
text to the "Retail' use category:
Table 14-2H-3B-1: Uses
Use
T3NE
T3NG
T3NG-
T4NS
T4NS-
T4NM
T4NM-
T4MS
Specific
Categories
O
O
O
Standards
Retail Uses
Sales
P'
P'
P'
P
Oriented
Personal
P'
P'
P'
P
Service
Oriented
Alcohol
S'
S'
S
14-4B-4B-
Sales
15
Oriented
Hospitality
Oriented
PR
PR
PR
FPR
PR
PR
PR
PR
14-4B-4B-
18(CN-1)
Tobacco
PR'
PR'
PR'
PR
14-4B-4B-
Sales
24
Oriented
Indoor
PR/S
14-4B-4B-
Commercial
7
Recreational
Uses
General
S'
S'
PR
14-413-413-
Animal
2(CN- 1)
Related
Commercial
Uses
4. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code', Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations', Article A, entitled "Use
Categories", Section 4, entitled "Commercial Use Categories', Subsection I, entitled 'Retail Uses', is
amended by adding the following Paragraph 2.(h.):
h Tobacco Sales Oriented: Any retailer actively engaged in the sale of tobacco products cigarettes,
alternative nicotine products or vapor products all as defined in Iowa Code Chapter 453A as
amended pursuant to a tobacco permit.
5. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 9 entitled "Definitions', Article A, entitled "General
Definitions', Section 1, entitled "Definitions' is amended by adding the following definition:
6. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations", Article B, entitled "Minor
Modifications, Variances, Special Exceptions, and Provisional Uses", Section 4, entitled "Specific
Approval Criteria for Provisional Uses and Special Exceptions", Subsection B, entitled "Commercial
Uses", is amended by adding the following Paragraph 24, entitled "Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses":
college and university.
7. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations", Article E, entitled
"Nonconforming Situations", Section 5, entitled 'Regulation of Nonconforming Uses", is amended to
add the following Subsection H, entitled "Nonconforming Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses":
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
J U N E 26, 2024-6:OOPM—FORMAL MEETING
E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Mike Hensch, Scott Quellhorst, Billie Townsend,
Chad Wade
MEMBERS ABSENT: Maggie Elliott
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Lacey Stutzman, Matt Kain, Brock Heller
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ24-0004. A proposal to rezone
approximately 5.01 acres of land at 1215 Camp Cardinal Road from Interim Development Single -
Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Low -Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone subject
to the following conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Owner shall:
a. Construct an 8' wide sidewalk along the Camp Cardinal Road frontage from the
southern property line to the existing driveway, as well as installation of curb ramps
to connect to the sidewalk on the east side of Camp Cardinal Road. The City shall
pay for the overwidth of the cost of the 8' sidewalk, which is the additional 3' beyond
the standard 5' sidewalk width.
b. Dedicate to the City, without compensation, right-of-way along Camp Cardinal Road
for the future installation of a turnaround.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owner shall:
a. Demonstrate access to City utilities can be provided.
By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ24-0005, a proposal to rezone
approximately 7.0 acres of land at 2255 N Dubuque Rd from Office Research Park (ORP) zone
to Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone.
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. REZ24-0004
Location: 1215 Camp Cardinal Rd.
An application for a rezoning of approximately 5.01 acres of land from Interim Development
Single Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Low -Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone.
Russett began the staff report showing an aerial of the property noting it's about five acres in
size. Next, she showed the zoning map and pointed out the land to the north and to the west is in
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 26, 2024
Page 2 of 10
the city of Coralville. To the north it's an open space area, to the west is Borlaug Elementary and
to the east it's the city of Iowa City. The land developed are properties that are single family
homes zoned RS-5 with a Planned Development Overlay. In terms of background, this property
was subdivided in 1984 as the Clear Creek Subdivision. Then in 1989 it was rezoned to Interim
Development Single Family (the current zoning designation) from Interim Development Office
and Research Park. The staff report at that time noted the area was more appropriate for
residential uses rather than future office and research park uses. At this time, the owner seeks a
rezoning to RS-5, which is the low -density single family residential zone. Based on staffs
conversations with the applicant and their representative, they have indicated that they would like
to build one additional home on the property, therefore require a rezoning. Russett explained if
more than one additional home were proposed they would need to go through the subdivision
process and that would come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Russett shared a few photographs of the property noting there is one existing home with a
garage. She showed another image of the house and view from the northwest noting the
woodland and sloped areas and ravine.
In terms of the current zoning designation, the Interim Development Single Family is a zone used
to provide areas of managed growth. Plant -based agriculture is a permitted land use in this zone
and is oftentimes seen at the edges of the community in areas that haven't been developed yet
and still continued to be farmed. Interim Development Single Family does allow detached single-
family dwellings, but it requires a minimum of five acres. Since this site is five acres in size, and
there's already existing home, the current zoning designation wouldn't allow an additional home
on the property. Therefore, the proposal is to rezone it to RS-5 because that zoning designation
does allow detached single-family homes with a minimum lot size of 6000 square feet.
In terms of the general development approval criteria, staff looks at consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan and compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. The Future
Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for residential land
uses at a density of two to eight dwelling units per acre. There are also policies in the
Comprehensive Plan that talk about ensuring infill development is compatible and
complementary to the surrounding neighborhood as well as the policies that support infill
development. In terms of compatibility with the existing neighborhood, to the east and south are
existing single-family neighborhoods, Borlaug Elementary School is directly to the west of the
property but further west there's more single family. As mentioned earlier to the north is the
Rotary Camp Park which is maintained by the city of Coralville.
In terms of transportation, access, and utilities, Russett explained the property does have access
off of Camp Cardinal Road, which connects to Kennedy Parkway to the south. There's currently
no sidewalk on the property so staff is recommending a condition that the owner construct an
eight -foot -wide sidewalk as well as curb ramps that connect east to the existing development.
Russett noted the typical sidewalk width is five feet so the City would pay for the additional three
feet. Sanitary sewer and water lines exist within the Camp Cardinal right-of-way and access to
these lines would be necessary for any development. Staff is also recommending a condition that
the owner demonstrate the ability to access City utilities as the main concern Public Works has is
that even though there's water and sewer within the Camp Cardinal right-of-way, because of all
the sensitive areas they want to make sure that those service lines can be extended to wherever
new house is proposed. Accessing the City utilities will need to be verified as part of the building
permit process. Also, there is an interest by the city of Coralville to vacate the Camp Cardinal
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 26, 2024
Page 3 of 10
Road right-of-way to the north of the property. Camp Cardinal Road eventually connects to
Camp Cardinal Boulevard further north and the city of Coralville would like to vacate that right-of-
way which would require a turnaround is built for any cars that head north on Camp Cardinal
Road, so they have the ability to turn around and go back south. Due to that interest by the city
of Coralville, staff is recommending that the property owner dedicate some right-of-way that
would allow the City to build that turnaround at a future date. Public Works feels they would need
to dedicate around 5000 square feet. In terms of sensitive areas, there are sensitive features on
the property however a rezoning does not trigger the need for a sensitive areas development
plan. If the owner chooses to move forward with the subdivision in the future, that's the point at
which the City would require a sensitive areas development plan.
Staff has received one email in opposition to the rezoning that Russett forwarded to the
Commission.
In terms of the timeline, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, City
Council would set a public hearing at the July 16 meeting and the public hearing is anticipated to
be on August 6.
Staff recommends approval of REZ24-0004. A proposal to rezone approximately 5.01 acres of
land at 1215 Camp Cardinal Road from Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS)
zone to Low -Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Owner shall:
a. Construct an 8' wide sidewalk along the Camp Cardinal Road frontage from the
southern property line to the existing driveway, as well as installation of curb ramps
to connect to the sidewalk on the east side of Camp Cardinal Road. The City shall
pay for the overwidth of the cost of the 8' sidewalk, which is the additional 3' beyond
the standard 5' sidewalk width.
b. Dedicate to the City, without compensation, right-of-way along Camp Cardinal Road
for the future installation of a turnaround.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owner shall:
a. Demonstrate access to City utilities can be provided.
Quellhorst stated he was curious about staff justification for the proposed conditions. In
particular, he thinks that turnabout and sidewalk are a great idea but are those really connected
to what the applicant is asking for. It seems like they want to rezone to add a single house, which
wouldn't seem to add too much traffic so is it justified to ask them to incur the costs of those
improvements. Russett explained that staff feels that the additional right-of-way is a pretty
common request at the time of a rezoning. She acknowledges his point that typically they are
looking at larger development projects that probably result in more traffic impacts than what's
proposed here but for the pedestrian sidewalk they do feel that is really important. It's in the
regulations to require a sidewalk even if it's just a single-family home or a duplex, something that
doesn't require site plan review. Staff is recommending that the sidewalk not be the full frontage
of the property but be from the southern property line to the existing driveway. And since there is
an existing eight -foot -wide sidewalk there that is why they are requesting the sidewalk extension
also be eight foot wide. There's also an elementary school in the area and a trail along Camp
Cardinal Boulevard that gets used quite a bit so that is why staff would like to see that pedestrian
infrastructure built out.
Quellhorst asked if there is a sidewalk currently on the other side of the street. Russett
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 26, 2024
Page 4 of 10
acknowledged there is. He also asked about the sensitive features and the woodland, is there
any precedent or mechanism for conducting some sort of environmental review to make sure
that the new building doesn't cause any environmental damage or concern. Russett replied that
is something staff could look at the building permit stage. Typically, single family homes that
don't impact more than 20,000 square feet are exempt from the sensitive areas ordinance.
Quellhorst asked how that review would occur if it was conducted as part of the building permit
process. Russett explained what triggers the review of a sensitive areas development plan is an
OPD rezoning or a subdivision which isn't being proposed at this time. If the applicant came
forward with the building permit and wanted to tear down the trees or impact the stream she is
not even sure they would have the ability to do to stop that because they're not proposing a
subdivision or a OPD rezoning, they're just building one home.
Craig asked why this isn't a subdivision when there's already one home there and they're
building a second home. Russett explained because they're not splitting the property nor creating
any additional lots. If in the future they wish to build more homes, they would need to come
forward with a subdivision plan and that would trigger a sensitive areas development plan.
Russett reiterated this has been subdivided before. There is parcel A and parcel B. Parcel A
does not have a home on it. The issue is that the Interim Development Single Family Residential
zoning requires a five -acre lot and parcel A is less than five acres in size.
Quellhorst noted in the past they've permitted by conditional rezoning and required things like
preservation of trees or other environmental features, does staff feel like there's any viable way
to do something similar here. Russett stated if the Commission was to make a recommendation
on adding an additional condition that limits the impacts, that's something that could be
considered.
Hekteon noted the key to imposing conditions is identifying the public need being created by this
rezoning so as they think about whether the recommended conditions are appropriate, or any
additional conditions, that's the standard. Craig asked can the public need be that they're trying
to protect sensitive areas, that seems to be a public need. She noted right now they have an
ordinance in it right now isn't applying. Hekteon agreed that would be a reasonable need.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Lacey Stutzman (MMS Consultants) began by clarifying there are three separate parcels here.
The existing home is on its own parcel and the applicant is rezoning all of it because if they are
spending the money to go through the process, they might as well take it out of that interim
development zoning and put it into an RS zoning for future planning. Down the road, if they go to
sell, it's just beneficial for them when it matches the adjacent zoning. Stutzman stated they are
also working on an access easement. The applicant is going to use the same driveway entrance
off Camp Cardinal Road and she has spoken with Public Works and Engineering about their
concerns regarding proper connections to the public infrastructure running through Camp
Cardinal Road. They have passed all that information along to the builder so when he does go to
potentially build a house in the future that's being accounted for. In regard to the sensitive areas,
the intent is to build one additional house on the flat open grassy area. She noted they did look at
the sensitive features just to do their due diligence on that, there are woodlands, a ravine and
some pretty steep slopes so they are intentionally proposing to build a house not to impact any of
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 26, 2024
Page 5 of 10
those. Stutzman also noted it is just really not feasible or cost effective to try to impact any of
those sensitive areas.
Hensch noted it's pretty obvious that several commissioners have some concern about sensitive
areas and what to assure they will comply with the slope issues for sensitive slopes, for the
protection of trees, etc., can they address that. Stutzman explained they looked at it in the light of
if they were going to do an OPD it would be a level one sensitive areas review which she
believes if it's under two acres that makes it a grove of trees as opposed to a sensitive feature, or
downgrades it to some degree that the impact are still regulated but not as heavily as when a
large subdivision development comes through. With slopes they are allowed a certain
percentage of impacts. She also doesn't think that the applicant would go through the trouble of
building a single-family home on the secluded lot to then go through an additional subdivision
process.
Craig asked about the single driveway and if the properties change hands. If there are two
different owners of these two houses, they could do an easement but with having just one owner,
do they need an easement as well. Stutzman stated they have already drafted an agreement,
it's a private agreement not dictated under this rezoning, a private access agreement between
the property that owns it and then the other property that it is mutual beneficial. They'll have
maintenance agreement, that's pretty standard and typical so that way, when it does change
hands eventually both parties are protected to continue to use that access, and it mitigates
impacts to the sensitive areas. They are not going to put in a second driveway onto Camp
Cardinal Road because with the way that those property lines are slated it would impact sensitive
features.
Quellhorst asked if the applicant has any position on staffs proposed conditions to add the
turnabout and sidewalk.
Matt Kain (1215 Camp Cardinal Road) stated they don't really have any concerns about that
turnaround, he suspects when they get in there and look it's a pretty steep ravine they may not
go as far as they want but if that's what they need, that's what they need. The only question on
the sidewalk he has is because there is a big gap between the Coralville sidewalk and where
their line is, essentially a sidewalk to nowhere, his thought is once Coralville finishes developing
then put the sidewalk in rather than putting a sidewalk in to nowhere. But it's also no big deal
they'll put the sidewalk in if required. Looking at the siting of the house, they fully intend to put it
up in the flat area and don't want to touch any of those trees. There's a grassy area that's very
flat and that's where the house will be built.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Wade moved to approve REZ24-0004. A proposal to rezone approximately 5.01 acres of
land at 1215 Camp Cardinal Road from Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-
RS) zone to Low -Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone subject to the following
conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Owner shall:
a. Construct an 8' wide sidewalk along the Camp Cardinal Road frontage from the
southern property line to the existing driveway, as well as installation of curb
ramps to connect to the sidewalk on the east side of Camp Cardinal Road. The
City shall pay for the overwidth of the cost of the 8' sidewalk, which is the
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 26, 2024
Page 6 of 10
additional 3' beyond the standard 5' sidewalk width.
b. Dedicate to the City, without compensation, right-of-way along Camp Cardinal
Road for the future installation of a turnaround.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owner shall:
a. Demonstrate access to City utilities can be provided.
Craig seconded the motion.
Craig is concerned about the sensitive areas and perhaps some language that could be added
that a review would be included. She can appreciate the applicant not wanting to disturb any of
the sensitive areas but it is the Commission's duty to worry a little bit about that.
Wade thinks they need to continue to embrace the builder community and it's reasonable to
promise that they're going to build it on the high, flat side of the lot. It makes sense from a
development point of view so he doesn't think they need to add additional requirements. He does
wonder if they could do a contingency on the sidewalk, they've had other cases where there has
not been a connecting sidewalk resulting in a sidewalk to nowhere. Hensch replied they do have
missing sidewalk segments all throughout the City and hopefully once the school district fills it up
they'll be connected. Russett stated If they wait until everyone is there and all are filled in, there
is no push to get it completed.
Hensch noted as he is entering his 10th year on this Commission he's learned to be not very
trusting of what people say but in this case he doesn't see any warning signals, given that the
topographic map makes the flat area a perfect location to put the house. Also since the person
who owns the property is going to be building this and continue to live in the neighborhood,
Hensch has pretty good confidence that they won't tell us they're going to build in one location
and then do something else. Of course, there's nothing else they can do about it if they do
something else, unless there is a condition in there but he doesn't feel it's necessary at this time.
Townsend wanted to say is there's so much building going on in that area and they don't
question the big builders. Here is a single lot and one home, and now they're questioning all
these things so her concern is that they're not giving more of these concerns to the big builders
that are cutting down all of the nice trees.
Craig acknowledged that's probably true but the big builder would have to follow the sensitive
areas ordinance because they would be building more lots more than this one.
Hensch also noted people don't realize the sensitive areas ordinance allows them to take up
quite a number of trees, it's actually pretty dramatic.
Quellhorst is inclined to agree, if anything having a single home on this property seems to
probably be more beneficial for environmental preservation. He also gives some deference to
staff who have evaluated this project and determined that environmental conditions are not
necessary or preferable. He is concerned about the environment, but also doesn't want to tie a
private project up in a bunch of red tape and cause somebody unnecessary time and expense.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 26, 2024
Page 7 of 10
CASE NO. REZ24-0005
Location: 2255 N. Dubuque Rd.
An application for a rezoning of approximately 7.0 acres of land from Office Research Park
(OPD) zone to Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone.
Russett stated this is an application from Iowa City Community School District for an area about
seven acres off of North Dubuque Road. Looking at the zoning map the ACT campus is to the
northeast of the site and the school district purchased a building from ACT. To the south is
Oaknoll East, the three multifamily buildings. Most of the area to the west and to the east
remains undeveloped. This property was annexed into Iowa City in the late 1960s, early 1970s.
The Iowa City Community School District would like to use what they recently purchased from
ACT as administrative offices and some educational facilities. The School District seeks to
rezone this P-1 for a couple of reasons, one to demonstrate that it is a publicly owned site, but
they also want to have educational facilities and Russett explained the existing zoning does not
allow educational facilities as a land use.
Russett showed a few photographs of the site noting it's a very beautiful property with trees in
front of it. The current zoning is ORP which generally allows office type uses but educational
facilities are not allowed. The Neighborhood Public Zone being proposed is used to reference
public ownership. Examples are schools, parks, police and fire stations and other civic buildings
that are controlled by local governments or the Iowa City Community School District.
In terms of general development criteria, Russett stated the Comprehensive Plan does show this
as Office Research Development Center in terms of the land use, however, there is part of the
Plan's vision that shows the City should encourage and support collaborative efforts with the
School District and other jurisdictions for mutual benefit of all communities, so staff feels this
rezoning is in line with the Comprehensive Plan. In terms of compatibility with the existing
character, the land to the north, east and west is all owned by ACT. Most of the area that's
developed is the ACT campus except for to the south, where it's the multifamily Oaknoll East
campus. The School District plans to reuse the existing building and has their current
administration building nearby on North Dodge Street.
In terms of next steps, this will go to City Council after a recommendation from the Planning and
Zoning Commission. Staff anticipates that City Council will set a public hearing on July 16, and
that public hearing would be August 6.
Staff recommends approval of REZ24-0005, a proposal to rezone approximately 7.0 acres of
land at 2255 N Dubuque Rd from Office Research Park (ORP) zone to Neighborhood Public (P-
1) zone.
Craig asked what is allowed under educational facilities. Russett explained it would be basically
public schools but there's also private schools that are considered a general educational facility.
Specialized educational facilities as a land use could also be things like specialized educational
training, like a Preucil School of Music or a dance studio, but this would be considered general
educational facility.
Craig asked if the plan is to redo this current building into new offices for the Iowa City
Community School District. Russett stated she thinks they're currently using the space as offices,
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 26, 2024
Page S of 10
but they do plan to incorporate some classroom space as well.
Townsend asked if they are also planning to build additional units on that space. Russett doesn't
believe any additions are proposed at this time, but that could be possible.
Hensch opened the pubic hearing.
Brock Heller (MMS Consultants) stated the proposed rezoning is taking into account renovations
of the existing space which is going to be predominantly office areas. However, part of the
architect's plans, as well as the School District's intention, is to incorporate some classrooms. He
is not sure at this time what grades or types of classrooms are being proposed. Also, at this time
there's no intention of expanding the footprint of the building. There is a FEMA shelter basement
addition that's below grade of the building for a tornado shelter because if part of it's going to be
a classroom space for safety purposes they need a FEMA rated shelter that has to hold the
entire weight of the building if it were to collapse.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Townsend moved to recommend approval of REZ24-0005, a proposal to rezone
approximately 7.0 acres of land at 2255 N Dubuque Rd from Office Research Park (ORP)
zone to Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone.
Quellhorst seconded the motion.
Townsend asked if the addition of the storm shelter being built will have to come back to this
Commission for review. Russett replied no, it would just be site planning and building permits,
which are just reviewed by staff.
Quellhorst stated this is a great use of space.
Townsend agreed it is nice to see a building being reworked as opposed to torn down and
rebuilt.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: MAY 1, 2024:
Townsend moved to approve the meeting minutes from May 1 2024. Wade seconded the
motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Hektoen announced this was her last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting as she is
resigning from the City of Iowa City. Commissioners thanked her for all her years of service and
her dedication to bettering the community.
Russett shared that the Pagliai's landmark rezoning has been approved by Council. She also
shared that there will be no P&Z meeting on Wednesday, July 3, the next meeting will be
Wednesday, July 17.
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 26, 2024
Page 9 of 10
Russett noted the City received a $3.7 million grant from HUD for the pro -housing grant
application that was submitted late last year. There is going to be a big event at City Hall on June
27 at 1:30 pm and HUD representatives will be there as well as the mayor. Iowa City is one of
21 communities out of 175 that applied for these funds.
Townsend congratulated everyone who participated in the grant proposal and noted there isn't a
community in this country that doesn't need help with low-income housing.
Russett noted it was a very well put together application that demonstrated the City's
commitment to affordable housing not only on the land use side but also with the affordable
housing action plan and fair housing study.
Craig asked what was being built across from Iowa City Landscaping. Russett replied that will
be a Dunkin Donuts.
Townsend asked about the two big slabs of concrete on off Gilbert. Russett is not sure. Hensch
noted there is a storage facility going up on Waterfront near Southgate in front of Plumbers
Supply.
Townsend stated people can't afford houses, so they have to have storage. She just wants to go
on record again that it's horrible that affordable housing is based on the HUD formula that for a
family of four is $90,000. That needs to be reevaluated as to what affordable is because if a
single woman with three children, unless she's a doctor or professor, is not going to have
$90,000. She would like to see it come back before this group and then to City Council to talk
about what affordable actually is for Iowa City. Yes there are a lot of people making a lot of
money in Iowa City but there is still a lot of people living under the trees in Iowa City.
ADJOURNMENT:
Townsend moved to adjourn, Quellhorst seconded and the motion passed 5-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2023-2024
4/19
6/21
7/5
7/19
8/2
8/16
10/4
10/18
11/15
12/6
12/20
1/17
217
2/21
4/3
5/1
6/26
CRAIG, SUSAN
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELLIOTT, MAGGIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
HENSCH, MIKE
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PADRON, MARIA
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
— --
QUELLHORST, SCOTT
-- --
-
- __
__
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
TOWNSEND, BILLIE
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
WADE, CHAD
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
= Not a Member